F35

[Cosmonaut]

Air forces In general get it wrong all the time which is why the F14 had such a long run and ended up as the bomb cat and also why the A10 is still going with no real replacement.

 

When I see an F35 staffing targets 80m away from friendly forces in a real combat situation then I'll start to worry for the Hornet. But if history repeats itself then those that think they know will have to listen to those that actually know and the Hornet will live on :pilotfly: ... I hope ;)

[tflash]

I'm pretty sure it can ... it definitely has the high thrust required for it, but it doesn't have vectored thrust which may make it less efficient as supercruising than an F-22.

 

I thought the intake design of the F-35, totally without moving parts, made it less efficient at high speed. It was a compromise to reduce cost and make it more easy to keep the front aspect stealthy. I though I read this somewhere, but I can't recall it and must confess never again ran into such an account ;)

[GGTharos]

Yeah, but lately it turns out that you don't necessarily need moving parts any longer to shape the airflow. ;)

[Pilotasso]

I say that's a big difference.

 

F-22 is $200 million. F-35 is $35 million.

F-22 is not for sale. F-35 is.

F-22 can supercruise. F-35 can't.

 

Other than the stealthy appearance and the fact that both can fly, there's nothing else similar.

 

Not Accurate.

F-22 is closer to 130 million apiece.

F-35 is closer to 40 million a piece.

[Viper101]

F-35A: US$48 million

F-35B: US$62 million

F-35C: US$63 million

 

F-22: US$120 million as of 2006

 

 

Ya know, its funny you compare the price of the aircraft and wether it is for sale......how about compare the capabilities of the F-35 and F-22 together and leave out the STVOL ability....their the same exact jet.

[GGTharos]

... wow. Get a clue already. No, they aren't. The F-22 is a purpose-built jet and the F-35, other than being 'same generation' has /nothing/ on it in air to air combat.

On the other hand? The F-22 isn't likely as good a bomb truck as the F-35, it can't take off from a small field, or a carrier, and as was pointed out lately, the F-22 can supercruise, the F-35 cannot. The F-35 is probably better geared to deal with low-level threats like MANPADS than the F-22.

The F-22 has thrust vectoring ... the F-35 does not.

The F-22 can float around at 50000', the F-35 cannot. Need I go on?

[Ven]

You guys are not reading the fine prints. $120 million is for incremental purchase.

 

According to wiki:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-22_Raptor

 

"By the time all 183 jets have been purchased, $34 billion will be spent on actually procuring the aircraft."

 

That turns out to be $186 million each.

[Pilotasso]

The F-22 can float around at 50000', the F-35 cannot. Need I go on?

 

According to many declassified texts it can go much much higher than that, though excatly is still classified. I read numbers in the 80K realm. Wich is amazing. And it would explain the fine tuned shape of the wings.

 

There was a text in F-16 forums stating that the US is already buying F-22 aircraft down to 120 mil and it will go further down in the future, probably under the 100 mil after a determined number of years. Please dont ask to search, Im too tired for that. :)

[Ven]

F-35A: US$48 million

F-35B: US$62 million

F-35C: US$63 million

 

F-22: US$120 million as of 2006

 

 

Ya know, its funny you compare the price of the aircraft and wether it is for sale......how about compare the capabilities of the F-35 and F-22 together and leave out the STVOL ability....their the same exact jet.

 

I thought you said you don't care what we say.

[GGTharos]

Go, yes, I mean operational loiter ... but yeah, 50000' + was what was quoted :)

 

According to many declassified texts it can go much much higher than that, though excatly is still classified. I read numbers in the 80K realm. Wich is amazing. And it would explain the fine tuned shape of the wings.

 

There was a text in F-16 forums stating that the US is already buyng aircraft down to 120 mil and it will go further down in the future, probably under the 100 mil after a number of years.

[tflash]

What I find awesome is the new materials F-22 and F-35 are made of.

 

See this high-res picture: http://www.teamjsf.com/jsf/data.nsf/public/6A6DB0BF1618FF1F8525725E00027AF8/$file/F-35_2nd_Flight_Gear_up.jpg

 

Compare that to the bunch of rivets and bolts on the venerable Tomcat and the likes.

[Alfa]

...the F-35B is really just an evolution of of the Harrier in terms of STOVL, allowing higher payload, better range, stealth, extensive and complex sensor integration, off-and-on-board, ability to self-escort and prosecute one mean air to air duel ... all the things the Harrier could -not- do.

 

Yup just an evolution of the the......Yak-41 :P .

[D-Scythe]

how about compare the capabilities of the F-35 and F-22 together and leave out the STVOL ability....their the same exact jet.

 

Tell me you're joking.

[Viper101]

Yes I know one can supercruise and the other cant. I know the raptor has thrust vectoring and the f-35 doesnt...woopdie doo, I am talking about the same armaments and combat abilites.

