F-22 Raptor Thread

[Air Force Brat]

Unofficialy, there are rumors that Air Force purposely mislead public about those mock combats, in order to gather more support for new birds. This may, or may not be true, but you got to remember that current lot of USAF F-15s is not equipped with latest gadgets for WVR combat , while potential adversaries will be . Anyway, I somehow doubt that F-22 could single-handedly beat 8 F-15s in close combat , if they attack all at once . More likely those encounters were one-on-one duels , where F-22 won 8 times in a row.




Well, it is not that easy . For one airplane to use radar signals from another plane, you would need time base synchronization and precise difference in coordinates between two aircraft to calculate position of the target . Therefore, F-15 would have to first detect F-22 and then transmit both the radar signal and its own relative position and time to F-22 . F-22 would then calculate position of the target with information from F-15 and reflected signal from the target .

In reality , more likely approach will be triangulation . For example,AWACS will stay behind and emit at maximum power, while 2 F-22 move forward without emission and listen for reflected signal from different angles, and then exchange information via data-link .

Chief Thundercloud, you really should know better than to post blatant Bravo Sierra on the Sino Defense Forum, and really if you have no greater understanding of the USAF or the F-22 and her capabilities, please don't post your baseless acusations and innuendos. Its a very poor man that "discredits" those who are more noble and honorable than himself, I would certainly hate to think that you sir fall into this category. So for the benefit of your own integrity, please post the source of these rumours and their context, and if you are unable to do so, please print a sincere retraction and apology. The F-22s capabilities are not fully known and some are "top secret", but these figures are common knowledge from the first F-22 squadron stood up on the East Coast. To discredit this magnificent airplane, with your own delusions of grandeur is a dishonor to the integrity of the Sino Defense Forum, and I believe may be grounds for the special title reserved for those who deliberately mislead other members, who are here for the best information available on a "civilian websight".

I have kind of taken a liking to you, but I deplore the posting of inaccurate information, and you sir, know better, so post that source or the apology please, and thank you, brat.

 

[TerraN_EmpirE]

F15C-D may lack IRST but F16C-D doesn't. Photographs can be produced easily from blogs like Alpha Foxtrot, Aviation Iintel and The Aviationist showing Aggressor squad F16C and D wearing IR targeting pods. And if those pods are there they were there to try against F22 and since we have not heard a massive bragging about the hit to kill ratio of F16 to F22 the case can be made that Raptor is top bird.

It’s not a matter of trying to kill him, but to see how long you can survive!” as “Rico” says in “Viper Force: 56th Fighter Wing–To Fly and Fight the F-16″ book by Lt. Col. Robert “Cricket” Renner USAF (Ret.).

that quote is taken from a Viper driver regarding dueling with Raptors. I got it from the Aviationist.http://theaviationist.com/2012/12/10/viper-dogfight/

 

[Inst]

On the other hand, Typhoon and Rafale operators seem to report that the F-22 is not that exceptional in WVR combat; it has a good turn radius, true, but its true sphere of domination is in BVR, where no 4th or 4.5th gen fighter can touch it due to its stealth, speed, and radar advantage.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

With regards to F-16s with IRST vs F-22, you may have 40km or 80km range against the F-22 with your IRST, but if he's seeing you out at 200km with his radar you're going to be toast because AMRAAM is going to lock and NEZ you before you can even get a shot off.

The old argument that IR detection can defeat stealth with 4th gens never really took off, simply because 4th gens aren't stealthy enough to survive long enough to take advantage of their IR systems. However, if you change the terms to battles involving 5th gen fighters instead, the calculation changes because now the IRST will be the first detector.

Another issue that Gambit highlighted previously, is that missile targeting systems have difficulty tracking the 5th gen fighters due to signature flicker, even at extremely close range. That's where the 5th gen's RCS spikes and drops constantly as it changes orientation, so even if your missile gets a temporary lock on the 5th gen aircraft, it won't be able to keep it. This either needs a software fix or upgrading to dual-mode or even triple-mode seekers with IR/Optical/radar.

