Is the F-35 stealthier than the F-22?

The F-35 compared with other modern jets.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8966
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post19 Sep 2022, 00:56

disconnectedradical wrote:
ricnunes wrote:While it's correct that the F-35 EOTS is larger because it includes a FLIR/EO and Laser tracking/spotting sensors on top of the IRST functions which by the way are provided by the same SNIPER FLIR/EO sensor, the FLIR/EO isn't used only for Air-to-Ground roles only. The FLIR/EO sensor also provides an invaluable complement to the IRST functions in air-to-air roles such as for example identifying targets much better (with much better confidence and image quality) and at much longer ranges than what any IRST could ever do.
So here's another advantage regarding the F-35 EO/IRST suite (on top of being mounted internally).


A FLIR/EO sensor does not automatically have better target identification capability than an IRST. Where are you getting this from? The IRST itself is a narrow FOV sensor that can provide IR imagery. A FLIR sensor like EOTS is better for strike because it’s window is pointed primarily downwards. The F-35 EOTS and F-22 AIRST are both narrow FOV IR sensors, so there’s nothing to say that the EOTS can somehow do target identification better.

You’re being too defensive of the F-35 and won’t concede anything that another aircraft can do better. The upgrades that the F-22 getting like AIRST, mission system upgrades, etc are dedicated for air to air, so once upgrade the F-35 won’t be a match, which is why the USAF considers the NGAD the successor, not the F-35. Just like how the F-22 can’t so F-35’s strike missions. For how minimalist the IRST pods are and how they’re shaped specifically for stealth, they probably won’t affect an F-22 versus F-35 stealth comparison in a manner that’s significant, especially when AIRST provides greatly enhanced targeting capability.


LOL

You're the one being to defensive! I've seen nothing in the future upgrades. That give the Raptor a significant advantage over the F-35. Even if that was the case. Hardly, matters because we aren't talking F-22 vs F-35. We are talking about F-22 and/or F-35 vs the real enemy threat!

Hell, odds actually favor the F-22 being retired by 2030. Leaving the F-35 to soldier on until the NGAD arrives in ~ 2040.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8966
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post19 Sep 2022, 01:12

wrightwing wrote:
No, a VLO pod will not increase the RCS more than an AIM-9X (which isn't VLO). RCS isn't based upon bulk. It's based upon shape and materials.
By going external, it also allows for a larger aperture (more range), than an internal IRST. The twin pods also allow for a single ship geo-location, as well as having room for additional EW, etc.... systems.


You have a source that says the new External IRST for the F-22. Actually, don't have a larger RCS than the AIM-9Xs on the F-35??? (They will effect performance!)

Also, the F-35 doesn't have to carry the external Sidewinders. The F-22 does have to carry the External IRST. Unless it wants to give up that important capability!




Sensor fusion has nothing to do with whether the sensor is internally/externally mounted. Everything about the F-22s avionics/computers/sensors are being upgraded, so you have to stop thinking in terms of legacy F-22 configurations. They're testing NGAD avionics on F-22s, so you can be assured that these systems will filter down to the fleet, once validated. If it helps, think of these mods as an F-22EX, where there's very little in common with the original aircraft, aside from the airframe/engines.


None of the F-22 upgrades will give the Raptor Sensor Fusion on the scale of the F-35 that is without question....

Plus, just because they may use the F-22 as a test bed for certain NGAD components. Hardly, translates in anything trickling down to the F-22...again odds favor the Raptor retiring sometime in the next several years.

In short this is likely the last upgrade the aircraft is likely to see.
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4094
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post19 Sep 2022, 06:31

Corsair1963 wrote:



LOL

You're the one being to defensive! I've seen nothing in the future upgrades. That give the Raptor a significant advantage over the F-35. Even if that was the case. Hardly, matters because we aren't talking F-22 vs F-35. We are talking about F-22 and/or F-35 vs the real enemy threat!

Hell, odds actually favor the F-22 being retired by 2030. Leaving the F-35 to soldier on until the NGAD arrives in ~ 2040.

