For most airforces I think the last is the most important, in case of a crisis alot of flying hours has to generated by a small fleet with short notice!

But it doesnt have a TV-Helmet or stealth! 😛

about the sparrow: 620 were fired, which gives you a little under 10% overall.. by the end of the war, the improved sparrow and better trained crews managed a staggering 13% success rate… not something to brag about in the end…

Totoro made a good thread on the topic and it also touches why missile Pk is a rough number to use “as is”.

http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?117432-historical-kill-percentages-of-SAMs

Technological edge is VERY important. While missiles may show 80-90 percent effectivenss in testing, even if it has manouvering targets that jam and have decoys – overall effectiveness of today’s missiles (and more so of earlier generation of missiles) will inevitably drop by perhaps as much as 60-70%, depening on technological gap. If the defender who has SAMs is trailing 20 or more years – he will be hoplelessly outmatched. For a half decent result he should be about on par, or trailing perhaps just several years behind attacker. Even then effectiveness of over 30% will be quite improbable. For best results, SAMs should be 10 or 20 years more advanced than the attacker – but such a situation is unlikely.

A lot of stats are provided in the thread.

Worth noting from allied force is that SEAD was effective as hell in obliterating SAM Pk. Similar tactics could be used in AA engagements.

no, what I sqay is that the F-35 is a waste of money for countries other than the USA…

putting missiles on a combat aircraft is definitely not.. you never know when you might need them, just as your gun

I would probably add the UK expeditionary forces as well. After all… their job is sort of strike oriented.

Tbh I think SAAB, EADS and Dassault all would be capable of producing a light weight 5th gen fighter with a lower budget if someone would have asked them.

I hope you aren’t teasing and have these numbers because I haven’t seen the numbers for a flanker or the eurocanards flying the mission and load profile of a f-35a, I would be most interested to see them.

The thing with the F35 profiles is that they arent carved in stone.

What we have is basically the following:
Su27, combat radius on internal fuel/cruise radius/recce mission: 810/973 nm
Gripen E, combat radius/recce mission: XXXnm/675nm
F35A, recce mission ~670nm (target was 673, but we all know they fell short)

If we compare to F35B the numbers gives an even greater difference.

Some sources:
Su27 http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/russia/airdef/su-27.htm
Gripen E http://www.jsfnieuws.nl/wp-content/DutchAirForceAssociation_Gripen_2009.pdf
F35A http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?123370-F-35-Debate-thread-(2)&p=2036249#post2036249

Basically it partially depends on mission profile (i took recce mission here based on the Norwegian example made by LM) and what F35 verion you pick. In a light config with recce equipment (ie radar + IRST) and self defence weapons the F35 falls short. Basically the potential gain is very small and very limited in scope. And this goes for both sides. OTOH the Flankers always have superior range no matter what fighter you compare with (spare the F111 that isnt even a fighter).

Next up I guess we have data fusion and avionics where the Eurocanards, once again, are on par in many areas, lagging in some and being ahead in others.

The two things that the F35 currently hold as USPs are superior FOV + lower RCS.

Based on where this thread is going I think that the turbo encabulator will be the biggest breakthrough by the JSF team.

For those who don’t recall it: http://youtube.com/watch?v=rLDgQg6bq7o

@Scooter. I try to never be biased or to claim authority. My sweet spot is truth.

WE NEED MORE CAPS! Unfortunately we have the pro F35 spam bots trashing their own fav thread.

No buzzwords will change the fat that the missiles will always do the toughest job in the worst conditions while, because of physical constraints, they will be worst equiped for the task at hand.

We have seen F16s repeatedly dodge missiles pulling ~45G at the given altitude, we have seen EWSs jamming radar systems roughly 10 times larger as well as a lot more powerful than the seekers in missiles and so on.

In BVR vs a capable adversary the Pk will be extremely low. But lets just say that the tv-helmet or whatever gimmick we can think of will change that. Because, according to LM and some fanboys, this time will be different™, or becuz physics don’t apply here™

@halloweene, exactly. Thats why I asked.

From what I hear he describes the temprary helmet.

@djcross, you have any source for that or do I just take your word for it?

PAK FA vertical soddock :angel:… RT is exaggerating?

Never, RT is the best and most objective news soure on the planet.