===

If you're going to talk about the YF-23, the true pity of that debacle was not that the Raptor won, but that Northrup sucked so much. Considering the size, stealth, and kinematics of the YF-23, if properly developed it would have been a better fighter going into 2030 than the Raptor would be; it would be faster, stealthier, have better range, and better payload. The problem is that Lockmart worked harder to win the contract, while Northrup Grummann was lazy and complacent.

The YF-23 and the YF-22 have been described, respectively, as parts of the ATF program, as the aircraft the Air Force asked for and the aircraft the Air Force actually wanted. The YF-23 definitely did better than the YF-22 in meeting the requirements of the ATF program, but Lockheed bothered to try to ask themselves what would actually win the contract and what would get the Air Force to go with their program. Thus, they sacrificed the stated aims of the ATF to go for better maneuverability with thrust vectoring, alongside a smaller, cheaper, and less risky airframe.

Northrup, on the other hand, was like the student that only looks at the face value requirement of the ATF. They tried to make the best ATF-specced fighter that was possible, without actually aiming to win the contest by understanding and exploiting the psychology and politics of the Air Force. Lockmart actually requested and received 6 extra months for both programs to finish their designs, which Lockmart used to finish perfecting the YF-22 prototype, while Northrup Grumman sat on their asses.

As a result, there is no F-23, which would have had better IR control features, a larger wing area, a larger radome, better range (AFB claims that the YF-22 outranged the YF-23, but the YF-23 had a larger wing area to begin with and had better supersonic performance, meaning that it would have been less draggy), and a better payload (with the larger wing area, alongside the more structurally stable diamond wings, the F-23 would have been able to hoist aloft a larger payload than the F-22).

 

[Air Force Brat]

On the other hand, Typhoon and Rafale operators seem to report that the F-22 is not that exceptional in WVR combat; it has a good turn radius, true, but its true sphere of domination is in BVR, where no 4th or 4.5th gen fighter can touch it due to its stealth, speed, and radar advantage.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

With regards to F-16s with IRST vs F-22, you may have 40km or 80km range against the F-22 with your IRST, but if he's seeing you out at 200km with his radar you're going to be toast because AMRAAM is going to lock and NEZ you before you can even get a shot off.

The old argument that IR detection can defeat stealth with 4th gens never really took off, simply because 4th gens aren't stealthy enough to survive long enough to take advantage of their IR systems. However, if you change the terms to battles involving 5th gen fighters instead, the calculation changes because now the IRST will be the first detector.

Another issue that Gambit highlighted previously, is that missile targeting systems have difficulty tracking the 5th gen fighters due to signature flicker, even at extremely close range. That's where the 5th gen's RCS spikes and drops constantly as it changes orientation, so even if your missile gets a temporary lock on the 5th gen aircraft, it won't be able to keep it. This either needs a software fix or upgrading to dual-mode or even triple-mode seekers with IR/Optical/radar.

===

If you're going to talk about the YF-23, the true pity of that debacle was not that the Raptor won, but that Northrup sucked so much. Considering the size, stealth, and kinematics of the YF-23, if properly developed it would have been a better fighter going into 2030 than the Raptor would be; it would be faster, stealthier, have better range, and better payload. The problem is that Lockmart worked harder to win the contract, while Northrup Grummann was lazy and complacent.

The YF-23 and the YF-22 have been described, respectively, as parts of the ATF program, as the aircraft the Air Force asked for and the aircraft the Air Force actually wanted. The YF-23 definitely did better than the YF-22 in meeting the requirements of the ATF program, but Lockheed bothered to try to ask themselves what would actually win the contract and what would get the Air Force to go with their program. Thus, they sacrificed the stated aims of the ATF to go for better maneuverability with thrust vectoring, alongside a smaller, cheaper, and less risky airframe.

