and yet they continue to develop stealth planes, interesting that

Thats ur assumption they only stealth is definition of 5th generation.

um no, it’s because both PAK-FA (russia and india) and J-XX (china) are designed to be stealthy

look them up sometime

Prdouct is based on what i read.

use some critical thought

there’s a reason those frequencies aren’t normally used, it’s because they don’t work as well

also, did you see the size of that antenna? it doesn’t fit on a Flanker

it also doesn’t fit on an AAM

also, how many stealth planes has it detected? i’m going to go with zero at the moment

manufacturer claims are nice, let’s see how they match reality

you can only hit what you can see

for ground targets that means only fixed targets

Su-35 has capbility to hit mobile targets at more than 100km. they have introduced super SAR mode even in PESA.

you assume they can get within 100km without being shot out of the sky

Thats agian ur assumtion. There alot of targets in air from Missiles to UAV that new AAMs are able to takle.

again, long-range missiles are no substitute for stealth

if you can’t see your stealthy opponent, you can’t target him no matter how far your missiles go

And extensive EW pods. Why to u think Su-35 has wing tip pods in addition to internal one. It is called flexibility.

EW is good, it is a nice complement to stealth, however it is NOT a replacement for stealth

you seem to think that it’s ‘obvious’ stealth will be compromised but have utmost confidence in EW to always get your big-ass plane through the tightest IADS.

yeah right . . . .

such as? please explain the compromises of the F-22 with respect to other fighters

Compare to size of aircraft interms of volume and the quantity of weopons that it carry and cost of whole programe.

so the effectiveness of a fighter is determined by its volume?

i guess the F/A-380 should be best fighter EVAR :diablo:

It was luck that it was developed in low inflation environment of 1990s.

wow a defense project went overbudget, first time that’s ever happened :rolleyes:

i’m still waiting for how the inclusion of stealth caused ‘too many compromises’ for the F-22

This whole JSF is based on unrealistic cost assumption and capability delivery intimeline

again, it won’t be the first military project to be over budget and behind schedule, and it won’t be the last

that make it obsolete any way.

pray tell how the F-35 will be obsolete when it enters service?

It wont make a difference what ever they put on Carrier as they cannot fight first rate power with those small carriers.

1. the CVFs are not small

2. so you’re saying they should cancel the CVFs? well that’s a completely different topic . . .

When anybody can point out an instance where a fighter used 8 AAMs in a single mission I might think this is a valid concern. Until then it’s pretty pointless.

how about 104? :diablo:

http://articles.latimes.com/2005/sep/11/local/me-then11

As the wayward Hellcat headed toward Los Angeles, twin Scorpion interceptors fired more than 200 missiles at it, missing their target each time. Instead the missiles – each pod containing 52 Mighty Mouse 2.75-inch rockets – damaged property and set off a string of brush fires across northern Los Angeles County. The Hellcat drone finally crash-landed harmlessly in the Mojave Desert.

i think the takeaway lesson here is that the number of missiles is not a reliable indicator of combat effectiveness 😉

That we can assume a higher max range in reality ok,

so you know the 1200nm claim is bogus, yet you continue to repeat it all the while chanting “that’s what LM says” while you know exactly how that came to be :rolleyes:

I believe the inlet on the F-35 is capable of Mach 2 Speeds…….Let’s also not forget that 4 or 4.5 Generation Fighters can’t fly at high Mach with external stores during your typical mission.

Belief?

Why not see what the head of the DOD portion of the F-35 program (Gen Davis) stated recently…

“The general added that a Raptor will not be able to perform close-air-support missions over a crowded area, just as the Lightning II will not be able to fly “at 60,000 feet at 1.8 Mach with six missiles waiting for somebody to come.”

That 1.8 is super-cruise btw.

um exactly, he’s saying the F-35 will not be able to CRUISE at Mach 1.8, I don’t think anybody was claiming that.

That says absolutely nothing about whether the F-35 can reach Mach 1.8 (or 2.0 for that matter) in max AB

When you do have a link about that, please do post. There is a reason, why the F-35 got two wet stations for ETs, when it comes to that 600 nm AR. 😉

huh? the 590+ nm combat radius is definitely on internal fuel only

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/farnborough/docs/F-35-Brochure.pdf

Combat radius (internal fuel) . >590 n.mi / 1,093 km

From take off to landing, the F-35 is in the same draggy condition, because the frontal area or most important drag will not change.

please compare the drag coefficient of a clean F-35 and a clean Flanker

you do realize that the flanker is a big-ass plane?

Otherwise all engineers had demanded for oversize fighters with all loads (fuel/weapons) carried internal only for decades. 😀

i think you are discounting our EXPERIENCE with planes developed with that THEORY, namely that they ALWAYS carry external tanks

you are too cavalier about the ease of dropping tanks, as already mentioned tanks are expensive and in limited supply, you can’t go punching them off every mission.

Ok, ill give you that.
If no counter-stealth is achieved VLO fighters will become the dominants of the skies.

Are you now going to answer my question?
What will happen if by 2015 both ground based and airborne radars detect stealth aircraft?

without stealth, the F-35 will still be a very formidable fighter, maybe it will be a little better, maybe it will be a little worse depending on the adversary and situation

the point is we’re talking about matters of degree

so then you come to your risk assessment question:
would you accept the possibility of being slightly inferior for the possibility of massively superior?

the downside is small, the upside is tremendous, the question becomes a no-brainer

They are simply implemeting a new, now understood technology;stealth.

but why would they make the SACRIFICES and COMPROMISES to add an OBSOLETE technology that’s ON IT’S WAY OUT and will soon be WORTHLESS?

oh wait, maybe, just maybe, it isn’t obsolete and they predict it will be useful a very, very long time to come