Hi Jess :

Indeed and this is what some other fighters are also doing , the F-22 is not one of a kind in this regard . Rafale and Gripen being the close followers .
The problem Jessmo is still the following : you need to transmit ! Sure , we now have very secure up-links but they still can be detected as such , which goes against the safety of the aircraft and its crew . 5th gen aircraft are not made to act as AWACs , even if they can do a little good job at it , but are made to stay as stealthy and silent as they can . Again , the “EMCON” idea 😉

Cheers .

This AWACS idea seems to be a common claim, it was made about the F14 too, but then again at least the F14 had a WSO. Either way, both have a radar that is forward facing only, so are in no way an AWACS.

If stealth were not “a paradigm shift in combat aviation”, then why would the Russians pursue T-50? Why would France pursue Neuron? Why would the UK pursue Taranis? Why would the PLAAF pursue J-XX? Your statement does not fit reality.

It has always been an advantage to be able to reach out and kill your enemy before he can kill you.
Spears > knives
Arrows > spears
Matchlocks > arrows
Small arms with rifled bores > smooth bores
Long barreled cannon > low velocity short barreled cannon
BVR missiles > WVR missiles
Stealth > non-stealth

Because stealth is an obcession for people that masterbate over Lockheed brochures, to put it simply. Lockheed, naturally presents a scenario that highlights the advantages of the F22/F35 and rightly so, but then the usual fan boys believe these scenarios represent the set of all possible engagements, which it does not.

For a start, radar evasion can be achieved by:
– Flying low in amongst ground clutter
– Materials & shaping (less practical as range decreases)
– Jamming
– EM Emissions control (radar off, jammer off, if using comms use highly directional antennas)

Targets can be found by:
– Vision
– Magnified vision (The Rafale system for this is supposed to be highly rated)
– IRST
– Radar
– ESM

UCAVs do represent a true shift.

Sure, but then the F22’s only real advantage over a Typhoon is the lower RCS, and Typhoons only real advantage over the F22 is a long range IRST, and as you say, its not about individual subsystems, but rather than sum of the parts, so by this summation it would peg them about even.

I guess we will have to wait another 20 years to know what is in a F-22 exactly… But from what is just published in that report I do not see how the F-22 is going to so significantly change modern combat.

Sensor fusion has been around in other aircraft and data linking between aircraft has also been around (thinking of the Sweedish Gripen more and Su-30MKI’s less)…

Dont get what this suddent shift is, its more of an evolution then a revalotuion.

F22 doesn’t change anything, its just marketing hype. If anything it could be said F22 is a step back as its less multirole than the F15E. The F22 does provide a good combination of capabilities in a new package, much like Typhoon and Rafale, but none are a major shift in air combat, such as the shift from propellor to jet aircraft.

………aliens………on topic??:rolleyes:

Nobody is debating aliens or UFOs, its an example of something which cannot be reasonably proven either way. Government UFOs make a good example as if they did exist, it would be extremely hard to find proof, but absence of proof is of course not a proof of absence so proving they don’t exist is equally difficult! UFOs (well the ones on youtube anyway) fly, so its reasonably related to the forum as an example, that said using non-aviation examples is probably acceptable too 🙂

Be better if it was AdA 😎

I have some very valid questions concerning the F-22,F-35,T-50 and J-X.

even though some will disagree with me some web sites are claiming that 5th generation tactics will offer a paradigm shift in the way we fight. for instance:
—txt—

But an AWACS could be much more vulnerable against a stealthier target.

Looking at this thread for example:

http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=104353

One might come to the conclusion the Visby does not in fact have any missiles.