Russia's crummy little stealth fighter

[Rich46yo]

From the beginning Ive told people this project was a piece of crap. Russia has been spinning it around air shows trying to convince the world its very first attempt at stealth has jumped three generations ahead of the Yanks. Thing is they have partners, India, who havnt been afraid to expose this POS for what it is. So now they have cut their own original order from 52 to 12 and the IAF , their partner and only export customer, doesnt even want one and no doubt will be soon knocking on the WH door asking for F-35s. http://theweek.com/articles/558397/russias-fancy-newstealth-fighter-serious-trouble

To blame world oil prices for the cut in orders is ludicrous cause Putin has shown he's willing to do anything for a complete revamp of the Russian armed forces and his current military budgets show that. What is obvious is the project is a total flub and was important enough for both the Russians and Indians to sink countless Billions into? Why? Why is stealth so important that everyone wants it?

First off they are not easy to design and build. Look at the problems were having with the F-35, our 4th stealth airplane. Tho I would hazard that most of "its" issues are that it was designed to have to many tasks and versions, most of all that jump jet version, and Lockheed has mismanaged the project. Still its going forward and it looks like it has no serious rivals from other players. For the next 10 to 20 years America and her allies will dominate the stealth war plane industry.

But the others will keep trying. I doubt China's J-31 effort will be any better, hell they suck at building engines, but apparently "stealth" is important enough for every major player to want it.

[PR3D4TOR]

This is why everyone want stealth.

http://theaviationist.com/2013/09/19/f-22-f-4-intercept/#.UjsinlOE5O_

[MrRiplEy[H]]

This is why everyone want stealth.

http://theaviationist.com/2013/09/19/f-22-f-4-intercept/#.UjsinlOE5O_

Isn't the Iranians F14 fleet from the 70's with no upgrades? They are lucky to have radar at all!

[PR3D4TOR]

F-4 ≠ F-14

However they were undoubtedly in range of Iranian ground control radar.

[Sabre]

Looking at the pictures of this aircraft, the most obvious problems are with the engines. Because they're not buried in the fuselage like the Raptor or F-35, the are both a radar and an infrared hot-spot. There's also a lot more to building a truly stealth vehicle than shape. Radar Absorbing Material (RAM), selective-frequency radomes, and low-probability-of-intercept radar are all (among many other less-sexy, but no less important) technologies that must be mastered and successfully integrated into the air frame to make it a combat-winning weapon. No doubt this a/c has a lower radar signature than a Mig-29 or Su-30, but would be at a tactical disadvantage to the F-22 (my opinion). Also, assuming this Russian bird doesn't have super-cruise like the Raptor does, it also holds a distinct operational disadvantage. Super-cruise is a force multiplier that is hard to overstate.

Regarding why stealth is important, the reasons are numerous and (mostly) obvious, and range from tactical to operational. The most obvious (operationally) is the element of surprise. Another, tactical, advantage is simply that whomever gets lock first wins the engagement. If your radar can lock up at 30-miles, but your enemy's can't lock up on you until 5 miles, he'll never get a chance to fire.

[Zimme83]

Problem with F-22 is that its combat capability is very limited, its a very potent plane but with 125 or so combat ready and with a pretty high demand for maintainace it will be har to keep any big number of F-22:s in the air for a longer period of time in case of a full scale war against a potent enemy. Most missions will have to be flown by teen fighters.

How big impact the F-22 can have is of course a matter of how the conflict looks like, against a low tech enemy like Iraq it doesnt matter if u have stealth planes or not. Against for ex China its a different matter. Problem will be to deploy them, operations against chinese mainland would requier air-to-air refueling and the tankers are not stealth. Penetrating an airspace covered by multiple ground and air based radars would make even the Raptor detectable.

[Gman]

My TL;DR =

High five for Rich,

and the only big problem with the F22 is that another 300 or more weren't built.  That and no JHMS/Aim9x, which is being rectified as we speak.

/end.

[Zimme83]

My TL;DR =

High five for Rich,

and the only big problem with the F22 is that another 300 or more weren't built.  That and no JHMS/Aim9x, which is being rectified as we speak.

/end.

Plus maybe the lack of a data link.
But yes, the F-22 systems biggest flaw is the low number of planes aviable. That decrease the combat capabilites. Its similar to the Me 262. A superior plane but lack of quantity limits the operational impact.

[Rich46yo]

The big reason there has been a lack of development of the f22, including more airframes, is that there has been a lack of a true opponent to it. It was designed for a war that was over before it first rolled off the production line and many possible upgrades were deferred to a later time, which was put off time and again because there has never been an operational need for it in combat. Mostly cause there has never been an adversary dangerous enough to worth risking it in its small numbers.

Eventually we let some fly around Syria and lob a few bombs out just so's we could say it "performed flawlessly in combat" which is a Joke. Its an ATA superiority fighter and while it can ground strike who in their right mind would do so when any cheap legacy could do the same thing, minus the news headlines.

I dont know what the current planned upgrades are for it. I know the data link 16 standard was considered a problem cause it could potentially expose the aircraft to an enemy. I thought there was some variation planned but I dont know the status, nor the status of all the planned software and weapons integration upgrades budgeted. The lack of an export version kinda killed the program as well.

I mean look at the war's we have fought since the F22 began testing. Iraq, Serbia, Iraq again, Afghanistan, Libya. Of them all Gulf-1 had the best enemy air defense and we clobbered it like a seal hunt. In Iraq and Serbia the F117 and B2 shined even tho they went up again fairly capable systems 3rd world-wise. We are now approaching the reality of opening night attacks against ATA networks being made up entirely of precision strike weapons. Im actually more interested in what will follow the F22 and the B2 then I am with what is.

Are the future threats serious enough to pour so many resources into next gen stealth?

[PR3D4TOR]

The procurement and design process of the F-22 started with the ATF program in 1981, at the height of the cold war. Obviously the need for a massive number of them disappeared along with its intended main adversary.

[Zimme83]

Using F-22 against a country like Iraq is a complete waste.

It has been pretty extensive proven that SAM:s and AAA cannot "shut down"  an air space. Without sufficient numbers of fighters u will loose the air war (and also the ground war). Chaff and radar jammers combined with HARM gives even a non stealth fighter good enough survivability in a combat zone.
What US hasnt been up against for a very long time is a potent air force. Even in Vietnam USAF greatly outnumbered the enemy in the skies. A match against a country like China would be something completley different. That would be a war were F-22 can make a difference but with the low numbers it prob wont.

[PR3D4TOR]

Zimme, it goes back to McNamara and Vietnam, the F-X program. The USAF would go for a two-fighter force. A small force of big expensive air superiority fighters and a large force of smaller cheaper fighters. The result was the F-15 and F-16. The F-22 and F-35 is the next generation of this force structure.

[Ack-Ack]

My TL;DR =

High five for Rich,

and the only big problem with the F22 is that another 300 or more weren't built.  That and no JHMS/Aim9x, which is being rectified as we speak.

/end.

The USAAF considers the F-22 to be a "force multiplier weapon", that's how they are justifying the low number and saying it's not to the detriment to possible future combat operations.

[Zimme83]

Nothing wrong with that. Problem is the low numbers of F-22 aviable and that the F-35 has a long way to go before it is ready for combat in any larger scale.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

F-4 ≠ F-14

However they were undoubtedly in range of Iranian ground control radar.

The Iranian F4 has the same exact problem. They were acquired in the 70's and never even upgraded.