Posted on 11/07/2019 7:50:31 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Key point: Russian aircraft are closing the gap with the West, making the need for investments in next-generation fighters more important than ever.
Russia’s Su-35 fighter certainly has western defense outlets buzzing--and for good reason.
Moscow, despite heavy sanctions and an economy that has certainly seen better days, keeps pumping out new combat systems one after another--items like new tanks, submarines, nuclear weapons platforms and more.
While many were indeed designed and planned for ahead of the imposition of sanctions, Russia is clearly making a big effort to modernize its armed forces, especially its air force, and moving past older Soviet platforms. The Su-35 is a good example of such efforts.
So how would the Su-35 do against America’s best planes? How would it fare against an American air force that is clearly the best in the world. How would, for example, the Su-35 do in a combat situation against Lockheed Martin’s F-35 Joint Strike Fighter? How would Russia’s new plane do against older aircraft like the F-15 or say F-16?
Such scenarios matter--and not just in the context of a possible NATO/Russia or Middle East situation, but now that Russia is set to deliver the Su-35 to China, such comparisons matter even more. There are many places where all of these lethal aircraft will overlap, making such comparisons even more timely.
Compiled below are three articles, written several years ago, that looks at these questions in depth, combined in one posting for your reading pleasure. With that said, let the debate begin.
***
While the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter is slated to become the mainstay of the Pentagon’s tactical fighter fleet, not everyone nation on Earth can afford to fly an expensive fifth-generation fighter.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalinterest.org ...
The US has a lousy doctrine of anticipating threats and saving pennies when they should be spending dollars. The cancellation of the F-22 program was gigantic blunder rife with political short sightedness for example. The dithering over replacing aging F-15 airframes with the F-15X is a close second. The numbers of active squadrons with viable air superiority capability has been constantly shrinking since the Gulf War.
Russian and probably Chines doctrine is weak when it comes to command and control centralization. Their battle fleet will be an all-in -one surge to obliterate us in a first (and likely surprise) strike. After the warfare devolves into small unit air to air combat, the article pretty accurately describes the probable outcomes.
The biggest US strength is training and tactics. Our military trains using dissimilar aircraft and known enemy tactics which should be a big advantage if going head to head.
Still the outcome could be based on quantity instead of quality. A very capable platform like the F-22 becomes an airliner once it expends it's ordnance. If the pilot kills 6 of opposing 22 enemy aircraft, he will be an ace but he didn't win the battle.
CORRECT.
The F-15 is superior and the F-22 is much better than the F-15.
“Russian and probably Chines doctrine is weak when it comes to command and control centralization. Their battle fleet will be an all-in -one surge to obliterate us in a first (and likely surprise) strike. After the warfare devolves into small unit air to air combat, the article pretty accurately describes the probable outcomes.”
That may be a weakness, but they also haven’t sat on their arses for 40 years either and it isn’t like they haven’t watched us either. If their actual military is like the Russian and Chinese players online in mil-sims, the *first* thing they’re going to do is take out the AWACS, JSTARS and other airborne radar observation platforms, which definitely goes a long way towards leveling the playing field. Keep in mind that in real world exercises, even US F-22s have been defeated by Indian MiGs and Luftwaffe Eurofighters when deprived of AWACS support. AWACS support has been a big portion of our ‘superiority’ over peer and near peer equipped airforces.
Yep. Billy-Jeff provided the latest nuclear weapon designs and launch vehicle expertise along with whatever else. Obambi probably supplied more when he wasn’t focused on assisting his fellow muzzies.
“All the pilot has to do is look at the target and depress their thumb, without regard to which platform releases the missile”
According to the article, the F-35 can’t use the sidewinder with that capability unless it gives up the AIM-120 that lets it take advantage of stealth and shoot BVR. That means it has to get into visual range -where it should never be- against any fighter. A 35s only chance is to use its moderate stealth to shoot before it is seen and at a stand off distance. If it carries the sidewinder, it is committing on takeoff to no air to air except in its most poor performing environment. Don’t forget, the moonpig is so slow it cannot outrun anything else fielded. So it even has a tough time breaking contact.
