why would you want to “spot” the aircraft if you have a video channel with high magnifying capabilities that can do it for you… Rafales can visually identify targets (aircraft) and even the armaments they carry (externally, obviously) at distances up to 50km (27nm) away ( according to wiki: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dassault_Rafale – sorry for posting french version, the english speaking one isn’t as complete about the systems) . Now, if the french do it today, don’t you think that most, if not all, other players will/do try their best to get similar capabilities ? With the RoE over the last few decades, BVR missiles could pretty much never be used in BVR, as they required the positive identification of the aircraft in front of the shooter. If you can identify it 50km away, you can launch your missiles long before the other guy can confirm who you are and shoot at you (unless his RoE allow him to shoot without having to see you first)

LRF still limited to around 20-33 km , and there are others method to IFF others than just visual .
Anyway , smaller target still harder to detect compared big target especially in clutter environment : bad weather , cloud ,hot surface …etc

I have never put the max. speed figures in doubt. I have clearly said they are roughly as representative as the M2.5 figure for the F-15. You will try it once in a lifetime for a dash of ~50 miles while depleting almost all fuel and then nicely get back to your subsonic speeds where the F-35 belongs. Yes, including the A.

and that is your opinion, not fact. Since obviously you cant get any official source to support your statement, how about using aerodynamic calculations ( just like Andraxuss ) to show that F-35A cant fly for more than 50 miles at supersonic speed?

That was discussed to death few years ago.. You might not have been here, I don’t remember… Swiss eval, especially the A-A component is very specific, much of that happening in Axalp mountain range. The extreme proximity of steep mountains renders much of what we expect to be a decisive factor (sensor range, EW, RWR) quite irrelevant, while other factors like nose poiting ability, agility, controllability, radar scan rate, lock-on stability etc. play a much larger role than with the same aircraft fighting high over the Sahara desert. It’s quite impossible to evaluate these results without having the weighing of the individual factors at hand and I personally do not like to use Swiss results for anything, even if Rafale was declared the winner..
..

are you saying aircraft cant fly higher than mountain, hence factor like turn rate, acceleration rate, roll rate., speed . etc also irrelevant in Swiss evaluation?

The statement in bold is complete BS. The rest I won’t comment.

lower thrust doesn’t necessarily results in less IR signature, but F-135 have higher bypass ratio compare to most 4.5-5 gen fighter. Which mean more percentage of its thrust come from the fan, as a result the exhaust temperature will likely be lower than engine with low bypass percentage

US NAVY have clearly said the APG-81 jamming is only a nice to have feature which cannot replace dedicated jammers. We have already been through this before, please use the search function and look it up if you’re new, I am tired of repeating the same..

mind you, that when they were compare APG-81 jamming capabilities with another AESA jammer, the NGJ

Which was my point. So why not just stick with it..

i suppose each caliber size have their own advantage, neither significantly surpassed the other. 20 mm allow more ammunition being carried while 30 mm allow more stopping power. 25 mm is a mix of both

That does not make high supersonic speed inefficient.
When you go the extra mile to design a platform with air intakes and engines to match. Then it is by deffinition an efficient supersonic design which goes supersonic in a efficient way.

going faster is inefficient in term of fuel use, that what it mean, an F-22*at supersonic wont use less fuel than a f-22* at subsonic.
Anyway, that isn’t where i focused my point. What iam trying to say is object move fast will have higher IR signature, and that a disadvantage of going fast

@mig-31bm.
I don’t know where you got that last piece from but it is incorrect.
Supersonic flight need not be inefficient compared to subsonic. In fact the thermal efficiency is generally increased by the higher total pressure ratio.
They do use more fuel at higher speeds due to the drag law.
Just because it is written doesn’t make it true..

get it from here
http://csbaonline.org/publications/2015/04/trends-in-air-to-air-combat-implications-for-future-air-superiority/
i think supersonic speed create higher IR signature simply due to friction

more is always better, but that “superior situational awarness” still remains to be seen against last modern so called 4+ gen fighters..

about the “impossible being possible”: when people said a rafale would be able to sneak close enough by effective ECM and ground masking, you and others like you claimed that a 4Gen fighter will never be able to hide from a radar as it would require active cancellation which is impossible to do… now, all of a sudden, the F-35 is capable not only to be unseen, but also to “protect” other 4gen aircraft from the radar… using some LM pixie dust or what?

i think you understand why it would be much easier for a stealth aircraft to hide in jamming environment, but just in case you forget, i repost it anyway

So it quite obvious why F-35 can get extremely close to enemy air defence with jamming.

