F22 vs. F35 - Which is more likely to destroy the other?

[alkemyst]

who has the cheat code?

 

[angminas]

Originally posted by: LemonHead
Plane for plane it would probably be the Raptor; however, put an expertly trained fighter pilot in an inferior plane against a not-so-hot pilot in a Raptor and the Raptor would be toast.

True enough, but I doubt there will ever be any such thing as a not-so-hot pilot in a Raptor.

 

[polarmystery]

Much misinformation in this thread.

 

[vshah]

Colonial Viper or Cylon Raider............ they have "Lasers"

Cheers,
Aquaman

i'm pretty sure they both use cannons

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

NO ESCAPE ZONE. Done.

 

[Arkaign]

Jets are really getting slower! Wow.

 

[evident]

Eurofighter Typhoon > F22/F35.

/thread.

yeah if a blind person was flying the F22/F35 then maybe the typhoon would stand a chance

 

[oogabooga]

Much misinformation in this thread.

F22 became the subject of political inquiry.. of course there is misinformation

I would personally imagine the F22 could beat the F35 just on the merits of it being dedicated to air superiority, vs being a platform for multiple attacks. I don't imagine it'd be a brutal devastating win, but then again it would surprise me if it was. I base this off my gut feeling which hasn't served me well today (it guided me to eat lunch at a restaurant that is now punishing my bowels).

 

[Pocatello]

I'm seeing the F-35 cost just a little less than the F-22 with far less capability. The F-35 has too many compromises, it must be stealthy, which limit how much weapons it can carry, it's a pig of a fighter because it's too heavy with a single engine.

 

[zerocool84]

Why is this even a question? The F-22 is meant to do one thing, kill other planes. The F-35 is a multi-role plane which means it gives things up.

 

[Crono]

I'm not even an enthusiast and I would say, all other things being equal, the F-22 would be more likely to destroy the F-35.

 

[Brainonska511]

I'm seeing the F-35 cost just a little less than the F-22 with far less capability. The F-35 has too many compromises, it must be stealthy, which limit how much weapons it can carry, it's a pig of a fighter because it's too heavy with a single engine.

The F35 and the F22 are designed to fill different roles.

 

[huberm]

F-22: Air to Air combat
F-35: Air to ground combat

 

[deanx0r]

Sorry for reviving an old thread, but I am not sure why you guys are pitting the F22 against a plane that only exist on paper. Even worse, you guys are just speculating based on paper specs

My money would be on the Rafale, which is a true omnirole light aircraft fighter. This bird participated in real world exercises where it was pitted against comparable airplane.

At Red Flag, it was pitted against F16 and won the confrontation 4-1.
At the UAE ATLC, it dominated the RAF Typhoon 7-1. Pitted against F22, it was behind the sight of the F22 only ONCE, which says a lot about the capabilities of the French pilot and the plane, specially if you consider the F22's price tag and all its shortcoming.

 

[KillerCharlie]

Sorry for reviving an old thread, but I am not sure why you guys are pitting the F22 against a plane that only exist on paper. Even worse, you guys are just speculating based on paper specs

My money would be on the Rafale, which is a true omnirole light aircraft fighter. This bird participated in real world exercises where it was pitted against comparable airplane.

At Red Flag, it was pitted against F16 and won the confrontation 4-1.
At the UAE ATLC, it dominated the RAF Typhoon 7-1. Pitted against F22, it was behind the sight of the F22 only ONCE, which says a lot about the capabilities of the French pilot and the plane, specially if you consider the F22's price tag and all its shortcoming.

You obviously didn't read the thread before reviving it. It was said a dozen times that they're not built for similar roles.

Also, the F-35 is not on paper, it has been flight testing for quite some time.

Furthermore, the F-22/Rafale engagement was within visual range only. A more realistic engagement would start with BVR, in which case the Rafale pilots would be dead before they even know there were F-22s around.

 

[Sureshot324]

Dollar for dollar, a F35's will win.

 

[Zebo]

F22's big time. I was watching something on history that said 1 took out 6 in war games.

 

[arcenite]

F22's big time. I was watching something on history that said 1 took out 6 in war games.

1 what took out 6 what? And what is war games?

 

[deanx0r]

The Rafale itself is mostly touted for omnirole capability rather than its air superiority, and yet it dominated the RAF Typhoon interceptor. The Typhoon and Raptor are built for air superiority, however I believe the versatility of the JSF Rafale such as being able to land on a aircraft carrier and executing A2G missions is an overall advantage.

The F35 is still on paper until it completes all its flight and armament tests, enters service and can be pitted against other aircraft in exercises or real combat. Whatever everyone has been babbling about F35 war scenarios is just based on paper specs. For all I care, the JSF might not just live to everyone's expectation at the end. Just look at the projected price tag, did that meet everyone else' expectation?

Furthermore, the F-22/Rafale engagement was within visual range only. A more realistic engagement would start with BVR, in which case the Rafale pilots would be dead before they even know there were F-22s around.

