I've often seen this come up in discussions. Person from country A says "Our fighter X is better than foreign fighter Y because it has this, that & the other capability". Person from country B pops up & says "Bollocks! Our fighter Y has exactly the same" - and he's right. But as often as not, he then goes on to claim superiority for Y because of some other characteristic which, although he doesn't know it, fighter X also has.
F/A-22: To Fly High or Get its Wings Clipped
- Thread starter LancerMc
- Start date
Ozzy Blizzard
New Member
not just the nosecone, the room aft of it. The nosecone may have the same diameter but i doubt there is the same ammount of room infront of the cockpit.
Actually there are definitions for all 5 generations of fighters. Theres a good one in a thread here but i cant be bothered finding it at the moment, its 3:30 in the am and i've got to go to bed. I'll try and find it for you tomorrow.
Dont dick arround with semantics, you know what i meant.So LM is lying because they claim the F-22 to be the first true 5th gen because it hasn't the super dooper NWC capabilities
No mate, its the technology that makes the label "5th gen", but that label istelf means jack sh*t. The unique capabilities and tactics that the combination of technologies of "5th gen" platforms is whats important, and they are remarkable. And not having a major componant of a "5th" gen platform doesnt just mean you miss out on the label, you kmiss out on the capabilities that combination gives you.
No, not just "stealth". The combination of stealth & NCW. The main aspect the typhoon may be lacking is LO, but that doesent mean its just a little bit short of "5th gen" capabilities, which you implied by saying its only missilng "stealth", that has many rammifications.
This is my whole point. What do you mean by "class", how about "generation"? I stated in my original post that IMHO it was the most capable 4.5th gen air superiority fighter in service at the moment. You've spent two post saying there's not much difference and the lables "5th" gen and the like are meaningless, now you say that the Typhoon and F22 are in differnt "classes"? The hole reason i pointed uot the differences between ( I know you dont like it but for lack of a better word) 5th and 4th gen Raptor and typhoon was because of some statements i have read, by a few englishmen who claimed that the Typhoon & F22 are comparable, and the fact they were lmped together in the title of this thread. But it seems you agree with me.
No mate they can't. Again you gloss over the critical point and then accuse me of being ignorant or having wishfull thinking. Rafael & Typhoon arent just a bit "easier to detect" by the enemy. There is an order of magnitude difference between the RCS of a typhoon and the VLO of an F22, even the LO of an F35. Like the difference between detecting a fighter at 300km and 30km. 30km is as good as useless because thats well within missile range, meaning the AEW&C would be dead. i.e. they are as good as undetectable by AEW&C beacause of the distance these systems are kept away from the battlespace. Unless they're right up close they wont see our 5th gen platforms, especially the F22, and no ones going to risk force multipliers with LO fighters lurking arround. This deprives the enemy of a huge resource and automaticaly puts them at a massive dissadvantage. However said AEW&C would detect Typhoon or Rafale from a good enough distance to direct the battle, which is what such systems are designed for, detecting fighter sized targets at 300km+ ranges. The only way they can hide is behind electronic noise, which has its dissadvantages, and as i said is the same tactic used by every other 4th gen fighter. F22/F35 on the other hand can move into optimal launch positions because they have an AEW&C actually doing something, launch missiles from tracks generated by offboard sensors at long range, without ever using their radar. The first thing the threat aircraft would know is when they detected the missiles or their RWR started flashing as the AMRAAM's seekers went active. If you cant see the massive advantage in denying your enemy use of AEW&C and indeed their own radar combined with networking to your own AEW&C then i'm not too shure what what you do consider an advantage, having them all lined up infront of you perhaps?
Really?????? Which "advanced AEW&C" systems would those be???? Would you care to outline these systems or the principles they are based on???? Have they even been imagined yet i wonder????
Your exactly right, not invisable, but much much harder to detect and track, which gives you a massive advantage. The chances of a current or even planned/new AEW&C detecting a VLO or even LO platform at 200KM, which is as close to the battle as an AEW&C would get are less than minimal. If you cant see the desisive advantage there then you must be blind, or just unwilling to admit that LO gives 5th gen cplatforms capabilities and tactics the Typhoon just cant do.