[GGTharos]

... and you're still wrong. ;)

[D-Scythe]

Yes I know one can supercruise and the other cant. I know the raptor has thrust vectoring and the f-35 doesnt...woopdie doo, I am talking about the same armaments and combat abilites.

 

Yeah, aside from the obviously better performance in every part of the flight envelope, and all the much more powerful avionics/radar/RWR tailored specifically for A/A combat, and the better stealth technology put into its airframe, the F-22 is obviously exactly the same as the F-35 in combat abilities :megalol:

 

BTW, you forgot the mention that they're painted similarly too, therefore their visual signatures must also be the same. Gee, how would we ever tell them apart?

[Ven]

Yes I know one can supercruise and the other cant. I know the raptor has thrust vectoring and the f-35 doesnt...woopdie doo, I am talking about the same armaments and combat abilites.

Well... for armaments, all current US fighters use same AMRAAM and sidewinders so I guess they're all same??? For air to ground, F-35 can carry more and much wider variety of A2G munitions internally.

 

For combat abilities... have you even looked them up? Absolutely nothing about these two are same performance wise. Instead of us making long list of differences, it'd be much easier for you to tell us what is same. Max speed? turn rate? climb rate? What's same? If you say these two are same, then I'm sure you also think F4 and F15 are same as well.

[LawnDart]

Woah! I had to dig back to the very first post to see what this thread's topic was really all about! DANG, how did this thread get derailed so quickly... :cry:

 

As far as the F-22 and F-35... simple answer: Different aircraft! Why? Completely different architechture and capabilities, cockpit integration and systems, but the two aircraft share coming from the same generation of figthers. Performance wise, it will be real interesting to see how well the F-35 will "carve air" like the Raptor? Not suggesting it will do better or poor, but it won't be because the same design reasons as the Raptor, because it's a different airplane. Saying anything else, is like suggesting the F/A-18 is the exact same plane as the F-14... (Which I'm sure, for once, even Viper can agree is not the case!).

 

 

159th_Viper, Thanks for sharing the video in the first post.

[Force_Feedback]

The lack of clearly visible rivets is because of a new high tech thing called filler, same idea like the white stuff you use to fill up cracks in walls. And every new airframe is smooth and shiny like the F-35A aa-1, your Boeing 777 and 737-NG might be stealthy for that same reason as well :P

It does heve less rivets than your Tomcat or some other 3/4 gen plane. And the horizontal stab looks nice, as do the MDC lines on the canopy, I'm beginning to like this little, but very advanced bugger.

 

BTW, is it having the HMD already? Because I don't see a HUD frame.

[SuperKungFu]

Trying to get back on topic, Does anyone have some nice hi-res pictures of the F-35 (not X-35) and other than the ones already on af.mil or the ubi forum http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/94610606/m/5921056164

[Frostie]

The British were with the Harrier in The Falklands for the very wrong reason: they decommissioned their real aircraft carrier with Phantoms just a year before. The very good performance against all odds of the Harrier must have given the false impression it is a valid asset, meaning they are now stuck with this by many accounts very limited aircraft in Afghanistan. The Harrier GR.7 is useless in A2A, has limited payload for strike and has a disputed reputation for CAS

I can't think why you would even consider mentioning A2A and GR.7 in the same statement?

 

The GR.7's have been so succesful in Afghanistan that they're numbers and extension have been increased as they are now backed up by GR.9's and because of their rapid deployment are the favoured support choice.

[rogue_blade]

I can't think why you would even consider mentioning A2A and GR.7 in the same statement?

 

The GR.7's have been so succesful in Afghanistan that they're numbers and extension have been increased as they are now backed up by GR.9's and because of their rapid deployment are the favoured support choice.

 

ya frost1e wtf....

[tflash]

It was of topic anyway so lets just scrap this statement. I guess I was overzealous in trying to make a point.

[Yellonet]

The best thing a mature individual can do in life is to (in as much a superior way as possible) put other people in their place when they're wrong about something on an internet forum.

[Force_Feedback]

Is the F-35 really inferior to the F-22 electronics-wise? Last time I heard something about the F-35 it was to have synthetic-aided vision ('transparent' cockpit), a helmet mounted display and one big primary flight display with all the stuff the pilot needs to know at that instance displayed. While the F-22 has not even a HMS. Which is unsurprising, as the F-22 is already more than 20 years old. The F-35 has a greater potential, even with its 60-70 mil. price tag (-A version).

And it's strange to compare the two in the air-air combat role as the F-22 was obviousely designed for that and only that from day 1. The F-22 is great to fight your invading China/Russia/Venezuela/Iran/whoeveryouthinkisathreattoyou, but face it, the likelyhood of such scenario equals that of the devil being visible in the WTC attacks. The F-35 is great on the other hand to do some real world missions; blow up 'terrorists/freedom fighters', and facing such threat is far more likely than some invasion from China, or whomever your politicians make you fear.