“Stealth is something that the F-22 brought” No, that was F-117.
F-22 added stealth as an afterthought, when it was deemed feasible with the primary attributes, supercruise, better availability,
lower operational cost, superior agility.

Stealth was not an afterthought on the F-22, I really don’t know where you got that idea. Stealth was the primary driver of essentially the entire design of both competitors in the ATF program.

Yes, I have seen your quote about stealth being introduced as a requirement, but it was introduced very early in the process and both competitors designed their aircraft around that requirement, hardly an afterthought.

Of course, only supercruise and agility really held up to the spec on the F-22, and in my opinion was the reason it got axed,
together with the collapse of SU.

The F-22’s stealth met spec, what are you talking about?

This idea would have some real potential provided the trainer’s costs could be kept down to an acceptable level.

With an order for 350+ airframes the Gripen NG would actually become a viable program. The possibility that the US could also procure some fully equipped Gripens for use as aggressors and in air policing roles would be an added benefit. The US is one of the very few countries in the world that can even consider maintaining a fleet of aircraft just for use as aggressors and air policing aircraft, but in the US’s case this might actually make sense.

Since the Sept 11 attacks there is zero chance the US will cease having fighters on alert near major population centers and the need to patrol the southern and Alaskan borders will not go away either. These are not missions that justify the use of an F-22 or F-35, but they aren’t going away. The use of an armed trainer could cover these missions at reduced cost.

What isn’t clear is whether a buy of Gripens would necessarily reduce F-35 purchases. I don’t know if current planning assumes all Air National Guard and aggressor squadrons will transition to F-35s.

I always find it kind of amusing how quickly perceptions of a program can change. The Osprey was a favorite target of BS and the usual media critics. Now that it has been in service a few years it is looking more and more valuable. (The exact same thing happened with the C-17.)

I do wonder if a JLENS based approach might make more sense for AEW than an Osprey. I don’t know about potential weather/sea state restrictions on JLENS but the ability to stay aloft for days at a time without consuming fuel and tying up the carrier’s deck/crew with operations would seem to be a better approach.

Lame argument. This has been discussed to death before. The learning curve of the pioneering nation is much less steep than of those who are catching up.
Nokia has designed and operated several generations of cellphones before Apple came with practically zero experience. I guess that makes iPhone inferior…

…or wait….

:very_drunk:

That would have been a better example if it had been at all true. Apple’s first attempt at a phone was a collaboration with Motorolla, an established player in the industry, which failed so badly few even remember it anymore.

http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2005/09/07Apple-Motorola-Cingular-Launch-Worlds-First-Mobile-Phone-with-iTunes.html

Not only did Apple’s first attempt at a phone fail, they had also been working on various similar products for years with their Ipod and Newton products. Additionally, unlike work in classified military fields Apple was free to hire engineers from its competitors and buy components from the same suppliers. The first Iphone was unquestionably a huge breakthrough, but it came on the foundation of several successful and failed predecessors and most of its key components were bought off the shelf.

Back to aircraft, I honestly don’t see how a F-117-ski (or lack thereof) would be relevant to Russians and their ability to design or operate T-50.

Then you just aren’t thinking.

The F-117 gave the US decades of experience operating, training with, and training against stealth aircraft. Even if relatively little of its technology was carried over into subsequent designs it certainly informed the decisions and priorities of the aircraft that followed it.

I can see that this has gone past the point where anything useful is going to be said. Your arguments in one part of your post aren’t even consistent with your arguments in other parts.

Four according to dozen sources, if we are talking about gulf war only.

Have one handy?

From mission POV, a tanker/AWACS/EW aircraft drawn out of position is no different than shooting it down. Your expectations for “killing a target” is utterly childish. Other side is not fool, they will always withdraw if they feel they are about to lose the airplane.

I have already said there is value in disrupting enemy operations, but losing two Mig-25s in four missions is an expensive way to go about harassing an opponent.

Nonsense. A MiG-25/31 routinely conduct intercept M2.0+ with full missile payload, same goes for PAK-FA and F-22, which will always fly clean. An F-15 or Eurofighter will almost always rely on external fuel tanks. Former types will always go fast and high at will. F-15 or EF can go fast, but those will require some mission planning. If you think about it, even a baseline Su-27 will have no problems running down an F-15 or EF in R/L.

Ok, this is getting embarrassing. Above you talk about tankers/AWACS etc withdrawing when threatened. Here you claim that an Su-27 would have no problems running down an F-15. (which isn’t at all true… but I am just pointing out how silly your arguments have become)

Its amazing same logic does not apply to MiG-25, which you expect nothing less than a kill to accept its success, yet his targets running towards allied bases, air defenses, and other escorts just as you describe.

Here you are back to saying that it is unreasonable to expect a Mig-25 to run down a tanker or other high value target… yet above you were claiming that it could “routinely conduct intercept M2.0+ with full missile payload.” Which is it?

I can go ahead and give you your answer since it seems to be escaping you. A Mig-25 can go M2+, but it takes time, distance and fuel to get there. It also isn’t free to simply fly in a straight line at an escorted target because that would be suicide. The escorts don’t need to out run the Mig-25, only get between it and its target. Similarly the escaping tanker/etc doesn’t need to achieve a higher speed than a Mig-25 to escape because the Mig’s supersonic range is limited.

