Matrix Games Forums

http://www.inquisitr.com/1638419/russia ... er-weapon/

What's very funny is reading that article and comparing it to the source article. Basically, they took all of the quotes out of context, stripped it of all of the counterpoints to the idea that the PAK-FA was better, and "forgot" that the F-22 and F-35 are very different aircraft. The PAK-FA can probably take on F-35s, but has inferior electronics and therefore would likely have major problems against groups of F-35s or against F-22. The advantages, heavily played up in that article, are its kinematics, which do not entirely offset its BVR disadvantage.

What a sh*t article. Useless information. Making assumptions without backing it up. Looks like it was written by the average youtube military 'expert'.

So very knowledgeable then

Here are some better stats on the aircraft.

http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft ... aft_id=782

there is too much false data on f-22, f-35 and PAK-FA T-50, some of them desinformation and some on a level of first graders at school (pissing contest?).

stealth aircraft are not invincible and can be countered quite easy... initially stealth ruled with kill ratios of 100 F-15 shot down to no f-22 lost in simulated combat. later on improved 4th gen fighters gave the f-22 a headache and today it is not improbable that better tactics and technology can defeat stealth and sensor fusion.

while the f-22 has been around for over a decade, it is still suffering from being the first 5th generation fighter, its technology only slowly maturing. keep in mind, this aircraft was made to go into the densest IADS and dominate the airspace. reducing all aspect radar cross section, stealth measures for X-Band radar have been applied, in theory ensuring first look and first kill.
However the AIM-120 AMRAAM has a lousy endgame kill rate against stealthy and/or agile fighters, so basically in the end the f-22 is knife-fighting after missiles run out. Or it can run away using super cruise.
That is why it has been used as fighter bomber, as mini-B-2 in Syria. With more stealthy adversaries like the PAK-FA, J-20 and other on the way including better stealth counter measures the f-22 will be soon obsolete (around 2020). There are no funds available (because of the F-35) to evolve (IRST!) and remanufacture the aircraft in case F-35 cant hack it.

The F-35 is still in development and low rate production, while ironing out technological bugs of everything, mainly computer code and the helmet, also weapons and avionics. at present it is not ready to serve and its price tag is still going further up. some milestones like carrier qualification are in progress or done but too many important operational concerns are still in limbo. the aircraft relies too much on sensor fusion and networking, so it is most vulnerable to cyber warfare. it is also too slow to run away and relies on friendly aircraft to protect it from enemy 4++ and 5 gen fighters (suchoi proliferation).
Even upgradable with mods the airframe of the f-35 makes it obsolete and dangerous to use in a real war. With such a high price per unit the f-35 is not a fighter but a job and profit machine. There is no backup program in case the F-35 fails. So Airforce, Navy and MCorps is stuck with this plane... and F-22 are trained to "babysit" them.

The PAK-FA was designated as a successor to the Suchoi T-10 family. Clearly stealth is not the main concern, its speed, agility and weapons load. Same is true of the chinese J-20. Both are in a prototype stage and some data on capabilities is not available, but in some areas both will be superior to the F-22. Both will be better useable and more economically feasable then the F-22 and F-35. If funding problems can be solved in russia... IOC of PAK-FA will be 2020-2025 (LRIP). J-20 will have IOC even sooner...

Another info: Many countries chose to skip the high costs of development of a 5th gen fighter and allocating funds to 6th gen fighter drones (UCAVs). If technology advances in current rate, first 6th gen UCAVs will IOC in 2030...

F-22 info:
http://theaviationist.com/2014/09/30/th ... hter-jets/

F-35 info:
http://theaviationist.com/2014/11/18/f- ... -together/

PAKFA info:
http://theaviationist.com/2014/06/02/t- ... n-flights/

J-20 info:
http://aviationweek.com/zhuhai-2014/j-2 ... nd-agility

AESA Cyber Threat:
http://aviationweek.com/defense/malware ... t-aircraft

All aboard the hype train!

Well it is a newer airplane than the F-22 so it might be better. I doubt it has better electronics tough.
In air to air it's probably better than the multirole F-35. But know knows. None of the 3 aircrafts in question has ever seen real combat.

But isn't it still some time from active duty? I read they had lots of problems with development in 2011-2012. So isn't far from ready for active duty?

