Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 17 to 32 of 62

Thread: F22 Vs F35 - what are the key differences

  1. #17
    Banhammer in peace PeterB kalniel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    31,023
    Thanks
    1,870
    Thanked
    3,381 times in 2,718 posts
    • kalniel's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra
      • CPU:
      • Intel i9 9900k
      • Memory:
      • 32GB DDR4 3200 CL16
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Samsung 970Evo+ NVMe
      • Graphics card(s):
      • nVidia GTX 1060 6GB
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic 600W
      • Case:
      • Cooler Master HAF 912
      • Operating System:
      • Win 10 Pro x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell S2721DGF
      • Internet:
      • rubbish

    Re: F22 Vs F35 - what are the key differences

    Quote Originally Posted by Gerrard View Post
    The new carriers are actually long enough for the Typhoon to take off in the convential way (with an addition of a ramp at the end). They even have arrestor hooks (there's an arrestor cable even end of runways for emergencies), it's just the the undercarriage wouldn't be able to take the impact of a landing, and uprating it would comprimise the design.
    So why are we bothering with F35Bs when we could just get F35Cs?

  2. #18
    Senior Member Andy3536's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    2,355
    Thanks
    164
    Thanked
    194 times in 135 posts
    • Andy3536's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte GA-880GMA
      • CPU:
      • AMD Phenom II X6 1055T 95w @3.8
      • Memory:
      • 4GB Corsair XMS3 1600MHz
      • Storage:
      • 1T WD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • ATI 4870
      • PSU:
      • Corsair 750
      • Case:
      • Antec P-182

    Re: F22 Vs F35 - what are the key differences

    Quote Originally Posted by kalniel View Post
    So why are we bothering with F35Bs when we could just get F35Cs?
    There must be some advantages for using them, not quite sure off the top of my head. But the carriers will not be fitted with arrester wires and catapults, they have an inbuilt provision for them so as to make them future proof as they are expected to last 50 years.
    All i can make out though is that the carriers could be fitted to take the conventional F-35 which has greater fuel capacity and mounting the gun in the airframe as opposed to a pod. The RAF may have a more appropriate use when proper airfields arn't available but there's no advantage i can make out for the Navy.

  3. #19
    Moderator chuckskull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    The Frozen North
    Posts
    7,713
    Thanks
    951
    Thanked
    690 times in 463 posts
    • chuckskull's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte Z77-D3H
      • CPU:
      • 3570k @ 4.7 - H100i
      • Memory:
      • 32GB XMS3 1600mhz
      • Storage:
      • 256GB Samsung 850 Pro + 3TB Seagate
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA GTX 980Ti Classified
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic M12 700W
      • Case:
      • Corsair 500R
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • Asus VG278HE
      • Internet:
      • FTTC

    Re: F22 Vs F35 - what are the key differences

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcos View Post
    Wow, i would have never guessed the F22 is more expensive than an F35, considering STOVL should really be an expensive system
    The F-22 is much larger for a start

    and was designed from the ground up to be the absolute best in the world at what it does, at a time('81) when America was throwing money at defence, fearing the ruskies coming over the hill at any moment. Very little has been compromised for the sake of cost effectiveness. The F-35 is a consumer product at the end of the day and will eventually be sold all around around the world, just as the F-16 is today, price is a big factor. Don't be fooled though, neither anywhere near the realms of 'cheap'.

    EDIT: Seems the site I pilfered the image from has a very technical answer to the OP http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/planes/q0216.shtml Worth a read
    Last edited by chuckskull; 19-07-2009 at 10:53 PM.

  4. Received thanks from:

    samcross (19-07-2009)

  5. #20
    Banhammer in peace PeterB kalniel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    31,023
    Thanks
    1,870
    Thanked
    3,381 times in 2,718 posts
    • kalniel's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra
      • CPU:
      • Intel i9 9900k
      • Memory:
      • 32GB DDR4 3200 CL16
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Samsung 970Evo+ NVMe
      • Graphics card(s):
      • nVidia GTX 1060 6GB
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic 600W
      • Case:
      • Cooler Master HAF 912
      • Operating System:
      • Win 10 Pro x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell S2721DGF
      • Internet:
      • rubbish

