F-22 Crash

If the F-35 was close in capability I doubt they'd do that. Further we have had many AF brass both retired and active stating we don't have enough F-22s for the high end fight. The F-35 is a great jet, its important for the AF's future, but it isn't a F-22 replacement.

Or it's a function of the fact that pulling large quantities of F-35s off to do A2A means you have nothing
aside from the B-2 that can do first-day-of-the-way stand-in/near-standoff attack.

A good chunk of achieving air superiority is through OCA which really only the F-35 can do.

It's not that upgrading the F-22 doesn't make sense it's just the tradeoffs: the F-35 will continue to get
cheaper and the F-22 upgrades will likely only increase in cost (since its a function of fleet size which
can only move one way now).

A good chunk of achieving air superiority is through OCA which really only the F-35 can do.

The F-35 is the only platform that can perform offensive counter air?

I don't disagree that F-22 upgrades will always be expensive, especially compared to the industrial sized F-35 force, but that doesn't mean its of less value when looking at a budget and capabilities perspective. The real problem is this nonsense of buying F-15EXs. We should buy more F-35s and increase production rate.

A good chunk of achieving air superiority is through OCA which really only the F-35 can do.

The F-35 is the only platform that can perform offensive counter air?

The B-1, F/A-18E/F, F-16, F-15E(X) can't penetrate
The F-22 can't carry heavy A2G loads
The B-2 is too small in numbers
The B-21 won't be around in force for a decade

That leaves more expensive* standoff options which will quickly be exhausted against the high-end threat.

* the end of the INF Treaty has the potential to change this but finding credible cost estimates for the
new weapons in this class is really hard

I don't disagree that F-22 upgrades will always be expensive, especially compared to the industrial sized F-35 force, but that doesn't mean its of less value when looking at a budget and capabilities perspective. The real problem is this nonsense of buying F-15EXs. We should buy more F-35s and increase production rate.

The money does have to come from somewhere. But I agree it should be at the expense of the F-15EX buy.

A good chunk of achieving air superiority is through OCA which really only the F-35 can do.

The F-35 is the only platform that can perform offensive counter air?

The B-1, F/A-18E/F, F-16, F-15E(X) can't penetrate
The F-22 can't carry heavy A2G loads
The B-2 is too small in numbers
The B-21 won't be around in force for a decade

That leaves more expensive* standoff options which will quickly be exhausted against the high-end threat.

* the end of the INF Treaty has the potential to change this but finding credible cost estimates for the
new weapons in this class is really hard

Brain fart on my part, I thought you were referring to the A-A mission of the construct. Agree completely the most effective path to air supremacy is to kill them on the ground. My impression from reading unclassified materials and hearing interviews with various professionals (AF Brass, analysts etc.) is that in the high end fight a high-end A-A capability is still required to enable even VLO assets to access targets. Particularly in the opening days of the conflict, hence F-22s. Your argument is more compelling to me, vice the vis-à-vis intrinsic A-A capability of the two platforms. I remain skeptical that the two are nearly equal in the A-A domain.

To the question of bringing Block 20 jets up to 30+ standard, one problem is the low MCR of the F-22 fleet exacerbated by its small size. Most of the low MCR is because of LO restore. Now if you could improve MCR with LO system improvements by even 12% you’d break even with the idea of bringing 33 jets up to Block 30 standards (w/o this upgrade obviously.) Any improvement over 12% MCR is just gravy at that point. I’d be fine with that approach, especially if it’s less costly. I know that one of the areas they are looking at for the MLU is signature improvements so I’d assume that improvements to LO restore and durability are in the mix as well.

