F-35A in full loadout for first time

[wiseone2]

I think everyone is actually missing my point on the F-35.

Kinematically the F-35 is a dog compared to F-22 and it will be so against other 5th generation fighters like J-20(once WS-15 engine is installed if not already), or the others that will come online over the next 10-15 years.
No amount of upgrades will allow the F-35 to super-cruise, dramatically increase it's top speed or supersonic manoeuvrability.

The fundamental argument is why buy F-35 right now when the current 4th generation fighters are good enough and just wait a while longer to buy a true air-dominance fighter?
As an example, the UK has ample technology to develop a real 5th generation fighter and I have no idea why the idiots in charge thought it would be a great idea to put the F-35B on the aircraft carriers. Fine if it only has to fight 4th generation but what if say in 2030, it comes up against an enemy that has 5th generation fighters that are optimised for air-superiority? F-35s would be shot down in droves and the carrier itself may even get sunk as it would have lost it's fighter cover.

It seems that every moron jumped onto the F-35 since the US was manufacturing it and so it must be good! The RAF wanted a squadron(24) of F-22s in the 1990s as they saw the inherent weakness in F-35s air-to-air capability but this was turned down by the Americans. At that time the government in charge should have launched a program in conjunction with other European countries like Netherlands, Norway etc to develop their own 5th generation fighter.

Even a 5th generation fighter that had a relatively lowly R&D budget(take whatever suitable from Eurofighter like avionics, radar and engines) would have been far better than the F-35 but alas there was no true leadership around at the time.

nobody knows what the J-20 is capable of. it is unknown commodity like all Chinese aircraft. exception is the JF-17 which has been shown to dozens of prospective customers.

the f-35 has been evaluated by scores of professional air forces in the west

 

[UKBengali]

nobody knows what the J-20 is capable of. it is unknown commodity like all Chinese aircraft. exception is the JF-17 which has been shown to dozens of prospective customers.

the f-35 has been evaluated by scores of professional air forces in the west

And what does that prove?

F-35 can shoot down 4th generation fighters with ease but do we have any results of F-35 versus F-22?
No as the results would be so embarrassing , US would not release the results.

 

[Penguin]

And what does that prove?

F-35 can shoot down 4th generation fighters with ease but do we have any results of F-35 versus F-22?
No as the results would be so embarrassing , US would not release the results.

And you know this how? Based on what?

 

[t_for_talli]

China with J-20 once they have the 5th generation WS-15 engine ready.

I can see others like Turkey and South Korea with the next 10-15 years also.

USAF had developed F22 in 1990s, China has just developed few prototype and Turkey is still on paper,
do you think R&D team of USAF is enjoying vacations since last 2 decade,

Fact is they are at least 2 decades ahead of any competitors

 

[UKBengali]

And you know this how? Based on what?

UK RAF wanted to purchase 24 F-22s in the 1990s
as they had little faith in the air-to-air capability of the F-35.

USAF had developed F22 in 1990s, China has just developed few prototype and Turkey is still on paper,
do you think R&D team of USAF is enjoying vacations since last 2 decade,

Fact is they are at least 2 decades ahead of any competitors

J-20 is in service as of now.

 

[Penguin]

UK RAF wanted to purchase 24 F-22s in the 1990s
as they had little faith in the air-to-air capability of the F-35.

Both interest in F22 and purported reason unsubstantiated. Like previous claim. I think you are confused with RAAF (Australians). Anyway, there was always a ban on F-22 exports. Also, by the 1990s, UK was already fully committed to Eurofighter Typhoon

 

[UKBengali]

Both interest in F22 and purported reason unsubstantiated. Like previous claim. I think you are confused with RAAF (Australians). Anyway, there was always a ban on F-22 exports. Also, by the 1990s, UK was already fully committed to Eurofighter Typhoon

Nope you are wrong as I remember the documentary on this matter on UK TV.
F-35 air-to -air capability got hammered by senior RAF officers
I live in UK, you do not. Thanks.

PS - ban on F-22 exports was done by congress in the 2000s.

