Yeah, the F-22 A2A combat record only includes balloons.
Guess, we can't judge the F-35 or F-22 then.
Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning and F-22 'Raptor' : News & Discussion
- Thread starter Nick
- Start date
Guess, we can't judge the F-35 or F-22 then.
Don't think that's true. The amount of F-22 praise is quite extensive the last 20 years.
Agreed it's not true. The guy is just trolling nonsense. The advanced stuff is done in a Sim. The F-35 has to do a Sim test, before it can go into full production. At this, stage the Sim isn't developed enough to do it.
The F-22 is an operationally proven jet, meaning it can do what it's tasked for when the time comes. But it's not combat proven yet because it's still not shot at any real aircraft yet, particularly the ones that can react to it. Granted, though, many aircraft are in the same boat due to lack of wars. The F-22 was operationally proven well over a decade ago.
No, the fake F-35 in a sim is fine, they can fake it, but the real F-35 still needs actual physical upgrades before it can start the FOC process, starting with the computing upgrade, which has been pushed to 2024. There are plenty of upgrades and software releases pending to get it up to speed.
Then it needs a bunch of other upgrades like the radar, to keep up with the times.
The sim tests are required to allow full rate production, so it's not even there yet.
Russia? In our last discussion you said that only a 5th gen can counter 5th gen. But Russia today has got only 10 Su-57s. So do you believe that Su-30SM and Su-35S are going to kill F-35s in a full-blown air war?
Also I found the last statement about EW really amusing? So the Americans after preaching about 'how stealth is the be all end all' are now waiting for Block-4 EW to make F-35 competitive, hilarious. @_Anonymous_
We could call it combat proven if it killed the best the enemy had to offer, even if there was a generation difference. It's not America's fault the Russians failed to develop their equivalent alongside the F-22.
It's referring to ESM, IR, RWR etc, not electronic attack (jamming), to a certain extent.
EW has a very broad definition. So EA is largely useless in air combat, but all other aspects of EW are important, so that's localisation, identification, passive tracking and targeting etc. Even IRST and MAWS are part of EW. Otoh, EA for the F-35 is very important against ground targets in order to disrupt the kill chain, ie disrupting fire control radars, missile seekers etc, 'cause there's enough time to do that in certain cases, although not the F-35.
So the F-35's ability is best used in finding hidden targets and killing them, because that's the hardest task for ground strike jets, and that's where the entirety of EW comes into the picture. And that's what the F-35 has been designed for.
Air combat is too fast for EA to be effective, but other aspects of EW are really important.
In all probability though, in reality, EA will be largely useless in any situation because the enemy will use unknown signals that cannot be jammed rightaway. But a towed decoy can use barrage jamming to force an incoming missile to home in on itself.
As per your own analysis Su-30SM/Su-35S vs F-35(current Block) in a full-blown shooting war, which one comes out on top?
Block-4 will include AI based EW system that will counter "unknown" signals on the spot without any pre-threat library assistance. It is going to be game-changing.
BVR, F-35.
WVR, where the F-35 made a mistake or the situation developed in a certain way, the Flankers get close enough, the F-35 is toast.
The Flankers can do a better job of escaping though. So performance is very important. Although the F-35 can dog fight very well, it doesn't have other performance features when competing against practically clean Flankers.
The current block makes the F-35 a stealth F-16, and with AWACS support, even the F-16 can kill the Su-35.
Maybe so. But AI in EW would mean AI in radars too. So a cognitive EA will be countered by a cognitive radar that can create new signals on the fly.
The advantage of radar is it has the ability to operate below background noise, which allows it to stay undetected when necessary, whereas EA has to match the radar. The radar knows when it's being jammed, whereas it's difficult for the enemy to know when he's being tracked for EA to take effect.
So, even with AI, radar will remain the king of sensors. EA is a hit or miss, you have to get lucky.
