Originally posted by BlackWidow23
Why is it that whenever someone talks about how to beat an F-22 they always include ground radars and SAMS?
Well i suppose it's due to the reality that one attempts to gain air superiority over such things? What's the point of a air superiority fighter
that can not survive over the battle space it's supposed to gain superiority in? The F-22 is not required to win wars against the type of third world
country the US has been attacking the last few decades so why build it when it can be shown that it is simply not good enough to operate over the type
of defenses that it's supposed to defeat or at least negate?
Why are the Raptors always the first aircraft in no matter what? I can tell you something that a lot of people JUST DONT GET! THE F-22 is an
AIR SUPERIORITY FIGHTER. IT IS MEANT TO KILL AIRCRAFT.
Aircraft are meant to bomb people on the ground who are trying to kill your people on the ground ( i can't make it simpler than that) and figthers
are basically there to ensure that your bombers are not prevented from doing their jobs. Any aircraft thus must be one that can at least survive ( or
at least be deployed in sufficient numbers to flood the defenses) in and over the FEBA and if it can not do that it is quite useless. The
I think that it is UNBELIEVABLY unfair to talk about how to beat an F-22 and use ground radars in an argument. That is a whole other
There are only a few countries with sufficient forces to require the USA to operate fighters such as the F-22 and they both have ground radars which
the F-22 will have to operate over if it is to take part at all. At this time there is no way to make a stealth plane that can escape detection by
both low frequency ground radars and high frequency fighter one's and that is assuming that one is only using the forward quarter of the F-22 which
is obviously entirely unrealistic if the F-22 is to penetrate hostile airspace with fighters and radars on all sides.
1. We dont even know the top speed of the Raptor, we can only speculate within probably .5mach. So "superior speed" is not a fair argument
either, due to the fact that both aircraft's speeds are - and for 50 years will be - completely classified.
We don't know it's top speed but we know it's not going to be able to catch either a Su-27, Mig-29, Mig-31, or even a Mig-23 if their intent on
running away... We know that both the Su-27 and Mig-31 can go further, faster and stay their for longer and frankly we know that you have to be quite
daft to operate one F-22 instead of four or five Mig-31/Su-27's in the vain belief that 'they wont see me'.
Now that were being speculative and including ground radars and other such not-air-to-air things:
This this is not a video game where you can choose which factors you wish to consider. The intelligent folk among us consider the planes
specifications in terms of what, how and where it were claimed it could fight.
2. Why is it that whenever people talk about America vs Russia, they always assume its America attempting to invade Russia and gain
air-superiority over the Russian landmass?
Because that is a more likely scenario and basically because modern air defense are VERY mobile and will always be present near the forward edge of
It would probably be in europe, and getting Russia's roxorz air defense to cover europe is an incredibly difficult task.
The Russians have ballistic weaponry to destroy airfields and strategic targets so their planes are likely to operate over their air defense and not
far beyond. The same can obviously be said for the USAF but then the surface to air force levels are not comparable in either effectiveness or scale.
3. Even if Russia managed to move its air defense, keeping its aircraft under the SAM-UMBRELLA would be CRIPPLING to its air force. Syria
tried that a while back....it didnt work out too well.
Why would it be crippling? They are not as reliant on air support as the US so they really do not need to fight in enemy air space as the USAF might
be forced to. What dis Syria try and when?
[quote[ 4. SEAD and wild weasels are the first in, not the raptors.
Which is kind of pointless as the SEAD/DEAD aircraft needs protection; why else does the F-22 exist?
5. Why is it that everyone thinks that there will some how magically be a radar umbrella right below a stealth aircraft? While newer radars may
be able to detect and track a stealth aircraft over a cluster of radars maybe hundreds, tracking one on the edge of a SAM umbrella is much harder.
Actually radars from the 60's tracks modern stealth aircraft and they always have for obvious reasons. Why do you think stealth aircraft are so hard
to track and how , if that is the case, did the Serbs manage to target two F-117's accurately enough to write them off?
What kind of stupid commander would fly an air-superiority mission there? Its suicide. And it wont happen. You JUST...DONT FLY FIGHTERS ABOVE
A CLUSTER OF GOOD AIR DEFENSES!!
Then how are you going to protect your strike aircraft from enemy aircraft if they attempt to attack those air defenses?
it doesnt happen unless the air force commander is smoking SOMETHING wierd. Thats a great way to loose half a billion dollars in one
I think your missing the point; air superiority is hat you gain when you can successfully prevent the enemy air force from attacking your bomber
aircraft. Flying around mindlessly securing airspace where there is nothing to protect is entirely pointless.
6. So now that were giving Russia the advantage of hundreds of ground radars that just pop up under US fighters, I think I'll throw in some
PATRIOT systems. So now the F-22s have some ground radars on their side, coupled with their own far superior radar to the one in the Su-27.
There really is no magic involved here as a modern Russian, Chinese air defense regiment does in fact deploy dozens of tracking, fire control and
early warning radars which will be around and do have the capacity to data link into very large mutually supporting complexes. The US armed forces
deploys very few patriot batteries so neither the force concentrations or efficiency is comparable.
7. Excersises are very accurate. First of all, the F-15 is similar to the Su-27 in overall performance.
The Su-27 is in fact superior in most regards and you can once again get almost two for the price of one.
The pilots also have ten times the flight hours of Su pilots,
more often, they have better simulators,
more resitance to G-forces...in my opinion,
Whatever use this is in BVR combat...
if the F-15s with 1,000 hour pilots cant touch the F-22
If you set up the training in ways that prevents the F-15 pilots from performing anywhere near what their planes or experience and training allows
for.... How do you think the fiasco that was the Korean and Vietnam wars happened?
the Su-27s with 50 hour pilots dont have a chance in hell, even with hundreds of invisible ground radars that can track stealth
Just like the Vietnamese and North Korean pilots didn't not so long ago. I am sure some people are learning from history but i rarely notice them
8. If America tries to get air superiority over the russian homeland they will have a hard time. If Russia tries to get air superiority over
America they will have a hard time. If the two air forces meet over common battleground such as europe, they RuAF IS going to lose.
In a full scale war the USAF will in my opinion simply lose in their own skies or European skies and certainly Russian skies. The Russians simply have
too many advantageous in too many fields for the conclusions to be any different but i must admit that i am now looking far beyond their air forces or
even air defenses...
America has numbers and quality.
So does the Russians...
The F-15s are a check for basically anything Russia can dish out save for the Su-35s of which Russia has a ground total of 11.
Anything upwards of the Mig-23 and Su-27 can take on the F-15 and i don't know why anyone would argue to the contrary.
9. The F-22 has LPI radar...its designed specifically so the enemy WONT get a radar warning.
Low PROBABILITY of intercept and once again we( including you) should ask who's deciding what counts as low probability and under what circumstances.