Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning and F-22 'Raptor' : News & Discussion

@Rajput Lion
It's very difficult to cover 1,000km out from ships with patrols. As the radius increases, the area you need to cover increases in proportion to radius squared. The F-14 with extrenal tanks could only cover out to 450km for instance and the Phoenix increased that to 600km theoretically. You have to cover 4x the area at 900km as 450km. I don't believe there's currently any carrier-fighter combo that can cover out to 1,000km.
I am not in disagreement with you. I was just laughing at what LM touted in the past about how even one loose rivet could increase the RCS of F-117 and now both F-35 & F-22 are supposed to be "stealthy" despite carrying external ordnance/IRST pods. The fact that we're supposed to believe that due to stealthy pylons/weapons/pods Stealth wouldn't be compromised is sheer BS.

That's what French posters like @Picdelamirand-oil and @Bon Plan etc. have said over the years about versatility of Rafale to carry heavy stuff at a far distance.

F-35 in that configuration which you've posted won't be any better than Rafale.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Bon Plan
I am not in disagreement with you. I was just laughing at what LM touted in the past about how even one loose rivet could increase the RCS of F-117 and now both F-35 & F-22 are supposed to be "stealthy" despite carrying external ordnance/IRST pods. The fact that we're supposed to believe that due to stealthy pylons/weapons/pods Stealth wouldn't be compromised is sheer BS.
The F-117 was designed to have mostly geometrical stealth, computers couldn't simulate curves or external ordance and RAM has advanced bucket loads since then. That said, an F-35 with pylons will still have a higher RCS than one without, but given the immense stand-off range and a blue water environment, that shouldn't matter. The F-117 also didn't know when trouble was coming, the F-35 sees all radar threats and EM signals besides.
That's what French posters like @Picdelamirand-oil and @Bon Plan etc. have said over the years about versatility of Rafale to carry heavy stuff at a far distance.
F-35 in that configuration which you've posted won't be any better than Rafale.
The Rafale isn't a stealth plane period, the pylons aren't stealthly and Storm Shadow has a higher RCS than a LRASM/JASSM. A stealthy plane carrying an external load still has a lower RCS than an unstealthy one doing the same. And the Rafale would still have to carry more externally like MRAAMs and drop tanks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rajput Lion
The F-117 was designed to have mostly geometrical stealth, computers couldn't simulate curves or external ordance and RAM has advanced bucket loads since then. That said, an F-35 with pylons will still have a higher RCS than one without, but given the immense stand-off range and a blue water environment, that shouldn't matter. The F-117 also didn't know when trouble was coming, the F-35 sees all radar threats and EM signals besides.


The Rafale isn't a stealth plane period, the pylons aren't stealthly and Storm Shadow has a higher RCS than a LRASM/JASSM. A stealthy plane carrying an external load still has a lower RCS than an unstealthy one doing the same. And the Rafale would still have to carry more externally like MRAAMs and drop tanks.
Fair enough👍
 
ALL BUT NOT SURE !
Obviously this is based purely on geometry, but LM tend to be ahead on stealth materials too:

1727708139605.png
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Rajput Lion
This is the same HMD as the French Rafale.
TDSI has been awarded an initial $1.6 million Other Transaction Authority (OTA) contract for integration and development testing of F-22 specific upgrades for its Scorpion® Helmet Mounted Display (HMD).
 

F-35 Inability to Detect Russian S-300 Frequencies “Alarming”

The inability of the United States' advanced F-35 aircraft to detect and identify frequencies used by Russian air defense systems is considered "alarming" as it poses risks to the aerial operations of NATO and Ukrainian combat aircraft.
(DEFENCE SECURITY ASIA) — At the outset of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the United States deployed its fifth-generation F-35 fighter jets to Baltic countries such as Estonia, Lithuania, and Romania to patrol the borders with Russia.

Operating in stealth mode, F-35s from the 388th and 419th Fighter Wings, based in Germany, were tasked with Electronic Intelligence (ELINT) missions to detect frequencies emitted by Russian air defense systems and fighter aircraft.

These aircraft gathered various data from enemy systems to aid NATO forces in better understanding the threats posed by the Russian military incursion.

According to a report by Air Force Times, these fifth-generation U.S. Air Force fighter jets successfully tracked most Russian air defense systems in Ukraine and Kaliningrad, a Russian enclave bordering Poland.