 

[Penguin]

Nope you are wrong as I remember the documentary on this matter on UK TV.
F-35 air-to -air capability got hammered by senior RAF officers
I live in UK, you do not. Thanks.

PS - ban on F-22 exports was done by congress in the 2000s.

Oh, you remember a documentary on this.
And where you or I live has no relevance here.

So, "in the 1990s" UK/RAF already knew the relative performances of F-22 and F-35? And UK was clear F-22 was needed INSTEAD of TYPHOON? Because F35 is to replace Harrier/Sea Harrier.....

F-35 development started in 1992 with the origins of the Joint Strike Fighter program
Studies supporting JAST/JSF started in 1993
In November 1995, the United Kingdom signed a memorandum of understanding to become a formal partner
Also, in 1996, the UK Ministry of Defence launched the Future Carrier Borne Aircraft project. This program sought a replacement for the Sea Harrier (and later the Harrier GR7); the Joint Strike Fighter was selected in January 2001.
First flight 15 December 2006
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Strike_Fighter_program
In 1981 the U.S. Air Force developed a requirement for an Advanced Tactical Fighter (ATF) as a new air superiority fighter to replace the F-15 Eagle and F-16 Fighting Falcon. he request for proposals (RFP) was issued in July 1986 and two contractor teams, Lockheed/Boeing/General Dynamics and Northrop/McDonnell Douglas, were selected on 31 October 1986. After the flight test demonstration and validation of the prototypes, on 23 April 1991, Secretary of the USAF Donald Rice announced the YF-22 as the winner of the ATF competition
F22 First flight 7 September 1997
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-22_Raptor#Development


Foreign sales were banned by a 1998 law aimed at protecting the "stealth" technology and other high-tech features said to have made the F-22 too good for money to buy.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-arms-usa-congress-idUSTRE5896JU20090910

In the works since 1997
https://web.archive.org/web/20150714130914/http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d105:HZ00295:

 

[UKBengali]

Oh, you remember a documentary on this.
And where you or I live has no relevance here.

So, "in the 1990s" UK/RAF already knew the relative performances of F-22 and F-35? And UK was clear F-22 was needed INSTEAD of TYPHOON? Because F35 is to replace Harrier/Sea Harrier.....

F-35 development started in 1992 with the origins of the Joint Strike Fighter program
Studies supporting JAST/JSF started in 1993
In November 1995, the United Kingdom signed a memorandum of understanding to become a formal partner
Also, in 1996, the UK Ministry of Defence launched the Future Carrier Borne Aircraft project. This program sought a replacement for the Sea Harrier (and later the Harrier GR7); the Joint Strike Fighter was selected in January 2001.
First flight 15 December 2006
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Strike_Fighter_program
In 1981 the U.S. Air Force developed a requirement for an Advanced Tactical Fighter (ATF) as a new air superiority fighter to replace the F-15 Eagle and F-16 Fighting Falcon. he request for proposals (RFP) was issued in July 1986 and two contractor teams, Lockheed/Boeing/General Dynamics and Northrop/McDonnell Douglas, were selected on 31 October 1986. After the flight test demonstration and validation of the prototypes, on 23 April 1991, Secretary of the USAF Donald Rice announced the YF-22 as the winner of the ATF competition
F22 First flight 7 September 1997
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-22_Raptor#Development


Foreign sales were banned by a 1998 law aimed at protecting the "stealth" technology and other high-tech features said to have made the F-22 too good for money to buy.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-arms-usa-congress-idUSTRE5896JU20090910

In the works since 1997
https://web.archive.org/web/20150714130914/http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d105:HZ00295:

Pathetic that you are implying that I am making things up.
End of the day, senior RAF officers are far more qualified and informed than some internet poster.
Goodbye as you are not interested in learning.

 

[Penguin]

Pathetic that you are implying that I am making things up.
End of the day, senior RAF officers are far more qualified and informed than some internet poster.
Goodbye as you are not interested in learning.

I'm not implying anything: you claim something and don't back up your claim with one of more valid, verifiable sources.

