I may be wrong but I suspect there might be a difference between the F-16/F-18 on the one hand and e.g., SH/Rafale on the other.

I believe India answered that question pretty well… New airframe, instability, fly by wire, reduced RCS, built in sensor fusion etc.

There are some indications that the more modern platforms like SH, Rafale are more survivable than what some people refer to as “4. gen”. A combination of lower RCS (not to hide from radar but to make specific EWD techniques more effective); improved sensors, improved MMI, sensor fusion etc. may make these more modern “4.5” gen fighters more survivable than the older machines.

I remember a Gripen Engineer talking about the NG and saying that the only way to make it more stealthly would be internal carriage, although weapon pods could address that problem in the future. 4.5+ aircraft manufacturers aren’t sitting on their hands while the almight JSF is being produced.

Long range stand off munition is another way to offset the lack of all aspect LO.

Stealth is great — if you can afford it. Interestingly most navies have so far not invested much money in stealthy surface ships. One notable exception is Sweden and their Visby class. In most other cases, the navies have to rely on “80s tech ships” and are forced to suffer the losses by not having stealthy platforms. Fighter pilots in many countries seem to be more “lucky” in this respect, in that they will have stealthy toys to play with. Hopefully it will not be too expensive!

Hum a few navies have and even more are now building stealth frigates. The fact that the US stayed way behind for a while and is planning a doing so in the future with the prologation of current class of ships doesn’t mean the rest of the world is. China, Russia, India, Europe… many countries are building stealth ships.

Also while most people talk about the Visby class when thinking about steatlh ships, the very first were the French Lafayette class.

Anyway since China and Russia are working on stealthy platforms I am happy that the US has a lead in this field.

Let’s hope. Catching up is very easy when you’ve got the money and your opponent is bankrupt.

I am quite convinced that eg. Rafale can survive most scenarios much better than e.g. F-16, but… F-35 will be more survivable in particular long-term (20-40 years from now).

Long terms Rafale is planning on improving its stealth, using remotely controlled drones from the cockpit to get into the most heavily defended areas (which might happen) etc. While maintainning the advantages of a lower cost of ownership. Nothing to be ashamed of really, although I’m sure Europe might want to consider a full aspect LO manned aircraft at some point (even if only to keep the face against countries like Korea and such).

Lol I did bring it as a exemple on a precise subject, not to digress about it as a program. If you want to do so then I suggest you switch over to the Typhoon thread.

Assuming the reason why of the F-35 is to go against modern opponent equiped with Russian or Chinese stealth fighters (or any other 4.5+ gen with strong ECM capabilities), then I doubt BVR will last very long, but I guess you’re right I should rephrase that part… Will do later when I find something nicer to say :diablo:

Glosson conveniently ignored F-117, which flew every mission at medium altitude. And F-22 was not in his inventory. F-22 flies its missions between 40-65K feet.

If all you possess is 80s tech jets, then you are forced to use 80s tactics and suffer the losses.

You conveniently ignored that the F-22 is also 80s/90s tech, the same as Typhoon and Rafale, however the former is so costly and its achitecture so complex and old that to date the USAF has been almost incapable to keep it up to date.

The F-35 might have a better sensor suite, but will lack basic aerodynamics to make it a suitable AtA fighter.

Bottom line due to cost, an aircraft like Rafale will see constant improvements (so far every two years with a major update) and will remain more efficient at an affordable cost while the F-22 will have to under go a very costly upgrade based on F-35 technologies (which are still being tested), while the F-35 upgrade path is limited due to being already almost over weight and costly too.

Remember how confident the USAF was over Vietnam in its missile tech (the stealth revolution of the time) that they thought they could do without gun and agility? Guess the USAF and their bomb truck theories never learn.

Some great footage there!

Has there been much ground fighting or is it a case of Armee de l Air blowing up the od technical and rebels disappearing into the shadows in the middile of the night as French forces advance?

SF haven been fighting quite a bit according to informations here and there, but for the regular troops it has been mostly show of force, securing areas after the SF have cleared them etc.

Also despite what some are saying, not so many bombs have been dropped so far (at least not versus Lybia for exemple), with rafales carrying only 2 bombs (I believe the lowest amount since the type is operational)…

It is my understanding the when mentioned as FDOW scenario in the various doctrine’s (and usually along with other lingo like “kicking down the door” ) it does not refer to literally the First DAY but the initial days of a campaign when the opponent’s IADS is likely to be at its most effective

Thank you…

It can take weeks to suppress enemy SAMs which use CCD and are reluctant to radiate. This hobbles your Gen 4 jets with poor stealth. And MANPADS may never be completely eliminated.

Oh come on, now you’re going to tell me that only 5th gen aircraft can survive MANPADs?

Once the enemy’s main CCs, advanced radar warning capabilities, have been dealt with, it becomes very hard to coordinate a effective respond to an military aggression.

Should a few S-400 survive and suddenly go active, then any aircraft flying nearby either 4th or 5th gen will get into trouble, but 5th aren’t the only one that can get away.

The US need to accept the fact that the days where they could claim to be the only super power is over. They’ll have to learn the notion of foreign souverainty… No F-35 will be flying over Russia, China, India, Brazil etc. any time soon, so the very concept of using the JSF to maintain the US’s military ability to enter any denied airspace is nothing but desillusion.

The technologies LM and the Pentagone are trying to implement into the F-35 program are all good, but the program itslef has been badly managed from the start. It’s already the most expansive program in history and has little to show for it. It’ll become even more expansive when the numbers currently touted will end up being completely fictional (and contrary to the eurocanards the JSF program cannot find excuses in funding being cut off, partners changing their minds etc.)

MQ-4C Triton Broad Area Maritime Surveillance