.

While I agree with you that more complex elements won’t be necessarily cheaper if built by China, this is mostly due IMO to their current lack of technical base (R&D been expansive everywhere) and the fact that when it comes to complex sciences they’ve got like anyone else to give a reason to people to stay home.

However while it’s true that most western or western affiliated
countries won’t be buying a Chinese fighter any time soon (Pakistan being an exception), I believe it won’t last for long.
First of all Chinese R&D is progressing pretty fast thanks to the amount of money they’re able to spend, then the lack of affordable, unrestricted fighters around is a very big selling point for China.

They’re able to make loan the West couldn’t, and they’re more willing to disregard the US when it serves their interests than Russia is due to their growing economic weight.

I personnaly believe that many more countries in Africa and elsewhere will be buying made it China equipments. Right now China and Sweden are the only countries that can offer a relatively affordable fighter for the next 20 years or so…

They already reduced the DDX1000 from 30+ to barely 3… They propably shouldn’t have gone beyond prototype stage, but let’s hope they’ll learn for the future.

I guess the current situation isn’t ideal, but it’s also an opportunity to work on efficiency and reduce non mandatory spendings…

Who needs flying hours when you’ve got fancy simulators?

One thing LM is conveniently staying silent about is what’s the real range of CUDA. I’ve seen many people pretty quick to be impressed by the increased load, but what’s its real characteristics.

“A medium BVR missile” seems rather vague tbh, and the fact that there are no comparaison on range vs other missiles like the AMRAM when they stress the ability to carry much more than legacy missiles worries me… a lot!

ROVER – Remotely Operated Video Enhanced Receiver

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/rover-sics-tacair-on-americas-enemies-updated-01700/

Nothing to do with Raptor´s but a datalink (and a bloody useful one at that, and yes is also integrated with the “other” twin eurocanard)

Cheers

I thought ROVER was only for troops on the ground, so I was confused you would talk about it here.
Will aircraft communicate through ROVER rather than Link 16?

i was explaining why the idea of blue wing is wrong (idea about DRFM can make radar reject their own signal )
and even through they use RAM on EF-2000 , rafale their RCS still high ( 0.1 m2 and much higher with weapon ) so the signal here will not going to be lost in noise ( even for F-22 , F-35 with extremely small RCS there still signal coming back at close distance ) and you will not be able to intercept large amount of signal by destructive interference because it extremely hard to create btw your argument here has nothing to do with what i and blue wing were arguing , i dont really understand what you are trying to say here ?

What BW was talking about is called Range Gate Pull-Off and you can find about it by doing a few move of google fu 🙂 .

You and I don’t know the true values of current military aircraft’s RCS (not even for older ones tbh), and I’m not saying a F-22 won’t have an advantage with stealth, I’m saying there are counter-measures being developed or already in place that can provide a 4th gen aircraft with enough time to balance the odds back in its favours, the same way you believe that the F-35’s sensors will compensate for its lack of manoeuverability…
The same have always being true for radar’s performances, missile’s performances, aircraft’s performances etc.

Again the real question here isn’t the technology itself, it’s how affordable and reliable it can be. So far, B-2 and F-22 have shown great potential but with huge cost to acquire, maintain and upgrade.
So far LM is trying to hide how much more expansive the F-35 is by selling as many as possible of the aircraft.

search barrage jamming and you will understand by frequency hoping is not a problem for noise jammer , and no they are not outdated , escort jamming are mostly noise jamming (ex Alq-99 )
and DRFM doesnot work like noise jamming it will not going to reduce distance the aircraft can be engaged like noise jamming but rather create more target to confuse enemy radar ( distance mostly dont affect ability of DRFM while noise jamming have burn through range )
please do some research and you will see what i say

Barrage jamming cannot jam 2 or 3 aircraft using beam agile radars hoping their frequencies using very advanced pattern to reduce the propabilities of decoding. That’s the reason why they’re no longer going to be very effective in a sky where multiple AESA radars are flying. They may succeed in jamming one radar at a time, but since aircraft can link their sensors, the jamming will not only be detected pretty quick, it’ll be defeated as well.

As I’ve told you DRFM is a method of manipulating radio waves rather than just producing white noise all over the place. What you can do with it is rather limitless. Because creating decoys has been one of its application so far that we know about doesn’t mean that’s all it can do.

lethality here based on what ???
how many time typhoon manage to kill F-22 compared to the time F-22 do the same to it 😉 it not about win every time but win most of the time
not to mention that F-22 dont have aim-132 , JHMCS , DAS or DIRCM ..etc so at wvr it will be at disadvantage compared to F-35

Well the F-35 isn’t the only aircraft with a good set of sensors/weapons for wvr engagements. I’ve got no problem if it has to use them for self defence, but to base your air defence on it? Especially given the fact that the new area of tension and of focus of the US and its allies are now Asia where a number of LO air superiority fighter are to operate in the future. I’m a sceptic.

i say it will make aircraft perform SEAD much better
and SH while not stealth do have clean RCS = 0.1 m2 same as rafale and typhoon

Again you don’t know that and if you did, you would be doing treason right now…