Best fighter today to face against F-22 Raptor?

RSS
Email

0 Kudo

Author	Comment
Desertfox.historypolitics...		#51	[-]
Registered Member Posts: 59 (29-Apr-2008 07:35:41) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Is that before or after a Super Hornet knocks the Tomcat out of the sky long before it has any chance to spot the SuperBug? Also, which MiG-31 systems are you proposing? The Zaslon radar is too big for the F-14 to carry. How exacly is the Super Whorenet going to hide? The Tomcat is not exacly stealthy, but a bombed up SH is hardly better. The Tomcat at least 'hides' its weapons, the SH has them hanging all over the place. That said I doubt even a F-14A is going to have problems detecting a SH before getting into the SH AMRAAM range. The Tomcat doesn't even have to advertise its around, it can use IR and TV while keeping its radar 'silent'. As for MiG-31: datalink. Allow the Tomcats to talk to each other and they won't have problems detecting even 'stealth' aircraft. There's a very simple way to defeat stealth, just have your transmitter and receiver in different places. The reciver will pick up the backscatter. If you were the US, how would you counter the Iranian Tomcats? The range makes it a killer. B-52s will get slaughtered, carrier air strikes with Whorenets don't have the range. That leaves unsuported B-2s strikes, supported B-1Bs, or massed F-15Es from Iraq... Of course I can; I'm an aerodynamicist . emc, you should have a bumper sticker made up with that on it. lol Raises hand Where can I get one? I'll definately be needing one in about 3 years or so!
Gernsback		#52	[-]
Posts: 235 (29-Apr-2008 08:23:34) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Just as a courtesy, would you please refrain from terms such as "Whorenet"? I find such vile rather annoying and pointless. How exacly is the Super Whorenet going to hide? The Tomcat is not exacly stealthy, but a bombed up SH is hardly better. Without actual data on RCS measurements, it's impossible to say, but if memory serves the F-14 Tomcat has the largest RCS of any fighter. I also doubt that the various bombs/fuel tanks will increase the frontal RCS beyond a few square meters. Certainly not onto the order of a F-14 Tomcat. That said I doubt even a F-14A is going to have problems detecting a SH before getting into the SH AMRAAM range. AIM-120D isn't exactly short ranged. Between RCS and ECM I doubt an Iranian Tomcat would be aware that it was entering the lethal zone of a Super Hornet (not to mention the likely degradation of the Iranian AWG-9 by now). The Tomcat doesn't even have to advertise its around, it can use IR and TV while keeping its radar 'silent'. And it's not going to find squat with that either. As for MiG-31: datalink. Allow the Tomcats to talk to each other and they won't have problems detecting even 'stealth' aircraft. There's a very simple way to defeat stealth, just have your transmitter and receiver in different places. The reciver will pick up the backscatter. Which works great until you try and solve the problems of integrating said backscatter (you'll only be receiving a partial bit of it as well) plus the absorption of much of the energy such that the range would still be greatly reduced. If you were the US, how would you counter the Iranian Tomcats? The range makes it a killer. B-52s will get slaughtered, carrier air strikes with Whorenets don't have the range. That leaves unsuported B-2s strikes, supported B-1Bs, or massed F-15Es from Iraq... I'd TLAM the bases. But if you insist on air to air, well I'll simply point out that an ancient F-14A with known electronics is no match for a Super Hornet (which does have the range, incidentally, unless you care to leave most of Iran unprotected; in any event, air to air refueling will certainly be available especially thanks to the Super Hornets tanker capability). Where would you like to argue the superiority of the F-14A? BVR it has an ancient and by now easily jammed radar vs the APG-79. AIM-7E against AIM-120C-7 or AIM-120D. WVR you have AIM-9P against AIM-9X with the JHMCS. I'll also point out that the Super Hornets would have Hawkeye support, but that's not needed for them to completely crush the IRIAF Tomcats.
Zen9		#53	[-]
Posts: 3481 (29-Apr-2008 13:48:22) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Exactly how is TLAM going to successfuly penetrate in sufficient numbers a full functioning AD system? Are we talking massive waves of the things here? Mark you I would'nt say the Iranain F14s are that available since its about one flight and then seven days of maintenence last I heard per plane. Now Iran is unlikely to have the program in place to develope the sort of radar technology we're talking about, but the UK through BAE Systems is in fact doing just this, 'distributed radar' with a reciever in one location and the transmitter in another. Trails where undertaken a few years ago.
drunknsubmrnr		#54	[-]
Posts: 1317 (29-Apr-2008 15:47:16) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	There isn't an operational multi-static radar in the world today, and even if there were it's only designed to defeat first-generation LO (ie F-117). Later generations of LO diffuse the returned signal in so many directions you'd need to carpet the ground and air with receivers. Kevin
Gernsback		#55	[-]
Posts: 236 (29-Apr-2008 16:32:25) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Exactly how is TLAM going to successfuly penetrate in sufficient numbers a full functioning AD system? Are we talking massive waves of the things here? They don't have a full functioning AD system. Here is the Iranian SAM network. MIM-23 HAWK is the only thing that will be of use against a TLAM and there aren't exactly all that many of them.
JBren1		#56	[-]