Northrup, on the other hand, was like the student that only looks at the face value requirement of the ATF. They tried to make the best ATF-specced fighter that was possible, without actually aiming to win the contest by understanding and exploiting the psychology and politics of the Air Force. Lockmart actually requested and received 6 extra months for both programs to finish their designs, which Lockmart used to finish perfecting the YF-22 prototype, while Northrup Grumman sat on their asses.

As a result, there is no F-23, which would have had better IR control features, a larger wing area, a larger radome, better range (AFB claims that the YF-22 outranged the YF-23, but the YF-23 had a larger wing area to begin with and had better supersonic performance, meaning that it would have been less draggy), and a better payload (with the larger wing area, alongside the more structurally stable diamond wings, the F-23 would have been able to hoist aloft a larger payload than the F-22).

Well, you really ought to read your two little puff piece articles, which I have done and did again, more hypothetical KRAP, "yes, I am Teutonic, and yes that is German for the kind of "stuff" you are posting here. So for you my friend--

1. I never, ever stated the F-22 had greater "range" than the YF-23, which completely illustrates why you continue to miss the point, your reading comprehension is likely around the 4th grade 3rd month, sorry but all your blather is simply maddening.

2. I did say the F-22 is far more maneuverable due to its OVT, and that the Weapons BAYs on the F-22 are larger than those on the YF-23 prototype, which is why the F-22 is the winner of the ATF fly-off.

3. I also recognize that the YF-23 was marginally "stealthier" and also marginally "faster", but neither of those two qualities allowed it to overcome the decisive edge presented by the YF-22, which was choosen as the winner, and went on to become the most capable tactical fighter aircraft in the world......

shame is, you still don't get it ? do you ?

 

[Inst]

Well, you really ought to read your two little puff piece articles, which I have done and did again, more hypothetical KRAP, "yes, I am Teutonic, and yes that is German for the kind of "stuff" you are posting here. So for you my friend--

Well, just call bullshit on whatever you don't like. The fact is, when the F-22 gets into close-range WVR with its opponents, all the opponent needs is sufficient nose-pointing ability, which is ITR, to lock onto it and fire its missile. In WVR, while the F-22 might still have an STR advantage, virtually all the latest fighters have comparable ITR rates and there's no big difference between it and the Eurofighter once you WVR. Of course, I wouldn't say the Eurofighter is the better fighter; it costs way too much for being a 4.5th gen aircraft, but the point is there.

And as far as whether or not this is hypothetical "krap", your YF-22 beat the YF-23 in part over having better maneuverability, which mainly matters in hypothetical "krap". If you bring up how overwhelming the F-22 is in BVR, the F-23 would have been more so due to having better radar and a better payload, which I'll get to in a moment.

As I've mentioned before, you are getting far too emotional about your vaunted F-22.

1. I never, ever stated the F-22 had greater "range" than the YF-23, which completely illustrates why you continue to miss the point, your reading comprehension is likely around the 4th grade 3rd month, sorry but all your blather is simply maddening.

Pot calling the kettle black, huh? I never said that the YF-23 is better than the YF-22 either, although you're getting all agitated and huffing and puffing about it.

2. I did say the F-22 is far more maneuverable due to its OVT, and that the Weapons BAYs on the F-22 are larger than those on the YF-23 prototype, which is why the F-22 is the winner of the ATF fly-off.

You're comparing the prototype to the finished version. Actually, in the YF-22 vs YF-23 competition, the YF-22 did have a bigger payload than its YF-23 competitor, but if you look at the schematics for the F-23 EMD (production variant), the design involved a huge weapons bay dug out of the frontal fuselage that would have fit 9-12 AMRAAMs. That would have been a significantly larger weapons payload than the F-22, and would have drastically improved the ATF's multi-role capability. As is, the F-22 wasn't even deployed to Libya or Iraq due to its lack of multi-role capability; when you considered the time it would have spent in hangars and the cost of maintenance per flight hour and available payload, it was just better to have missions be flown by B-2s instead.

