has passive radar made stealth jets like F35 obsolete?

[Boagrius]

Not sure what any of the above has to do with the F35?

Russia hasn't had to directly fight a peer level adversary in a long time either (since WW2?) so I don't see that critique as valid. Certainly not a reason to dismiss the effectiveness of US designed platforms out of hand.

From my POV it seems as though Russia has developed some extremely potent capabilities in the EW space. I take it they have invested heavily in this area and we are seeing some of the fruits of that labour in Syria.

I think you will find that the same applies, though, to the US' development of VLO aircraft like the F35. The US are undoubtedly the world leaders not just in aircraft signature management, but also other important technologies such as compatible powerplants, datalinks, tactical aircraft AESA radars and so on.

I think the links Todjaeger has posted would make for excellent reading here...

 

[Stepan]

Not sure what any of the above has to do with the F35?

Russia hasn't had to directly fight a peer level adversary in a long time either (since WW2?) so I don't see that critique as valid. Certainly not a reason to dismiss the effectiveness of US designed platforms out of hand.

From my POV it seems as though Russia has developed some extremely potent capabilities in the EW space. I take it they have invested heavily in this area and we are seeing some of the fruits of that labour in Syria.

I think you will find that the same applies, though, to the US' development of VLO aircraft like the F35. The US are undoubtedly the world leaders not just in aircraft signature management, but also other important technologies such as compatible powerplants, datalinks, tactical aircraft AESA radars and so on.

I think the links Todjaeger has posted would make for excellent reading here...

My english is far from perfect, so apology if i´m not able to bring 100% of my words through.

The F35 is seen in Russia as a seriously flawed aircraft. The problem we see is, that it has very low agility and low performance in almost evry field.

The core problem seen here is, that this aircraft wanted to play evry aspect but infact ends failing in each aspect.

I believe the Syrian conflict is an opportunity for us to actively engange american hardware and test it for weakness and so far we do so quite effective i think.

Unfortunately we had not the chance yet to test the passive radar against the F35 yet, because the americans avoid such an encounter.

 

[Boagrius]

That perception of the F35 has been pushed by multiple sources in the west as well. Fortunately we have multiple defence professionals on this site who can help to differentiate the fact from fiction.

Be sure to notice that nobody on this site has patriotically rushed to the defence of the F35 to give an emotionally based response. What you WILL get is a circumspect insight into the reality of the jet. I am not a pro so I will leave the rest to them.

With that said I would encourage you to do the following:

- Read the links Todjaeger has provided thoroughly. They are very informative and you have been asked several times now.

- Consider the fact that the US and Russia have different military doctrines which has seen them invest in different areas over many years and in turn develop different strengths in terms of platform development.

- Consider that Russia has consequently developed significant capabilities in areas like electronic warfare, hypersonics/rocketry in general, various forms of artillery, deep diving submarines, explosive reactive armour... etc.

- Consider that in the mean time the US is has spent decades not just developing but widely fielding, testing, using and deploying VLO aircraft.

- Consider that the F35 is the latest development in that long line of endeavour and has been designed to function in the broader US doctrine of network centric warfare.

I think you will find that the F35 turning out to be such a dud is about as likely as you Russians developing a jammer that couldn't emit electromagnetic waves

 

[oldsig127]

The F35 is seen in Russia as a seriously flawed aircraft. The problem we see is, that it has very low agility and low performance in almost evry field.

The core problem seen here is, that this aircraft wanted to play evry aspect but infact ends failing in each aspect.

I take it that you didn't takethe time to read the links provided, or have been reading Kopp and Goon for background. The bald assertion that the F-35 has "very low agility and low performance in almost evry field" is disputable and you need to post at least a little proof

I believe the Syrian conflict is an opportunity for us to actively engange american hardware and test it for weakness and so far we do so quite effective i think.

Unfortunately we had not the chance yet to test the passive radar against the F35 yet, because the americans avoid such an encounter.

Or the Russians failed to detect it...

oldsig

 

[Stepan]

I will read it when i have time.

But it wouldnt be the 1st failed development. Just look at the european A400 military cargo aircraft. Billions invested but its an complete failure.
It suffers from same problem. Good ideas at first but then politics changed it again and again until a crippled product was delivered.

 

[Boagrius]

I'm sorry but the "failure" of the European A400M has literally nothing to do with the F35 - an aircraft that is already being fielded in the hundreds and procured by numerous highly professional air forces around the world who have all done their due dilligence on it.

Again, there are numerous individuals on this site who have relevant first hand experience with these things and they have contributed their knowlege on the matter in places like the links mentioned earlier as well as in the F35 thread itself. I'd suggest doing some more reading in these areas before you respond again on the subject.

