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

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

charlielima223

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1698
  • Joined: 12 Jan 2014, 19:26

Unread post23 Sep 2022, 00:35

garrya wrote:they look the same i think
Capture.PNG


AIRST and EOTS? Whose to say the F-22 cant have both? I know that its upgrade path calls for a dedicated IRST for air-to-air engagements but having EOTS would give the F-22 better target ID and more air-to-ground capabilities.
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

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

Unread post23 Sep 2022, 07:36

disconnectedradical wrote:
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.


It's not really clear if F-22 IRST system is better or even equal to EOTS in air-to-air either. While F-22 IRST is dedicated for air-to-air, EOTS doesn't need to be any less capable or less suited in that role especially as IRST functionality was designed into it from the beginning. Traditional targeting pods/FLIR systems didn't have that functionality as they were dedicated for air-to-ground targeting and they were external systems which were not deeply integrated with other avionics (for target detection and tracking capability). So that's why they have lacked IRST functionality. Modern targeting pods/FLIR systems also have IRST functionality as they have much more capable processing systems and are much more integrated with the avionics systems. EOTS goes much further than that as it's fully integrated part of the avionics and was designed for both FLIR and IRST functionality from the start.

EOTS definitely has advantages in air-to-air compared to pretty much any IRST system. It likely has significantly longer range ID capability along with accurate range measurement with laser range finder. If we compare Advanced EOTS to say F-22 IRST, then it adds SWIR and HDTV sensors which would further enhance ID performance against both air and ground targets. Detection capability is really difficult to compare as so many things affect that like optics, detector, processing hardware and software.
Offline

milosh

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1938
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 23:40
  • Location: Serbia, Belgrade

Unread post23 Sep 2022, 09:36

And how we know AIRST isn't repacked EOTS? Maybe without some capability of EOTS but more less similar sensor and optics?
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 27926
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post23 Sep 2022, 09:49

milosh wrote:And how we know AIRST isn't repacked EOTS? Maybe without some capability of EOTS but more less similar sensor and optics?

How do we know anything? We use references to HOW WE KNOW otherwise it is all just guesswork and I told you so?
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos
Offline

milosh

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1938
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 23:40
  • Location: Serbia, Belgrade

Unread post23 Sep 2022, 09:54

spazsinbad wrote:
milosh wrote:And how we know AIRST isn't repacked EOTS? Maybe without some capability of EOTS but more less similar sensor and optics?

How do we know anything? We use references to HOW WE KNOW otherwise it is all just guesswork and I told you so?


Well to me it is logical to use EOTS sensor and optics, logistic and cost wise that is why I ask question. If I used wrong terms sorry english isn't my native language.
Offline

disconnectedradical

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

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

Unread post23 Sep 2022, 10:13

charlielima223 wrote:
garrya wrote:they look the same i think
Capture.PNG


AIRST and EOTS? Whose to say the F-22 cant have both? I know that its upgrade path calls for a dedicated IRST for air-to-air engagements but having EOTS would give the F-22 better target ID and more air-to-ground capabilities.


The F-22 AIRST pods are longer than the Sniper ATP or Legion Pod, but I don’t think it uses the same kind of sensor and doesn’t have the gimbal head that can look further down.
Offline

disconnectedradical

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

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

Unread post23 Sep 2022, 10:36

hornetfinn wrote:It's not really clear if F-22 IRST system is better or even equal to EOTS in air-to-air either. While F-22 IRST is dedicated for air-to-air, EOTS doesn't need to be any less capable or less suited in that role especially as IRST functionality was designed into it from the beginning. Traditional targeting pods/FLIR systems didn't have that functionality as they were dedicated for air-to-ground targeting and they were external systems which were not deeply integrated with other avionics (for target detection and tracking capability). So that's why they have lacked IRST functionality. Modern targeting pods/FLIR systems also have IRST functionality as they have much more capable processing systems and are much more integrated with the avionics systems. EOTS goes much further than that as it's fully integrated part of the avionics and was designed for both FLIR and IRST functionality from the start.

EOTS definitely has advantages in air-to-air compared to pretty much any IRST system. It likely has significantly longer range ID capability along with accurate range measurement with laser range finder. If we compare Advanced EOTS to say F-22 IRST, then it adds SWIR and HDTV sensors which would further enhance ID performance against both air and ground targets. Detection capability is really difficult to compare as so many things affect that like optics, detector, processing hardware and software.


It’s unlikely an EOTS is as optimized for air to air as F-22 AIRST, and we don’t even know what the full capabilities of AIRST will be other than the test pilot statement that it allows single ship passive targeting. As for FLIR pod being as capable for air to air, why is LM developing the Legion Pod/IRST21 instead of just offering an upgraded Sniper ATP pod? There were even F-15s in Iceland with Sniper ATP being used as IRST a few years ago but they’re phasing those out for Legion Pod.
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

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

Unread post23 Sep 2022, 11:50

disconnectedradical wrote:It’s unlikely an EOTS is as optimized for air to air as F-22 AIRST, and we don’t even know what the full capabilities of AIRST will be other than the test pilot statement that it allows single ship passive targeting. As for FLIR pod being as capable for air to air, why is LM developing the Legion Pod/IRST21 instead of just offering an upgraded Sniper ATP pod? There were even F-15s in Iceland with Sniper ATP being used as IRST a few years ago but they’re phasing those out for Legion Pod.


What optimizations there could be in F-22 IRST system compared to EOTS?

As for why use Legion pod instead of Sniper ATP pod, I think it's because of pod-to-pod data link and because air-to-air functionality was just an afterthought for these targeting pods. So they lack automatic target detection and tracking capability (hardware and software to do that). So they work just fine for ID'ing targets detected and tracked by radar but they are not good for searching and tracking targets as they lack the equipment and software to do so.