Posts: 193 (29-Apr-2008 19:55:53) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Zen9 wrote: Exactly how is TLAM going to successfuly penetrate in sufficient numbers a full functioning AD system? Actually, though there's nothing revolutionary about a non-stealthy subsonic cruise missile like a TLAM, it's questionable there's any actual AD system in the world could knock down a large % of a typical attack by several dozen of them. A lot of AD discussions seem to neglect that the earth is curved. The simple fact the missiles fly at low altitude means only a system with continuous AEW coverage, controlling continously patrolling look-down/shoot-down capable fighters can comprehensively deal with such a threat, and there are few if any countries with enough suitable AEW planes and interceptors to maintain such patrols continuously over the whole area they have to defend, Iran certainly isn't one. And knock down most of them is what you have to do. Consistently knocking down 1% per sortie of manned air attacks would be a nasty surprise for US air arms compared to their recent experience, 10% a disaster, but not nearly enough against a wave of TLAM's. Particular targets can be point defended effectively by SAM's against one or a few missiles but again if lots of targets there won't be enough SAM systems, if a few targets there'll be more than a few missiles attacking pretty much simulaneously from various angles, not hard to do with the later TLAM's and then it's not not real-world likely most would be downed. And of course it's artificial to assume an attack would be just by cruise missiles without other forms of attack to confuse and mess up the AD situation at the same time. The best defense against TLAM's is to move stuff underground or otherwise hide it, or move it around 'inside' the retargetting cycle of the missiles, which is quite doable for many potential targets though not all. Joe
Craiglxviii	Legal spares support	#57	[-]
Posts: 82 (29-Apr-2008 20:34:52) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	emc, there you have hit the nail on the head! For 2 years I helped keep the Greek Air Force's UH-1's flying with no LEGAL spares support! And ditto the ME-109's flying for the IAF's Historic Flight...! Illegally, it's perfectly easy to obtain- for a price- just about anything you want, whether it's an RTBS for aN L188's 501 D13 engine in Nepal (don't ask!) to an MLG actuator for a Citation in the Aujstralian Outback. Knowing something about how the global aviation support & spares industry works- and indeed how resourceful the Russkies were/ are in reverse engineering- I don't find it hard at all to believe that the Iranians have found a way to keep some, if not all of their F-14 fleet flying and combat-ready. Sir Humphrey: Minister, Britain has had the same foreign policy objective for at least the last 500 years: to create a disunited Europe. In that cause we have fought with the Dutch against the Spanish, with the Germans against the French, with the French and Italians against the Germans, and with the French against the Germans and Italians. Divide and rule, you see. Why should we change now when it's worked so well?
emc		#58	[-]
Posts: 3715 (29-Apr-2008 21:22:37) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Craiglxviii wrote: emc, there you have hit the nail on the head! For 2 years I helped keep the Greek Air Force's UH-1's flying with no LEGAL spares support! And ditto the ME-109's flying for the IAF's Historic Flight...! Illegally, it's perfectly easy to obtain- for a price- just about anything you want, whether it's an RTBS for aN L188's 501 D13 engine in Nepal (don't ask!) to an MLG actuator for a Citation in the Aujstralian Outback. Knowing something about how the global aviation support & spares industry works- and indeed how resourceful the Russkies were/ are in reverse engineering- I don't find it hard at all to believe that the Iranians have found a way to keep some, if not all of their F-14 fleet flying and combat-ready. ...I used to work for the US aerospace and defense industry. One story I heard was of people calling up my employer for spares support and giving engine s/n that either didn't exist or had been reported as scrapped. In both cases, the engines had been built from illegally obtained spares. Another was of a (US) airline, which is (thank God!) out of business which used its copies of some drawings to get parts made at a local machine shop. Except the airline's brilliant management (hey, they probably got big bonuses...) neglected to tell the machine shop that the part had to be made of a specially heat-treated, high alloy steel (18-8ph, I think) not some off the shelf low-carbon stuff. Yes, people paid for the flight that crashed killing them. Unfortunately, none of the executives got sent to death row.
Zen9		#59	[-]
Posts: 3483 (30-Apr-2008 00:33:51) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	In terms of a TLAM attack it all depends, and numbers is the key question. How many TLAM per target? How many Targets? How far away from the country containing these targets is the launchers? AD system How many radars? How many AEW aircraft? How many fighters? How many SAMs on how many launchers? how many command and control centers? How big is the country? How many TLAM guarentee a hit per target assuming X% fail in flight, Y% are shot down by the AD system (fighters and SAMs) and Z% fail to detonate? How much damage on a target is required to fullfill that mission criteria? How many failures to achieve said criteria for the target list denotes a failure of the attack? TLAM is no magic bullet against a functional AD system it alone is no guarentee of success, but as part of a larger assault it fullfills a very useful set of functions. The alternative is of course to use lots of them, but how many guarentees that success without any supporting systems in the assault, is the next question and that provokes a cost/result question, "is it the most efficient use of resources to achieve the result". An AD system is not just SAMs, or even AAA, its also the fighters available to be directed against such incomming attackers. "system" is the key phrase there.
seasick		#60	[-]
Posts: 4623 (30-Apr-2008 05:25:39) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	. . . Another was of a (US) airline, which is (thank God!) out of business which used its copies of some drawings to get parts made at a local machine shop. Except the airline's brilliant management (hey, they probably got big bonuses...) neglected to tell the machine shop that the part had to be made of a specially heat-treated, high alloy steel (18-8ph, I think) not some off the shelf low-carbon stuff. Yes, people paid for the flight that crashed killing them. Unfortunately, none of the executives got sent to death row. Figures. Decisionaters usually don't.

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Yuku free message boards

Best fighter today to face against F-22 Raptor?

Quick Reply