JSF vs F/A-22
- Thread starter armage
- Start date
They are not the same electronic suite. They have complimentary suites and different roles. They are a hi-lo combo.
I thought they were configured to different role. F-22 is for air superiority while JSF is multi-role fighters with strong ground attack capability.
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
The F/A-22 would cream the JSF. The F-22 will have a reasonable air to ground capability when it's in service and the JSF will have a reasonable air to air capability. The F-22 however is designed mainly for air to air combat. The JSF is designed mainly for Strike/Battlefield interdiction missions.
The F-22's Radar Aperture size is several times larger than the JSF, (which is restricted due to airframe size) and thus the F-22 will possess a clear superiority in detection ranges, given the similar technology they will possess.
This is enhanced when you consider the F-22 is designed for all round Stealth, while the JSF is optimised for stealth in the front of the aircraft only. Then you have factors like supercruise (which the JSF is not designed to have) which provides superior kinematic performance to the F-22, vectored thrust engines for greater maneuvrability on the F-22 only and a greater air to air missile warload (internally at least) on the F-22 and it becomes clear that the F-22 is the superior air to air fighter.
An excellent comparison of the 2 types is available here:
http://www.headsup.com.au/files/0915_adm_rebuttal.pdf
The F-22's Radar Aperture size is several times larger than the JSF, (which is restricted due to airframe size) and thus the F-22 will possess a clear superiority in detection ranges, given the similar technology they will possess.
This is enhanced when you consider the F-22 is designed for all round Stealth, while the JSF is optimised for stealth in the front of the aircraft only. Then you have factors like supercruise (which the JSF is not designed to have) which provides superior kinematic performance to the F-22, vectored thrust engines for greater maneuvrability on the F-22 only and a greater air to air missile warload (internally at least) on the F-22 and it becomes clear that the F-22 is the superior air to air fighter.
An excellent comparison of the 2 types is available here:
http://www.headsup.com.au/files/0915_adm_rebuttal.pdf
The Su-37 is also not in service. It was a CTD and will never be in service. The Russians themselves have said this. On top of that it was not a viable proposition due to a number of design issues.armage said:
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
I don't think there is a fighter in the world that will go close to matching the F-22 for some years, but of the present ones, a Block 3 Eurofighter fitted with an AESA Radar would probably be the closest.
Do u mean Su-37 or S-37gf0012-aust said:
S-37
I herd on Discovery channel that its going to come out regardless of the problems it is facing. Sukhio got their break through & it will fly in 2008-9.
It also said MiG-1.42 or MiG-20-Technicko project will also go ahead.
According to that documentory the only two jets that can come close to F-22 are EF-2000 & Rafale but when S-37 & MiG-1.42 come out, they would be in direct competition with F-22.
As for the JSF, it was described the best yet in all areas. It can land at any surface & doesnt require long runways to take of.
S-27 Berkut. My typo. The Berkut is not a runner. There are a number of reasons why it won't be published, some of which have been declared by Irkut. so I am at a loss to understand why it's still put forward as a contender.SABRE said:
The Russians have been quite consistent in stating what has happened.
S-37 CTD only - chord area problems with wings, resolution required new carbon fibre and compound solutions which made it too expensive as a production asset. In addition it has a restricted weapons loadout due to wing config. It's RCS was high and is not conducive to stealth development due to reflection and angle issues.
Mig 1-42/44. Again a CTD where a lack of funding has stymied development. The aircraft is seen as generationally behind the rafale and as such would need a major re-work. The platform has had less than 50 hrs total flight time and has not been flown for some years. Again, the rebuild to make it competitive would require 2nd country funding - much like the US process with the JSF and proposed MMA. Realistically that makes it India as India is a closer ally and economic neighbour (especially through the last few difficult years for Russia). Mikoyans Chief Test Pilot has said this aircarft is not a contender for future development.
Both aircraft are considered orphans.