Now move on to the next point, what is jamming?
it basically increase noise-signal ratio so that enemy can no longer track you.
In general, the further you stay from enemy’s radar, the weaker your radar reflection will be, and your jamming power at target location will also decrease. However because radar signal travel 2 ways, while jamming signal travel one way, hence, as distance increase, it would be easier for the aircraft to hide from enemy’s radar with it’s jammer. So the normal conclusion would be : jamming aircraft would prefer to stay far away from enemy’s radar, correct? 😉 Wrong! it only true for self protection (self screening) jamming.

If your aircraft doing support jamming role ( aka, you want to use the jammer to hide other aircrafts in the formation), then you would prefer the jamming density at target location to be as powerful as possible, which mean you have to get as close to enemy’s radar as possible (stand in jamming) . The problem with legacy jamming aircraft is that doing so with put them inside burn through range of modern air defense radar , so while they may be able to hide friendly aircraft flying dozen miles behind them, they are in danger of being shot down by enemy’s SAM.

As explained earlier reduce RCS will lower burn through distance significantly, with extremely low RCS, F-35 can get very near enemy’s radar, to the point where it’s jammer can help hide 4 gen fighter while the F-35 itself still not inside enemy’s burn through range

Another factor that could help is the fact that F-35 have massive jamming aperture, bigger aperture equal bigger gain, and gain play very important role if you want to focused your power at a location

Mig31 said above “the F-35 would destroy the radar”, but if it’s only about destroying a single radar, a rafale can pinpoint its location from quite a distance as well (radio waves travel further than radar’s effective range, and make it detectable, as always) and guide another one close to the ground to hit it… again, if it works as advertised, it’s nice, but not something nobody else can do

nap of the earth tactic put the strike aircraft in a vulnerable position again shoulder SAM and AA cannon, and nap of the earth tactics doesn’t work again enemy’s AWACs and interceptors either
also normally aircraft will be able to carry a higher number of short range weapons vs long range weapons ( F-35 will be able to carry more SPEAR III than Rafale can carry storm shadow)

4+ Gen fighters like Rafale match or surpass the F-22 in terms of sensor fusion, there is nothing exceptional in there.. The F-22 only has two virtues over its peers – that is RCS and speed.. nothing else..

and that RCS bit is extremely important
due to much lower RCS, it can detect and attack opponents far sooner than the opposite side can, lower RCS also mean it will benefit significantly more from jamming and can get in much closer, allow higher PK missiles shot

Complete nonsense. The F-22 was and is all about speed.. Practical speed values combined with range, not a theoretical M2.5 achieved once in a lifetime for a dash of 50 miles.

No. with top speed of mach 2.2 and cruise speed of mach 1.8 the F-22 still a slug when compared to interceptor such as Mig-31, Mig-25 or YF-12

Another nonsense.. It wasn’t that far off when you guys were all about how release SC speed provides increased kinetic range for the weapons, thus expanding the No-Escape-Zone. You were one of them claiming that the F-35 would use the same advantage.. Funny how you managed to turn the coat completely just because the F-35 has turned out to be a slow pig..

faster speed improve missiles range, that is correct, however it will also increase closure rate with enemy’s missiles , so a fast cruise speed can work again you, especially if you are not stealthy and face pop up threat

another problem of flying too fast is high IR signature

Secondly, while F-35 may not have high cruise speed, stealth allow it to achieve first look giving pilot plenty of time to get into favourable missiles launch position ( accelerate to high speed, climb to higher altitude , or both)