EOTS is totally different as it connects directly to F-35 avionics system and the sensor fusion engine directly manages and tasks it. So it has similar capabilties as both Legion pod and Sniper ATP pod because F-35 other systems provide search, tracking, automatic ID (sensor fusion system) and high-speed data link (MADL). F-22 system is also different from Legion pod as F-22 avionics system can likely provide those things without having those capabilities (data link and target search/tracking functionality) in the pods. The pod likely just has the sensor, cooling and initial processing (image processing for example).
Offline

disconnectedradical

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

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

Unread post29 Sep 2022, 03:37

hornetfinn wrote:
disconnectedradical wrote:It’s unlikely an EOTS is as optimized for air to air as F-22 AIRST, and we don’t even know what the full capabilities of AIRST will be other than the test pilot statement that it allows single ship passive targeting. As for FLIR pod being as capable for air to air, why is LM developing the Legion Pod/IRST21 instead of just offering an upgraded Sniper ATP pod? There were even F-15s in Iceland with Sniper ATP being used as IRST a few years ago but they’re phasing those out for Legion Pod.


What optimizations there could be in F-22 IRST system compared to EOTS?

As for why use Legion pod instead of Sniper ATP pod, I think it's because of pod-to-pod data link and because air-to-air functionality was just an afterthought for these targeting pods. So they lack automatic target detection and tracking capability (hardware and software to do that). So they work just fine for ID'ing targets detected and tracked by radar but they are not good for searching and tracking targets as they lack the equipment and software to do so.

EOTS is totally different as it connects directly to F-35 avionics system and the sensor fusion engine directly manages and tasks it. So it has similar capabilties as both Legion pod and Sniper ATP pod because F-35 other systems provide search, tracking, automatic ID (sensor fusion system) and high-speed data link (MADL). F-22 system is also different from Legion pod as F-22 avionics system can likely provide those things without having those capabilities (data link and target search/tracking functionality) in the pods. The pod likely just has the sensor, cooling and initial processing (image processing for example).


The details of F-22 AIRST is scare because it’s still being developed and tested but it’s supposed to offer single ship targeting. When it comes to sensor fusion, the F-35 in many ways was built on the F-22, which also has highly integrated avionics and same family of sensors, with an AESA radar, BAE EW system, all-aspect IR sensors (F-22’s sensors are only missile warning, but software to allow DAS capability has been talked about for a while). The fusion engine of the F-22 is also why it’s harder to upgrade compared to older aircraft. Yes, the F-35 has more lines of code than the F-22, but it’s also designed for far greater range of missions other than air to air, particularly for strike.

Put it another way, what prevents F-22 AIRST from being as capable as F-35 EOTS for air to air?
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

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

Unread post29 Sep 2022, 08:42

disconnectedradical wrote:
hornetfinn wrote:What optimizations there could be in F-22 IRST system compared to EOTS?

As for why use Legion pod instead of Sniper ATP pod, I think it's because of pod-to-pod data link and because air-to-air functionality was just an afterthought for these targeting pods. So they lack automatic target detection and tracking capability (hardware and software to do that). So they work just fine for ID'ing targets detected and tracked by radar but they are not good for searching and tracking targets as they lack the equipment and software to do so.

EOTS is totally different as it connects directly to F-35 avionics system and the sensor fusion engine directly manages and tasks it. So it has similar capabilties as both Legion pod and Sniper ATP pod because F-35 other systems provide search, tracking, automatic ID (sensor fusion system) and high-speed data link (MADL). F-22 system is also different from Legion pod as F-22 avionics system can likely provide those things without having those capabilities (data link and target search/tracking functionality) in the pods. The pod likely just has the sensor, cooling and initial processing (image processing for example).


The details of F-22 AIRST is scare because it’s still being developed and tested but it’s supposed to offer single ship targeting. When it comes to sensor fusion, the F-35 in many ways was built on the F-22, which also has highly integrated avionics and same family of sensors, with an AESA radar, BAE EW system, all-aspect IR sensors (F-22’s sensors are only missile warning, but software to allow DAS capability has been talked about for a while). The fusion engine of the F-22 is also why it’s harder to upgrade compared to older aircraft. Yes, the F-35 has more lines of code than the F-22, but it’s also designed for far greater range of missions other than air to air, particularly for strike.

Put it another way, what prevents F-22 AIRST from being as capable as F-35 EOTS for air to air?


Nothing really prevents F-22 IRST being as capable as EOTS except money, but there is also nothing that prevents EOTS being as good for air-to-air. EOTS could very well be better for ID purposes due to very high magnification optics and very long range laser finder will give it ability to measure distance to target very accurately, giving very good firing solution capability. We really don't know and I don't even think it matters as they won't be fighting each other. IRST for F-22 will give it new capabilties which will make it even better than it was.

F-22 MLD won't be nearly as good as EO DAS in F-35 without upgrading the sensors, giving new software and similar helmet as that in F-35. Those won't likely happen but all-around short range IRST will be good in many situation still.

F-22 is a monster in air-to-air combat but so is F-35 but in different ways. Both have VLO stealth but F-22 has unique flight performance. F-35 has overall superior sensor system, sensor fusion system and probably also networking as it was designed to fight in groups even more than F-22. Of course both have extremely good sensors and sensor fusion, so the differences can be pretty meaningless especially in air-to-air. For air-to-ground operations F-35 wins hands down but that's what it was designed for. I think in real war these aircraft would be working together a lot using the strengths of each one. Then either one having better stealth or sensors doesn't really matter much.
Previous

Return to F-35 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests