HotshotHostage said the F-35 CAN be stealthier than the F-22. He was probably not talking about the RCS, but other types of stealths. For instance it is not hard to believe that an F-35 would be stealthier in IR than an F-22 when it doesn’t use its afterburner. It might also have more advanced EMCON stealth. So don’t count too much on less than 0.001sqm RCS.
Also the F-35 specs were not supposed to be equal to the F-22’s, as the F-35 was meant to be exportable. In particular, the F-35 is probably significantly less stealthy than the F-22 from the sides.
The typhoon will have a powerful EASA radar with a moving antenna, so it can search to the sides, that is, the angle at which the F-35 has a higher RCS. If the typhoons are spread over a large area, it might not be easy for the F-35s to try and turn around them without being detected. Using the afterburner will also get the F-35 detected if it is in the PIRATE’s field of view and if the weather is not bad.
So it might not be as easy as it seems, all the more that the F-35 can’t run after a typhoon because of its very limited supercruise. Its missile would have a much shorter range when fired from behind.
As for the ability of the radar to guide the MSDM, the 4.5 gens EASA radars are probably good enough to detect an incoming missile.
The MSDM will have side thrusters to change direction very quickly after launch so it will probably be capable of attacking missiles coming from behind. A DAS type system might be able to detect and track a missile fired from behind.
I still think the stealthy plane has an advantage, but the F-35 is NOT an F-22 and will have a limited number of missiles onboard, especially if one of the internal hardpoint is used for 4 MSDMs. Also, forget about external AIM-9Xs if you want to keep it as stealthy as possible to go through the enemy planes and attack from behind.
HotshotAs far as I can remember during preschool years, I started drawing airplanes. I got fascinated and if it wasn’t planes, anything from people to nature to landscapes. It wasn’t until during after mid-1980s when I first got awed of the F-14 after the movie Top Gun came out. After that, about the same time, I remember one of my older brothers watching News and they showed the MiG-29 Fulcrum when it first came out while the Soviet Union (CCCP) was still known as the bad guys. The Fulcrum became my fave fighter (since it was different than the Western fighters like F-14/F-15, etc…) and that’s when I started reading about military planes from around the world. Lost interest once I reached adulthood and, in part, because of women, too.
After the Berlin Wall came down, I got interested with planes again, both civilian and military, but not as hardcore the first time around. As of now, I just read articles or go online for leisurely reading…MAAKUSIMI.
Ok so you’ve become like obsessed with military planes. Same for me, I used to draw planes at school too I remember. Does the RCAF send planes over there? Is there an air base there?
I find it amazing that humans have been able to survive in such harsh environments. Do you go hunting, fishing etc?
HotshotIt means, when translated to English, “from Markosie…” Maakusi is my name within our Inuktitut language, Inuit is background (or race). When pronounced in Inuktitut (my name), Maa – ku – si. When the Government or white culture did the paperwork like SIN, Health Card Numbers, etc… back then (1970s/1980s), they couldn’t pronounced my name correctly. So how they pronounced my name, they spelled my name, Markosie ( Mar – ko -sie) in English. Maakusimi is just something I’ve been doing since I got used to emailing on computers back in early 2000s…
MAAKUSIMI.
Ah ok, so MI is like a suffix meaning from, right? Wow you get to learn all sorts of things on aviation furums! 🙂
So have a good day Maakusi… huh I mean 3 months night! 😀
Hotshoti think Stealth fighter would still have advantage in air to air engagement again normal fighter, because they can choose to creep up behind 4.5 gen aircraft instead of going head on
Even very powerful aircraft radar such as Irbis-e can only detect F-35 from around 40 km in optimum conditions ( look up, no jamming, focus search) , that is around 30 km for tracking range, if the F-35, F-22 fly close to ground to take advantage of clutter or do jamming by their radar, ALE-70, MALD-J or have support jamming from NGJ then the detection, tracking range of enemy’s radar will be significantly shorter probably around 10-15 km http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?133536-RWR-ECM-vs-FCR-AAM , IRST can be easily defeated by flying in or bellow cloud, it would be quite simple for stealth fighter to dive down the deck when they detect enemy and circle behind 4, 4.5 gen fighter before launching their missiles, it would be hard to intercept missiles launched from behind you with very high speed unless you have something like a turret
another choice for stealth fighter is just to avoid engagement altogether ( it would be similar to WW II when fast fighter can dictate the term of engagement, stealth will be able to do the same )
on the other hand, i think MSDM will be super useful again SAM, if your aircraft fly at around 40-50k ft then only long or medium range SAM can reach and shot you down ( which mean they still have to use big missiles ) , with 30-40 MSDM a single aircraft will be able to deplete the whole SAM battery , and the advantage of MSDM again cruise decoy such as MALD or ITALD is that they are much smaller, lighter, affect aircraft aerodynamic much less, Not to mention you won’t waste any MSDM if enemy decide not to attack
the disadvantage is that : a single ITALD or MALD may be able to attract more than 1 enemy’s missiles while 1 MSDM can only intercept 1 projectile but with load out of 30-40 missiles that isnot really a big problem
Mmmh I kind of doubt that the Irbis-e would detect the F-35 at only 40km, even from the front. And I was talking about 4.5 Gen planes, meaning reduced RCS planed, unlike the Flanker. Say a plane with 0.5sqm RCS fully loaded, like a typhoon with 6 AAMs and 6 MSDMs.
The F-35 would shoot first but they don’t carry many missiles, and their missiles would probably not have a high pk against an advanced 4.5 gens to begin with. If the F-35 itself carries MSDMs, the number of missiles it carries is even less.
