Why does the F22 have a mostly flat bottom while the F35 does not?
also do you think the F35 is more or less stealthy than the F22 at this point?
Why does the F22 have a mostly flat bottom while the F35 does not?
Why does the F22 have a mostly flat bottom while the F35 does not?
also do you think the F35 is more or less stealthy than the F22 at this point?
No clue about the bottom design. In general I’d bet the 22 still rapes the 35…. Theirs a reason we sell the 35 and not the 22…
that is not why but ok.
it has nothing to do with the actual effectiveness on the coating.
it's about how hard it is to reproduce.
>Theirs a reason we sell the 35 and not the 22…
The reason is the 22 is a dedicated air-to-air fighter; it's an air superiority fighter and that's it's only job. It's the greatest dedicated fighter that's ever existed at this point - and if it had the data-sharing capabilities the 35 does, it'd be even better. The 35 is multi-roled and does many things pretty well. It's not as good a fighter as the 22, but it's a damn good ground attack plane.
Why is this relevant to why we sell it to allies? Simple. Air forces are incredibly expensive. The maintenance alone is a steep and constant cost that scales as the size of the air force grows. Training pilots takes a long time and a lot of money. Actually using an air force costs a ton (fuel& munitions). Most militaries can't afford large air forces if they can afford one at all - which means they'll have fewer planes. When you can't afford many planes, it behooves you to purchase planes that perform multiple roles. It streamlines inventory, supply, and logistics. It simplifies training, it simplifies maintenance, and it grants greater flexibility. All of that allows the smaller militaries to get more for the money. Makes way more sense than buying uber-expensive dedicated air superiority fighters that nullify or make cumbersome your ability to air-to-ground attacks
Car analogy is an easier way to describe it.
Everybody wants a car that goes fast. It's always helpful for your car to carry a lot of stuff or tow. You may also want to drive with a family or a large friend group. Maybe you want to offroad.
A rich guy will have a sports car, a truck, a limo, a dune buggy, and anything else they could want to do their favorite automotive activities. For the average person, this is unsustainable. If you really like doing all of these things but aren't pulling firm 6 figures, you'd probably get one SUV with a high HP engine. Now you can do all the stuff you could reasonably see yourself needing a car for, just not nearly as effective at any of them as a dedicated vehicle.
Okay
>food analogy
You also forgot to mention that the USA isn't particularly interested in letting anyone else have the ability to have unchallenged air superiority. Even nations that are our allies and can theoretically afford it (ie, brits) could be off the table as the US may simply want to remain unchallengeable in the skies
Also a very good concurrent point
>the 22 is a dedicated air-to-air fighter; it's an air superiority fighter and that's it's only jo
It's first combat mission was dropping JDAMs in Syria
They sell it because it's a joint strike fighter, meaning countries outside the USA already have it anyway since they helped build it, so sell more. F22 is US derived only and thus ITAR and other stuff restricted.
I'd say current block F-35's are stealthier. F-22 doesnt even have DSI
You really think we’d sell a plane to anyone if we didn’t have a fighter in inventory capable of reliably shooting it down? Anon allies change.
They probably have backdoors in all those exported f-35s
And they probably know exactly what the odds of taking down a flight of them with an f22 are…
most countries that operate the F-35 are still dependent on us to keep it running because they don't have the keys to unlock its DRM. we only shared that capability with two other countries, the brits (it's cool cause they do whatever we say) and the israelis (it's cool cause we do whatever they say)
>most countries that operate the F-35 are still dependent on us to keep it running because they don't have the keys to unlock its DRM
we also hold their parts hostage too, pretty slick system tbh
kind of difficult to hold parts hostage when a bunch of them are produced and stored in european warehouses.
it would work on thirdie countries, but not the ones actually involved in it's construction.
>kind of difficult to hold parts hostage when a bunch of them are produced and stored in european warehouses.