However, despite being equipped with advanced electronic warfare and sensor systems, the F-35s were not able to detect all Russian air defense systems in Ukraine.

“During these missions, the F-35s sometimes failed to identify military equipment because some of these systems, like air defense units, could mask their presence in the field,” explained 388th Fighter Wing Commander Colonel Craig Andrle.

He suggested that Russian air defense systems might operate in modes unrecognized by the F-35s, and this inability to identify “unknown objects” was reported back to headquarters.

This failure of advanced U.S. F-35s to detect and identify frequencies used by Russian air defense systems is considered concerning, posing risks to NATO and Ukrainian air operations.

This shortcoming surprised the F-35 pilots themselves and highlighted the Russian S-300 air defense system as a significant challenge to the U.S. military.

Despite the F-35s being touted for their formidable Electronic Warfare (EW)/ELINT capabilities, this failure indicates that Russia has its own effective countermeasures.

“We identified the SA-20 system (NATO designation for the S-300). I knew it was an SA-20, and intelligence also indicated an SA-20 operating in the area, but my aircraft failed to recognize it, possibly because the air defense system was operating in a ‘war reserve mode’ we had not encountered before,” stated a U.S. Air Force officer.

It is standard for air defense systems to not use their actual frequencies during peacetime, known as “war reserve,” to prevent enemies from discovering their real frequencies.

Air defense units operating in “war reserve” mode do so to avoid detection by adversaries.
Identifying these frequencies would enable the “enemy” to devise Electronic Counter Measures (ECM) strategies against them.
 
Israel is about to use F-35's against Iran targets defended with s-300 and a Russian s400 that is man by Russians. Israel also used F-35's to bomb a Russian base in Syria and Russia's tried to shoot down but couldn't.

F-35 is for war a first strike weapon system against modern IADS while Rafail is just there to look pretty.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Picdelamirand-oil
Israel is about to use F-35's against Iran targets defended with s-300 and a Russian s400 that is man by Russians. Israel also used F-35's to bomb a Russian base in Syria and Russia's tried to shoot down but couldn't.

F-35 is for war a first strike weapon system against modern IADS while Rafail is just there to look pretty.
F35 is uggly and not war ready.
It would be interesting to see what bird is used over Iran, the noob F35 or the well proven F15....
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Rajput Lion
Israel is about to use F-35's against Iran targets defended with s-300 and a Russian s400 that is man by Russians. Israel also used F-35's to bomb a Russian base in Syria and Russia's tried to shoot down but couldn't.

F-35 is for war a first strike weapon system against modern IADS while Rafail is just there to look pretty.

You shouldn't take any of pic's BS articles seriously.

This was never said and is 'only quoted' on a rubbish site.
“During these missions, the F-35s sometimes failed to identify military equipment because some of these systems, like air defense units, could mask their presence in the field,” explained 388th Fighter Wing Commander Colonel Craig Andrle.

Here is the real article that it said it was based on and lied about. Block 4 has increased the antenna farm to I think is more than double its present number. I'll try and google it

this is a start
 
Last edited:
Here is the real article that it said it was based on and lied about.
In your article
(..)
“We had all hoped it was going to work like it’s supposed to, but then to see it actually perform very, very well in that role was great,” Andrle said.

Airmen hopscotched from Spangdahlem to Estonia’s Amari Air Base, Lithuania’s Siauliai Air Base and Romania’s Fetesti Air Base, U.S. Air Forces in Europe said in a press release.

The jet didn’t always recognize objects around it, since assets like air defense systems have digital ways of evading notice.

For instance, Andrle said: “We’re looking at an Sa-20 [NATO’s name for the S-300 surface-to-air missile system]. I know it’s an Sa-20. Intel says there’s an Sa-20 there, but now my jet doesn’t ID it as such, because that Sa-20 is operating, potentially, in a war reserve mode that we haven’t seen before.”

But the F-35 flagged the object for troops who updated and re-uploaded the data into the jet. After that, NATO aircraft knew what they were looking at and how to geolocate it. That makes it harder to take NATO by surprise.
(..)
 

View attachment 36975
1.24 billion more....
The initial bid was not for a fully capable bird ? ;)

Same history with Switzerland F35. Not to speak of USAF....

I don't have seen same news about Egypt Rafale, Indian Rafale, Qatar Rafale, Greek Rafale.

If these customers like to be f*ck by LM.....
 
