Via Wired.com...
Instead, the U.S. military’s main flying branch has turned to an older jet that, with upgrades, could prove to be an even better J-20-killer than the newer, more expensive F-22. That’s right: the Boeing F-15 Eagle, one of the stars of the 1991 Gulf War, is quickly shaping up as America’s main countermeasure to China’s new fighter for the next 20 years.Read the whole thing if you haven't already...but my question is this. Does this mean that stealth is already dead?
If AESA radars are that capable then give me a big motor, tons of gas, 14 conformal missiles, HMD and an AWACS with that same radar and lets ditch the cost of stealth!
I was watching stealth when I should have been paying attention to the electronics that are being developed for the next gen fighters.
This is awesome and a little annoying.
If stealth isn't the big boy on the block now then that means that old school fighter pilot rules are back in vogue (with the caveat that the fight will probably be all BVR...I mean heck...why allow an enemy to close if you can detect them, launch your missiles and break contact because of modern electronics).
I sure hope he does a follow up article.
The main point here was that the F-15 has more space in the nose for a bigger and more powerful AESA front plate than the Raptor, hence it can tank it much better.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately this has been one of APA's main arguments for F-22 vs F-35 ie: F-35 has a much smaller radar plate than even the Raptor and is thus 'inferior'. The idea LM has always pitched was that better transistors and back end processing would negate the size quotient, but this particular move on the F-15 at least seems to validate the size issue for now.
Outside of that the F-15 pilots must be pretty chuffed about their birds being front line warriors for the conceivable future, although I'm not to sure about the whole battle strategy that Axe outlined, with Eagles up front and Raptors with sensors off sneaking behind...shouldn't it be the other way round? Surely the Raptors being undetectable should put them up front with Eagles scanning from behind and presenting a further target???...What do you think Sol?
Solomon:
ReplyDeleteYou need bough if you have a airframe witch have smaller radar cross area, you will need less energy to hide it from the enemy.
Thats means that you could go deeply into enemy territory.
Lets not forget as well the L band radars you can not feet them into the nose of an fighter (actually the Russians are trying to fit them onto the wings of the sukhoi 35) but still are becoming increasingly efficient to detect stealth objects of the size of a fighter.
Guillermo
Eagles can house a big radar, but they are also big radar targets - even after a Silent Eagle conversion.
ReplyDeleteAnd it's nice if an Eagle can see further, but so can (modernized) Flankers, PAKFA and (eventually) J-20.
And ofcourse stealth isn't just for air-to-air; there are these things called S-300/-400 and AESA-equipped ships and your run-of-the-mill surveillance radars.
i think in the article Axe says Eagle teamed up with VLO Raptor....
ReplyDeleteEagle does have a larger nose cone, better cooling and larger weapon & fuel load.
Solomon: Read what the article said. They're talking about detecting the J-20. That's done with a bigger radar. One's own RCS is irrelevant in *detecting* a stealth aircraft as it's all about the radar. The F-15 has a bigger nose than the F-22 so it can carry a bigger AESA. That has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with survivability. Depending on the RCS of the J-20 you could get a situation where the Eagle could detect the J-20 before the Raptor but itself be detected WELL before the Raptor was thus being more vulnerable to the J-20. This has been shown time and again with F-22s regularly eating the lunch of AESA-equipped F-15s in training. In fact, the F-15 and F-22 would likely operate in teams, with the team taking advantage of the F-15's larger radar and the F-22's ability to get in undetected. Better yet, just put the damn cheek arrays in the F-22 and the whole thing becomes moot.
ReplyDeleteAlso, the comment "stealth is dead" suggests an inaccurate understanding of how stealth works. Stealth isn't an ON/OFF thing and a smaller RCS will always be advantageous over a larger one.
-sferrin
Each AESA-equipped modernized legacy can bring 8 (F15) to 12 (F18EFG) AIM120D to the fight; when teamed up with VLO aircraft, it would be a formidable armada esp against a quantitatively superior opponent. Forget the "B-1R" shit.
ReplyDeleteNow don't get too excited. Remember: Davis Axe is a 'journalist' with all the commensurate technical background and understanding that accompanies the title. By a happy co-ink-a-dink, I just posted a bit on 'Stealth References' yesterday. Check out the links.
ReplyDeleteRemember: the purpose of LO is to NOT be 'invisible': It is to break the kill chain early and often.