>it would work on thirdie countries, but not the ones actually involved in it's construction.
you might be right, the dutch tried to with hold their f35 parts for fear of later being accused to fueling war crimes perpetrated by israel,
but the US took them to court at the hague, and guess what
>the parts went to israel
>he's still seething about israel
wew lad
>us owned warehouse
>us parts
>located in the Netherlands
It takes a true moron to be wrong about basically everything
how do people keep running in the same moronic circles for decades
the US has two tools for dealing with a suddenly hostile country that they sold a lot of nice airplanes to
>major control over the flow of spare parts
>two of the three largest air forces on earth manned by pilots who get more training and flight hours than anyone else
bu bu bu backdoors it's called an aim-120
>bu bu bu backdoors it's called an aim-120
based
Waste of fuel and munitions. No need for a backdoor of any kind when you can just revoke thier software license and brick the plane.
moronic boomer homosexual
Exactly. The "backdoor" is the maintenance contract from Lockheed Martin. good luck maintaining that stealth coating without them. I feel like the gov isn't dumb enough to put a backdoor into fighter jets as that would be such a massive vulnerability.
f22 was built in a time when we didn't struggle with recruiting.
f35 is.
so they made f35 belly sexier.
Sex sells.
but who's buying
me
>mostly flat bottom
disgusting
When you title your RFP "Fat Amy" what sort of proposals do you think you will get?
Badonkadonk
Advancements in digital solvers for ugly differential equations. F-117 is all straight lines and sharp angles because calculating curved stealthy shapes was beyond the capability of the computers of the day. F-22 gets more complex shaping because 90s computers could do more CFD and signature prediction. F-35 shape benefits from finer mesh sizes, faster parallel processing, better optimization solvers, etc. All of this pushes out the pareto front between stealthiness and aerodynamics, so the F-35 shape is presumably stealthier than the F-22 shape, more aerodynamically optimal, or both.
Advancement in materials and manufacturing methods also plays a role, once designed the shape has to actually be built within tolerance at scale.
unpopular answer is that it is aerodynamic compromise.
the engineers were trying to keep the cord from ballooning too much with two weapon bays that could hold a JDAM and AMRAAM each. The A and C variants are compromised to for commonality with the B.
It's a proven fact that the F-22 is stealthier than the F-35. Not a point for argument, even. The difference is objective and measurable and has been verified.
>It's a proven fact that the F-22 is stealthier than the F-35.
Huh? By what metrics is the F-22 stealthier than the F-35?
>Not a point for argument, even.
I disagree, as does the DoD, AF, and LM. This was only a contention during the early years of the JSF program. Based on misconceptions and assumptions of aviation "experts". Once the AF and LM started opening up a little with the stealth features were incorporated into the F-35, it was clear the F-35 was stealthier, using more advanced features that were improved from what the F-22 pioneered.
The F135 in the F-35 and the F119 have the stealth augmentors (after burner spray bars).
>Pratt points out that the F119 and F135 are the only production engines with stealthy augmentors. Their design eliminates conventional spray bars and flame holders and integrates multi-zone reheat fuel injection into curved vanes that block the line-of-sight to the turbine.
https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/p-w-confirms-stealthy-augmentors-of-f119-f135.12335/
The F-35 is stealthier than the F-22, having an RCS of 0.0001m^2. Especially when you add in the all composite body panel with "baked in" Carbon Nanotube (CNT) RAM that the F-22 lacks.
>Hostage caused a stir in late spring when, in press interviews, he said the F-35 would be stealthier than the F-22...“I would say that General Hostage is accurate in his statement about the simple stealthiness of the F-35 [with regard] to other airplanes”
https://www.airandspaceforces.com/article/The-F-35-on-Final-Approach/
>The F-35 also has excellent RAM bonded to the composite panels, making it extremely difficult to detect - if not impossible.