This is a cheetah vs gazelle scenario. The Cheetah is the fastest land animal on earth, but the gazelle has better endurance. In practice the cheetah needs to catch the gazelle within the first few seconds of the chase or it is unlikely to do so at all.

The escorts need only delay the Mig-25 to prevent it from catching its target. Firing off a bunch of missiles at it will do the trick, even if those missiles are low probability shots that don’t result in a kill.

Of the confirmed kills, there were only 1 MiG-25RB and 1 MiG-25PD lost to F-14s which was posted some time ago on this forum. I was talking about gulf war simply because its more reliable.

Confirmed kills meaning what? What is your source for those kills because others have done research and found much higher numbers.

I wasn’t counting post gulf war incidents. Scenarios are very different there.

Not really, Mig-25s flew at the no-fly zone in an attempt to either find a target to engage or just to provoke a response. One was shot down by an F-16.

Very dense ECM jamming from dedicated EW aircraft hinders sensors of MiG-25s, 8 F-15s around and well ahead of EF-111s, likely attempted to interpose themselves between MiG and EF-111. Result is MiG-25 fired his missiles towards its target and withdrew unharmed. Bring any bells?

Sure, sounds like the Mig scored a small tactical victory in that it disrupted an adversary without getting killed itself. What that engagement does not show is any ability to “blow through” defenders and engage high value targets. Get it yet?

You are blaming me for being stuck in 1960s, yet your weakness is over emphasis on “modern” technology too much. Its not impossible for MiG-31 to detect F-35, it has IRST, and big + networked Zalson is not totally helpless againist stealth either. IMHO its much more likely than utterly obsolete MiG-25 detecting all the aircraft, discriminate between bombers, EW escorts, and escorts of the EW escort, and dozens of other aircraft in air, and acting accordingly (evading escorts, tracking/attacking target, ignoring everything else).

Come on man… who said impossible? I don’t doubt under the right circumstances, at close enough ranges, a Mig-31 could detect an F-35 with either its IRST or its radar.

That said, a Mig-31 racing in at supersonic speed trying to catch a fleeing AWACS isn’t going to have much of a chance to detect an F-35 with any time to do something about it. An AMRAAM or Meteor armed F-35 would move into the Mig’s path and take a couple nice high probably shots at the approaching Mig with time to fire again, if necessary.

No. MiG-31s are already closing in at around M2.5 whether they detect F-35s or not. With R-37, they have the means to hit their target at 300+ km. F-35s would react how exactly? Lit their afterburners to move in, and give away their position? MiGs would simply increase to approach angles and reduce F-35s effectively launch range. If F-35 closes in, it will enter the no escape zone of R-77s, if not, it requires much speed to move to a favourable position to launch amraams. On paper, F-15 is 21% slower than MiG-25. On paper, F-35 is 43% slower than MiG-31. You are be expecting F-35 to do something F-15 couldn’t back then. A few minutes of headstart -due to stealth- wont make things any better.

Again, you don’t protect a high value asset by flying off its wing. The F-35s would be deployed around and ahead of the aircraft being protected. The Mig would have essentially zero chance to detect the F-35 in time to do anything at all at those speeds.

In the Mig-25/F-15 engagements in the Gulf War the Migs at least knew where the F-15s were… that is how they were able to escape. If the Mig-25s had been completely unaware of the locations of the F-15s then they would presumably have attempted to run down their target and been killed before they could do so.

I really don’t know how to explain this to you so that you will understand. Are you at all a football fan?

It is one thing to be the fastest guy on the pitch, but that doesn’t mean you can expect to just run down the field with the ball and score at will. (which is essentially what you are describing)

The defenders don’t have to be able to beat you in a foot race in order to prevent you from getting where you want to go. They need only play their positions well and avoid opening exploitable gaps. In this analogy the Mig-25/31 is the fastest player on the field but he is not particularly agile. If the opportunity presented itself he could certainly use his speed to race down the field with the ball, but he can’t expect to do so with impunity. In the Mig-31/F-35 scenario the Mig’s speed advantage is somewhat larger, but the defenders are invisible until they are within a few feet of him. The best he could hope to do would be to run at top speed and hope for the best but he couldn’t hope to get much done if the F-35s are at all competent given that they are free to survey the field seeing both the other F-35s and the Mig.

YF-12 was way too slow to ensure air dominance, MiG-25s and later 31s have safely provided complete aera denial for SR-71s over USSR more than two decades ago.

The US stopped flying recon flights over the USSR due to the political risk of losing another pilot over Soviet territory. Certainly Soviet interceptors were part of that threat, but all US recon flights had already stopped over the USSR well before the Mig-25 became operational.

These are alternatives which could easily have gotten more priority than today’s concepts. It all depends on few people in charge.

No, not really…

This was not the product of some single individual or even a few groups of individuals. Those types of designs were briefly seen as the future in the late 50s and early 60s before they were almost all abandoned. The Mig-25/31 is probably the best example of the thinking that ever achieved operational status.

The new glide bomb would have more benefits than just fitting in this bay, it glide better to start with, it greatly reduce drag on external stores,
is backward compatible for pylons.

Glide better than a SDB? What size weapon are you talking about?

There is already such a thing as a wing kit for a JDAM. Sure, a purpose built munition could probably glide a little bit better… but of course that already exists and we call it a JSOW.

There is just no way such a project could get even exploratory funding in today’s defense spending environment.