Dogfights of Fifth Gen. Aircraft

[Grand Danois]

To make a more relevant example, when examining an engagement between a 4th gen. and a 5th gen., you have to take into account all the other factors. So for example lets say we have a squadron of 4th gen. Flankers MKIs or the like, defending a target that a unit (lets say less then a full squadron) of F-35's is heading towards. The Flankers have extensive GCI, with redundant radar coverage of the immediate vicinity, a handful of theater/division level SAMs, and plenty of tac-SAMs, coupled with volumes of MANPADS and guided AAA (yes I know how little it can do in most cases), and an AWACS. All of a sudden, if the radar coverage manages to detect the inbound Lightnings, potentially even get targetting data, then all of a sudden we have a situation where the JSF could find itself outmatched on a system level, even though on a platform level they're quite clearly superior to the Flankers.

That's an enormous amount of hardware, infrastructure, personnel, just to slow down an inferior number of stealth fighters.

Attacking "4th gens" would suffer instantaneous disruption/obliteration.

Stealth = asymmetry.

And the F-35 is also part of a system - they don't come alone.

 

[Feanor]

That's an enormous amount of hardware, infrastructure, personnel, just to slow down an inferior number of stealth fighters.

Attacking "4th gens" would suffer instantaneous obliteration.

Stealth = asymmetry.

And the F-35 is also part of a system - they don't come alone.

I know this, and I would hope you know I know this. I was simply trying to produce a simple and understandable example within the context of the discussion. And yes naturally if you're a generation (or more) behind in terms of the hardware you have, it takes far more of it, and quite a bit of luck, to achieve similar results.

 

[Grand Danois]

I know this, and I would hope you know I know this. I was simply trying to produce a simple and understandable example within the context of the discussion. And yes naturally if you're a generation (or more) behind in terms of the hardware you have, it takes far more of it, and quite a bit of luck, to achieve similar results.

See your PM.

 

[ReAl PrOeLiTeZ]

well 5th vs 5th doesnt always =dogfight. If it was this kind of thinking then when the 4th generations came out it would be 4th vs 4th=dogfight. Honestly it wasn't it was still BVR engagment of who had superior radar and AAM. So when it is 5th vs 5th, the engineers will finds some way of tracking the stealth fighter down, and engage from distance. Their is always a counter balance to most scenarios.

 

[icekid]

Well F-117 was shot down once by a SAM http://www.defenceaviation.com/2007/02/loss-of-first-stealth-ever.html

 

[Todjaeger]

Well F-117 was shot down once by a SAM http://www.defenceaviation.com/2007/02/loss-of-first-stealth-ever.html

There is nothing particularly new about the linked story. One could perhaps consider it a cautionary tale about the limits to signal management and that "stealth" does not mean invisible or invulnerable. Or put more simply, do not be an idiot when conducting mission planning and have fly aircraft along the same route three nights in a row...

-Cheers