I'm in no way an airplane expert but when you look back at the development of airplanes the last 30-40 years and how technology has dominated the airspace for a very long time the trend is that new planes and technology is so advanced and expensive that high end products can and will be much more effective than low end products. The days of innovative cheap designs of 1900-1960 is gone forever and will not likely return. Even a relatively low technology focused country with a decent economy could build decent planes, weapons and electronics, today high tech is so dominating the military when it comes to conventional warfare that countries such as Russia will simply be left behind. China might be able to catch up, but not in the next 20-30 years. In my opinion China will never catch up unless they become more friendly and by then they will be more or less part of the rest of the world and war will not be very likely.

When we look at new ships, planes and other military equipment we can see how high tech equipment quickly separate the aces from the rest. The ability to strike first, see the most and enjoy better command and control will just be devastating.

To put it a little more blunt... I don't have much confidence in Russian High technology or its quality in comparison with the humongous research and cooperative nature of most of the rest of the world. There is a reason why military projects in the West are so expensive and it certainly is not corruption or inefficiency. There are no scientific grounds to support that science in either Russia or China being very efficient in comparison. Openness and cooperation will always provide more innovation and progress as well as more efficient military technology as a result, not to mention population support.

So far I believe it is like NATO(or rest of the civilised world) 100 to Russia/China built equipment at more or less 0 for the last three to four decades. With high tech advancing in raging speed I don't see this changing much as long as not something radical occur. The more the human factor is removed from the lethality of any weapon system the more countries such as Russia and China will struggle to keep up.

Both Russia and China have much to prove and so far they have not provided with very reassuring quality of their product on a wider basis.

Only my layman opinion at looking at the facts over the past 30-40 years of military conflict.

However the AIM-120 AMRAAM has a lousy endgame kill rate against stealthy and/or agile fighters, so basically in the end the f-22 is knife-fighting after missiles run out.

Source?

With more stealthy adversaries like the PAK-FA, J-20 and other on the way including better stealth counter measures the f-22 will be soon obsolete (around 2020).

Such as what? VHF radars can't fit on aircraft, and AWACS makes up for GCI.

There are no funds available (because of the F-35) to evolve (IRST!) and remanufacture the aircraft in case F-35 cant hack it.

I can't find anything about the F-22's IRST being cancelled. F-35 will also likely hack it pretty well, as I'll discuss later.

Also, about the article you cite. Firstly, they criticize the F-22 for not having an HMD capable missile. This was true at the time that it was written, but is no longer the case with AIM-9X integration, a missile that is substantially more capable than the IRIS-Ts that it was going up against there. Secondly, they utterly fail to mention that the EF2000s and Rafales were unable to match F-22 at all in BVR, and had to drop all external stores to score a 1:5 kill ratio.

at present [F-35] is not ready to serve

Yep.

and its price tag is still going further up

Nope. F-35A (in millions of USD) LRIP 4: $111.6. LRIP 5: $106. LRIP 6: $103. LRIP 7: $98. LRIP 9: $96. Source: http://www.janes.com/article/46129/pent ... 8-contract.

I'm not sure that's going up.

too many important operational concerns are still in limbo

Which, exactly?

the aircraft relies too much on sensor fusion and networking, so it is most vulnerable to cyber warfare

Let's suppose that there is a vulnerability. Then, you're left with a fighter with a great radar, VLO, IRST, pretty good handling and large internal stores. Oh, woe is me.

I should also note that the article you cite is 100% speculation.

it is also too slow to run away and relies on friendly aircraft to protect it from enemy 4++ and 5 gen fighters (suchoi proliferation).

Now, ask the Sukhois to catch it with full fuel and external tanks (hint: they can't).

Even upgradable with mods the airframe of the f-35 makes it obsolete and dangerous to use in a real war.

Why? Sprey's criticism of its handling is demonstrably not based in reality, like everything else he's said for the last 40 years, as his favorite wing-loading metrics handle lifting bodies very badly. The aircraft likely performs about as well as a clean F-16 with CFTs, which is very impressive when you consider it has 10% more range still and can two 2klb bombs at the same time.

Furthermore, how exactly is the airframe obsolete? The sensors are top-notch, and those are what really make a modern fighter.

There is no backup program in case the F-35 fails.

Which it isn't going to, at this point. If it were 5 years ago, possibly. Not now.

There is no backup program in case the F-35 fails. So Airforce, Navy and MCorps is stuck with this plane... and F-22 are trained to "babysit" them

The Harrier clearly outperforms the F-35 in every single way imaginable, right?