LOL, really??? so i'm underrating the Typhoon because of my lack of knowledge about the platform????? It must be my lack of knowledge right? i mean you said it twice in the one sentance. I did call it the best 4.5th generation air superiority fighter, but i'm under rating it??? Actually my point isnt the Typhoons lack of capabilities, as a 4th gen platform it is very capable. My point was the leap in capabilities 5th gen platforms have brought to the table, and the simple fact that the typhoon can not utilise these tactics because it doesnt have the technologies needed. Pretty simple...
Ozzy Blizzard
New Member
Yeah mate i'm shure this conversation is that simple. I've got some patriotic love for someone elses platform, especially over yet annother somene elses platform.. That makes heaps of sence. And theres some magical something that the Typhoon has that i didnt know about thats going to change the whole argument right???? maybe it was hiding its comprehensive LO and i never knew about it because of my lack of knowedge???
The point i'm making isnt just "F22 is better", its the revoloutionary capabilities 5th gen platforms bring to airial warfare. I dont give a hoots about US stuff v Euro stuff... I'm an aussie and we buy both!!!!
Scorpion82
New Member
As details are unknown its not necessary to discuss about that. We will see how this developes in the future.
Don't bother with finding it at all. I'm well aware about the capabilities and technologies people associate with 5th generation fighters. I for my self define the generations by the nature of their sense. F-22 must be 5th generation simply by the fact it is replacing aircraft like the F-15 which is classed 4th generation. In Europe aircraft like the F-15 are classed as 3rd generation, therefore new designs such as the Eurofighter or Rafale are seen as 4th generation. If you would use the US and Russian generation classes these aircraft would be 5th generation by the nature of the word generation. If you link capabilities or technologies to the generation definition you quickly end up with the problem "who defines what makes an aircraft this or that generation"? You often find contradictions. It's a fact that at a time the JSF weren't that present supercruise was claimed to be a capability of 5th generation, now as the F-35 becomes more a reality supercruise is suddenly no matter for the definition. That's only a simple example, but I estimate you can understand what I mean. I personally don't bother with the labels 4th, 4.5th, 5th or whatever generation I prefer to talk about and compare capabilities and technologies.
Stealth is the main difference between aircraft like the F-22/35 and Typhoon/Rafale. Stealth alone doesn't make a super fighter, its the combination of all the factors, but if you look closer at the european fighters you will see that stealth is the real difference.
The F-22 was designed at the same time as Typhoon, but the requirements and budgets were different. The F-22 was required to penetrate soviet airspace to shoot down enemy aircraft over their own territory. This required high surviveability which is achieved through the combination of high speed and altitutde and of course stealth. The Typhoon was designed to defend own assets against enemy airstrikes and to achieve local airsuperiority, with a secondary AG role. The Typhoon had to be more flexible by design and cheaper. Because of these different requirements (simplified version) they are very different aircraft and therefore in different classes.
I see the aircraft as a whole thing and as such there aren't that much differences technology wise. Stealth is the main difference in terms of technologies between Typhoon and F-22 and of course AESA and TVC for the moment. That doesn't mean that the aircrafts are not different by their design philosophy, but many of the technologies or capabilities often claimed to be unique for the F-22 are in fact as present for Eurofighter as well. Sensor fusion and NWC to mention some prominent examples.
Of course you can compare them, but if it makes much sense is the other question. The most people compare them as they achieved by far the best ratings in simulaitons such as JOUST and by the fact that they were both optimised for aircombat, though their mission profiles are different.
Once again stealth is the main difference and yes it offers huge advantages. There is no need to explain me such things, but thanks for the effort. But it doesn't change the fact that the Typhoon can launch its missiles as max range as well, though it's more difficult and the aircraft can also use offboard data to do so, without using its own radar = keeping silent.
Just an example. Stealth is not that new at all and antistealth technologies are under developement. First successes were already announced. The question is how mature are these technologies, who will get it and how effective are they in reality? I'm sure stealth will offer a noticeable advantage for the foreseeable future, but I wouldn't bet on stealth as an untouchable non counterable technology.
That was spoken in general, not directly pointing at you. But I have to admit that I have the feeling that you aren't aware about some essential capabilities of the Eurofighter Typhoon.
My point is the Typhoon uses very much similar technologies, some differences here or there on both sites. The main difference is stealth as mentioned before and once again, I have no doubt about the significant advantages stealth provides.
good night
Scorpion
Last edited:
I didn't say it was, & I wasn't having a dig at you. I was veering off topic slightly into a general grumble.
Take that chip off your shoulder & cool down a bit.
-They made generations of aircraft based on the tehnology it posseses.