The odds favor the F-22 remaining in service as the premier A2A fighter until NGAD enters service in sufficient numbers and maturity, to replace it. You don't spend the next decade upgrading F-22s, to retire them the following year, when there's already a shortage of aircraft.
Offline

disconnectedradical

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1236
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2010, 00:44
  • Location: San Antonio, TX

Unread post19 Sep 2022, 07:34

ricnunes wrote:You must be joking, right??
IRST's use less quality IR imagery which allows higher contrast which makes it easier to detect aircraft at longer ranges.
A FLIR uses higher IR quality imagery - to the point of for example allowing to see and identify a man with an AK-47 for example. While technically FLIR's like the SNIPER have lower contrast (but higher image quality) the F-35's advanced software allows the FLIR to be used as an IRST and still be able to detect targets at long ranges like a traditional IRST would.

Bottom line, FLIR has better image quality than IRST which obviously gives the FLIR much better target identification capabilities while at the same time the advanced software allows it to detect targets at long distances like a traditional IRST would!


No, both IRST and FLIR are narrow FOV sensors, so IRST would not have lower quality IR imager. Did you try comparing SNIPER to an IRST with the same generation imager? Old IRSTs are only in long wave which has less resolution than EOTS midwave, but modern IRST comes in variety of wavelengths, for example the PIRATE which is a older system uses dual band midwave and long wave. The EOTS is not a magical sensor that is a better IRST than a dedicated IRST itself, and with F-22 also being such a software driven aircraft the kind of image processing is also very applicable.

Your image examples don't have any context like what distances the images are taken, etc. For aircraft target ID a color TV makes no difference.

ricnunes wrote:I guess that I could say the same about you regarding the F-22! At least I can concede (and conceded several times here) that the F-22 has better kinematics than the F-35.
As opposed, it's you who cannot seem to concede the limitations of the F-22 when it comes to IRST and how a podded solution is not an ideal (and half-baked) one! And you even go to the point of saying that the F-35 won’t be a match for the F-22 when the not-ideal IRST pod solution is implement, go figure :doh:


The F-35 is not a match for F-22 in air to air, because that's not what it's optimized for. The podded AIRST, not as ideal as an internal sensor, is not half-baked either, otherwise they would just slap a Legion Pod under the wing. They're deliberately shaped to have as little RCS impact as possible. Will it have limitations? Yes, and moreso than an internal sensor, but quite marginal when shaped correctly, and the added capability in passive targeting and other additions is worth it. There was a statement by F-35 PM Tom Burbage that the F-35 wingtip AIM-9X adds little to the RCS, so a slick pod roughly the size of a missile that's specifically shaped to be stealthy will have an even smaller impact, especially from the front.

So yes, the F-22 with a stealthy shaped IRST pod is superior to an F-35 in air to air. It trades a bit of RCS for greatly increased passive targeting capability. Evidently the USAF thinks this is a worthy addition, and there is nothing to suggest that a pod specifically shaped to be stealthy will have bigger RCS than an AIM-9 like you're suggesting.
Offline

disconnectedradical

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1236
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2010, 00:44
  • Location: San Antonio, TX

Unread post19 Sep 2022, 07:41

Corsair1963 wrote:LOL

You're the one being to defensive! I've seen nothing in the future upgrades. That give the Raptor a significant advantage over the F-35. Even if that was the case. Hardly, matters because we aren't talking F-22 vs F-35. We are talking about F-22 and/or F-35 vs the real enemy threat!

Hell, odds actually favor the F-22 being retired by 2030. Leaving the F-35 to soldier on until the NGAD arrives in ~ 2040.


:roll:

The F-35 is not replacing the F-22, period. The USAF has said time and time again that the successor to the F-22 is NGAD, and F-22 retirement will only happen when NGAD becomes operational, no matter how many F-35s there are or how good you think it is. So your absurd fantasies have little to do with what USAF actually plans for.

The F-22 upgrade funding goes to 2031, and somehow you think it will retire in 2030? :doh:
Offline

jessmo112

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1045
  • Joined: 16 Mar 2020, 02:09

Unread post19 Sep 2022, 08:42

1. The F-22 Super cruises at Mach 1.7+
The F-35 cannot.

2. The F-22 has a better stealth A2A load.

3. The F-22 is more agile, better T/W, better turning.

The F-35 is a great plane but the F-22 is a better a2a platform period.
Offline

disconnectedradical

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1236
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2010, 00:44
  • Location: San Antonio, TX