I’ve recently read a CSBA paper on future force structure and its interesting that they do not believe that 5th Gen platforms will not be able to operate in what they’re calling Highly Contested Environments. In this context 5th Gen fighters will not be able to penetrate and persist without a more traditional IADS rollback. The authors contend that this is going to be too slow and that we must be able to penetrate and carry out attacks simultaneously with rolling back IADS operations. Even more interesting is that the authors suggest that a PCA must be manned and fully capable of operating autonomously without requiring network support. a

I agree with this but I believe what you mean is one on one.
yes the F-35 should be more capable than any other potential adversary 1 on 1 but there will be F-35 operators (like S.Korea or Japan) that will contend will large numbers of Chinese 4th gens.

I would disagree as with the F-35's advantage is Sensor Fusion. It should do better than the F-22 with multiple aircraft. Especially, considering far more F-35's would be available in the first place...Actually, the F-35 is ideally suited to take on a large number of opponents.

I'll have to disagree with the "just as well" part. If you listen to the fighter pilot podcast for both the F-22 and F-35, I noticed a stark difference between how the pilots of each platform describe their aircraft's ability in the air to air arena.

Now while both are confident that they can win any air to air, Col. Terry Scott from the Raptor is just brimming with confidence and lauding how the Raptor was built from the ground up for air to air. The F-35 pilot on the other hand was less confident and said that the F-35 is not a purpose built air to air machine like the Raptor and was built more for SEAD/DEAD roles.

Sorry, a number of other pilots would disagree. Even the former F-35 Chief Test Pilot (Jon Beesley) is on the record that both aircraft operate very similarly. Except for super cruise of course...

Gen. Mike Hostage also said that he needs 8 F-35s where he will only need 2 Raptors for a target. I understand that this is simply an analogy the point is simply that he needs much more F-35s than F-22s.

This isn't always possible specially for limited forward deployed units. And while the F-35 is more fuel efficient and has cost less to maintain per Flight hour than the F-22, I don't think 8 F-35s would cost less than 2 F-22s.

Old quote and I doubt Gen. Hostage beliefs that today with the far more mature F-35 now in service. As a matter of fact I doubt you would find any Senior USAF Leader or F-22/F-35 Pilot that would stand behind that..........

I don't disagree that F-22 upgrades will always be expensive, especially compared to the industrial sized F-35 force, but that doesn't mean its of less value when looking at a budget and capabilities perspective. The real problem is this nonsense of buying F-15EXs. We should buy more F-35s and increase production rate.

The money does have to come from somewhere. But I agree it should be at the expense of the F-15EX buy.

Clearly, upgrading at least some of the older F-22's and buying more F-35's. Makes far more sense than acquiring the F-15EX...

Old quote and I doubt Gen. Hostage beliefs that today with the far more mature F-35 now in service. As a matter of fact I doubt you would find any Senior USAF Leader or F-22/F-35 Pilot that would stand behind that..........

F-35 can do many things, but replacing F-22s is not one of them. Upgraded F-22 will be much more capable in air to air, since it will get many of the sensor capabilities that F-35 has.

If you doubt this, then provide evidence that somehow F-35 can directly replace an upgraded F-22.

Old quote and I doubt Gen. Hostage beliefs that today with the far more mature F-35 now in service. As a matter of fact I doubt you would find any Senior USAF Leader or F-22/F-35 Pilot that would stand behind that..........

F-35 can do many things, but replacing F-22s is not one of them. Upgraded F-22 will be much more capable in air to air, since it will get many of the sensor capabilities that F-35 has.

If you doubt this, then provide evidence that somehow F-35 can directly replace an upgraded F-22.

Sorry, the F-22 isn't getting many of the sensor capabilities of the F-35. Honestly, surprising you would even mention such a thing. As it has been discussed here at length.....

In addition the F-35 has no serious threat today or even in the foreseeable future. So, hardly matters if the F-22 is or "isn't more capable. (i.e. Air Superiority Role)

Old quote and I doubt Gen. Hostage beliefs that today with the far more mature F-35 now in service. As a matter of fact I doubt you would find any Senior USAF Leader or F-22/F-35 Pilot that would stand behind that..........

