MM11Different study vs different threat (& of course we don’t know nearly enough about the details to make a direct comparision between the results of the different models). 😉
The study with the 3:1 result was against a Flanker/Fulcrum threat. The other study was against a “threat in the near future”. Interestingly the exhange ration for the F-15, F-16 & F/A-18 against that evolved MG-29/Su-27 models is equal or less than 1:1. For the unspecified type in the other study the exchange ration was equal or less than 1:1 for aircraft like the Typhoon, Rafale, Gripen, Super Hornet, but >6:1 for the F-35. Given LMs usual bias for marketing hype we speak about a similar threat aircraft for both studies, non LO/VLO types being treated as equal and of course the F-35 is way superior! Interestingly not that much superior in the study were the F-22 has to be justified:rolleyes:.
Given the fact that LM seems to have been involved in both studies, which one should we take for granted? 😉
LM HAS to be involved if any kind of realistic model data is to be used for the F-22 &/or F-35…
So has any other manufacturer for their types…
Oh, ~1/10th the RCS of the F-35, a pair of Sidewinders for WVR, superior flight performance…The F-35 IS NOT an F-22.
The F-35’s stealth was (in BOTH cases) good enough for a positive exchange ratio when other fighters could not.
I’m aware of the F-22s advantages over the F-35, it was more a kind of rethorical question.
BTW when other fighters could not according LM.;)
Different models, different parameters = different results.
Interestingly no different results for the non LO/VLO types, just for the F-35…
Where are you getting that the F-15, F-16, F/A-18, Rafale, Gripen, Typhoon, Su-30MKI had equal exchange ratios?
All about 1:1 or less. So basically similar exchange ratios.
Excuse me. Significant positive exchange ratio (3:1, 4:1 & 6:1) when the other competators (including the BEST competition available) obtain near 1:1 at best IS way superior.
Well 3:1 is definitely superior, but not “way” superior.
To cut it short, I’m more than sceptical about those results! It looks much more like hype the F-35 nothing more or less.
MM11That’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
6 AAMs + a couple of AG weapons might be sufficient, but of course stealth has its price.
MM11What’s the detection range of a MAWS system? That’s a last ditch warning system, so the pilot can jam/deploy chaff/attempt to maneuver.
Just an example the SOAR MAW offered by RAC MiG for the MiG-35 is claimed to offer detection ranges up to 30 km against BVR missiles, nothing you could consider “last ditch”. Advanced MAWs might be more capable than many believe here!
MM11LM is trying to sell more F-22s. This means that for certain target audiences the F-35 will be downplayed, and in for other audiences the F-35’s capabilities will be defended. The F-22’s advantages are better stealth, and superior kinematics, which are force multipliers.
I don’t think LM cares much about more F-22 when it comes at the expense of the F-35, it’s more like the USAF wants more F-22s as they fear the F-35 might not be good enough especially when considering future 5th gen fighters. Of course are kinematics a factor, next to better stealth, add superior manoeuvrability a more AA orientated radar and probabley even more capable ESM. There’re quite some factors. And exactly this is the point.
MM11The Su-35 isn’t in-service.
Yes but the Su-30MKI/MKM/MKA are and these are the real best Flankers currently in service!
@wrightwing
And Rafale, Typhoon, Gripen, Flanker, Fulcrum for that matter.
Interestingly the sources all say those aircraft are equal, but that is nonsense. Some of them might well be more effective in A2A than the F-15, F-16 or F/A-18 (legacy and maybe even the SH). So it’s funny that LM considers all those non VLO fighter being equal, just because the lack of stealth. Funnily the F-22 is claimed to be 10 times as effective as the F-35, one might wonder why… Just stealth? Certainly not!
MM11Cool. Where did you find this photo ha27?
Is it really on of the new Su-34(03) from the second production batch?
Second batch? What was the first one, the pre-production examples?
MM11I am not sure what you mean by nose gear. Here it says that the Sukhoi will need modifications of the fuselage. Its a huge missile and I think only a single one can be carried at a time. This should also mean that its carried under the fuselage.