    Re: F22 Vs F35 - what are the key differences

    Quote Originally Posted by chuckskull View Post
    EDIT: Seems the site I pilfered the image from has a very technical answer to the OP http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/planes/q0216.shtml Worth a read
    It's not entirely accurate though - the site seems to suggest this Hi/Lo strategy and the planes for it were planned from the start.. I thought the reality was they blew stupid amounts of money on the F15 because they'd seem some data about the Mig 25 and thought it was a super-plane that did ludicrous speeds and would just eat anything they could come up with.. when in fact it was a dedicated short flight interceptor that manouvered like a cow. By the time the myth was exploded it was too late so they were stuck with a really expensive and hard to maintain aircraft that happened to be really easy for SAMs to lock onto. Hence need for a simpler, cheaper aircraft that could be operated in remote theatres more easily and the light-weight fighter tender. The F16 won that competition and was chosen by the air force, but the YF17 that lost was still good enough that the Navy chose an aircraft based on it, the F18, for themselves to replace (not work alongside) the F14.

    The F22 is the replacement for the F15, but hopefully less easy to shoot down with SAMs, while the LWF concept continues with the JSF and the F35 replaces the F16/18 (and AV8B).

  6. #21
    Resident abit mourner BUFF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Sunny Glasgow
    Posts
    8,067
    Thanks
    7
    Thanked
    181 times in 171 posts

    Re: F22 Vs F35 - what are the key differences

    why do you think that the F-15 is very easy to shoot down with SAMs?
    I know of nothing that says that it's any worse than any other conventional aircraft (& indeed given it's manoeuvrability & countermeasures it's probably better than most).

    The F-16 was originally designed partly with a view to being a cheap daytime fighter for export to friendly nations (same role as the F-5 had performed ).

    MSI P55-GD80, i5 750
    abit A-S78H, Phenom 9750,

    My HEXUS.trust abit forums

  7. #22
    Banhammer in peace PeterB kalniel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    31,023
    Thanks
    1,870
    Thanked
    3,381 times in 2,718 posts
    • kalniel's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra
      • CPU:
      • Intel i9 9900k
      • Memory:
      • 32GB DDR4 3200 CL16
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Samsung 970Evo+ NVMe
      • Graphics card(s):
      • nVidia GTX 1060 6GB
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic 600W
      • Case:
      • Cooler Master HAF 912
      • Operating System:
      • Win 10 Pro x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell S2721DGF
      • Internet:
      • rubbish

    Re: F22 Vs F35 - what are the key differences

    Quote Originally Posted by BUFF View Post
    why do you think that the F-15 is very easy to shoot down with SAMs?
    Because it was the single thing the USAF were terrified about before and during the Iraq war - the Iraqis even used to try and bait F15 into waiting 'Sambushes'.

  8. #23
    Resident abit mourner BUFF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Sunny Glasgow
    Posts
    8,067
    Thanks
    7
    Thanked
    181 times in 171 posts

    Re: F22 Vs F35 - what are the key differences

    & yet I'm not sure that even 1 has been shot down by a SAM* (groundfire, yes) .
    On the other hand F-16s have been, Tornados have been (partly due to their operating level at the time) etc. etc. but F-15s tend to operate at medium - high altitude anyway.


    quick check suggests that they lost 1 -E in Desert Storm to a SAM but I still haven't found an A/B/C/D loss.

    MSI P55-GD80, i5 750
    abit A-S78H, Phenom 9750,

    My HEXUS.trust abit forums

  9. #24
    Banhammer in peace PeterB kalniel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    31,023
    Thanks
    1,870
    Thanked
    3,381 times in 2,718 posts
    • kalniel's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra
      • CPU:
      • Intel i9 9900k
      • Memory:
      • 32GB DDR4 3200 CL16
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Samsung 970Evo+ NVMe
      • Graphics card(s):
      • nVidia GTX 1060 6GB
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic 600W
      • Case:
      • Cooler Master HAF 912
      • Operating System:
      • Win 10 Pro x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell S2721DGF
      • Internet:
      • rubbish

    Re: F22 Vs F35 - what are the key differences

    Medium-high altitude is fine for SAMs, but the reason there aren't more losses is because they tend to avoid flying them over any area that has decent SAM coverage.

  10. #25
    Resident abit mourner BUFF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Sunny Glasgow
    Posts
    8,067
    Thanks
    7
    Thanked
    181 times in 171 posts

    Re: F22 Vs F35 - what are the key differences

    what's decent SAM cover?
    with man portable SAMs they are pretty pervasive & all you need is 1 ...