1. The US definition of "upgrade" is there for all to see. If it fails randomradio's definition, that is is a sad day but it is also irrelevant. even in the above you describe what we would call an upgrade. its your opinion that the upgrades are not enough to count for an upgrade and are only "add ons"
2. The F-22s engines are still more sophisticated than what Russia and China can produce. the USSR was starting on an engine like F119 but then the collapse happened and that set them back. We know this because the Su-57s "true" engine is still in the works. So there is a standard where the F-22 with better engines is failing because they are not core upgraded, and the J-20's "True" engines are still in development and both aircraft are basically working from Flanker engines that have been upgraded, but Flanker engines nonetheless.
the conclusions are fairly well pre drawn. The F-22 has not been upgraded, besides all those upgrades or "Add ons" as you call them. I'm sorry I am not ready to completely give up just because China built something that very much resembles an F-22 but without the capability. The engines on the F-22 are very impressive and I think if given the choice of things to "fix" on the F-22 the engines will be left until later. Its a matter of prioritization and the F-22 engines are not faulty, so attention is turning to other areas
sounds great, now please show me the brochures so I can see for myself. I think you and others have explained the same narrative about 5 times at this point and still can't produce anything that I actually ask for.
also can't decide if 5th generation is an actual recognized set standard or just invented marketing. just end the horror and show me.
U.S. Air Force F-35s carry out first combat mission against ISIS targets
Strikes against ISIS tunnel network mark a first for the USAF - a year after Israel became the first to use the jet in a combat.
www.jpost.com
U.K., U.S. F-35Bs Launch Anti-ISIS Strikes from HMS Queen Elizabeth - USNI News
British and American F-35B Lighting II Joint Strike Fighters flew anti-ISIS strike missions from the U.K. Royal Navy aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth (R08) – a first for the U.K. in a decade, defense officials confirmed to USNI News on Tuesday. The F-35s from the embarked Royal Air Force 617...
news.usni.org
US Air Force conducts airstrikes with F-35 for first time ever
The U.S. Air Force follows the Israel Defense Forces and U.S. Marine Corps in its use of the F-35 in combat.
www.defensenews.com
Hill Airmen demonstrate combat flexibility, reliability of F-35 during deployments
HILL AIR FORCE BASE, Utah – For 16 months, Airmen from the 388th Fighter Wing here have been deployed in combat with the F-35A Lightning II and they continue to find ways to improve the capability of
www.centcom.mil
official CENTCOM statement is right there.
its only been 4 years since the USAF first used F-35s against ISIS. 4 years. and the Israeli's used them before the USAF.
Easily found.
that is exactly my point. then there was a disagreement suddenly about what constituted combat.
Lot of Americans were killed or wounded in combat the last 20 years, and although its no Russia or China obviously, we still consider that combat. are you trying to say that any war or combat short of China or Russia is not combat? bad news for the Libya/Mali crew.
if you want to start counting things this way, when was the last time China or Russia took down an IADS? shot down lots of aircraft? mounted a dedicated SEAD/DEAD campaign? pulled off a land invasion that reached and took a capital? or an amphibious operation? operated dozens of aircraft carriers? the list goes on and highlights your constant double standard the US has the most experience in the standards you just set. targets hit, electronic warfare, aircraft shot down. etc.
Ukraine is still operating Soviet-era helicopters and Mig-29s against Russia, but the F-35 will be killed against Russia? and of course I hear all about how Rafale is still viable and its no F-35.
you don't even think when you post and then call others stupid. we then spend multiple posts with you attempting to fix and explain the wacky things you say that are then easily discounted by the most basic of open research.
which brochures were those? What time was that exactly? F-35 first flight was 2006. LM won the contract back in 2001. JSF started back in 1995. crazy to think that LM didn't take into account the largest defense contract win in history. when did the F-35 not "exist" exactly? weren't they building the F-35 for years before it first flew? they didn't know any of this existed?
Last edited:
The F-22 needs GaN radar. It could have been fine with a digital radar too, but that was cancelled. That's what an upgrade means. It's like buying a new more recent phone to replace your old phone. No, buying a new case for your phone isn't an upgrade.