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showpost.php?p=1347199&postcount=37
The Brahmos is a huge missile as you said and aircraft like the F-16, SH or basically all the MMRCA contenders are much smaller than the Su-30MKI. This weapon might be simply to large to fit under the fuselage as it would interference with the nose gear in front of the centreline stations.
MM11Quick question.
Which–if any–of the competing MRCA designs could be adapted to carrying the massive BrahMos missile if necessary?
Do any of them have the clearance or pylon capacity for carriage of the weapon?
Thanks,
Logan Hartke
Rafale at best, but even that is questionable. The weapon is more designed for heavier designs such as the Flanker and as the Su-30MKI can already use this weapon there is no reason for other types to do so.
MM11As I wrote in the LM about the F-35s A2A performance thread, LM and the USAF state quite different exchange ratios for the F-35 on different occassions.
MM11the Sukhoi pilot will have no idea of any threat until the AMRAAM’s radar goes active…
MAWS seems not to have arrived your guys minds…
MM11Looks pretty that MCA concept.
MM11First posted by saptarishi in Bharat Rakshak
http://www.raytheon.com/capabilities/products/aces/
I have a question. Does the block 60 have the same suite or is it supplied by Northrop.
That interesting, thanks for the links. To answer your question the blk 60s EWS is developed by Northrop Grumman and is dubbed FalconEdge. What I wonder about is that no MAWS has been mentioned as part of the EWS.
ALR-69A all-digital RWR with the Raytheon ALQ-187(V)2 jammer and the ALE-47 countermeasures dispenser system
Strange the TRD isn’t mentioned. Would be interesting to know if the ALR-69A provides a ranging capability and if the ALQ-187(V2) is internal.
MM11My point is that unless the F-35 somehow spectacularly outperforms everyone else in WVR it’s not going to get 2 kills with the gun to the enemy’s one. Which it doesn’t and won’t.
Why does that matter? A 6-to-one ratio tells me that if I put 1 F-35 against 6 competitors then the fight is even.
That’s wrong the exchange ratio means that the F-35 would win 6 out of 7 fights against the enemy. It’s not measured during a single mission, but it’s an average value for multiple encounters.
So if the F-35 fights 70 battles it will win 60 of them and lose 10.
MM11Thats your first mistake, thinking any competent commander is going to commit his forces to the fight on equal terms. You’d probably be looking at any where from four to sixteen F-35s in any decent strike package, plus all the other aircraft doing thier jobs such as Raptors, AWAC etc etc.
The truth is fact that the F-35 not having heaps and heaps of Amraams is not going to matter to much at all.
For the US, but for other customers? That’s the main problem of you guys you compare the US military to that of others. Seeing a weapons system as part of the entire war fighting machine is viable, but you guys should start to see that this sort of argument is not valid for those other customers or potential customers of the F-35!
MM11What I wonder about is that LM states the F-35 is 400% as effective in A2A as the teen fighters in one of its brochures, which would work out to a 4:1 exchange ration given that the teens all achieved a 1:1 exchange ratio in those 2 articles being mentioned. Now in the first article I posted LM says 6:1 and in the other article where the F-22 is conerned as well it is just 3:1, meaning the lowest number is just half of that of the highest. So basically the same source but 3 different results? Of course it is feasable that the F-35 was primarily designed as a strike aircraft and the F-22 was primarily designed as a fighter. But how does the stealth argument holds water given the HUGE difference between the F-35 and the F-22? Could it be that the F-22 is much more stealthy or is it more owned to the Raptors vastly superior flight performance? Flight performance is interestingly something which has been dismissed as unimportant when comparing non VLO aircraft cause its just the radar or weapon which makes the difference… The exchange ratios being equal for all those aircraft (F-15, F-16, F/A-18, Rafale, Gripen, Typhoon, Su-30MKI) sounds a bit odd either. Or to cut it short those studies seem to be a bit oversimplified. Also given the fact that stealth is often mentioned to be the main decisive factor the 3:1 or 4:1 ratios are of course not bad, but they seem not to reflect the widely spreaded opinion of the F-35 being way superior to anything else spare the F-22.
Sign In