The other option is sidewinders on pods, but then you have no stealth and are again very exposed.
LOL, great point about the P-47 in Afghanistan. That would be something to see, especially if they operated on the ETO circa 1944 rules of engagement.
I’m a hopeless romantic I guess.
Very strong point about the sore loser concept. Looking back the Bradley did very well. And who would replace the F-16 with the F-20? I remember the M-1 tank being castigated with deep concerns about it’s turbine engine being unreliable in sand.
I read Dan Petersen’s book and I am of the opinion that whichever craft can gun it up toward space the fastest will prevail. Then bring the hammer down in pairs.
“even US F-22s have been defeated by Indian MiGs and Luftwaffe Eurofighters when deprived of AWACS support. “
On the other hand, it is well known in the USAF that “foreigners win sometimes” in joint training. The point of the joint exercises is not to utterly demoralize them at how lowly they perform compared to us. We are there to teach them a few things, and boost their morale and strengthen alliances.
If you played one on one with Michael Jordan he’d probably let you score a basket or two. Operant word being “let”.
“I’m ex Navy and don’t want to say anything nice about the Air Force. “
I’m retired Air Force and have nothing but nice to say about ALL my brothers in arms from ALL branches.
“Again - what happens when the AWACS gets taken out and our pilots have to search for targets themselves?”
the F-35, with its IR sensors and broad spectrum radar solves the problem.
DAS...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1NrFZddihQ&list=PLxYF2Xt6-JqGp-LHnQucGbtbQTBdsnFp2
This is true... but when deprived of AWACS support in exercises, our F-15s have also had their heads handed to them on more than a few occasions. Enough that there are some reports that have been sent back to Washington about how we *really* need to update the F-15 to counter developments.
Here’s another item in point - the Chinese J-20 fighter is derided a lot for being oversized and not looking terribly stealthy, probably not all that agile and generally not a match for the F-22. What a lot of people (especially here) miss is that the J-20 isn’t designed with fighting the F-22 as it’s primary role. It’s primary role is to be stealthy enough to haul some *very* large long range anti-AWACS missiles into launch range without being detected, and then salvo them at the AWACS. That’s why it has that huge weapons bay on the bottom and is the size it is.
Again - you radiate, you die. Broad spectrum radar does not mean you cannot lock onto and track the source.
As for DAS - they just had to fire the initial vendor for that as it wasn’t working and switched to another vendor. Who has been reported to be having problems as well.
https://breakingdefense.com/2018/06/major-upset-as-lockheed-ditches-northrop-for-f-35-das-sensor/
The platform will load weapons based on its role.
ALL stealth aircraft have a payload issue.
When one considers over 100 aircraft engaging, networked with drones and ships, it’s a busy battle space and he who sees best, lives longest.
Drones can carry sidewinders if needed.
“Again - you radiate, you die.”
That axiom dates to the 1960s.
And ignores the complex EW environment.
While it still has some validity, it’s no longer an Axiom and no longer certain.
I guess Northrup screwed up on DAS. The biggest issue being reliability, not whether the system works. The new Raytheon version is touted to be 5x more reliable and cheaper.
They will get it right, as US builders have always got it right with their front line products.
Taking off from 500 miles apart, would you rather be in the F-35 or the SU-35?
The answer to that question depends on three things:
1. Is the AWACS down yet?
2. How close is the ocean and are there USN Aegis units there?
3. Which F-35 variant is it?
“US builders have always gotten it right with their front line products”
Um... No.
Bell P-59 Airacomet
Vought F7U Cutlass
Grumman F-11 Tiger
Convair F-102 Delta Dagger
No, no, they don’t always get it right.
That is the classic politically driven short sightedness I talked about earlier
F4’s with no gun.
Those were not front line, bet-the-bank aircraft and were not intended to be.
All but the F-102 had less than 300 produced.
The F-102 was at least a moderate success until superseded by superior, more advanced aircraft.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.