    Medium - high altitude gives more to time/options to react to a threat & is more likely to be a radar guided SAM hence affected by countermeasures - at low level with a modern SAM an engagement can be under 2 seconds (e.g. Starstreak will travel 2.5K in 2 seconds). Not long to identify & react to the threat especially as you will have fewer options due to ground proximity.

    Can you cite your sources that the USAF were especially terrified of SAMs re. F-15s before/during the Gulf wars?

    MSI P55-GD80, i5 750
    abit A-S78H, Phenom 9750,

    My HEXUS.trust abit forums

  11. #26
    Moderator chuckskull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    The Frozen North
    Posts
    7,713
    Thanks
    951
    Thanked
    690 times in 463 posts
    • chuckskull's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte Z77-D3H
      • CPU:
      • 3570k @ 4.7 - H100i
      • Memory:
      • 32GB XMS3 1600mhz
      • Storage:
      • 256GB Samsung 850 Pro + 3TB Seagate
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA GTX 980Ti Classified
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic M12 700W
      • Case:
      • Corsair 500R
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • Asus VG278HE
      • Internet:
      • FTTC

    Re: F22 Vs F35 - what are the key differences

    Very few F-15's have been lost to enemy fire over the years. The USAF is very proud of the fact none of theirs has ever been taken down in air to air combat. Not to mention they are a very solid plane with a huge wing area, one israeli F-15 landed safely with only one wing. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kk1KBQ96_DI

    It's not the fact that F-15's in particular are easy to shoot down with SAM's but that generally you find out where SAM sites are once you're in their range and if the guy pressing the buttons has any brains he will only turn it on if he thinks he can kill you. Along with many nations possessing man portable SAM's. The first thing you'll know about a SAM is often lots of beeping(Assuming your plane is newer than their SAM) or a smoke trail, and of course at this point the missile is in the air and coming toward you a great rate of knots.

    They are just about every pilots worst nightmare. You can't see them on radar, they are usually portable, easily concealed and incredibly difficult to engage without specialised weaponry and electronic warfare capabilities(HARM or wild weasel units). Without those, most pilots only have afterburners, G's, personal skill and prayer as a defence.
    Last edited by chuckskull; 20-07-2009 at 06:36 PM.

  12. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,028
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked
    34 times in 29 posts

    Re: F22 Vs F35 - what are the key differences

    the typhoon can't easily be navalised - the arrestor hook is far land operations, and it is not just the landing gear that needs to be strengthen but the entire airframe - landing on a carrier is a controlled crash.

    The Royal Navy are going down the F-35B (VSTOL) route because of commonality with the RAF who want VSTOL. As the amount we will likely buy will be tiny (barely enough to fill the carriers) any if not all the airgroup on the carriers will be RAF planes

    re: SAMs, the sams that shot down tornados etc in the 1st Gulf War were afaik low level sams - low level flight gives far less time to evade. Longer ranged/high level sams are radar guided, and even before launch a pilot will know if they have been detected due to search radars. Plus as radar frequencies get know jamming etc against them gets better they are negated somewhat. Iraq's air defence system was seen as a highly dangerous one in GW1 but with various means it was largely negated.

  13. #28
    Moosing about! CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    32,039
    Thanks
    3,910
    Thanked
    5,224 times in 4,015 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: F22 Vs F35 - what are the key differences

    Of course the MIG25 formed the basis of the MIG31 which had the first production airborne phased array radar. Anyway it was used mostly to plug gaps in the Soviet radar chain and for the interception of bombers neither of which required much maneuverability.

    The F16 was developed primarily since the F15 was a complex and very expensive fighter to purchase and the F4 could not be replaced on a one to one basis. The F16 used one of the engines found in the F15 and was originally developed as a very maneuverable day only fighter-bomber. The original F16A and F16B did not have the ability to guide radar guided missiles like the AIM7 Sparrow as early versions of the APG66 could not do so and the airframe was made with very little exotic materials like titanium to cut down on costs. Only with the arrival of the F16A ADF conversions in the late 1980s and the F16C could the F16 actually use the AIM7 and AIM120.

    It will interesting to see the Russian PAK-FA when it does fly(hopefully within the next two years). It was sad that the Mig 1.42 demonstrator only had a few test flights.

  14. #29
    Moosing about! CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    32,039
    Thanks
    3,910
    Thanked
    5,224 times in 4,015 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: F22 Vs F35 - what are the key differences

    Quote Originally Posted by YorkieBen View Post
    the typhoon can't easily be navalised - the arrestor hook is far land operations, and it is not just the landing gear that needs to be strengthen but the entire airframe - landing on a carrier is a controlled crash.
    The Russians did so with the Su27 and the Su33 naval derivative uses STOBAR. The SU27 is a bigger aircraft than the Typhoon so I do not see why it should be an issue. In fact the French have a naval version of the Rafale already so we could always get that instead. After all the Naval Lynx and Jaguar had French involvement so I would see no issues there too.

