What language is the software for Russian aircraft written in? Have they adopted C/C++ or is a Russian analogue employed instead?

1. There are no MiG-21s available for that, anymore. The production ended three decades ago.
2. Russia is not a politically acceptable vendor for everyone..

So if the Mig-21 was still in production and the political factor was absent, that would be your aircraft of choice. And within the option available today, I imagine you’d recommend an AJT like the T-50 over the Gripen to most customers?

Given the leverage effort LockMart has to make to see few dozens of them I am not entirely sure whether there really is that much need for it.. Those reports showing the F-35 cheaper to buy and run than a Gripen must have cost a truckload of banknotes. But the reputation of the pig is quite laughable, 5 out of 6 news pieces are negative, be it cost, delays or technical issues or performance.. In few years it went from the coolest gadget in town to an idiot’s choice.

The F-35 was never the ‘coolest gadget in town’. Its always been a magnet for criticism.

Fortunately for the program, the aircraft isn’t being marketed to the general public to be parked in their garages. The entities that matter don’t rely on ‘news pieces’ to make their decisions – its already got a dozen confirmed customers (more if you count the services independently) with at least another half dozen in line.

The rest of the club (Rafale/EF/Gripen/SH) will have to be content will its leavings.

F-35s throwing bombs at ISIS Humvees, talk about cost efficiency.. exactly why do you need stealth for such mission?

Indeed. Or AESA, supercruise, IRST, sensor fusion, MAWS and everything else offered by the F-35 competitors. An MQ-9 will do the job just fine.

I think that is a very, very disputable statement.

If both sides were relying solely on their airborne radar to acquire, localise and track, then I *might* agree with you.

But, they don’t.

Furthermore, first look does not necessarily equate to first shoot if you are unable to attain or retain as good a flight (launch) profile as the other guy.

On the contrary, if both parties were using their own radars in a 1-v-1 scenario, that’s a situation where the Eurocanards would have fair-to-good chance against the F-35. Disregarding the LPI element, and (generously) assuming parity in ESM systems, there are three ways that could play out in a head-on BVR setup –

1. EF/Rafale/Gripen E radiates all the way. F-35 locks onto and closes in to missile range undetected. Launches first. Remains undetected.

2. F-35 radiates all the way. Follows erratic course to get around FoV limitations. EF/Rafale locks on at long range. F-35 locks on at medium range. Both close in to effective missile range and launch together. EF/Rafale retains energy advantage. F-35 retains VLO edge (reduced range for hostile seeker).

3. Both fly silent. Close into short range relying on passive systems (EOTS/Talios). Luckier pilot wins.

_______________________________

In all other standard setups/situations, where off-board targeting is available to both aircraft (from an AWACS or friendly fighter), the F-35 closes in to missile range undetected and shoots first. Every time.

Mmm… that sounds a lot like nonsense to me. You seem to be saying that if you are in a secure area eg Switzerland (and are not under threat) a non-F-35 choice makes sense but if you need to meet some military/security need, you must have F-35.

No the point was if you’re in a Switzerland’s shoes you don’t need any fighter, F-35 or otherwise.

F-35 is not a particularly good fighter compared with Rafale, Typhoon and F-15 so why is it your only choice?

Tell that to all the F-15 drivers that routinely get nailed by the F-22 without the slightest idea where it is. Every professional will bet on the F-35 over the Eurofighter/Rafale/F-15, every time. ACM is all well and good while training under restricted RoE, but no pilot will choose to get into the merge if he can end it at a range of 40nm instead. And fact remains, the F-35 will always enjoy a first-look-first-shoot advantage against the teens and Eurocanards.

And here we go back to the root of the problem. This scenario is a complete nonsense.. How many times in the history of the Ottoman Empire the Turkish F-16s were tasked with air superiority over Baghdad? Zero times? Right, glad you understand what I mean now… The F-35 is only better than an F-16 in scenarios which most air forces never require.. And it utterly fails exactly in those scenarios which are needed every day.. which is interception and maintaining air superiority over the own capital which is ~35 miles away from their landing strip..

In the last few decades, how many countries have had their capitals menaced by hostile aircraft? So why the advocacy for half measures? Why not call for (and I’m not being facetious here) the countries facing a benign threat environment to abolish their air forces altogether?

FYI, 3s is the time if takes an APG-68 to perform a 120°x4.9° field. Scanning the whole FoV will take upward of a minute. Reposition of the dish takes 17% of the time so moving to an AESA reduces scan time by 17% at most.

The APG-81 can scan its entire FoV in 9 seconds extending up to a range of 100nm. Mig-31BM posted a screenshot on the last page.

JUMP TO 01:00

You act as if you had the detection range figures Rafale vs APG-77 and APG-77 vs SPECTRA on the table.. In reality, you’re just guessing..

Well Thales claims a 150 km+ track range for the RBE-2AA against a fighter sized target. Surely its not too presumptuous to expect the far more powerful APG-77v(1) to track a loaded Rafale at similar ranges?

As for the SPECTRA vs APG-77, I’ve assumed that the former can not just detect but track the latter’s emission, how can my assumption be any more generous toward the Rafale?