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
The discovery channel needs to recheck some of it's facts I think. Only the F-35B JSF will be V/STOL capable, the F-35A/C are conventional take-off and landing versions. In addition as I pointed out above (which has come from expert analysis on these aircraft) the JSF will be decisively inferior to the F-22 in almost every area of air to air combat that you can think of.
The only area in which the JSF will approach the F-22 is in the actual weapons it will carry, as these will be the same.
The only area in which the JSF will approach the F-22 is in the actual weapons it will carry, as these will be the same.
The X-29 involved both Grumman and Irkut. Grumman decided that the project was not worth pursuing. Russia continued for a few years more with the S-37.SABRE said:
Same problem. It's a big transmitter and has some compromised carriage problems. It's a less powerful platform as it was not designed as a weapons carriage. The Berkut OTOH was.
FSW's are not stealthy aircraft - they might look futuristic - but they have severe RCS and stress issues.
So is it the swept forward wings causing problem or what??
If these wings cant carry heavy & too much of weapons, than weapon should be placed inside the Jet, just like in F-22 & JSF-35.
HOw do u see this GF. Would this one be able to carry weapons, if swept farword wings r causing problems.
If these wings cant carry heavy & too much of weapons, than weapon should be placed inside the Jet, just like in F-22 & JSF-35.
HOw do u see this GF. Would this one be able to carry weapons, if swept farword wings r causing problems.
there is a problem with the chord ratio and a corresponding materials use issue. hence load outs are restricted.SABRE said:
internal weapons bays are not necessarily the solution as it dramatically reduces carriage. you might gain RCS advantages, but you lose on delivery.
I actually prefer the widow over the raptor. in a number of areas (apart from price) it seemed to me to be the better platform.SABRE said:
interestingly enough, there are indications that the widow may be considered for a strike role rather than the F-22B (long range bomber)
at this stage its unsubstantiated though.
Finaly some thing came out that could be compaired to F-22.
So u mean to say that black widow project might still be live n kicking. Hmm.Intersting. Realy interesting !
Ok so if we ignore the cost of production, than widow comes out to be the number one choice?
So u mean to say that black widow project might still be live n kicking. Hmm.Intersting. Realy interesting !
Ok so if we ignore the cost of production, than widow comes out to be the number one choice?
This discussion cracks me up. Why would the US compete against the US? Pardon, me, but there is no such AC as the "Black Widow". OK? Just a concept.
And as far as the OP, the loser would be the guy who stole the AC. Jsf or Raptor, it wouldn't matter. These AC will never go up against each other.
My opinion is we put this thread to bed. Let's get back to reality.
And as far as the OP, the loser would be the guy who stole the AC. Jsf or Raptor, it wouldn't matter. These AC will never go up against each other.
My opinion is we put this thread to bed. Let's get back to reality.
Calm down man. We r not discussing US against US. What I was discussing with GF of was, which AC is actualy competeble with F-22.highsea said:
I dont know where u get this from that there is no black widw, I just posted the pics of it above. Its commonly known as YF-23.
& We r were not putting F-22 against JSF-35 or F-22 against YF-23 in a battle mode. We were just asking a general question n comparing few jets.
& what do u mean by "And as far as the OP, the loser would be the guy who stole the AC"
where did steaing come from.
Which bit are you talking about? The YF-23 has been coming up in discussions as a supplementary system for a long range strike role. This was as an alternative to the FB-22. As I said before, it's hard to get any substance around it, but it has been persistent across various circles. As far as anyone knows there are only 2 platforms made - but the presses and other specific construction gear is still intact if a move was made to bring them online. The reasons oft touted for it are that the YF-23 has a better load out, longer range and is easier to turn into a long range strike package than cutting up the F-22. (which IIRC on the FB-22 is a tail-less design) The other issue is that even though it might be a discrete run, a lot of the critical components (engine etc...) are common - so costs are minimised.highsea said:
But - all unsubstantiated so far.
addendum: first raised in Flight International in July of 2004.