 

[wiseone2]

And what does that prove?

F-35 can shoot down 4th generation fighters with ease but do we have any results of F-35 versus F-22?
No as the results would be so embarrassing , US would not release the results.

i would assume the f-22 would outperform the f-35
i have no evidence for the assumption

 

[EpiiC]

i would assume the f-22 would outperform the f-35
i have no evidence for the assumption

F-22 has better stealth features and is better than f-35.... Congress won't allow F-22 because its too good to be exported.... F-22 has better radar than F-35.... F-22 has smaller Radar cross section..... F-22 has 2 engines.... More payload..... these are some of the reasons why its better than f-35//

 

[randomradio]

And you know this how? Based on what?

http://breakingdefense.com/2014/06/...he-f-35-no-growlers-needed-when-war-starts/3/
The F-35’s cross section is much smaller than the F-22’s, but that does not mean, Hostage concedes, that the F-35 is necessarily superior to the F-22 when we go to war. In fact, Hostage says that it takes eight F-35s to do what two F-22s can handle.

“The F-35 is geared to go out and take down the surface targets,” says Hostage, leaning forward. “The F-35 doesn’t have the altitude, doesn’t have the speed [of the F-22], but it can beat the F-22 in stealth.” But stealth — the ability to elude or greatly complicate an enemy’s ability to find and destroy an aircraft using a combination of design, tactics and technology — is not a magic pill, Hostage reminds us.
----------------

Every single one of these points alludes to previous information having been purely propaganda. Imagine that, the F-35 has superior avionics, superior payload and greater stealth than the F-22, but you still need 8 F-35s to do the work of 2 F-22s. And this is coming from the guy who was running the Air Combat Command when he made those statements. The difference the F-22's kinetic capability brings in is way too much.

So this difference may become obviously evident in air combat as well. As Hostage said, the F-35 doesn't have the altitude or the speed, both of which are critical for BVR combat.

I would definitely bet my money on the F-22 in a F-22 v. F-35 bout.

F-22 has better stealth features and is better than f-35.... Congress won't allow F-22 because its too good to be exported.... F-22 has better radar than F-35.... F-22 has smaller Radar cross section..... F-22 has 2 engines.... More payload..... these are some of the reasons why its better than f-35//

The F-35's stealth and avionics are superior to the F-22's.

 

[Penguin]

Every single one of these points alludes to previous information having been purely propaganda. Imagine that, the F-35 has superior avionics, superior payload and greater stealth than the F-22, but you still need 8 F-35s to do the work of 2 F-22s. And this is coming from the guy who was running the Air Combat Command when he made those statements. The difference the F-22's kinetic capability brings in is way too much.

So this difference may become obviously evident in air combat as well. As Hostage said, the F-35 doesn't have the altitude or the speed, both of which are critical for BVR combat.

I would definitely bet my money on the F-22 in a F-22 v. F-35 bout.

The F-35's stealth and avionics are superior to the F-22's.

Thanks, your post shows there ARE results on F-22 v F-35. Even if some would consider these embarrassing, the US(AF) did not bury these results. Which is what some previous poster claimed.

Now, for mental exercise, how does F22 v F35 compare to e.g. F15 v F16?

Plus, we're looking at F-35 in a role for which it wasn't particularly designed (unlike F-16).

F16 origins:
Air Force F-X proponents were hostile to the concept of a small, lightweight aircraft that could maneuver with the minimum possible energy loss, and which also incorporated an increased thrust-to-weight ratio, because they perceived it as a threat to the F-15 program. However, the Air Force's leadership understood that its budget would not allow it to purchase enough F-15 aircraft to satisfy all of its missions.The Advanced Day Fighter concept, renamed F-XX, gained civilian political support under the reform-minded Deputy Secretary of Defense David Packard, who favored the idea of competitive prototyping. As a result, in May 1971, the Air Force Prototype Study Group was established, with Boyd a key member, and two of its six proposals would be funded, one being the Lightweight Fighter (LWF). The Request for Proposals issued on 6 January 1972 called for a 20,000-pound (9,100 kg) class air-to-air day fighter with a good turn rate, acceleration and range, and optimized for combat at speeds of Mach 0.6–1.6 and altitudes of 30,000–40,000 feet (9,100–12,000 m). This was the region where USAF studies predicted most future air combat would occur. The anticipated average flyaway cost of a production version was $3 million. This production plan, though, was only notional as the USAF had no firm plans to procure the winner.