How would you know that the Raptor wouldn't be fooled by the Rafale's ECM? Survivability is a priority for both aircrafts, but they both took different approaches. The Raptor relies on its low observable design and paint while the Rafale relies on its active radar cancellation system to remain stealthy.

My point is that, in this particular WBR scenario, the Raptor was pushed to the edge by an aircraft that cost substantially less.

I think the F22 is a beautiful bird, but its conceptualization is somehow flawed when you have to account its cost, its low operability, or its maintenance issues and cost.

 

[deanx0r]

1 what took out 6 what? And what is war games?

I think he meant live exercises that simulate real combat such as Advanced Tactical Leadership Course or Red Flags.

 

[garndawg]

F22's big time. I was watching something on history that said 1 took out 6 in war games.

Mmm, mayhaps you should read about the results of Northern Edge '06...

Much misinformation in this thread, as has been stated. However, let us make a few things perfectly clear. (Note: This is my field. I WORK on this stuff...)

Radar: JSF and Raptor have the same radar. The exact same one.
Passive dectection: Raptor fully integrated sensor suite. JSF natch.
Maneuever: Raptor has high alpha capabilities (Vector T). Natch for JSF. This point is fairly useless and my personal opinion is that the vector thrust for Raptor is great for airshows, but in a fight mostly ballast.
Armament (internal): JSF 2x AIM-9, 2x multistore; Raptor 2x AIM-9, 6x AIM-120 (or download 4 AIM-120's to get 2x multistore)
RCS (published): Both are less than 0.01 M^2, officially.

To sum, different platforms, different missions. To elaborate:

A2A (Typical): 4-ship Raptors (two-two, mutual support). 6x4= 24 AIM-120's at range. Detection can be passive or active. Targeting is active, but can be delayed until terminal approach. (i.e. Raptor picks up emission from Bogey, sensor suite analyzes total emissions from bogey to characterize as Bandit. Launches on vector from passives, goes active for final corrections until missile terminates. Bandit gets their first threat warning typically <1 sec prior to impact.) Basically, 24 shots at range (+75 miles, pending detection).

For JSF, no integrated passive suite, but same radar, so same active detection range. 4-ship of JSF has max 2x4=8 total AIM-120 shots.

JSF versus Raptor (assume same RCS, heh). JSF must be ACTIVE to detect Raptor. Raptor may launch early, due to passive aquisition of JSF's lit nose. (If you are using a flashlight to find someone in the dark, how far away can THEY see YOUR flashlight, eh?) At launch, 24 shots versus 8 shots, with the Raptor launching early. You do the math...

All that said, JSF has a much better A2G loadout. Makes sense, as that is what it's designed for, a bomb truck that can defend itself.

As for other platforms:
Raphael: No AESA radar. Much higher RCS. Good luck with that..
Typhoon has a decent AESA, but still a pretty high RCS. A better chance than Raphael, but not by much.

Visual range (dogfighting) doesn't mean much. If you're in a Raptor and you've got a target within AIM-9 range, something is wrong with your leadership's ROE. If you are overmatched, push to MIL and extend/disengage. If you MUST engage at a disadvantage, you've got the best E sub S ratio on the planet. Use it. And hope your wingman is doing his job in the Loose Duece.

Raptors die due to stupidity (this includes politics), not technology.

 

[Gibsons]

----snip-----

As for other platforms:
Raphael: No ASEA radar. Much higher RCS. Good luck with that..
Typhoon has a decent ASEA, but still a pretty high RCS. A better chance than Raphael, but not by much.

Visual range (dogfighting) doesn't mean much. If you're in a Raptor and you've got a target within AIM-9 range, something is wrong with your leadership's ROE. If you are overmatched, push to MIL and extend/disengage. If you MUST engage at a disadvantage, you've got the best E sub S ratio on the planet. Use it. And hope your wingman is doing his job in the Loose Duece.

Raptors die due to stupidity (this includes politics), not technology.

just one nit, the newer rafales are supposedly AESA.

They're making some noise about an active stealth ECM. I wouldn't want a terribly active ECM against a raptors radar suite. Not only is the raptor potentially passive (as you pointed out), but even if it's active... if you somehow jam one radar, you're simply emitting to another (as also pointed out, you don't fight 1v1).

 

[garndawg]

just one nit, the newer rafales are supposedly AESA.

They're making some noise about an active stealth ECM. I wouldn't want a terribly active ECM against a raptors radar suite. Not only is the raptor potentially passive (as you pointed out), but even if it's active... if you somehow jam one radar, you're simply emitting to another (as also pointed out, you don't fight 1v1).

Yup, read about that AESA they've put on. Dunno what I think about it, though.

Active Stealth ECM (both constructive and destructive) is all about the response times, which suck now, tomorrow, and a pretty far distance into the future...makes for nice scifi, though. Biggest pain is detecting and analyzing the waveform in time to respond to it BEFORE it's reflected off you and headed back to the emitter.

 

[IEC]

Pulling the plug while running a CHKDSK can make anything crash.

Don't forget to park your drive before turning off the Tandy 1000!

 

[Jadow]

I'll take whatever plan Mitchell Gant is flying