wrightwingMostly true, now again, how many has the F35 dropped? The point re the aasm and the brimstone was the numbers that can be carried.
Secondly are you sure re the release of those at mach 1 plus for the F35. There has been some speculation that the bomb doors are not designed for supersonic opening.
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/new-lockheed-martin-f-35a-will-test-weapons-91665819.html
Supersonic launch of internal weapons, including maximum-speed (Mach 1.6) launch of internal air-to-air missiles, is a feature of all F-35s. An internal-weapons-only configuration is used when Very Low Observable stealth is required to complete a mission. When VLO stealth is not required, more than 15,000 pounds of additional ordnance can be loaded onto six external pylons.
wrightwingSure, but you don’t or shouldn’t need 1,000’s of airframes to do that.
A decent number of high end, expensive platforms do that job (…or less expensive unmanned platforms…;)). After which the less expensive but less specialised and more flexible platforms take over.
If you want to overwhelm those defenses(and the short range defense of those defenses), it certainly doesn’t hurt your cause to have 1000s of airframes.
wrightwingWrightwing :
Years of leading edge technology , backed up by countless facts which I intend to expose in a new thread soon . For now , take my words on it and be patient , thanks 😎
This ought to be good, seeing as how you don’t have access to sensitive info on either aircraft’s systems(and even if you did, you couldn’t post it here).
It is very hard and the score stands at 1-0 for the F-22 after 6 engagements .
No other aircraft so far fared that well against the Raptor . One rumor even says that the score was in fact 1-1 .
Well I guess it all depends on whose anecdotes you find more credible.
Because the F-35 doesn ‘t have a system like SPECTRA to fool incomings EM missiles .
Again, you don’t know what capabilities the F-35’s defensive systems possess, and its survivability isn’t nearly as dependant upon such systems in the first place.
Regarding the IR signature of both fighters , I already provided some material from Snecma and Prat&Whitney who shows the difference in engineering (air cooling by-pass chamber) . You did not .
How about providing some IR images of the 2 fighters(with a production representative F-35), for comparison purposes.
Yes the Rafale is a better flier than the F-35 both in subsonic and supersonic . Calling me wrong would be foolish .
I wonder if you’d oblige us, and show the ITR/STR, AoA, Acceleration, roll/pitch/yaw rates, etc…throughout the entire flight envelope of both aircraft. I suspect once the actual figures start coming out from the F-35 flight testing, you’re gonna see that the differences are probably much less than you think.
the know-how behind it is not comparable (in hardware and most importantly in software) .
Cheers .
This should be interesting as well.
wrightwingWhen I think that some people are going to War with this……
It might appear less disengenuous if you acknowledged that the F-35 has quite an impressive external carriage capacity, or that the configuration you showed would be a first day of war, prior to the IADs being suppressed.
wrightwingI’m pretty sure that no open source site is going to answer the questions that I said were crucial to understanding what happened though.
wrightwingBy the time you need externals, the need for stealth isn’t nearly as great. The other platforms don’t have that option. Survivability is an important component of flexibility. Even with externals, the F-35 will be stealthier than its competitors.
wrightwingHere’s another F-22 kill reference, this time by an EA-18G:
“Note that an EA-18G aircraft has managed a radar-guided missile kill on an F-22 in combat exercises, so it can be done. Again, stealth isn’t invisibility – but it can make the F-22 a very slippery opponent that can engage or disengage from combat much more easily than previous radar-age fighters. “
Source: http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/f22-raptor-procurement-events-updated-02908/Reasonable people are always evaluating the facts to form accurate conclusions. But believe what you want at your own peril.
No one is saying that it’s impossible to kill an F-22, but it’d be helpful if we knew the circumstances of the Growler kill, before drawing too many conclusions(i.e. at what range did the engagement start, at what range was the Raptor spotted, which method of engagement was used with the missile, what range was the missile fired from, etc…)
wrightwing“But still no sign of side weapons bays? I don’t see them.”
I’m looking at the blown up images, and I’m not seeing anything that immediately looks like it’s a weapons bay.
wrightwingMigL :
Now (and this is my personal opinion) , the Rafale has a better survivability than the F-35 in every mission we can think of .
To you , it might sounds crazy but I stand by it .
To start with , I pose as a fact that French ECMs and ECCMs are the World best (and have been for a rather long time) .
And this “fact” would be based upon what empirical comparison?
To kill a F-35 or a Rafale , you need to hit it with something : canon rounds or missile . Right ? Ok .
To put a canon round on a Rafale is not an easy task to say the least , ask the F-22 pilots 😎
Ask the Rafale pilots how easy it is to put a round on the F-22.:cool:
(A Rafale would kill a F-35 in a canon fight within the 2 first turns .)