F16 as compared to Dassault-Breguet's proposed Mirage F1M-53, the Anglo-French SEPECAT Jaguar, and the proposed Saab 37E "Eurofighter".

 

[randomradio]

Thanks, your post shows there ARE results on F-22 v F-35. Even if some would consider these embarrassing, the US(AF) did not bury these results. Which is what some previous poster claimed.

I think he was referring to proper figures, like kill ratios and such. Releasing that is going to be a bit embarrassing depending on how bad it is.

Now, for mental exercise, how does F22 v F35 compare to e.g. F15 v F16?

Plus, we're looking at F-35 in a role for which it wasn't particularly designed (unlike F-16).

F16 origins:
Air Force F-X proponents were hostile to the concept of a small, lightweight aircraft that could maneuver with the minimum possible energy loss, and which also incorporated an increased thrust-to-weight ratio, because they perceived it as a threat to the F-15 program. However, the Air Force's leadership understood that its budget would not allow it to purchase enough F-15 aircraft to satisfy all of its missions.The Advanced Day Fighter concept, renamed F-XX, gained civilian political support under the reform-minded Deputy Secretary of Defense David Packard, who favored the idea of competitive prototyping. As a result, in May 1971, the Air Force Prototype Study Group was established, with Boyd a key member, and two of its six proposals would be funded, one being the Lightweight Fighter (LWF). The Request for Proposals issued on 6 January 1972 called for a 20,000-pound (9,100 kg) class air-to-air day fighter with a good turn rate, acceleration and range, and optimized for combat at speeds of Mach 0.6–1.6 and altitudes of 30,000–40,000 feet (9,100–12,000 m). This was the region where USAF studies predicted most future air combat would occur. The anticipated average flyaway cost of a production version was $3 million. This production plan, though, was only notional as the USAF had no firm plans to procure the winner.

F16 as compared to Dassault-Breguet's proposed Mirage F1M-53, the Anglo-French SEPECAT Jaguar, and the proposed Saab 37E "Eurofighter".

You can't compare the F-15/F-16 combo to the F-22/F-35 combo at all.

The F-16 was designed to be a dog fighter, it was better than the F-15 in that respect. It changed into something else later on. The F-16 was designed for a role and it was successful at that. But it will be wrong to assume a new fighter will be successful simply because it has been designed to replace a successful fighter from a different era.

The F-35 got mired in propaganda. While it was built as a replacement to the F-16, they also started advertising it as a replacement for the F-15. They said its advanced stealth and avionics will make it suitable for air superiority, which is far from the truth considering an "inferior" aircraft is most likely kicking its butt simply because it has higher acceleration, higher speed and higher altitude. Now they are accepting the fact that "stealth" isn't enough considering the less stealthy, less advanced F-22 is able to tackle the superior F-35.

What they don't explain is what will happen to the F-35 if the enemy deploys 4th gen aircraft with superior kinematic performance and avionics that can detect and engage the F-35 from max missile ranges, let alone 5th gen aircraft.

Right now, their only argument is "The enemy can't build an aircraft better than the F-35", which is obviously propaganda again.

Rewind back to 1976. A USAF report comes out saying the F-15 and F-16 are going to be useless after 1990. Can you imagine the impact that would have made back then, with the Soviet Union around? Today, they are saying the F-35 is going to be useless after 2030. But then they are also going to make a new fighter to compensate for the differences by 2028. That's like saying they will make a new fighter by 1988 to compensate for the "soon-to-be useless" F-15 and F-16. Good luck explaining to the F-35 pilot how he is no longer capable at maintaining air superiority against his "less capable" enemy. Propaganda can only work to an extent.