Its not old, it was barely 6 years ago and the capabilities of the F-35 now were already known back then. In fact if you look at his statements, he said that if an F-35 was to be caught in a dogfight it would have the maneuverability and thrust to weight of an F-16.

So he was not referring to a block 2A F-35 in 2014 which was limited to 3Gs IIRC, he was already referring to a mature block 3F version with a full 9G envelope. He already knew what the F-35 would be capable of in 2020 and thats where he based his statements.

Sorry, the F-22 isn't getting many of the sensor capabilities of the F-35. Honestly, surprising you would even mention such a thing. As it has been discussed here at length.....

Much of the F-35's sensor advantages over the F-22 are more pronounced in the A-G role than the A-A role. in fact in the
A-A the F-22 still holds some major advantages in sensors over the F-35, the AN/ALR-94 has 30 receiver antennas where as the F-35's AN-ASQ-239 only has 10. The APG-77(v1) uses the same T/R modules as the APG-81 and its bigger and more powerful. These 2 systems provide the Raptor with more than enough SA to conduct A-A.

And contrary to what Ret. Col David Chip Burke said about speed and maneuverability being the "least impressive" thing about the F-22, Ret Col. Terry Scott said in the fighterpilot podcast that the Raptor's flight control were his choice when asked what was the F-22's best strong suite. He also said the super cruise was crucial in that the difference between .9 mach and 1.5 mach is so great because the enemy cannot defend.

Much of the F-35's sensor advantages over the F-22 are more pronounced in the A-G role than the A-A role. in fact in the
A-A the F-22 still holds some major advantages in sensors over the F-35, the AN/ALR-94 has 30 receiver antennas where as the F-35's AN-ASQ-239 only has 10. The APG-77(v1) uses the same T/R modules as the APG-81 and its bigger and more powerful. These 2 systems provide the Raptor with more than enough SA to conduct A-A.

I agree with the radar, although the difference is not nearly as big as between F-15 and F-16 for example. F-35 has huge antenna for its size.

I think the number of EW system antennas is not necessarily indicative of the capabilties of the system. It might mean that AN/ASQ-239 antennas are more capable individually than those in AN/ALR-94. It seems that they are supposed to be about equally capable systems but AN/ASQ-239 is significantly lower cost and weight due to using newer technology:

https://www.aviationtoday.com/2006/04/0 ... rotection/

At the EW system level, the F-35 will about equal the F-22 in performance, Branyan predicts. But because the newer aircraft's EW suite was developed from the start for reliability and affordability, it promises twice the reliability at half the cost, compared with legacy aircraft.

I agree that F-22 has supercruise and the kind of supersonic acceleration and maneuverability that F-35 don't have and never will. But avionics wise, I think F-35 is surprisingly close to F-22 in most capabilities and has some capabilities that the F-22 doesn't have and probably never will (long range EO system, EO DAS and HMD). Of course we can debate what importance each of those have in air-to-air combat.

Old quote and I doubt Gen. Hostage beliefs that today with the far more mature F-35 now in service. As a matter of fact I doubt you would find any Senior USAF Leader or F-22/F-35 Pilot that would stand behind that..........

Its not old, it was barely 6 years ago and the capabilities of the F-35 now were already known back then. In fact if you look at his statements, he said that if an F-35 was to be caught in a dogfight it would have the maneuverability and thrust to weight of an F-16.

So he was not referring to a block 2A F-35 in 2014 which was limited to 3Gs IIRC, he was already referring to a mature block 3F version with a full 9G envelope. He already knew what the F-35 would be capable of in 2020 and thats where he based his statements.

Sorry, the F-22 isn't getting many of the sensor capabilities of the F-35. Honestly, surprising you would even mention such a thing. As it has been discussed here at length.....