There's a new airborne radar battle shaping up between the major players right now pushing for next-gen upgrade work, and the ‘marketeers’ are going at it hot and heavy. There is already a (relative) handful of F-15s (Cs?) with AESAs and the AF has wanted to put it on more F-15s for a while. IMHO, their REAL value is in their primary (as in WHY it they were funded and fielded) purpose: finding from above those small, stealthy targets, especially cruise missiles flying low level in the ground clutter.
Stealth is not dead as such but F35 went all or nothing on stealth and as stealth puts great limitations on the airframe the question is what happens to a airfoce equiped with F35 plane that might be undetectable to 40nm to a 4th gen fighter now but in 10-20years becomes detectable at 80-100nm to that same 4th gen fighter that can out preform it in all other fields at the same time the airframe might not have much growth potential left.F22 on other hand is not an one trick pony like F35, has the speed advantage to dictate terms of aircombat while F35 is dangerously slow.
ReplyDelete"Anonymous" the F-35 is far less of a "one trick pony" than the F-22. Let's see an F-22 take off and land on an aircraft carrier or perform a vertical landing. Let's see it aquire and attack ground targets on it's own. Where is the F-22's IRST? Laser designator? Getting the idea?
ReplyDelete-sferrin
Axe's journalism style has rarely, if at all, been critiqued being "that" biased.
ReplyDeleteIt's quite likely that [Golden] Eagles and Raptors will take terms being the spotter and shooter in future air war.
A few months ago a report came out saying that, while they try to modernize their A-D Eagle to Ra'am/I standard, Israeli engineers realized that F15's airframe has been structurally overbuilt. Anyway, glad to hear that USAF too plans to fly the big bird for a few more decades.
@ Whoever
ReplyDeleteYou might as well say that M1126 Stryker is far less of a "one trick pony" than M1 Abrams MBT.
Per my-toy-is-better-than-yours "power play" - between military equipments built for entirely different purposes, we can safely say that one is well "out the other's league." Pointless, isn't it?
i've tired of the F-35 vs. F-22 debate.
ReplyDeletethe F-22 has shorter legs than the F-35...
the F-35's stealth isn't as good as the F-22's...
you get the point.
lets stay on track here guys.
F-22 is a hangar queen. It unlikely the US can get the operational numbers to battle. F-15e and F-35 will be doing the bulk of the work.
ReplyDeleteI'm surprised that I read this in the Danger Room on Friday, this was discussed on Ares last April
ReplyDeletehttp://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog:27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post:39df4196-72dd-4601-b2ec-7784bff0ffc6
i did too dushan,
ReplyDeletebut that article came out without things being put in the context of the j-20 and PAK-FA as being threats to US air dominance.
i've pounded on the USAF but Anonymous is right (i didn't want to go there...) the F-35 and the F-15 will be the airplanes doing this fight.
Sounds like someone has been 'feeding a tame journalist' to me. Tame f coyrse equalling clueless.
ReplyDeleteThe size and power of an individual fighter radar is irrelevant compared to the power of AWACS, AEGIS and ground based radar systems like the TPS-77 and the network that will join these systems providing a 'greater than the sum of the parts' system.
The idea that J-20's will only be detected and killed by fighters (in some sort of 1v1 engagement scenario) with even larger radar and missile systems, is typical of the simplistic and completely out of touch thinking, exemplified by APA.
We are not fighting World War One air battles any longer. NO-ONE fights this way and thinking it is so, simply shows the limitations of those that think this way.
The inclusion of large and powerful radar systems is an attempt to keep the platform relevant in a modern environment. A more imprtant upgrade is the inclusion of modern data-linking capabilities on the F-22 but notice that barely gets a footnote?
Demonstrates perfectly the limitations in thinking! Even if one has to break it down to simplistic 'power' comparisons, how can you possibly think that a fighter radar that can detect an LO aircraft at 70nm (for arguments sake) is going to make the slightest bit of difference in the overall scheme of things, when AWACS aircraft are detecting them at 170nm or more and are handing off this targetting data, more than 100nm before the fighter even has a chance of detecting the other fighter?
Is there something stopping a CFT equipped Eagle from being an AMRAAM truck? The Strike Eagles have a boatload of hardpoints and are stressed for huge loads so why not carry 10-12 of the bad boys into combat? At BVR the turning radius and G stress will hardly matter...
ReplyDeletegood point. i can see that as a more likely outcome than the mythical B-1R.
ReplyDeleteI don't know what the max load would be but 12 sounds kinda high...time for a google search.