    I do agree that the reason the RN is buying the VSTOL is due to the RAF requirement as it would be easier to maintain less types and also per unit cost would drop for a larger buy too.

  15. #30
    Moderator chuckskull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    The Frozen North
    Posts
    7,713
    Thanks
    951
    Thanked
    690 times in 463 posts
    • chuckskull's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte Z77-D3H
      • CPU:
      • 3570k @ 4.7 - H100i
      • Memory:
      • 32GB XMS3 1600mhz
      • Storage:
      • 256GB Samsung 850 Pro + 3TB Seagate
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA GTX 980Ti Classified
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic M12 700W
      • Case:
      • Corsair 500R
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • Asus VG278HE
      • Internet:
      • FTTC

    Re: F22 Vs F35 - what are the key differences

    The F-35 is also stealth capable, which while not particularly useful for the current counter insurgency efforts it's a very nice string to have in your bow none the less.

  16. #31
    HEXUS.social member
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    2,562
    Thanks
    102
    Thanked
    320 times in 213 posts

    Re: F22 Vs F35 - what are the key differences

    Regarding portable SAMs, helicopters have very effective counter measures. In fact, they seem to be so effective, that the launcher can't get a lock and are sometimes found left disbanded. The defensive suite in most aircraft is automatic, so when it picks up a missile threat, its type is identified and the appropriate counter-measure is launched (chaff/flares) almost instantly. The system can be fooled though by false readings; better safe than sorry though I guess!
    Quote Originally Posted by YorkieBen View Post
    Iraq's air defence system was seen as a highly dangerous one in GW1 but with various means it was largely negated.
    Mainly because it was the US/UK that sold them the system, so we knew exactly what frequencies it used and how best to counter it!
    Quote Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH View Post
    In fact the French have a naval version of the Rafale already so we could always get that instead. After all the Naval Lynx and Jaguar had French involvement so I would see no issues there too.
    The French were originally in the Eurofighter program, but wanted a carrier capable aircraft which the other nations did not want; so they left and created their own (the Rafale, which looks quite similiar to the Typhoon). However, they did have to extend their carrier (Charles de Gaule) in order for it to work.

  17. #32
    Moderator chuckskull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    The Frozen North
    Posts
    7,713
    Thanks
    951
    Thanked
    690 times in 463 posts
    • chuckskull's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte Z77-D3H
      • CPU:
      • 3570k @ 4.7 - H100i
      • Memory:
      • 32GB XMS3 1600mhz
      • Storage:
      • 256GB Samsung 850 Pro + 3TB Seagate
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA GTX 980Ti Classified
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic M12 700W
      • Case:
      • Corsair 500R
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • Asus VG278HE
      • Internet:
      • FTTC

    Re: F22 Vs F35 - what are the key differences

    Quote Originally Posted by Gerrard View Post
    Regarding portable SAMs, helicopters have very effective counter measures. In fact, they seem to be so effective, that the launcher can't get a lock and are sometimes found left disbanded. The defensive suite in most aircraft is automatic, so when it picks up a missile threat, its type is identified and the appropriate counter-measure is launched (chaff/flares) almost instantly. The system can be fooled though by false readings; better safe than sorry though I guess!
    While this is true of most recent conflicts we've been involved in, this only because the enemies involved were using outdated(usually early cold war era) equipment we had already figured out how to beat or as you rightly pointed out weapons we sold them, obviously the vast majority of those completely combat ineffective against our own forces.

    Newer systems developed by friendly and not so friendly countries pose a much larger threat, CLOS and beam riding systems are incredibly hard to effectively counter. Many using multiple guidance systems and ECCM.

    Just like every other weapon, it's an arms race, you develop a new weapon, someone develops a new protection and the cycle continues.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Quote to replace key on Sony laptop
    By Bluecube in forum Help! Quick Relief From Tech Headaches
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 25-03-2010, 09:22 AM
  2. AACS decrypted... keys in memory
    By Steve in forum HEXUS News
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 14-01-2007, 05:14 PM
  3. right click menu
    By shiato storm in forum Help! Quick Relief From Tech Headaches
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 15-01-2006, 11:45 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •