That target lock thing works both ways.
Posted on 04/09/2018 12:49:58 PM PDT by Mariner
Russian air defenses may appear formidable as part of Moscow’s increasingly sophisticated anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) capability, but areas protected by these systems are far from impenetrable bubbles or 'Iron Domes’ as some analysts have called them.
While it is true that a layered and integrated air defense may effectively render large swaths of airspace too costly—in terms of men and materiel—to attack using conventional fourth generation warplanes such as the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet or Lockheed Martin F-16 Fighting Falcon, these systems have an Achilles’ Heel. Russian air defenses will still struggle to effectively engage fifth-generation stealth aircraft such as the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor or F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.
“In terms of establishing viable air defenses against opponents with fifth generation aircraft, it's quite clear how Russia is trying to tackle the problem of stealth," said Mike Kofman, a research scientist specializing in Russian military affairs at CNA Corporation during an interview with The National Interest. “Russia's advanced radar, variety of capable missiles and systems that try to integrate large amounts of data for a more potent air defense will increasingly segregate Western air forces into two benches. In a future where these systems have proliferated to China, Iran and other regional powers there will be those that can penetrate and survive against advanced air defenses in a high end fight, and those whose job it is to bomb ISIL or its successor.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalinterest.org ...
It looked ;like an even contest until the Russian upped the anti with the arrival of their SU-35S. After that the No-Fly zone pertained to US planes.
Just remember kiddies, the S-200, S-300, an S-400 and likely the S-500, where it in theater, are linkable. What one sees, they all see; best missile and best target lock used.
And of course do not forget that the Russian excel at jamming - something the US lags badly on. So all those sensor may not work as advertised in actual combat. This being especially true if the Russians succeed in keeping the AWAC (or whatever it is now) so far away as to be useless to the 22s and 35s.
Did you read that off the marketing brochure the Ruskies gave to the Syrians?
That target lock thing works both ways.
A stealth airframe vs increases in SAM technology? The airframe fixed in time is bound to lose in a few short years. Even Ben Rich admitted this.
When that time comes, we will wish we had way more F-15s instead of the slowest least maneuverable fighter we have deployed since the early 60s.
You expressed my concern perfectly, DesertRhino. I also believe the next war might be fought largely without GPS. Excellent thread, Mariner.
The batteries have lots of antimissile missiles for just such an occasion. they are formidable systems and not to be taken lightly. Witness the shooting down of Israeli missiles (rockets/guided bombs, whatever) over Syria in the T4 attacks by relatively lowly S-200 antiques.
seems to me Israeli F-15s already won that fight...
Very interesting with the addition of actual stats for comparison.
“A stealth airframe vs increases in SAM technology? “
Gents, respectfully...
The idea that we should sacrifice the very advanced features of the F-35 in order to be able to fight a 1960 era air war, to me, seems counter-productive. And it’s a view shared nearly universally by everyone who had the opportunity to buy them.
Remember, their physical performance is still limited by a software load. Mach 1.6 and 9G is not a dog.
These aircraft will always have an advantage in modern air warfare...for the life of the platform. Even IF the Russians figure out how to target them.
The pilots situational awareness and ability to target/deploy weapons will continue to be superior...and the advantage of stealth will never be completely eliminated.
Precisely. The F-35 is today’s F-111 Kitchen Sink.
Agreed! F-22 is today’s F-15.
Did the Syrians actually shoot down the Israeli missiles? I haven’t seen any proof as of yet.
The weak link in missile AA systems is... missiles. If you can goad sites into expending their load outs on a variety of $200-$20,000 RC aircraft the rest of it will be easy because you can always release payloads outside of the range of conventional cannon AA, and onto them to make the area accessible to ground support aircraft.
The final arbiter of AA is going to end up being kinetic or energy based systems that can reach out to missile ranges without costing 5 million dollars every time you pull the trigger.
Interesting article.
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.