It is starting to sound as though your mind is made up on the matter and you are now simply telling us about it. Unfortunately this approach probably won't be well received by members/mods on the forum who have contradictory professional experience to share, but alas, I will let them speak for themselves.

 

[steve33]

No, i can prove it:

Russia jams U.S. drones over Syria to stop airstrikes: Report

We jam US drones and aircrafts over Syria

Russia is jamming American drones in Syria, officials say

It looks like we jam the GPS signals.

As for the rocket strike against syrian targets, more than 70% of the rockets got jammed and intercepted

Most rockets in Western attacks on Syria were intercepted: Russia

From 103 rockets, we shot down 71.

Russia claims Syria air defences shot down 71 of 103 missiles

The fact that so many rockets were launched but almost zero damage was done and no military installations were hit, underlines this.

If so many of the US missiles were shot down there would be wreckage of the missiles all over Syria why hasn't the Syrian and Russian military provided photographic evidence to back up their claim.

There was footage of the Syrian SAM systems firing up to high altitude yet the US cruise missiles don't fly at high altitude they would fly at under 100 feet.

If the Russian systems were so great at shooting down the US missiles why would senior Russian leadership being talking about moving the s-300 into Syria when the systems that are there now are supposed to be doing such a great job.?

As for the F-35 you don't know anything about the aircraft except the propaganda you have heard about it and you really do show a contempt for US tech which is surprising considering the money and time they put into developing it and they have a track record of making some very good equipment.

 

[steve33]

I disagree in that.

You must take into consideration, that after Vietnam war USA never was in a real war anymore. USA did not fight any enemy who would have the ability, training and equipment to even remotely strike back. Panama, Grenada or Iraq in most parts are extreem poor 3rd world countries.

Since our country takes a more buff stance against USA, we learned alot and what we learned made our confidence rise. Most of the western weapon designs depend on psychological effect. In Syria we have the ability to actively work with american designs and test them.

We jam american aircrafts and disturb their electronics over Syrian airspace and it obviously became bad enough that the americans started to complain.

Other nations found the low performance in the recent airstrikes on Syria very interesting. We were able to jam and intercept over 70% of the western fired rockets.

Most what we see appears overengineered.

All you know is what you are feed by the Russian propaganda machine.

 

[Stepan]

If so many of the US missiles were shot down there would be wreckage of the missiles all over Syria why hasn't the Syrian and Russian military provided photographic evidence to back up their claim.

There was footage of the Syrian SAM systems firing up to high altitude yet the US cruise missiles don't fly at high altitude they would fly at under 100 feet.

If the Russian systems were so great at shooting down the US missiles why would senior Russian leadership being talking about moving the s-300 into Syria when the systems that are there now are supposed to be doing such a great job.?

As for the F-35 you don't know anything about the aircraft except the propaganda you have heard about it and you really do show a contempt for US tech which is surprising considering the money and time they put into developing it and they have a track record of making some very good equipment.

No need to get agressive buddy.

In russia we have the advantage to have acess to both propaganda machines. To ours as well as yours.

When we see how Trump made a huge wave for his planned attack and then we see the result...no mayor installation hit. The only damage reported is a broken university building and people in Damascus dancing in the streets.

We already have the S-300 in Syria and also S-400. It protects our military installations there. The new plans are, that we provide S-300 to Syria for themself now as well and we consider to deliver it also to Iran.

Since 2013 Russia decided to end the US world hegemony. And i think we do that quite sucessful, dont you think? Russia influence grows while US influence shrinks and is pushed back.

Russia was not only able to hold Assad in power but also to crush the american led rebellion. Russia also was sucessful to crack NATO, as Turkey now orientates towards Russia and Germany starts to break away from NATO as well.

Which leads back to the F35. Germany dismissed a purchase.

Of course the best PR stunt will be when we down a F35 in Syria. Until then, all we have is speculation.

In octobre 2017 an old S-200 propably damaged an israeli F35

Israel Is Hiding That Its State-Of-Art F-35 Warplane Was Hit By Syrian S-200 Missile - Reports

As for US tech, i think the Space Shuttle is a prime example for an utterly flawed design, where billions got spend for nothing.

 

[Preceptor]

Thread locked pending discussion among members of the Mod team. The discussion within this thread, specifically by the OP, is not at all in keeping with what is expected or desired here on DefenceTalk. Repeating the same assertion doesn't make it any more true the third time. Quoting news sources which cite a statement from a participant nation but don't (or can't) themselves verify independently isn't proof, it's just a repetition of the participant's claims. Lastly, it appears that the OP really has been more interested in this being a Russia vs. the West/US discussion and vs. discussions have no place here on DT.

In the meantime, read the linked posts and threads, as the content covers years of discussion about the capabilities and limitations of various LO platforms and sensor systems.
-Preceptor