Unread post20 Sep 2022, 15:54

Another example of how physical size doesn’t mean stealthier, look at the F-35 drag chute fairing. Compared to the actual mechanism it’s quite large and bulky, but the larger fairing gives much better stealth characteristics than the smaller drag chute mechanism itself.

https://www.f35.com/f35/news-and-featur ... ystem.html

But anyways, I’ll laugh at Corsair1963 when the F-22 gets AIRST and other upgrades and serve well into the 2030s. Because again, it’s the NGAD, not the F-35, that’s the successor to the F-22, and the F-22 won’t retire until the NGAD comes online (and I’d expect it to serve longer), no matter how many F-35s there are.
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4290
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post21 Sep 2022, 12:47

disconnectedradical wrote:
ricnunes wrote:You must be joking, right??
IRST's use less quality IR imagery which allows higher contrast which makes it easier to detect aircraft at longer ranges.
A FLIR uses higher IR quality imagery - to the point of for example allowing to see and identify a man with an AK-47 for example. While technically FLIR's like the SNIPER have lower contrast (but higher image quality) the F-35's advanced software allows the FLIR to be used as an IRST and still be able to detect targets at long ranges like a traditional IRST would.

Bottom line, FLIR has better image quality than IRST which obviously gives the FLIR much better target identification capabilities while at the same time the advanced software allows it to detect targets at long distances like a traditional IRST would!


No, both IRST and FLIR are narrow FOV sensors, so IRST would not have lower quality IR imager. Did you try comparing SNIPER to an IRST with the same generation imager? Old IRSTs are only in long wave which has less resolution than EOTS midwave, but modern IRST comes in variety of wavelengths, for example the PIRATE which is a older system uses dual band midwave and long wave. The EOTS is not a magical sensor that is a better IRST than a dedicated IRST itself, and with F-22 also being such a software driven aircraft the kind of image processing is also very applicable.


Generally the difference between IRST and FLIR/Targeting pod is that the latter usually has significantly more capable optics. Basically that means that targeting pod systems have higher magnification capability which results in better ID capabilities as they can zoom in better. Usually IRST systems have something like 3-5 degrees FoV in their Narrow FoV mode whereas targeting pods nowadays have less than 1 degree. That's also one major reason why FLIR/Targeting pods are usually significantly larger than IRST systems. EOTS is targeting pod and likely has significantly better ID capabilties due to more capable optics. IRST in F-22 might be better for detecting targets (at least in some cases) but I would bet that EOTS is much better for IDing targets.
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4494
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post21 Sep 2022, 19:54

hornetfinn wrote:
disconnectedradical wrote:
ricnunes wrote:You must be joking, right??
IRST's use less quality IR imagery which allows higher contrast which makes it easier to detect aircraft at longer ranges.
A FLIR uses higher IR quality imagery - to the point of for example allowing to see and identify a man with an AK-47 for example. While technically FLIR's like the SNIPER have lower contrast (but higher image quality) the F-35's advanced software allows the FLIR to be used as an IRST and still be able to detect targets at long ranges like a traditional IRST would.

Bottom line, FLIR has better image quality than IRST which obviously gives the FLIR much better target identification capabilities while at the same time the advanced software allows it to detect targets at long distances like a traditional IRST would!


No, both IRST and FLIR are narrow FOV sensors, so IRST would not have lower quality IR imager. Did you try comparing SNIPER to an IRST with the same generation imager? Old IRSTs are only in long wave which has less resolution than EOTS midwave, but modern IRST comes in variety of wavelengths, for example the PIRATE which is a older system uses dual band midwave and long wave. The EOTS is not a magical sensor that is a better IRST than a dedicated IRST itself, and with F-22 also being such a software driven aircraft the kind of image processing is also very applicable.


Generally the difference between IRST and FLIR/Targeting pod is that the latter usually has significantly more capable optics. Basically that means that targeting pod systems have higher magnification capability which results in better ID capabilities as they can zoom in better. Usually IRST systems have something like 3-5 degrees FoV in their Narrow FoV mode whereas targeting pods nowadays have less than 1 degree. That's also one major reason why FLIR/Targeting pods are usually significantly larger than IRST systems. EOTS is targeting pod and likely has significantly better ID capabilties due to more capable optics. IRST in F-22 might be better for detecting targets (at least in some cases) but I would bet that EOTS is much better for IDing targets.