In fact, regarding the YF-23's payload, if you look at the Japanese ATD-X project, you can note that, while being to a large degree a fusion between the F-23 and F-22 design, the F-23 plans rumored to have been sold to the Japanese, the part the Japanese retained from the F-23 was not the pelican tail or the diamond wings, but the long forward fuselage that the Japanese retained from the F-23. I wonder why. Maybe it was the combination of enabling a deep weapons bay alongside a high fineness ratio for low drag?

3. I also recognize that the YF-23 was marginally "stealthier" and also marginally "faster", but neither of those two qualities allowed it to overcome the decisive edge presented by the YF-22, which was choosen as the winner, and went on to become the most capable tactical fighter aircraft in the world......

shame is, you still don't get it ? do you ?

Which is why I'm telling you you're the pot calling the kettle black. I never said that the YF-23 deserved to win over the YF-22. I mentioned repeatedly that the shame is that Northrup dropped the ball, that they didn't take the ATF competition seriously and that's why the US is saddled with the F-22. After all the cost overruns and mistakes that Lockheed made with the F-22 and then later the F-35 project (definitely Son of F-22, given that the F-22 hit IOC more than 10 years late and was so expensive its consignment was cut to around 25% of the original size), maybe the United States deserved something better. Or maybe not.

If Northrup had actually bothered to design a YF-23 that had many of the F-23's features, if Northrup had bothered to do an NATF design that was more than a primitive copy and paste with canards added for laughs, if Northrup had bothered to realize that Lockheed's emphasize on maneuver was going to console the Air Force Brass and if they had bothered to develop a YF-23 with more capable WVR maneuverability (because TVC on the F-22 was in large part for ITR; notice that in dogfights people mention that inept F-22 pilots end up bleeding off too much energy with the TVC system), quite likely in the form of TVC, then the United States wouldn't have to have dealt with Lockheed's mendacity and ineptitude between 1995 and 2020, it would have had a stealth fighter that would have had better radar capability than the stuff the Russians and Chinese are putting out, it would have had a stealth fighter that would have had the ultra-range and payloads that the USAF is resorting to the F-35 to get, and hey, maybe it wouldn't have shut down the ATF program after ~190 airframes.

 

[Jeff Head]

...and that's why the US is saddled with the F-22. After all the cost overruns and mistakes that Lockheed made with the F-22 and then later the F-35 project (definitely Son of F-22)

Well, you can go on all you like, and that's fine. You make some good points.

From your own perspective then...we are "saddled," with an aircraft that the rest of the world would give their right arm, and who knows what other body parts to have. And that the two most capable potential adversaries are themselves spending hundreds of billions (before all is said and done) to this day to try and build something...anything...that can compete with it.

And while they are doing that, we are going to absoutely flood them with the next 5th generation fighter that will be so situationally aware...and ahead of them...that they will have to go back to the drawing board...again.

We should have 300 more F-22s...but we do not.

I wish we had 300-400 F-23s too...but we do not.

But the 185 or so F-22s we do have flying are the bain to the rest of the world, and they all know it and can only dream of having anything like it.

When there are 3,000 or so F-35s on top of that...which every one of our major allies is lining up to buy (Hint: They are not doing that because they think for an instant that it will be a failure or will not perform over the next 40+ years), we are going to be in very good shape indeed, despite whatever problems.

And well before then our 6th generation fighter will start coming out, and, as usual, about the time these others get a fairly decent 5th gen out, we will start in with the 6th...another 20 years ahead.

And you know what? I bet you dollars to doughnuts that the same naysayers will be out in force saying what a waste and failure the 6th gen fighter is too.

Some things never change.

 

[Air Force Brat]

Well, just call bullshit on whatever you don't like. The fact is, when the F-22 gets into close-range WVR with its opponents, all the opponent needs is sufficient nose-pointing ability, which is ITR, to lock onto it and fire its missile. In WVR, while the F-22 might still have an STR advantage, virtually all the latest fighters have comparable ITR rates and there's no big difference between it and the Eurofighter once you WVR. Of course, I wouldn't say the Eurofighter is the better fighter; it costs way too much for being a 4.5th gen aircraft, but the point is there.