1.24 billion more....
The initial bid was not for a fully capable bird ? ;)

Same history with Switzerland F35. Not to speak of USAF....

I don't have seen same news about Egypt Rafale, Indian Rafale, Qatar Rafale, Greek Rafale.

If these customers like to be f*ck by LM.....
If USA gets serious about its relationship with India and offers local production of F-35 Block 4 with full TOT, then it's the ONLY jet that can defeat Rafale F5 for this latest MRFA tender.

But instead they are pushing F-16V/21 & F-15EX for MRFA, which IAF obviously doesn't want.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Bon Plan
No TR-3, no juice. Ask the Americans (DoD).

And B4 beyond requires MLUs. Again, ask the Americans yourself.

can you please post exactly what was said? remember that the DoD also says the F-35 is best fighter flying today. its interesting what you decide to "parse" and it all of course depends on how anyone wants to parse something when the DoD says many things anyway.

Wow, good job comparing Canada to Australia. Both countries are not in the same situation.

You have a very poor understanding of the dangers both countries are facing as of right now. Canada is under threat from Russia and Australia from China. But the difference is Canada is today within reach of Russia, but China isn't yet within reach of Australia.

Given the threat environment, Australia has time, Canada doesn't. So Canada pursuing both Hornet upgrades while buying F-35s (and at the right time may I add) is the correct course of action. Canada is part of NORAD, and any heavy-lifting will be done by the USAF anyway, so whatever assets can back up the USAF will help.

Given the fact that Australia does not have Canada's advantages under NORAD, ie, a massive USAF force right in its backyard, they are facing a major issue. I don't think you have kept up with the news, but as per the Pentagon, every single F-35 in operation today is incapable of fighting the PLAAF. B4 capabilities are what make the F-35 and initial B4 capabilities are not expected until 2025 or 2026. And this is only to deal with the threats from China today, not the kinda threats China will bring to the table post 2030. And it has been discovered that most of the F-35s delivered today cannot receive the upgrades necessary to deal with a post-2030 threat without a major ridiculously expensive rebuild of the F-35s which can happen only after 2040 for the already delivered RAAF jets.

Right now, China isn't a direct threat to the RAAF. Why? Distance. That could change within 10 years 'cause of PLAN's new carriers, and perhaps with China introducing a 6th gen jet too, alongside a stealth bomber. And unlike Canada, having to deal with Russia, the Australians aren't dealing with any real threat today. An upgraded Hornet with its life extended by 10 years is not better than a pre-TR-2 F-35, but would have bridged the gap between the time they bought the F-35 to the time they actually need the F-35, ie after 2030, so a 2031 retirement instead of 2021. And had they placed F-35 orders this year or the next, almost like Canada did, they would have directly received B4 jets right from the start, the version that's expected to match China.

Btw, Canada's set to operate its Hornets until 2032, with sufficient room to make up for delays. Canada's basically doing what I said Australia should have done. Ironically, they would have the anti-PLAAF fleet while the Australians wouldn't.

Thank you for explaining my own country to me. Maybe when you are done fixing your own nation, you can tour Australia and Canada and tell us all the things you are so certain of from so far away and finally perfect us in your own eyes.

so much of this iswrong it would take days to fix it all and its not the focus of the thread anyway. and you have no idea how Canada works or our defence needs. This has been one of the most telling things with the CF-18 replacement, even within Canada everyone "thinks they know best" and there is little room for the people like the small RCAF to get a word in on terms of reality. even the PM had very firm opinions based on... well.. his own thoughts, and very little thought or regard for the reality. eventually, reality won out.

you don't even seem to understand the notion of alliances either. Very few countries are "direct threats" to the conglomeration of nations that make up alliances like NATO, NORAD and UN. its doesn't mean that fighting won't take place. Remember that many Australian soldiers in world war II had be called back from North Africa to fight the Japanese. Germany, Italy, and the front of North Africa is also very far from Australia as were the trenches in world war I.


I don't think you have kept up with the news, but as per the Pentagon, every single F-35 in operation today is incapable of fighting the PLAAF.

Thats an amazing admission. The Pentagon stationed the majority of the F-35s in the pacific, and now say they can't fight the PLAAF? Where is that exact quote please I would like to see it.