DITTO hornetfinn! :thumb:

I hope that puts to rest any "wishful thinking" (or should I say "being defensive") that IRSTs have just as good image quality than FLIR/EO sensors!
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call ECM and pretend like it’s new.
Offline

disconnectedradical

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1236
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2010, 00:44
  • Location: San Antonio, TX

Unread post21 Sep 2022, 20:05

hornetfinn wrote:Generally the difference between IRST and FLIR/Targeting pod is that the latter usually has significantly more capable optics. Basically that means that targeting pod systems have higher magnification capability which results in better ID capabilities as they can zoom in better. Usually IRST systems have something like 3-5 degrees FoV in their Narrow FoV mode whereas targeting pods nowadays have less than 1 degree. That's also one major reason why FLIR/Targeting pods are usually significantly larger than IRST systems. EOTS is targeting pod and likely has significantly better ID capabilties due to more capable optics. IRST in F-22 might be better for detecting targets (at least in some cases) but I would bet that EOTS is much better for IDing targets.


Interesting, thanks for clearing up on the optics and magnification of IRST versus FLIR. For against aerial targets the PID capability of FLIR wouldn’t be quite as significant compared to smaller ground targets. The whole point of the argument is the statement that the F-35’s EOTS will be better for air to air than the F-22’s AIRST itself.

ricnunes wrote:DITTO hornetfinn! :thumb:

I hope that puts to rest any "wishful thinking" (or should I say "being defensive") that IRSTs have just as good image quality than FLIR/EO sensors!


FLIR sensor having higher magnification optics allowing for better ID is a tradeoff for an IRST to have better target detection. Your defensiveness is you asserting that a FLIR is a better IRST than a dedicated IRST system and using that as the basis for the F-35 somehow having superior sensors for air to air. The F-22’s AIRST is a dedicated system that will be integrated into the F-22’s avionics, and will be superior to F-35’s EOTS because that’s literally the primary role, while air to air on the EOTS is secondary.

Your whole argument is trying to counter the F-22’s superiority in air to air compared to the F-35 by arguing sensors and stealth advantage. For air to air, the F-35’s EOTS is capable but the F-22’s AIRST is a dedicated air to air system that makes better suited for the job. Similarly Tom Burbage, the F-35’s program manager, even said that wingtip AIM-9X has very small impact on RCS, so a pair of AIRST pods specifically shaped to be stealthy is even better in this regard. Not as ideal as an internal sensor, but it won’t suddenly make the F-22 somehow completely outclassed by the F-35. Again I’m talking only air to air. The F-35 is a better aircraft for many other things, air to air isn’t one of them.
Offline

henshao

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 86
  • Joined: 09 Feb 2010, 01:24

Unread post21 Sep 2022, 21:32

I find it interesting there are going to be two pods...
Offline

disconnectedradical

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1236
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2010, 00:44
  • Location: San Antonio, TX

Unread post21 Sep 2022, 22:01

Only the left pod has the IRST apertures, while the right one seems opaque. The right pod might be for ESM/ECM or CommNav. It’s not big enough for offensive EW, but it may be able to house defensive EW systems.
Offline

garrya

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1017
  • Joined: 25 Dec 2015, 12:43

Unread post22 Sep 2022, 02:59

disconnectedradical wrote:Only the left pod has the IRST apertures, while the right one seems opaque. The right pod might be for ESM/ECM or CommNav. It’s not big enough for offensive EW, but it may be able to house defensive EW systems.

they look the same i think
Capture.PNG
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4094
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post22 Sep 2022, 21:12

garrya wrote:
disconnectedradical wrote:Only the left pod has the IRST apertures, while the right one seems opaque. The right pod might be for ESM/ECM or CommNav. It’s not big enough for offensive EW, but it may be able to house defensive EW systems.

they look the same i think
Capture.PNG

They very likely both contain IRST sensors, along with whatever other systems that can be fit inside. That would allow for a single ship passive ranging.
Offline

henshao

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 86
  • Joined: 09 Feb 2010, 01:24

Unread post22 Sep 2022, 22:25

wrightwing wrote:They very likely both contain IRST sensors, along with whatever other systems that can be fit inside. That would allow for a single ship passive ranging.


raptors are indeed known for their binocular vision

Image

field of view may also be an objective
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests