[IceFire]

The F-35 does have stealth capabilties, and in fact I believe it will cost less than the F-22, although it lacks some of the more advanced features (supercruise being a major one I think).
And if the enemy can't see you, you can kill more with one aircraft than you could with ten

A question then, I know the three variants of the F-35 use the same materials, what percentage I dont know for sure but I heard is near 80%, since each variant serves a specifical role, do all of them present the same level of stealth or do they vary between variants?

I think its closer to 90% parts commonality.  The F-35A and F-35C are nearly the same except for the wings (the 35C having much larger ones for Navy ops) and the F-35B looks mostly the same as the F-35A externally.  I would expect that their stealth profiles will be similar.  The F-35C might have a slightly enlarged signature because of the wings but I'm not an expert on that so I don't know how much of a real world difference it would make.

[Mars]

I don't think the US gov wants people to know... that would sort of be asking for it.

[Kosh]

I have a question, when exactly is this going to be used in a real war?


Besides it doesn't matter, sooner or later SKYNET will come online and school our asses in the art of nuclear war anyway.

[Col. Fishguts]

I think its closer to 90% parts commonality.  The F-35A and F-35C are nearly the same except for the wings (the 35C having much larger ones for Navy ops) and the F-35B looks mostly the same as the F-35A externally.  I would expect that their stealth profiles will be similar.  The F-35C might have a slightly enlarged signature because of the wings but I'm not an expert on that so I don't know how much of a real world difference it would make.

On that note, if I have read correctly only the B variant (the one for the Marines) will have VTOL capability, right ?

I can see why the Air Force doesn't need VTOL, but it sure would come in handy for the Navy variant too. Is it too expensive for the Navy, or do they just not need it ?

[NGTM-1R]

Basically the VTOL option is nice, but not really necessary. VTOL launches require lighter weapons and fuel loads, and the F-35 is IIRC rather lighter then some of the other stuff that gets catapult-launched (Hawkeye and its cargo cousin the Greyhound) anyways. A lot of carrier air wings include a Marine squadron anyways, so if push comes to shove the option for VTOL takeoff would still be there if needed.

What I'm really curious about is if the proposed Osprey variant to take over from the SH-60 series is ever going to get off the ground.

[Tyrian]

The F-35 does have stealth capabilties, and in fact I believe it will cost less than the F-22, although it lacks some of the more advanced features (supercruise being a major one I think).

Both the F-22 and F-35 cost a small fortune.  But the F-22 is cheaper, I believe.  Of course, that's a relative term.  This info is old though...

Does the F-35 has any stealth capabilities? Honestly, how much worth is stealth today? The costs of the F-22 alone are absurd, the F-35 wont be cheap in any fo its versions as well and, IMO, inst taking down the enemy more important than not beeing seen?

Both the F-22 and F-35 have some stealth capability.  But the F-22 has a much more...interesting...form of stealth.  It can be fitted with a chameleon skin.  It works by having a series of photosensors embedded in the skin.  These sensors pick up the frequency of ambient light.  The color frequency is then sent to a computer when then runs a specific current through the chameleon skin.  The skin then changes color to match the surrounding environment.  The color can be adjusted by varying the current put through the skin.

Now the enemy can't see you, even if they are lucky enough to get on your six.

Never heard of that in all of the reading I've done on it...

It's not well publicized.  It was only recently declassified.  I have...connections...

I have a question, when exactly is this going to be used in a real war?

The F-22 is undergoing op eval right now.  It should be fully operational in a year or two.  Last deployment date I heard was sometime in late 2007.  The F-35 doesn't even fly...yet.  Curse my old info!

What I'm really curious about is if the proposed Osprey variant to take over from the SH-60 series is ever going to get off the ground.

Osprey variant?  Never heard about that...What is it?

[Unknown Target]

The F-35 does fly...there's quite a few videos showing it off.

[IceFire]

The X-35 has flown several times.  Its now been retired and is going to a museum somewhere. I forget which.  The F-35 has not yet flown but it will be in the next few months as I understand it.

The F-22 is far far far more expensive than the F-35.  The F-35 is, in general, meant to be like what the F-16 was when the F-15 was introduced.  The F-15 was expensive but the F-16 was cheap so they had a first and second rate fighter.  Ultimately what happened is the F-16's role expanded into ground attack and became a multi-role aircraft.  Its capabilities were impressive and it kept being expanded. I'd daresay that in some respects the F-16 is just as capable or moreso than the F-15.  Each has their place.

With the F-22 the concept is the same.  The F-22 is the premier out and out fighter.  The F-35 is a multirole attack platform perfect for the US forces but also for its allies.  Its a force multiplier basically because the F-35 uses some of the same datalink technology so American F-35s and F-22s operating alongside Allied F-35s get a massive combined overview of the battlefield.  Even aircraft not emiting radar (and thus not showing up on the RWR of the enemy aircraft) have the ability to track the enemy through the datalink.

I did some reading over the last few days.  The F-22 and F-35 to a lesser extent are more stealthy than the F-117.  The F-117 is barely stealthy in comparison to the new aircraft.  What neither F-22 nor F-35 have is full stealth against all bands of radar.  Advanced ground radar can still track them but aircraft radar cannot. Even with tracking, they are still difficult to lock.  So modern stealth warfare is not so much about being invisible but being a hazy shadow...if there are of shadows its going to take a while to try and sort them out.

Throw in some UAV's with similar signatures and you'll have a hell of a confusing mess of a radar screen.  Thats the idea.

[Unknown Target]

IIRC a Nighthawk would show up on radar with about the same signature as a seagull. The F-22 and -35 are probably similar.

[Janos]

IIRC a Nighthawk would show up on radar with about the same signature as a seagull. The F-22 and -35 are probably similar.

From what distance? 150km or 15km? Remember, stealth just reduces the range an aircraft can be spotted by radar.

Ice talked about advanced ground radar. The best way to detech stealth aircraft are long wavelenght radars - like 1950s stuff and so on! - but they are very large and practically immobile. The smaller radars have to be really powerful to "burn" through stealth and, because a radar can be spotted from greater distance than the radar itself can spot objects, it becomes painfully visible.

Then there's multistatic radars. And of course there are was to try to detech the IR signature, EM transmissions, air turbulunces or just the shape.

[Unknown Target]

All stealth aircraft have masked IR signatures. I'm suprised though, everyone's comparing these aircraft to the Nighthawk, why not the Spirit? I know the Spirit is actually a huge bomber, but it's more contemporary so it's a better comparison.

[Janos]

All stealth aircraft have masked IR signatures. I'm suprised though, everyone's comparing these aircraft to the Nighthawk, why not the Spirit? I know the Spirit is actually a huge bomber, but it's more contemporary so it's a better comparison.

Spirit is more contemporary; Nighthawk is closer, although still not very close, to the purpose of F-22 and F-35. You can compare how these planes would perform certain tasks, but that's about it.

[NGTM-1R]

Osprey variant?  Never heard about that...What is it?

They tentatively called it the SV-22, back before there was the ****storm over the Osprey's supposed lack of safety. It was to have taken over the role currently played by the SH-60F Oceanhawk, and may have eventually spread as far down as the Ticonderoga and Spruance classes. It would have offered greatly increased payload and flight time over the SH-60 series, including dipping sonar, nearly twice the store of sonobouys, twice the ordinance load (two Mk46/Mk50 vs four), real capability for surface attack (with a pair of Harpoon 1Cs instead of the puny Penguin Mk2s the SH-60s can carry), and a greater capablity for delivering cargo/personnel in VertRep.

I can't confirm its current status, but I think the program got axed. It may come back like the Osprey itself has though.

[Kosh]

The F-22 is undergoing op eval right now.  It should be fully operational in a year or two.  Last deployment date I heard was sometime in late 2007.  The F-35 doesn't even fly...yet.  Curse my old info!

I never asked when it would fly, I basically asked when it would actually intercept something other than a few billion dollars.

[Janos]

The F-22 is undergoing op eval right now.  It should be fully operational in a year or two.  Last deployment date I heard was sometime in late 2007.  The F-35 doesn't even fly...yet.  Curse my old info!

I never asked when it would fly, I basically asked when it would actually intercept something other than a few billion dollars.

F-22 is bought for two reasons:

1. To actually prevent a situation where it might be used in anger against other airplanes (deterrance), and
2) to preserve a technological edge, were some unforseen events suddenly to take place.
Things change fast, and that's why the armies generally like to have the most modern toys available - if something just goes terribly wrong, they have a trump card. Just in case.

[Kosh]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDt9KY0xDHY


This is equally cool, but it is far less expensive.

2) to preserve a technological edge, were some unforseen events suddenly to take place.
Things change fast, and that's why the armies generally like to have the most modern toys available - if something just goes terribly wrong, they have a trump card. Just in case.

On the flipside, where are they going to get funding for this when the economy collapses? It's only a matter of time before the Pentagon's budget has the rug pulled out from under it.

[Janos]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDt9KY0xDHY


This is equally cool, but it is far less expensive.

On the flipside, where are they going to get funding for this when the economy collapses? It's only a matter of time before the Pentagon's budget has the rug pulled out from under it.

This is exciting! Prove this.

edit: regarding Berkut:
This is somewhat an eternal debate which never ends. When Russian airplanes have as good fire control, comms, radars, EVERYTHING, then we're talking. Manouverability has precious little to do with modern air combat, especially if facing truly stealth platforms. Pretty much everything we know about most modern Russian airplanes is hype and speculation.

[Wanderer]

.... Pretty much everything we know about most modern Russian airplanes is hype and speculation.

Same goes for US tech as well.....

[Janos]

.... Pretty much everything we know about most modern Russian airplanes is hype and speculation.

Same goes for US tech as well.....

The same tech different states buy and use regularly, including Finland? US has some ridiculous tech that is nowhere near completion, but what the have is usually quite well-known and tested (most of their modern equipment is in use in several armies) and F-35 will/would/could be too (unless someone pulls the plug on the entire program).

The most well-known Russian export fighters are Su-27 series. This includes Su-30 and -33 and stuff like that. Those are the fighters we know and that are in active duty around the world. Based on what the western intelligence knows about them, they have impressive airframes and unprecented manouverability but in terms of electronics fall seriously behind their western counterparts.

Berkut is a testbed for various technologies, it is not scheluded for production or export, and if it ever were the changes would be drastic. It would be better to drool about MiG 1.44 which is still on prototype stage.

[Kosh]

This is exciting! Prove this

The program cost for the F-22 is something along the lines of $90+ billion....


The total debt is $8.5+ trillion, and $300 billion is going to be added to it again soon. It's only a matter of time before China stops bankrolling projects like this. When that happens, then what?

Based on what the western intelligence knows about them, they have impressive airframes and unprecented manouverability but in terms of electronics fall seriously behind their western counterparts.

True, then again nothing that a good old refit can't take care of.