Combat proven means exaclty what the term says. The F-35 isn't combat proven.
Combat proven and winning or losing are two wholly different concepts. Even Muhammed Ali has lost fights.
Just 2 posts above I said the Su-35 will lose.
It's the Americans saying the F-35 is a piece of ... and that it's not ready yet, not me.
You will have to flog this dead horse somewhere else. Personally I don't care about the F-35 being 5th gen or not, it's gonna be surpassed long before it becomes operational, making the discussion pointless anyway. It's already been surpassed by the US's main enemy, so it's not even worth focusing on even when it becomes ready in 2029 when it can't survive without a better jet protecting it.
F-22s have dropped bombs in combat and operated in combat over Syria.
remember that the US making sure to include block 4 in all statements regarding F-35 is to ensure that Block 4 continues to get attention and funding. I think its going to be exciting to watch Russia's 10 Su-57s fight a handful of randomradio approved F-22s and F-35 while everything else is sidelined or dies.
its already going to be disappointing and won't count as combat.
This is that "context" that keeps getting mentioned. on one side if a Flanker gets in close to an F-35, the F-35 is in trouble, showing that the Flanker still has lethality and viability in future combat.
but also anything less than a block 4 F-35 is dead, which almost sounds like LM marketing...?
not unlike how the 6th generation Gripen E has reached its limit, but the older Rafale is still viable into the future thanks to drones. clearly one 6th generation fighter has reached its limit, while another has decades of life left.
buying a new phone is not an "upgrade" either, that is called a "replacement" and you used the word REPLACE highlighted and underlined there in Red
Oh no wait! F-22 has shot down hundreds of Fighters because its just the replacement for the F-15. F-22 a newer more recent plane to replace old F-15!
Last edited:
and yet term is officially applied to the F-35 already as was already posted. Exactly what the term says. it must be a real relief to the people involved in F-35 combat operations that no one was harmed when they were dropping thousands of tons of explosives on living human beings.
I'm not interested at all either. I would at least like to get some basic proof to see if its worth looking into further. what we have instead is people saying all these things (and they don't care of course) but they also don't let it go.
its very simple. if people keep bringing up this up, I'm going to keep asking for the proof. we have very real proof that the F-35 has been into combat and dropped bombs in conflicts that are recognized as having combat take place and I have provided links to this and I am told that such combat never took place and does not count.
meanwhile, I am told that LM marketing said these things 15 years, and I have not yet been given any proof. We have more proof that F-35s have been in combat, and have denials for this. as opposed to the belief the LM said these things and no proof exists.
its not to "evangilize" the F-35.
The point for me is to just keep showing the absurdity and its been great to have so many people willing to supply such absurdity to the point we are redefining reality
Buying a new recent phone ( whatever it means ) to REPLACE your old phone is an UPGRADE.
The age old saga of RST tripping himself continues. Pretty soon he'd be demanding proof that LM designed F-35 ever came with super cruise & TVC in it's preliminary design.
Reminds me of those loony tune toons we saw as kids with Bugs Bunny or Daffy Duck arguing with some other toon initially taking position A against the other toons position B only to swap positions somewhere in between , in the heat of the argument.
It'd be hilarious had we not see this being played out practically every week as a matter of routine for the past 6-7 yrs in one form or another . It's the sheer monotony & predictability of RST's response which killed the humour however dark though newcomers would be massively tickled.
The age old saga of RST tripping himself continues. Pretty soon he'd be demanding proof that LM designed F-35 ever came with super cruise & TVC in it's preliminary design.
Reminds me of those loony tune toons we saw as kids with Bugs Bunny or Daffy Duck arguing with some other toon initially taking position A against the other toons position B only to swap positions somewhere in between , in the heat of the argument.
It'd be hilarious had we not see this being played out practically every week as a matter of routine for the past 6-7 yrs in one form or another . It's the sheer monotony & predictability of RST's response which killed the humour however dark though newcomers would be massively tickled.