-F15 is 4.5th generation , not 4th as you said.
Stealth is not bad , avionics are better, without them a fighter is nothing.
-Yes F-22 was designed for air supreority against soviet union , but it was equiped with ground capabilites aswell.
-True they are different aircrafts , its like comparing shotgun to a machinegun.
-True
The "how good is the F22" has been done to death previously along with what is 4th, 5th and 4.5th generation fighters.
Next we will have the discussion on supercruise ........ again.
Is there anything new you have to add to the debate.
Sure. If MiG claims they can reduce the MiG-29's RCS to 0.3m2 why can't they just do the same with MiG-35 (a MiG-29M/M2 with TVC) which features an AESA radar and an internal optical locater system, fit it with HMS and displays from Thales, develop a 5th gen. engine for it and call it a 5th gen. fighter with performance better than the F-35 and the Eurofighter(at half the price) and a good deterrent to the F-22 when bought in numbers??? It would sell like crazy.
The RCS would be new....... if indeed it is posible. Seems to be marking hype to me and a lot of wishful thinking.
The rest of it does not exist at present nor is there any concrete plasn for an Mig-35 fitted with western avionics. You claim such an aircraft would have better perforamce than the F-35. Do you have concrete information on what the f-35 performcane will be or is this opinion?
Otherwise we look like sprilling back down the rehashing of discussions on the 4th, 5th and 4.5th generation fighters and supercruise
No, I was mocking MiG's claims.
Fair enough, I did not read it that way hence the comment.
Das Kardinal
New Member
Going after the enemy's force multipliers is an obvious role for the F22 given its capabilities. When the enemy AEW&C is dead, while your AEW&C is alive, it becomes something of a turkey shoot, I suppose. Fits quite well : F22s as the spearhead, teen-series behind doing the mopping-up.
It's completely unfair, isn't it ?
It's completely unfair, isn't it ?
Scorpion82
New Member
The F-15 is defined as 4th generation in the US as well. Some claim that the newer models might be 4.5th gen, but as I said before I don't bother that much with the generation definitions, as it says not that much and as it depends on the point of view.
And what do you want to tell me with that?
AG capabilities were not part of the specification back in the 1980s. After the end of the cold war it was decided to introduce AG weapons as well, but the Raptor is not going to be the best allrounder, though it performs well in the roles it is intended for.
F-15 Eagle is 4th generation
F-15E and later variants are 4.5th generation
Yes its not so important anyway , i was just correcting you.
That you said stealth is very important , you were talking like you seem to think stealth is the most important part , its not.
Yea thats what i said.
Scorpion82
New Member
Complemented would suit better as I spoke about the F-15 in general. And interestingly I never see any USAF or Boeing official saying 4.5 generation.
You get me wrong on that. What I mean is that stealth is the greatest difference between F-22 and Eurofighter. Based on the data available I don't see a significant advantage for the F-22 as far as avionics are concerned. The main advantage is currently the AN/APG-77 in that field and the centralized avionics structure might offer advantages as well.
It is never a platform or a pilot which makes it superior but the combination of a well trained pilot and a superior platform will make it a serious threat. If not, even a F-22 will be shot down in an exercize by a F-16 as reported below:
This news will surely please the F-16 supporters.
FIRST EVER F-22 SHOT DOWN BY A F-16C
During their first major exercise in Alaska last year, Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor fighters from the 27th Fighter Squadron shot down 144 “enemy” F-15s and F/A-18s in mock dogfights. Still flush from that victory, the 27th headed to Okinawa in February and its sister 94th Fighter Squadron simultaneously deployed to Nellis Air force Base, Nevada, for the type’s first Red Flag exercise. While the 27th was sweeping the skies clear of Air Force F-15s and 1960s-era Japanese F-4s, the 94th ran headlong into the F-16s of the 64th Aggressor Squadron and suffered its first simulated shoot-down. Somehow the news escaped me, but Airforces Monthly has all the dirty details in its July issue:
The 57th Adversary Tactics Group undertook some interesting tactics not contained in the overall [scripted] intelligence scenario. These involved surprise threats, generally Red Air [enemy] fighters, entering the air battle unexpectedly. White Force [exercise control] staff would confirm that the threat was Red and Blue Air [the “good guys”] had to react. The tactic worked. An F-16C pilot assigned to the 64th Aggressor Squadron gained the first-ever F-22 kill in Red Flag. [94th commander] Lt. Col. Dirk Smith told AFM: “At least half of the 94th FS crews had less than 50 hours in the F-22 and no matter how magical the F-22, any pilot can make a mistake. The beauty of Red Flag is that we were able to go out and practice our tactics in a challenging scenario, make a mistake, learn a lesson, and be that much better prepared for actual combat.”
