The latest radars appear to have enough accuracy to saturate a given area of space with autonomous missiles with multispectral seekers. Have these been developed? No. But the technology already exists.
Well that’s the big question isn’t it? Long wave radar systems seem to be the best bet countering when countering VLO aircraft as already stated. The biggest problem is these will be ground based, large, expensive and in many cases imobile – and thus relatively vulnerable. They are by nature pretty inaccurate systems, especially the futher they are from the target. Against the F-22s proposed stand off munitions – they will need to engage the jet at relatively long ranges – where a missile’s radar based seeker is going to have a hell of a tough time picking up the F-22. They are going to have to be saturated quite closely – probably within a 1 or 2 kms from each other. Can a long wave radar get the required accuracy of 1 to 2 kms from such a distance? If the resources are abundent and the will is there perhaps… For me I don’t think it that practical and I don’t think we will see a massive move in this direction over the next few years – for its a extreme “niche” system (even with the F-22/JSF/PAK-FA) that will cost a lot of money and perhaps be vulnerable/defeatable to pilot tactics – say the F-22 bugs out and the SAM has just fired 6 missiles to trap it. Well thats huge waste of missile’s/money to me. Im not saying its impossible – far from it but I believe pretty impractical and unlikely. If the seekers are multispectral – yes they will pose more of a threat. But again as you say they are a few years away in the future – while their countermeasures are already being developed and in some cases operational – look at NG’s Gaurdian system if I remember correctly. The best bet in my opinion is sharp enemy tactics using S-300/400 class SAMs – like the Serbia incident.
Its all about a need coming forth, enough for a big player like MBDA to see enough money in it. But if stealth becomes ubiquitous, thats where technology will head. Bi/Multistatic systems (see Swedens attempts for eg), more autonomous units, more investments into non conventional sensor systems will take precedence.
Without doubt Nick – I do agree, eventually this will be the route to take. But remember if we look at the situation now – the F-22 is currently “top dog” – in many cases it should have the edge now. The others in my opinion are generally playing a bit of catch up – but the F-22 won’t stand still – it will get Avionics/ESM/VLO/KE/etc based incremental improvements and counters to its counters over its life. It has been propogated as the the evolutionary step up by LM etc etc and many people seem to be agreeing – so perhaps its counter systems will need to see an equally evolutionary step-up to effectively put it on equal terms? No doubt it is very much defeatable – nothing is invulnerable – but it is the closest thing to it. While it is also part of a system – it is definitely the enabler or the silver bullet of the high threat environment.
All in all, I dont see the Raptor being invulnerable beyond the next decade and a half. Thats still a good thing to be, but one wonders whether the US couldnt have spent the money on cheaper and more flexible options for its long term defence needs.
Again – of course it isn’t invulnerable and it won’t always be at the top – that is reality of any weapon system. But that is still a long long time as undisputed “top dog” – another 15 years on top of its operational service holding that mantle without “effective” challenge is hugely impressive in the history of fighter aircraft. Thats not to say with the advent of the proposed PAK-FA/other threats – it won’t still be the best. It might lose its ridiculous kill ratio’s against future systems but – who is to say it won’t be individually the best? Eventually that will come to pass of course, but time can only tell when. It should be a highly effective weapon system for the next 30 years + however. So I don’t have a problem with sinking 60-70 billion $ into a current silver bullet weapon system that should hold its own well into the future. 😎
The Raptor in some ways, is as much a jobs program as the Euro canards, and other programs worldwide are accused as & a testimony to the fighter mafia who dominate the USAF (as in many other AF’s), who wanted the latest and coolest toy.
Which western based defense system isn’t. It is one of the few industries the west has superiority in over China. It helps in global politics and seems to be a path into government admin for many people.
Irbis figures are consistent, if we go by NIIP/Sukhoi press releases. They stated 350-400 km for a 3 SQ MTr target, which translates to around 90 Km (using 400) for a 0.01 target. 4th scale law.
The 350-400 Km figure wasn’t available in my source – that makes more sense. But my logic earlier still applies.
My point was not about the current Irbis equipped Flanker challenging the Raptor either, but the “future”, which might see entirely new avionics challenges for the Raptors stealth.
I was responding to Zare’s post here Nick – on a sidenote for him: Sukhoi themselves have downplayed the lastest Super-Flanker (Su-35) as being an F-22 class fighter/competitor.
The ALR-94 is not magic. It uses current gen technology and can be replicated by other designers such as Thales, IAI, DARE etc. For all we know the DASS on the EF or SPECTRA on the Rafale are as good as the ALR-94 or even better.
Of course it isn’t magic Nick 🙂 – but I do believe it is the best EW suite fitted to any fighter – its non-classified figures seem to be better than any of the competitors and it’s a the most expensive system/piece of kit on the F-22 – definitely being more expensive than the competitor systems – in this case I believe its more cash = more capability. Reading press-statements by Sanders/LMavionics/BAE US who claim its the best EW suite ever fitted to a fighter and salivate over it does give one the impression it’s its a world beating piece of kit – and watching videos from pilots who big it up does tend to make one favour it over other systems. However it could merely be PR :). Two futher points:1) It probably has the biggest SIGNIT database in the world at its disposal. 2) It has more antenna farms than DASS/SPECTRA – which are reportedly brilliant systems.
Simulations are simulations. They cannot predict the outcome in a real battle, whether it is Flankers overwhelming JSF’s or Raptors decimating the latter.
Here I agree – one cannot make a worthwhile prediction on who will come out on top in a real life engagement. But with good intel and a few assumptions – one can gauge how effective a system is within a set of parameters. So in many cases it can be a good judge of how effective the tech on a jet is or how effective the weapon system is – removing the human factor.
The Raptors greatest strength is not the fact its the Raptor. Every US design benefits from the supporting assets the US throws into the battle. An AF flying against the Raptor has to go against the E-3, against Rivet Joints sniffing out their emitters, against Compass calls trying to knock down their C3I..its this integrated system which is practically very hard to challenge. Not just the Raptor etc.
Of course – I couldn’t agree more but it’s arguable that the F-22 will be the most important factor in the AD mission. It is the silver bullet of that mission and therefore essential. There is a saying out there – I think its someones sig on this forum – that with all the SA in the world and no perfomance/killing capability all your going to do is see the guy who kills you. Thats not the exact saying but you get the gist.
The Flanker/EF/Rafale derivative need not be at the same speed as a Raptor to compensate. It can rely on more advanced weaponry such as Meteor derivatives with multispectral seekers.
Two things – firstly for survival that speed can be is essential, while having a weapon that has that extra bit of range is great, but your plane is still more of a sitting duct while flying subsonic than the F-22 which has had the suprise advantage and as such is at a KE advantage and can use his Mach 1.7+ SC and crank out and attempt to defeat the missile – secondly F-22 development in the US won’t stand still, development of JDRADM and new concepts are starting to hit full swing. So in years to come such advanced weaponary might be 2nd best? AIM-120D is by no means a slouch either, I wonder how much of an advantage Meteor will have over it.
The point I was making is that there is nothing in the Raptor which is impossible to defeat without some nifty engineering. All that takes is consistent effort + money.
Why the hell would I want to become an engineer in this industry if that weren’t the case :)?
Care to point out who said that? Or is that some strawman?
Zare.
All these problems existed with early gen radars as well. Technology evolved, and so can IRSTs and radar technology. Its all a question of need and investment.
Of course! IRSTs however have innate limitations.
Sign In
