Stealth aircraft have their RCS concentrated to few directional spikes due to angle alignment while at other angles they maintain more or less of the LO/VLO (the best figures usually reserved for frontal aspect). If you approach an F-35 (or other stealth design for that matter) from the spike angle, it will have an RCS larger than a conventional design due to massive return on multiple surfaces/edges.

What aspect would a sensor have to be to take advantage of that though, and is it realistic that it would be there? Additionally what’s the signal strength of that return, due to the RAM coatings? Certainly lower than with conventional materials.

The strategy of the F-35 is to produce it in huge numbers over a long period of time. If it turns out that it can’t get a confident kill in BVR on PAK-FA or J-XX and isn’t competetive against them in WVR that plan wont work. Instead you would have to cut the production short and build more F-22 instead or develop a new aircraft. Those who already has bought early F-35’s at high prices would then be losers.

Eurofighter, Gripen and Rafale on the other hand can be upgraded with better RAM coatings, jammers and decoys to prevent the opponent a BVR kill and force a merge. As they are more balanced designs that isnt so dependant on on BVR I would rather be a pilot in a eurocanard in that situation than an F-35.

From the article-

Lockheed Martin has defended the air-to-air capabilities of the F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) while conceding that the aircraft’s performance in combat within visual range (WVR) will only be marginally superior to that of its fourth-generation and advanced fourth-generation counterparts.

Marginally superior is still superior, which means the F-35 would have at least as good a chance in WVR and a better chance in BVR.

Out of the F-22’s features, which gives it the biggest advantage over it’s competitors? It’s speed? Rubbish. Plenty of fighters have it’s speed.

Not many other fighters can fly fast as long as the F-22 though, except perhaps the Mig 31.

For increased supersonic dash capability.

Nothing more.

Unless you want 250nm mission radius, you won’t be flying even an F-22 at M1.7 constantly.

What supercruise gives the F-22 is 100nm of supercruise and 200 – 300nm of subsonic and EFFICIENT cruise capability.

Do you believe the fact that EVERY fighter in the world cruises at high subsonic mach speeds out of sheer coincidence?

Next you’ll be quoting Dr Carlo Kopp and insisting that M1.7 is the F-22’s normal cruise speed and because it flies twice as fast at this cruise speed it’s mission rates are double that of existing fighters…

If you believe that, I pity you the next time a snakeoil salesman turns up at your door…

Your numbers are a little low for the supersonic and subsonic radii. AW&ST claims a 41 minute supercruise capability for the Raptor vs. 7-8 minutes supersonic for an F-15, to give a comparison of the increased capability.

So Mig 29Ks instead of Su 33s. Hmm AESA equipped Ks should be really capable. 🙂

Are they going to be AESA equipped though?

… from which angle? Don’t be surprised to find out that from certain angles its RCS might be 2x higher than the one of F-16.

I kind of doubt that the F-35 has 2x the F-16 RCS from any angle, considering it’s an all aspect stealth design. Of course head on is its most advantageous angle, but that’s not the only angle it enjoys VLO.

Jason

The RCS equations dont work in multiples of ten.
If the Flanker detects a Viper at 140 km´s, and if the Lightning II “has an radar cross section, approximately 1/8th of an F-16”, your BARS will be picking the F-35A at (roughly, top of my head, without a calculator at hand) 100 km´s away.

The F-35’s RCS is considerably smaller than 1/8th that of an F-16(1m^2 vs. .001m^2).

If I pay for a swing-role fighter, I don’t want a strike fighter with self defence, I want a fighter which can switch from doing an air dominance mission to a strike mission with the press of a button. 2 AMRAAMs are not enough for an air dominance mission. Hence the F-35 is not in its current configuration at all suitable for any definition of swing-role.
Neither is the F-35. Your point?

That’s why you mix the loads on the planes. Some with more AAMS for escort if need be. How many AAMs did F-117s carry? Some F-35s will pull CAP, some SEAD/DEAD, some interdiction/CAS, etc…. Which strike fighter carries a full A/G load, AND 8 AAMS? You have to understand- you’re going to be using entirely new tactics with a VLO aircraft, to exploit that capability.
The F-35 will be in service sooner than the Su-35(the USAF will start receiving production models next year, with an IOC a couple years later). Has anyone even ordered the Su-35 yet?