I totally agree: failure is the best way to improve. And if losing one simulated dogfight against other Americans flying F-16s was such a profound experience for our Raptor jockies, imagine what they might take away from a no-holds-barred match with experienced foreign pilots flying a genuinely dissimilar aircraft, say Indian aces in Su-30s or veteran Russian pilots in Su-27s – or even top British aviators in the Royal Air Force’s new Typhoons. So far the Air Force has kept its Raptors on a short leash, letting them play in only the most controlled circumstances. Maybe it’s time to cut them loose for some real education. Just think how prepared they’ll be after 50 mock shoot-downs.
Black Box in the left hand corner means trigger was pulled.
This news will surely please the F-16 supporters.
FIRST EVER F-22 SHOT DOWN BY A F-16C
During their first major exercise in Alaska last year, Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor fighters from the 27th Fighter Squadron shot down 144 “enemy” F-15s and F/A-18s in mock dogfights. Still flush from that victory, the 27th headed to Okinawa in February and its sister 94th Fighter Squadron simultaneously deployed to Nellis Air force Base, Nevada, for the type’s first Red Flag exercise. While the 27th was sweeping the skies clear of Air Force F-15s and 1960s-era Japanese F-4s, the 94th ran headlong into the F-16s of the 64th Aggressor Squadron and suffered its first simulated shoot-down. Somehow the news escaped me, but Airforces Monthly has all the dirty details in its July issue:
The 57th Adversary Tactics Group undertook some interesting tactics not contained in the overall [scripted] intelligence scenario. These involved surprise threats, generally Red Air [enemy] fighters, entering the air battle unexpectedly. White Force [exercise control] staff would confirm that the threat was Red and Blue Air [the “good guys”] had to react. The tactic worked. An F-16C pilot assigned to the 64th Aggressor Squadron gained the first-ever F-22 kill in Red Flag. [94th commander] Lt. Col. Dirk Smith told AFM: “At least half of the 94th FS crews had less than 50 hours in the F-22 and no matter how magical the F-22, any pilot can make a mistake. The beauty of Red Flag is that we were able to go out and practice our tactics in a challenging scenario, make a mistake, learn a lesson, and be that much better prepared for actual combat.”
I totally agree: failure is the best way to improve. And if losing one simulated dogfight against other Americans flying F-16s was such a profound experience for our Raptor jockies, imagine what they might take away from a no-holds-barred match with experienced foreign pilots flying a genuinely dissimilar aircraft, say Indian aces in Su-30s or veteran Russian pilots in Su-27s – or even top British aviators in the Royal Air Force’s new Typhoons. So far the Air Force has kept its Raptors on a short leash, letting them play in only the most controlled circumstances. Maybe it’s time to cut them loose for some real education. Just think how prepared they’ll be after 50 mock shoot-downs.
Black Box in the left hand corner means trigger was pulled.
powerslavenegi
New Member
pshamin a minor nitpick in this particular case it was a simulated dogfight i.e. both F-22 and F-16 were able to see each other (infact in this case pilots ) hence it came down to individual skills ,it remains to be seen if any other aircraft can manage a BVR or even a WVR kill against the Raptor .
ps: WVR too relies on the Radar/IRST for the target is too far for the pilot to see via the naked eye which is not the case in a dogfight.
ps: WVR too relies on the Radar/IRST for the target is too far for the pilot to see via the naked eye which is not the case in a dogfight.
I just had to post this. I have always been a little partial to a F-16. I have sit in it, smelled it and touched it but never been certified to fly it.
What is noteworthy that Raptor annihilated every other aircraft including F-15s and F-18s in simulated dog fights but failed against a F-16. Does say a lot about this little aircraft.
What is noteworthy that Raptor annihilated every other aircraft including F-15s and F-18s in simulated dog fights but failed against a F-16. Does say a lot about this little aircraft.
Its probably important to emphasise that they were Red Hat pilots. Red Air events are very different to normal DACT. You are looking at the creme de la ceme of their training cadre.
I would like to see Red Hats in F-15's (or F18's), but they chose F-16's due to legacy sov block training (IIRC)