Also , I believe that it is harder to hit a Rafale with a EM missile launched from a late S-XXX SAM than a F-35 , even if the latest is VLO .
Notice than I said hit and not track
If the F-35 is harder to track, how do you reckon that it’s easier to hit?
The Dassault fighter also have a lower IR signature than the F-35 at all regimes and altitudes .
You have access to both sets of data I suppose, or is that your personal assessment?
It is also a better flyer at all regimes and altitudes (and attitudes) .
This remains to be seen.
The F-35 ECM suite ~and the people behind it~ are half a league behind .
The AN/ASQ-239 (Barracuda) who did cost $672 million in development can ‘t do what SPECTRA do .
Presumably, the capabilities of each system are top secret, so I’m curious as to how you think you know what the ASQ-239 is capable of.
wrightwingAnd normally the tripwire once sprung isn’t so hidden or misunderstood when experienced the second time around. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.
This is true, if you believe that early warning sensors will be left alone, and continue to operate at 100%. With each successive day, there’ll be bigger holes in the air defenses, allowing more unrestricted access.
wrightwingpeople state that rafale can’t go to war on first day: where’s the proof? not speculation, but proof? there’s none either.. so?
No one is saying that a Rafale couldn’t be used on the first day of war, but….the risk goes up.
there’s a difference, some bet on fully passive stealth, which cost billions to develop and will become useless in near future, and others have chosen to make somewhat LO aircraft which rely more heavily on ECM (upgradable and, therefore, adaptable to future threats) to stay safe… while still being cheaper to develop
The Russians and Chinese don’t seem to agree that passive stealth will be useless in the near future.
maybe that it’s already operational and efficient for all missions an airforce or navy can ask from an aircraft and that at a fraction of the cost of the F-35? reminds me of the old joke about nasa speding 10 million dollars to develop a pressurised pen capable of writing head down, at 0G etc.. and the russians solving the problem simply by using a pencil. rafale and F-35 is more or less the same story: rafale does everything for a reasonable cost, the f-35 hopes to do more or less everything, and costs multiple times the rafale price
The F-35 won’t cost several times more than the Rafale.
wrightwingthe fact remains that we still have to see a single rafale shot down by any air defence…
presenting it as being a suicidal machine to fly in doesn’t seem very serious in the first place. When (because it’s not an “if” ) the shape stealth becomes more or less useless (which is just a matter of efficiently proceeding the lower frequency signal, a task that more and more modern calculators shouldn’t have so much trouble in achieving in the not so distant future – Moore’s law, etc…), what will be left is fighters which will be able to do their job because they can adapt and have flying wualities to do so, and the others… how the F-35 will perform once its stealth becomes obsolete remains the question
Stealth doesn’t mean that you’ll fly over a SAM site, so much as giving you the ability to fly around it, due to smaller engagement envelopes. I hear everyone saying “but what about low frequency radars, etc…..” and the answer to that involves a number of factors.
A- how widely proliferated are these radars?
B- how mobile are they?(fixed sites aren’t going to have a long life span)
C- they serve only as a trip wire(they’re not able to guide weapons. They can only alert other locations that there’s something in the area)
D- F-35s(or F-22s/B-2s, etc…) won’t be operating in a vacuum. There’ll be multiple systems, platforms, etc…working simultaneously, to suppress and kill the early warning systems.
E- for mobile targets, staying outside of S-300/400 envelopes and using cruise missiles isn’t a great solution(especially if you’re firing $1 million dollar weapons to blow up $50k targets).
wrightwingPlease read and understand the point i have been making. I am talking of external loads. See post #164.
Usable external loads, anything other than a short range aam, can be carried on four (4) external pylons.
See post #160 for the loads both external and external and the following which addresses your comment re seeing the difference:“”Expect the F35 can’t carry the same payload, internally, externally or believe it or not in your dreams. Four pylons isn’t it?”
Meaning that the range of payload (as in type and number of munitions) the aircraft can carry at the same time and thus it’s flexability is not as great as a platform with more than four usable hardpoints.
“The point and advantage is that you do have the flexability. With the F35 you do not.
Having the first day of war survivability against modern air defenses sounds like a pretty flexible option to me.
wrightwingMod Edit: Quoted posting now deleted.
wrightwingFor F-22 and F-15, some one has told you before, for maneuver most to do with F-22 is TVC compare with F-15.
This is incorrect. Until the F-22 enters into post stall maneuvers, it uses very little TVC, for agility. It’s flight control surfaces are more than capable of providing the authority for heavy maneuvering.
Sign In