Also, the article you cite is referring to F-22 escorts of F-35s. At no point in the past has a single F-15C escorted any group of F-16s in any engagement ever.

Both will be better useable and more economically feasable then the F-22 and F-35.

The traditional problem with Russian aircraft is that they burn through engines 2x as fast as US aircraft do. The PAK-FA and T-50 carry this tradition onwards, as expected. Uptime and maintainability were one of the F-35's main objectives, so I'm going to need a citation on this one.

Another info: Many countries chose to skip the high costs of development of a 5th gen fighter and allocating funds to 6th gen fighter drones (UCAVs). If technology advances in current rate, first 6th gen UCAVs will IOC in 2030...

The US certainly didn't just launch a UCAV off a CVN, and we have definitely not been one of the major users of UAVs in the last 10 years at all.

Edit: rearranged my responses so that the point actually made sense.

I have to guess that were 20 years from drone air superiority and strike aircraft anyway. No pilot = extended range, more weapons, time over target, expense associated with training, rescue, etc. So if we are talking a plane being obsolete by 2030...will it matter?

No pilot = decreased operational flexibility, increased weapons integration costs, higher vulnerability to ECM and EW, increased risk of hull loss to electrical systems failure, and dramatically reduced integration with legacy communications systems.

We're a long ways off from UCAVs ruling the sky, more than 20 years. In 20 years, I'd expect something along the lines of a UAS B-4, but strike, CAS, and air superiority are beyond the limits of AI for some time yet.

ORIGINAL: ckfinite

No pilot = decreased operational flexibility, increased weapons integration costs, higher vulnerability to ECM and EW, increased risk of hull loss to electrical systems failure, and dramatically reduced integration with legacy communications systems.

We're a long ways off from UCAVs ruling the sky, more than 20 years. In 20 years, I'd expect something along the lines of a UAS B-4, but strike, CAS, and air superiority are beyond the limits of AI for some time yet.

Well CAS is quite successfully done with UCAV's? Youtube is filled with it.

Well CAS is quite successfully done with UCAV's? Youtube is filled with it.

It would be better to say CAS in nonpermissive or high EW environments.

Just read something wierd about the F-35A's Norway get delivered in 2017. The article said Norway gets their first F-35's in 2017 but that these first planes will have severly reduced capabilities. The article didn't elaborate on what capabilities are reduced?
It also stated that planes delivered from 2020 would have full capabilities. Anybody know anything about this?

ORIGINAL: Spookyashell

Just read something wierd about the F-35A's Norway get delivered in 2017. The article said Norway gets their first F-35's in 2017 but that these first planes will have severly reduced capabilities. The article didn't elaborate on what capabilities are reduced?
It also stated that planes delivered from 2020 would have full capabilities. Anybody know anything about this?

Maybe it has something to do with concurrency. They are building the planes but are still partially developing it. All planes that are built now during LRIP's will later have to be modified to address things that they are now finding out during development. Although I would guess that that would be finished way before 2020. Doesn't it have something to do with some weapons systems which will be only integrated from 2020 on? When will meteor be released for the F-35?

ORIGINAL: Dutchie999

ORIGINAL: Spookyashell

Just read something wierd about the F-35A's Norway get delivered in 2017. The article said Norway gets their first F-35's in 2017 but that these first planes will have severly reduced capabilities. The article didn't elaborate on what capabilities are reduced?
It also stated that planes delivered from 2020 would have full capabilities. Anybody know anything about this?

Maybe it has something to do with concurrency. They are building the planes but are still partially developing it. All planes that are built now during LRIP's will later have to be modified to address things that they are now finding out during development. Although I would guess that that would be finished way before 2020. Doesn't it have something to do with some weapons systems which will be only integrated from 2020 on? When will meteor be released for the F-35?

Don't know, my first thought was that they were talking about the 4 training planes we are getting. But they will be delivered in 2015 and not 2017. I think the Joint strike missile and naval strike missile from Kongsberg Group will be ready for action in 2019 according to Kongsberg Group.
So I have no idea what they are talking about when they say from 2020.
Then I thought it had something to do with the pentagon and LM cut the specs on the plane, Things like max sustained turnrate +++ . But I haven't heard anything about them getting raised again by 2020?

Then I thought it had something to do with the pentagon and LM cut the specs on the plane, Things like max sustained turnrate +++ . But I haven't heard anything about them getting raised again by 2020?

They can't really change that after-the-fact, I think that they're talking about the block III software capability.