>The composite absorbs radar in a frequency range from about 0.10 Megahertz to about 60 Gigahertz. The CNT-infused fiber material forms a first layer that reduces radar reflectance and a second layer that dissipates the energy of the radar.
>Radar absorbing composite materials of the present invention are particularly effective, for example, in the L- through K-band as described herein further below.
https://patents.google.com/patent/US20100271253
https://www.ineffableisland.com/2010/06/lockheed-martin-discloses-carbon.html
https://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=197759
https://www.key.aero/forum/modern-military-aviation/136859-advanced-in-ram-make-low-frequency-radar-much-less-effective-in-future
https://theaviationist.com/2020/07/05/new-and-old-f-35-coatings-compared-in-recent-photo-of-two-italian-lightning-ii-jets/
https://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=60&t=53014
This is why it's insane to me that we're open to selling this aircraft to a place with such heavy concentration of enemy nation spies (Singapore). We're basically giving the Chinese F-35 reverse engineering basis for free if we do that
another important thing that people tend to neglect is the amount of effort required to upkeep a certain amount of radar stealth. i'd wager there's a difference between a stealth jet that has just had it's coating re-applied and one that is about to have it's coating re-applied. both might take a certain amount of time to reach the point where that's a necessity, and the F35's more durable coating and easier appliance of coating means it's probably going to be getting the most out of it's coating more often than the F22.
(PS to all the people that whine about the F22 pictures with cracked coating, those are airshow F22's)
>and the F35's more durable coating and easier appliance of coating
its not a "coating" its baked in during manufacture,
thats why it turns to shit at sea
hey look he's back from his crying session.
you can speak actual english again, impressed at your recovery.
airperson rodriguez!
good morning!
"another day, another dollar" as they say
>he's going to spend another whole day seething about how good the F35 is while i sit here watering my plants
please do that would be hilarious.
hey guys did you know helmettard doesn't actually know what samegayging is?
lmao
>helmetard in an f35 thread
Just couldn't pass it up could you.
i made this thread as bait. he was too moronic to resist further embarrassment.
HNGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG
only when the F35 is wearing the reflector spats.
My uninformed guess it that it has all sorts of spooky sensors and stuff protruding from the body frame, and the exterior skin accomodates to them in aerodynamic shapes.
lmfao, the f22 has to be refuelled by the boom,
so no F18 buddy refuel for it, no wacky stealth drone refuel, none of that
f22 is essentially worthless combat wise, on these grounds alone
It was made for a single purpose, an air war in central Europe against the Soviet Union. The moment the Soviet Union collapse it became pointless
>It was made for a single purpose, an air war in central Europe against the Soviet Union
brilliant, so make it soley dependent on huge tankers to refuel it, one at a time no less, thanks to the boom.
again,
the F22 not being able to accept "buddy-stores" or the drogue refueling probe is 99% of the reason the plane is obsolete, and was replaced by the f35
perhaps the greatest boondoggle of the f22 was the boom refueling method, uttterly doomed the plane
I guess the F-16, F-15 and every other plane used by the USAF including the F-35A is obsolete, because buddy refuelling lets pilots stay in the air at peak performance for 3000 hours before landing. That’s why the F-35B/C are the most common variants and the only F-22 users are ANG chumps who spend every day praying they’ll be granted the privilege of flying leftover Canadian hornets.
But tell me more about the Raptor’s unknown yet crippling weaknesses, such as it’s lack of a HMCS, square nozzles and optimized IWBs you enlightened folk love to repeat.
if it needs the boom, ITS FRICKED in any sort of "hot" scenario
pretty sure israel converted some of their f15's to the drogue/probe for this very reason, but I have no idea if they ever finished that project, or if it was just an idea
>Look how flat she is! God damn, that's hot.
The door bays are shaped like that to fit in the munitions.
>lust provoking image
>lust provoking statement
F35 is way smaller. And stealth is not what you see but what the radar see.
Each stealth plane has been built with better and better computers.
Do you remember how the f-117 looked?