I don’t think intercepting a missile coming from behind would be that much of a problem because the MSDM has thrust vectoring. Of course you need the sensors to detect the incoming missile.
The stealthy plane woud still have the advantage, but not by much.
The MSDMs might be usefull against long range sams indeed. I can imagine a few aircraft being loaded with MSDMs instead of their normal number of AMRAAMs to protect a strike package, if the formation is flying close enough.
HotshotThese are only very short range missiles. They probably only have enough power to go 2-3km. They’re a last ditch defense only used if all your other jammers, lasers, decoys, etc don’t work. More akin to IMIs’ Iron Fist tank defense system than a Sidewinder.
If the missile is designed to be mounted on a BRU-61, it might be significantly larger than what you think. I think a 5-8km range would be nice because it would give the plane an short range air to air capability to complement the AMRAAM. In particular, the F-35 has no short range missile internally, so it would be a nice complement. Maybe say a 50kg missile.
I actually see this being more useful on transport aircraft and helicopters. They have less kinetic energy to avoid missiles and the missiles (or rpgs) are often fired closer to the target giving other systems less time to work.
I see your point. The MSDMs would also help protect the fighters when they carry a heavy load, in which case they can’t maneuver much.
Imagine a UAV with a laser and a couple of hardpoints with these things flying an overwatch position over a base or airport able to kill rpgs, mortars and missiles. They could fly escort for inbound and outbound traffic.
Yep. Or a reaper flying above an airbase with like 15 of those to provide an extra layer of protection.
HotshotYou don’t have to send me pictures, I think I have seen 250000 pictures of those planes ahah! But yes indeed there seems to be to types of carriage intended to be used for it, although it is only a concept for now.
Could this revive 4.5 gen aircraft? They can carry many of those on external stations.
Btw these missiles are so accurate, if they were to attack an aircraft instead, they could target a very precise part of it, like the cockpit. That would me them even more lethal.
HotshotOk. 🙂
What does MAAKUSIMI mean? Is it your name? Is it an Inuit name?
It’s the first time I talk to an Inuit who is a fan of the F-14. :eagerness:
HotshotOne of the coldest years we’ve had with temperatures going down to minus 50 celcius (over minus 75 celcius with windchill) more than a few times…
MAAKUSIMI.
Geez…
Is it night for 6 month over there? what are you doing there? 🙂
HotshotHow long does it take to make a U-turn? The missile is coming at you at mach 4.
The only thing that could work is a vulcan on a turret, which would be way to big for a fighter. Maybe for a bomber…
HotshotI don’t know if it would work but if you do that you can’t make an evasive maneuver. It would be very dangerous because you’re pointing right at the missile.
HotshotIt is not very clear. The article says:
It could replace the storage space now claimed for small diameter bombs . Alternatively, three of the miniature interceptors could replace one Raytheon AIM-120 AMRAAM , he says.
Not the ‘alternatively’, it seems like there are 2 ways of carrying it. One from the quadruple launcher, and one from a triple launcher that can take the space of one AMRAAM launcher. The first would be more for stealth planes from the internal quadruple launcher, the second for legacy planes. For instance an F-15 could carry 3 of those on one of its wing pylon mounted AMRAAMs. That could be a game changer even more for non stealth planes, as they don’t have the stealth to avoid being shot at in the first place.
HotshotNice article.
Not too cold in Nunavut? 🙂
HotshotFast packs are one hell of a good idea. Thanks to them there was no need to build a new strike plane.
Shouldn’t heavy fighters be designed from the start to accomodate Fast packs? Think for instance of an F-22 type plane with flat sides to be able to mount stealthy Fast packs…
HotshotImage the maneuvrability it must have to kill a small target like an AAM, amazing.
Do other companies have the technology to develop such a missile?
It could replace the storage space now claimed for small diameter bombs . Alternatively, three of the miniature interceptors could replace one Raytheon AIM-120 AMRAAM , he says.
If it takes the same space as an SDB, why isn’t it 4 per weapon station, so 4 instead of 1 AMRAAM?
I’d be curious also about the possibility of using that kind of missile from ground launchers to intercept ballistic missiles, guided bombs…
HotshotThere hasn’t been a point in time (recently at least) when the USAF did not look forward to the next generation when inducting the lot of aircraft. The ATF was begun formally (studies and plant S&T effort probably predated it) when the 4th gen acquisitions were ongoing and the JSF was begun, and awarded when the F-22 acquisitions and or development/testing were ongoing. This is nothing new.
They would also continue to add capability in the best possible manner as has been the case with most aircraft before it. While i seriously doubt that they would look at a serious change externally (from where has this tailess delta come from, I do not understand) but there is plenty of things that can be done to make it more capable over time. However, the USAF also has to develop the next generation Air dominance fighter to replace the F-22, which it couldn’t acquire in the amount it really needed to. That is what is driving their push for a next generation fighter
I think you will agree that the super hornet has been a success. Spending around 5 billion in R&D on it proved to be a relatively inexpensive way of recapitalizing the USN fleet.
You said in a previous post that one of the LM proposal for the F/A-XX was a modified F-35. Maybe the USAF could benefit from it too, whatever its aerodymics modifications are. I guess the F/A-XX will have supercruise as a KPP.
A faster and possibly more stealthy tailless delta configuration would be a significant improvement, so it it were possible it would be great. Of course it is speculation, we don’t know what the modification that LM has proposed are.
Sign In