And as far as whether or not this is hypothetical "krap", your YF-22 beat the YF-23 in part over having better maneuverability, which mainly matters in hypothetical "krap". If you bring up how overwhelming the F-22 is in BVR, the F-23 would have been more so due to having better radar and a better payload, which I'll get to in a moment.

As I've mentioned before, you are getting far too emotional about your vaunted F-22.



Pot calling the kettle black, huh? I never said that the YF-23 is better than the YF-22 either, although you're getting all agitated and huffing and puffing about it.



You're comparing the prototype to the finished version. Actually, in the YF-22 vs YF-23 competition, the YF-22 did have a bigger payload than its YF-23 competitor, but if you look at the schematics for the F-23 EMD (production variant), the design involved a huge weapons bay dug out of the frontal fuselage that would have fit 9-12 AMRAAMs. That would have been a significantly larger weapons payload than the F-22, and would have drastically improved the ATF's multi-role capability. As is, the F-22 wasn't even deployed to Libya or Iraq due to its lack of multi-role capability; when you considered the time it would have spent in hangars and the cost of maintenance per flight hour and available payload, it was just better to have missions be flown by B-2s instead.

In fact, regarding the YF-23's payload, if you look at the Japanese ATD-X project, you can note that, while being to a large degree a fusion between the F-23 and F-22 design, the F-23 plans rumored to have been sold to the Japanese, the part the Japanese retained from the F-23 was not the pelican tail or the diamond wings, but the long forward fuselage that the Japanese retained from the F-23. I wonder why. Maybe it was the combination of enabling a deep weapons bay alongside a high fineness ratio for low drag?



Which is why I'm telling you you're the pot calling the kettle black. I never said that the YF-23 deserved to win over the YF-22. I mentioned repeatedly that the shame is that Northrup dropped the ball, that they didn't take the ATF competition seriously and that's why the US is saddled with the F-22. After all the cost overruns and mistakes that Lockheed made with the F-22 and then later the F-35 project (definitely Son of F-22, given that the F-22 hit IOC more than 10 years late and was so expensive its consignment was cut to around 25% of the original size), maybe the United States deserved something better. Or maybe not.

If Northrup had actually bothered to design a YF-23 that had many of the F-23's features, if Northrup had bothered to do an NATF design that was more than a primitive copy and paste with canards added for laughs, if Northrup had bothered to realize that Lockheed's emphasize on maneuver was going to console the Air Force Brass and if they had bothered to develop a YF-23 with more capable WVR maneuverability (because TVC on the F-22 was in large part for ITR; notice that in dogfights people mention that inept F-22 pilots end up bleeding off too much energy with the TVC system), quite likely in the form of TVC, then the United States wouldn't have to have dealt with Lockheed's mendacity and ineptitude between 1995 and 2020, it would have had a stealth fighter that would have had better radar capability than the stuff the Russians and Chinese are putting out, it would have had a stealth fighter that would have had the ultra-range and payloads that the USAF is resorting to the F-35 to get, and hey, maybe it wouldn't have shut down the ATF program after ~190 airframes.

Well Inst, you continue to blather on and on about other peoples failings, mine, Engs, Northrup Grummans, those inept F-22 pilots bleeding off to much energy,,, with their TVC ,(if you were half the patriot you pretend to be), you would offer those fabulous brains to the USAF and teach those poor USAF airplane drivers how to fly, and Northrupp some business sence, and Lockheed how to bail on the horrible F-35, and probably ought to just retire the F-22, its so bad, and help NorthRupp Grumman gain the contract on the 6th gen Fighter/Attacker/Bomber/Kropduster/Airliner/Growler/UAV/ and also the role as Air Force 1, heck you're so smart, hang a Rotor on it and call it Marine 1 while you're at it, maybe we should just elect you president while we're at it?????

