What's new

The reason, why F-22 is not an unbeatable fighter jet

Muhammed45

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Oct 2, 2015
Messages
10,321
Reaction score
-18
Country
Iran, Islamic Republic Of
Location
Iran, Islamic Republic Of
PENTAGON: STEALTH FIGHTER IS A LAME JAMMER, END IT ALREADY


ea18g_f22kill-300x225.jpg
Congress and the Pentagon are locked in a battle royale over the future of the Air Force's $150 million-per-copy F-22 Raptor stealth fighter. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates thinks 187 of the jets is just plenty. House and Senate panels have moved to buy at least another seven this year – and potentially dozens more, later.

In a Senate confirmation hearing Thursday, Marine Gen. James Cartwright, the vice chairman of Joints Chief of Staff, defended Gates' position – and whipped out a new argument for why Raptor-making should end. Faced with shutting down either Lockheed Martin's F-22 production line, or Boeing's competing F/A-18E/F fighter, for cost reasons, Cartwright said he asked the military's regional commanders what air capabilities they needed most. They chose "electronic warfare," a.k.a. "radar jamming," Cartwright said. That meant keeping the Boeing jet, for only it has a dedicated jammer version, the EA-18G Growler.

Cartwright's testimony might come as a surprise to some Raptor boosters, who for years have touted the stealthy jet's ability to perform "electronic-attack" missions, including jamming, using its sophisticated, electronically scanned radar. It's for this reason that a top Air Force official, in 2007, said the Raptor's "F-22" designation simply wasn't comprehensive enough. "It’s not an F-22, it’s an F-, A-, B-, E-, EA-, RC-, AWACS … 22," then-Deputy Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. David Deptula said, adding the letter prefixes for bombers, spy and radar planes and jammers.

But the F-22's electronic-attack skills have remained dormant, while the Air Force focuses on honing the jet's air-to-air prowess, and improving vexing maintenance problems. The Raptor won't be able to jam enemy radars, until 2011 – and then, only half the fleet will have that capability. The Raptor suffers other, serious limitations, that haven't been widely reported. As many as half of the jets already paid for, lack modern dogfighting systems, such as helmet-mounted sights.

Still, the F-22 is the only jet that can routinely "supercruise" – flying faster than sound, without afterburner – and there are hints it can use this ability to loft AMRAAM air-to-air missiles, high enough to kill enemy satellites. But that wasn't enough to sway top generals, when asked to choose between the Raptor and the much cheaper F-18. In a recent mock dogfight, an EA-18G "killed" an F-22 – one of only a handful of times any other fighter has managed such a feat, in the air. Now the electronic F-18 has also beaten the Raptor in the hallways of the Pentagon.

https://www.wired.com/2009/07/pentagon-stealth-fighter-is-a-lame-jammer-end-it-already/
 
.
An old article, but has a good point about F-22.

And other point is the big hat used for the customers of F-35s. :sarcastic:
 
.
No Weapon of War will be Unbeatable , Something Will always come and Take its place simple as that .
 
.
No Weapon of War will be Unbeatable , Something Will always come and Take its place simple as that .
Indeed technology is moving forward, day by day

But you should pay attention at the point of the article, every F-22 costs more than 150 million USD but a cheap EA-18G could defeat it by electronic warfare and easily detect it and aim it's AMRAAM at that expensive fighter.

Anyway agreed, nothing is unbeatable
 
.
Yes, probably a growler defeated a F-22, but in a real combat scenario, a growler fights alongside raptors.

Indeed technology is moving forward, day by day

But you should pay attention at the point of the article, every F-22 costs more than 150 million USD but a cheap EA-18G could defeat it by electronic warfare and easily detect it and aim it's AMRAAM at that expensive fighter.

Anyway agreed, nothing is unbeatable

Growlers are not cheap, they cost over 100 million.
 
.
Another orgy for keyboard fighter pilots. Its all simulation. The situation and goals depends the outcome.
 
.
Growlers are not cheap, they cost over 100 million.
Should ve typed cheaper :tup:
Yes, probably a growler defeated a F-22, but in a real combat scenario, a growler fights alongside raptors.
RQ-170, RQ-4, U-2 and B-2 are using the same technology in the stealthy phase.
If a country could down RQ-170 safely, i have no doubt it can shoot down an F-22 with high confidence :D
 
Last edited:
.
Should ve typed cheaper :tup:

RQ-170, RQ-4, U-2 and B-2 are using the same technology in the stealthy phase.
If a country could down RQ-170 safely, i have no doubt it can shoot down an F-22 with high confidence :D

No doubt, but the triumph lies in networked warfare. US will not send F-22 or B-2 without considering initial SEAD mission using cruise missiles to take down long range radars.

If you look at their strategy during Iraq invasion, a similar tactic has been employed.
 
. . .
No doubt, but the triumph lies in networked warfare. US will not send F-22 or B-2 without considering initial SEAD mission using cruise missiles to take down long range radars.

If you look at their strategy during Iraq invasiosn, na similar tactic has been employed.
depends upon location of radar.china has worked on small radars which are highly portable and widely dispersed so it is difficult to destroy them
 
.
depends upon location of radar.china has worked on small radars which are highly portable and widely dispersed so it is difficult to destroy them

Then again, a smaller radar means lower power output, hence compromising both in range and resolution. They can be easily taken off by medium range standoff weapons.

If you look at Russian S-400 deployment, they are protected heavily with short range quick reaction missiles like Pantsir S1, as a protection against low flying cruise missiles. I'm guessing Chinese will adopt similar approach.
 
. . . .
Back
Top Bottom