From a layman point of understanding, bigger is always better.
Basically...Yes.
The more power a radar can get, the more further it can detect ( maybe i am not choosing the right words so correct me here). The F-22 radar is bigger, its twin engines can give in more power, then how exactly a less powerful radar of the F-35 Jam F-22?
Just because you have a lot of reserve power, that does not necessarily mean every transmission is of max power. This applied even to the classic dish system. The MIG-25's radar was so powerful that it can achieve 'burn through' of most jamming back then. But its target resolutions were so poor that saying it was sh1tty was to be kind. It can barely tell the pilot the target's altitude, heading, speed, and aspect angle. All vital components
BEFORE engagement. It was so bad that the best it can do tell for the pilot was the target's general direction.
Power allows range and that is good. But target resolution depends on beamwidth for
ANY freq, which is inversely affected by antenna size. In other words, the larger the antenna/array the tighter the beamwidth, the smaller the array, the wider the beamwidth --
IF the same freq is used for both situations. However, if you have a smaller antenna/array but a matching higher freq, then you will have the same beamwidth as the larger antenna/array.
For most fighters, a 2-3 deg beamwidth is desirable.
The above is one degree.
That is the advantage of small beamwidth, which is a complex relationship between antenna size and freq employed. So if you want a 2-3 deg beamwidth while using the HF/VHF/UHF bands which are meters length freqs, your antenna will be literally dozens of meters span. The tighter the beamwidth, the better to discriminate targets that grouped close together.
So just because you have twin engines, that does not automatically mean your radar is better. Reserve electrical generation is a different issue.
Gambit a question for you sir?
F-22 is not open for sale even to countries such as Japan, Israel while F-35 is and the reason for that is because Americans like to keep the edge. So how exactly will the edge be maintained if according to you sir, F-35 proves to be superior to the F-22 and yet is cheaper.
I never said that the F-35 is superior to the F-22.
The F-35 is as different from the F-22 as the F-16 is from the F-15. The F-22 is a dedicated air superiority fighter with any air to ground capability as secondary. For the F-35, it is the opposite. The F-35 is intended to be a better jack-of-all-trades than the F-16. So just because the F-35 may have an advantage in one area, that does not mean it is overall 'superior' to the F-22.
what I missed was who the real expert is supposed to be here...
He said he has aviation 'experience' in trying to shut the Indians up. Then he backed down to 'study', which we have yet to know what. So the question is: What is the dominant variable in longitudinal stability?
Let us see how he respond.