 

[Jura The idiot]

Upgrade Cost Estimate

Posted on InsideDefense.com: May 16, 2014

The estimated price tag for the Air Force's F-22A Raptor post-production modernization program is $11.2 billion, little changed from 2012, according to an updated audit that recommends the Pentagon establish a new framework to track schedule and costs for a long-term effort to improve the stealth fighter's reliability and maintainability.

The Government Accountability Office, in a May 15 report, states that efforts by the Air Force -- following a statutory directive -- to establish the Increment 3.2 Modernization effort as a stand-alone major defense acquisition program have improved transparency and given lawmakers "a more precise view of cost and schedule changes."

DOD spent $67.3 billion to develop the F-22 and acquire a total of 195 aircraft, including eight test aircraft. Crashes have reduced the operational fleet to 182 aircraft.

In 2003, the Air Force established a four-phase project to enhance the F-22A by providing a robust ground-attack capability that was not part of the aircraft program's original requirements. GAO estimates the total cost of this project will be $9.3 billion, including $5.6 billion spent so far to develop and field four sets of incremental improvements. The last set is Increment 3.2B, which the Pentagon plans to begin in FY-15 (DefenseAlert, April 22).

According to GAO, however, the project "faces schedule and performance challenges . . . as a result of continuing maintenance issues." Depot-level maintenance delays have triggered slips in the planned schedule for modernizing increments, "which could also affect future increments," the report states.

In addition to the main F-22A modernization program, the Air Force maintains two other projects to improve the Raptor fleet: the Structural Repair Program, begun in 2006 to incorporate hardware modifications necessary to achieve the planned 8,000-hour flight-hour life; and a larger effort, the "Reliability and Maintainability Maturation Program," begun in 2005. That has comprised hundreds of relatively small projects aimed at improving the operational availability of the fleet. The total cost of these projects could be as much as $1.9 billion, according to GAO.

While the RAMMP program is scheduled to continue until 2033, the planned service life of the F-22A fleet, GAO says it lacks a key blueprint. "Without a comprehensive baseline cost and schedule estimate for reliability efforts that encompasses the life of the aircraft across all types of funding, it is difficult to consistently track cost and schedule progress on projects that to date have cost almost $1 billion," the report states.

GAO recommends the defense secretary require that the Air Force establish such a cost and schedule baseline for the RAMMP that accounts for all development, procurement and operations and maintenance costs.

The Defense Department, in an April 22 written response included in the report, disagreed with the recommendation, arguing that reliability and maintainability programs cannot be baselined like major acquisition projects "because there will be fluctuations in the cost based on life-cycle issues that arise as the weapon system ages."

GAO said the Air Force estimates the planned cost to upgrade and improve the F-22A will be $11.2 billion, down from an $11.6 billion estimate in a 2012 audit, a 3 percent decline.

 

[Inst]

Well, you can go on all you like, and that's fine. You make some good points.

From your own perspective then...we are "saddled," with an aircraft that the rest of the world would give their right arm, and who knows what other body parts to have. And that the two most capable potential adversaries are themselves spending hundreds of billions (before all is said and done) to this day to try and build something...anything...that can compete with it.

And while they are doing that, we are going to absoutely flood them with the next 5th generation fighter that will be so situationally aware...and ahead of them...that they will have to go back to the drawing board...again.

We should have 300 more F-22s...but we do not.

I wish we had 300-400 F-23s too...but we do not.

But the 185 or so F-22s we do have flying are the bain to the rest of the world, and they all know it and can only dream of having anything like it.

When there are 3,000 or so F-35s on top of that...which every one of our major allies is lining up to buy (Hint: They are not doing that because they think for an instant that it will be a failure or will not perform over the next 40+ years), we are going to be in very good shape indeed, despite whatever problems.

And well before then our 6th generation fighter will start coming out, and, as usual, about the time these others get a fairly decent 5th gen out, we will start in with the 6th...another 20 years ahead.

And you know what? I bet you dollars to doughnuts that the same naysayers will be out in force saying what a waste and failure the 6th gen fighter is too.