I think you are mixing things up. (shocker!) whether it is for sake of winning an argument or if you are confused, I suppose remains to be seen. Even the Pentagon knows if there is a war with the PLAAF F-35s will fight, even if its not the latest version. The "black and white" version you propagate is not the truth and I would like to think you know that. even you admit that an upgraded teen fighter is not as good as an old version of the F-35. So the pentagon is telling us nothing save fore the F-22 can fight the PLAAF. no F-16? nor F-35? nothing? I guess everyone just sits back and dies? interesting strategy they have there in the pentagon, even more interesting to "broadcast" such things. One would think that would be an extremely guarded piece of secret information. its almost like its not true. and I admire the PLAAF's strategy too. The US is telling China they can own the sky now, or wait and lose it. China is being very kind in allowing the US to catch up.

anyway long post over. please post the exact words, then I can post the other things the Pentagon has said about the F-35 in terms of its capability, and we can continue the dance once more. but lets be fair and post both version in the future.
It falls short, in a clean config, against a dual seat F16 with 2 pendular tanks.....
So no.
its sad that you don't understand what was being tested there, and later fixed. it was found that flight controls laws were "too tight" its a point of fact that an F-35 can pull more Alpha than an F-16. we also have tons of pilot comparison and testimony from pilots that have flown multiple aircraft including F-16s and F-18s and can talk about the F-35s agility in comparison. naturally you had to look past all that to find one piece of evidence from a flight control test, and not a "real dogfight" ---and this was talked about at the time as well.

its worth noting that F-5s and A-4s were routinely able to beat F-16s, F-18s, F-14s, and F-15s in training. so is your opinion now and forever that the teen series can't beat A-4s and F-5s who's origins date back to the 1950s?
this is one of the many reasons the Rafale loses against the F-35. The French simply refuse to adjust. They would rather talk about the exception rather than the whole. I wouldn't dream of telling people the Rafale was not worth pursing because years ago they suffered fatal accidents for example. but the French mindset continues to hinder. The Swiss pilots go and fly the F-35 themselves and discover themselves of course that the F-35 does have good agility, and compares well with what they already know. so the argument, is basically over at that point.

in this very thread we have seen Super Hornets beating up on Rafales. I don't think anyone thinks of the Super Hornet as some hyper-manuevarble dynamo. Super Hornets are amazing in slow speed maneuver and high alpha though to be fair.

you insist they don't know what they are talking about and talk about a flight control test in California from years back, a test that lead to changes to the flight control laws that gave the pilots more control of the F-35s agility. in other words, they fixed the problem. I don't know what year France is stuck in exactly-- the argument about fighter generations you keep trying to use to obfuscate might have been an interesting philosophical debate 10-15 years ago. I just find it boorish and outdated now, just like the above. its pedantic and no longer relevant. I am very glad that Dassault and other professionals who understand these things better than you do are out there. it would be funny to watch Dassault trying to explain to the Swiss air force not to believe their own lying eyes, because back in 2015 an F-16 "beat" an F-35 in a test about flight control stick inputs. its hard to discern the Dassault company from the poor representatives Dassault's fanboys are to it.
 
@Spitfire6

In Switzerland, they compared paper F-35 via a simulator to the real Rafale. And to get to the paper F-35's capabilities in the real world, as the JPO and DOT&E have discovered, the F-35 needs massive upgrades including a new engine.

remember that one can always upgrade an F-35, but there is no upgrading a Rafale to the point it can ever be an F-35. This is a problem Dassault has been unable to solve. also why we have the emergence of the online "French Excuse Factory" (FEF) its employing a lot of people/bots I see.

These upgrades are effectively the cost of buying a new aircraft. That's why the RAAF is screwed.
fascinating! especially when I am told the super astrnomically hyper expensive cost of F-35s. what a collision of narratives.

what do the upgrades cost exactly and what is the comparison with a new aircraft exactly? I would love to see the price difference. feel free to post sources. and hard numbers.


In both competitions, costs were manipulated to favor the F-35. What's funny is in the UK, the Typhoon is cheaper to operate than the F-35B, and in turn Rafale is cheaper than the Typhoon.

there is no manipulation needed, and the competitions explained their cost models.

But somehow the F-35 was cheaper in Switzerland and Finland.
basic mathematics actually. its not complicated if we look at the methodology employed.

The Rafale is a fine aircraft, but its not an F-35 as I pointed out above. That is the key an inescapable elephant in the room. for some reason you desire to carry "French water" and argue on behalf of the French because you have loyalty to the aircraft your air force uses. This is fine of course, just don't lose track of things
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Bon Plan