Much of the F-35's sensor advantages over the F-22 are more pronounced in the A-G role than the A-A role. in fact in the
A-A the F-22 still holds some major advantages in sensors over the F-35, the AN/ALR-94 has 30 receiver antennas where as the F-35's AN-ASQ-239 only has 10. The APG-77(v1) uses the same T/R modules as the APG-81 and its bigger and more powerful. These 2 systems provide the Raptor with more than enough SA to conduct A-A.

And contrary to what Ret. Col David Chip Burke said about speed and maneuverability being the "least impressive" thing about the F-22, Ret Col. Terry Scott said in the fighterpilot podcast that the Raptor's flight control were his choice when asked what was the F-22's best strong suite. He also said the super cruise was crucial in that the difference between .9 mach and 1.5 mach is so great because the enemy cannot defend.

You're “Picking and Choosing” what you want to hear. Sorry, the consensus of sources don't agree with much of your assessment.

Sure the F-22 does have some advantages. Especially, at height and supercruise. Yet, in some respects that is even questionable. Because at supercruise speeds even on Military Power. You're still consuming greats amounts of fuel. This in turn limits your time on station. While, your infrared signature is much much higher. (not good for a stealth fighter) So, again what's the benefit??? This is not to say it doesn't have a benefit. Yet, to what extent and how often would you actually use it in most scenarios??? It's all about trade offs...


Honestly, your back to the same old argument we've heard for years now. Back to close in dogfights with guns blazing!


Yet, in the "Real World" it will be a BVR Fight at some distance in the majority of cases. This is the world the F-35 with it's advantages in Stealth and Sensor Fusion thrive in....


My point was just asking the question is the trade off of upgrading the older F-22's vs buying new F-35's worth it...


Answer...........maybe not???

I agree that F-22 has supercruise and the kind of supersonic acceleration and maneuverability that F-35 don't have and never will. But avionics wise, I think F-35 is surprisingly close to F-22 in most capabilities and has some capabilities that the F-22 doesn't have and probably never will (long range EO system, EO DAS and HMD). Of course we can debate what importance each of those have in air-to-air combat.

Number of antennas don't tell how capable a system is, it may be better to look at band coverage instead.

F-22 upgrade funding includes new sensors, including a "multispectral" sensor so eventually F-22 may get an IRST and also get software to have DAS enabled in the MLD. Once these upgrades are included, F-22 will be much more effective at air to air than F-35.

Sorry, the F-22 isn't getting many of the sensor capabilities of the F-35. Honestly, surprising you would even mention such a thing. As it has been discussed here at length.....

In addition the F-35 has no serious threat today or even in the foreseeable future. So, hardly matters if the F-22 is or "isn't more capable. (i.e. Air Superiority Role)

F-22 upgrade is manned to have new sensors including a "multispectral" sensor which likely will be IRST. With that, and with software upgrades that enable DAS, there is not much difference in sensor capabilities between upgraded F-22 and F-35.

Of course it matters that we have a more capable air to air fighter than F-35, that's what F-22 is meant for, and why they're still spending money on upgrades, and why they're also ramping up on PCA to go even beyond what F-22 can do. F-35 is not the end all be all.

You will "never" be able to upgrade the F-22 to the same level of the F-35 in many respects. Honestly, this has been discussed at length more than once.

You will "never" be able to upgrade the F-22 to the same level of the F-35 in many respects. Honestly, this has been discussed at length more than once.

We're not talking strike, or air to ground. This is air to air. Give evidence that F-22 can't be upgraded to same level as F-35 for air to air.

You will "never" be able to upgrade the F-22 to the same level of the F-35 in many respects. Honestly, this has been discussed at length more than once.

We're not talking strike, or air to ground. This is air to air. Give evidence that F-22 can't be upgraded to same level as F-35 for air to air.

The infrared sensors for one. Hell, the cockpit couldn't use the existing F-35 Helmet. Because it wouldn't fit the pilot within the cockpit. So, a compromise had to be found....


Overall the F-35 has much better Sensor Fusion and always will....

BTW - You never answered my question on what threat the F-22 could counter but the F-35 could not???