Some things never change.

Actually, regarding the PAK-FA and the J-20, both these aircraft should be reasonably useful in their own ways as fifth generation fighters. Comparing the two, the PAK-FA is much better than any other fifth-gen fighter as an AWACS and tanker hunter, given the way its weapons bays were designed to enable extremely long missiles. This means that unlike the J-20, the PAK-FA should be reasonably efficient at hunting down enemy AWACS and killing them in short range. Against the F-22, the PAK-FA should be able to get into IRST or WVR range against the F-22 with its LO stealth and try to do a 1:1 K/D with the F-22, but against the F-35, its lower emphasis on stealth and the irrelevance of WVR maneuverability against the F-35's EODAS system would make it a widowmaker against the F-35. So I agree with you here that the F-35 would essentially make the PAK-FA obsolete due to the PAK-FA's emphasis on maneuverability over stealth, and how the F-35's sensor system would just LOAL PAK-FAs targeted against it.

The J-20, on the other hand, would not have the PAK-FA's capability against tankers and AWACS, due to its relatively short weapons bays, being around 4.6 or 4.7 meters, like the ones on the J-31, but the J-20's better stealth and sensor system compared to the PAK-FA would make it quite capable against both the F-22 and F-35.

Against the F-22, the J-20's goal would be to try to either stay stealthy and kill the F-22 by detecting it with its IRST first in BVR, or go up close and use its own EODAS system to assure a kill against the F-22 with LOAL missiles. Against the F-35, it would have to try to use its combination of kinematics and stealth to kill the F-35 in BVR, because against the F-35 getting into WVR range will just result in a telefrag at best. Against a combination of the two the J-20 should try to kill the F-35s in BVR while not getting sniped off by the F-22s, then close in to the F-22s and kill them with IRST or EODAS.

And regarding the F-35's worldwide sales, haven't you considered that the problem might just be that there's no competitors for the F-35? The Europeans are working on stealth UCAVs instead of stealth manned fighters, the Russians are late with their PAK-FA, and that means you'd have to resort to a vendor outside the Western alliance system, and while the Chinese intend to put up the J-31 for export, it's years away from readiness and also means that you'd have to deal with the Chinese as vendors.

 

[Jeff Head]

Actually, regarding the PAK-FA and the J-20, both these aircraft should be reasonably useful in their own ways as fifth generation fighters.

The J-20 would not have the PAK-FA's capability against tankers and AWACS, due to its relatively short weapons bays, being around 4.6 or 4.7 meters, like the ones on the J-31, but the J-20's better stealth and sensor system compared to the PAK-FA would make it quite capable against both the F-22 and F-35.

While both of these aircraft, particularly in the hands of well trained personnel, are going to be a considerably greater threat than most existing air superiority fighters, I do not believe either will fair exceptionally well at all against the F-22.

If they build enough of them, however, they may perhaps fair well enough to pose a serious threat in terms of atttrition.

We will just have to see what the numbers are.

I expect in order to do that, they would have to at least have a kill ration in the two to three to one in favor of the F-22. That way, if they have a force of, say 500 aircraft compared to the 185 F-22s, they will be in a position to overwhelm them.

Against the F-35, it is going to depend on a lot of factors.

If they get to WVR of the F-35 to fight, they are not going to be at all as effective IMHO.

However, the F-35 is going to have good enough stealth that they may be able to force that to be exactly what occurs...and the F-35 is going to be situationally aware enough, including seeding potential threat areas with stealthy UAVs far in advance of the F-35s themselves, which would allow the F-35 to remain very passive, that they may well get a better and quicker BVR solution on either of those two aircraft. That's where it is headed with the F-35, IMHO.

In this mode, the numbers of F-35s are going to be simply overwhelmning unless either country has something in numbers that can effectively deal with them.

We shall just have to wait and see.

At my age, and with the service life of these aircraft...I expect the ultimate answers to these questions will come after I am no longer in a psoition to be too concerend about it. Hehehe.