57 replies to this topic

[Umbrella Secrets]

If the F-35 and the F-22 battle each other which one do you think would win?

Edited by U-W-SAtomicarmy, 13 March 2008 - 02:12.

[Cuppa]

I'm thinking F-22 because it is going to become the Army's next air superiority fighter.

[CommanderJB]

The F-35 is basically a single-engined, 'export-quality' version of the F-22. There are of course many differences but they are both 5th-generation, both incorporate stealth technology, and are both built by co-operating U.S. armament firms. The big change is that the F-35 is built as a multi-role aircraft, as opposed to the F-22's dedicated air superiority mission, so it is less stealthy and poorer at dogfighting but is intended to be a strike/tactical bomber aircraft in addition to providing air cover, or even (in the case of the F-35B version) a V/STOL carrier attack jet.
Basically, the F-22 wins hands down as it is built purely for air superiority and dogfighting and the F-35 isn't.

Edited by CommanderJB, 16 March 2008 - 07:40.

[JJ]

Like TPAM said, the Raptor would obviously win since it is a dedicated fighter, while F-35s can do a lot more than just dogfighting.

[AllStarZ]

Of course however, which is more tactically useful?

[Sgt. Rho]

F-35. I think it even carrys more missiles or bombs than a raptor can. Also it can land and take off vertically...while the raptor is just fast and maaneuverable. Both are steealth

[Crazykenny]

F/A-22, higher speed, better manueverability and a far better range.

[Sgt. Rho]

Blow the runway. WHOOPS; now the craptor is useless^^

Edited by Master_Chief, 14 March 2008 - 09:38.

[Crazykenny]

Well, America must be pretty idiotic if it lets planes slip trough to even bomb the runway. Besides, the F-35 has more competition from other planes aswell.

[CommanderJB]

About the runway: This is true, but only the F-35B variant (being built in limited numbers for the U.S., Italian and Royal Navies) has the internal ducted fan that allows STOVL/VTOL flight, and it loses a significant of its payload capacity as a result of the added weight. So there goes your missile advantage, plus the F-22 has a much bigger radar aperture and better stealth technology, and can supercruise to get to or away from a battle faster.
The F-35 is far more versatile, but as a result worse at any particular role than a specialised aircraft designed solely with that role in mind. That's why it's mostly being sold to non-major-military-power nations who can't afford one type of plane for each separate job.
Edit - got "ninja'd".

Edited by CommanderJB, 14 March 2008 - 09:53.

[Kris]

For me, It depends on the pilot themselves. I've heard stories of Japanese Elite pilots in World war 2 that survived by out running a better and faster Allied Corsair using an old Mitsubishi Zero Figher.

Edited by Chris, 14 March 2008 - 11:38.

[CommanderJB]

To be honest I don't really think that pilots are anything like the factor they used to be. Not to denigrate the amazing skill of people who have one of the most physically and mentally demanding jobs on the planet, but if the other guy has a longer-range radar and longer-range missiles, then you're toast, plain and simple. I actually think that a bomber filled with top-of-the-range AAMs, a powerful ECM suite and a high-powered, long-range radar could conceivably be as or more effective than a squadron of modern fighter jets for pure, dedicated air-to-air engagements. I realise it's more complicated than that but actual dogfights are from everything I've seen pretty much a thing of the past.
Edit - typo.

Edited by CommanderJB, 16 March 2008 - 07:46.

[Foxhound]

If I may interject, the F-22 has an attack capability as well (though somewhat more limited) in the form of PGMs. The Raptor also has external weapon hardpoints which can be attached if it needs weapons more than it needs stealth.

F-22 wins hands down though.

[Dauth]

I do love these completely arbitary threads with no basis in reality, who here has thousands of flight hours? At all? Let alone in both planes, in combat.

It's a thread of my opinion over yours and it doesn't half make me chuckle.

[Crazykenny]

Dauth, on 16 Mar 2008, 21:00, said:

I do love these completely arbitary threads with no basis in reality, who here has thousands of flight hours? At all? Let alone in both planes, in combat.

It's a thread of my opinion over yours and it doesn't half make me chuckle.

Most of us base our facts and arguments upon the specifications the armies have given us.

[Lord Atlantis]

F-22: Pure air superiority.

F-35: Jack of all trades - can do it all, but isn't the most effective at them all.

Air to air combat, F-22 wins. But for doing close air support and bombing raids, F-35 wins.

[Umbrella Secrets]

Dauth, on 16 Mar 2008, 15:00, said:

who here has thousands of flight hours?

I've had thousands of flight hours.

Riding on Passenger planes. Just joking more like 50 hours.

Anyways I think the F-35 would win, because it can fly like a AV-8B Harrier, its carrier based, and it can out manuver the F-22.

Edited by S.O.PAtomicarmy, 17 March 2008 - 01:02.

[Major Fuckup]

oh yer F-22 would win hands down no question its a specialized in air to air

Edited by Major Fuckup, 17 March 2008 - 12:57.

[Razven]

[Edit: Sorry, wrong topic and clicked the wrong thing. Post removed]

Edited by Razven, 20 March 2008 - 09:30.

[Waris]

S.O.PAtomicarmy, on 17 Mar 2008, 11:25, said:

Anyways I think the F-35 would win, because it can fly like a AV-8B Harrier, its carrier based, and it can out manuver the F-22.

...And it loses out to F-22's superior BVR strike ability before it can even be seen

[ShockBlast]

Between F22 and F35 the winner will be F22.F35 is a cheap variant of the F22 for export.

[LCPL Carrow]

WTFH, no it's not, the F-22 is an interceptor (replacing the F-15), whilst the F-35 is a multirole to replace the F-16 (for the Air Force) and the F/A-18 for the Navy/Marines. Neither is a version or variant of the other, and are completely unrelated except for the fact that they're made by the same company. Which raises the question of why the same company would produce two different aircraft of the same type simultaneously?

[̀̀̀̀█]

They are very similar. As has been said before, F-35 is multi role, moreso than the F-22. Your supposed to know the f-35 is there, as its bombing your ass. The F-22 remains in the clouds so to speak, as its primary purpose it to strike unseen.

[CoLT]

Chris, on 14 Mar 2008, 19:35, said:

For me, It depends on the pilot themselves. I've heard stories of Japanese Elite pilots in World war 2 that survived by out running a better and faster Allied Corsair using an old Mitsubishi Zero Figher.

That's still because the Zeroes were lighter and still more manouverable.


The F-35 is watered down and is not a true fighter. It has competition from F-16s, F-15s, even F-18E/Fs. And those are planes from the last generation.

Also, the F-35A is the conventional aircraft with not VTOL capability and it is the most manouverable version.
The F-35B which has the VTOL mechanisms is heavier and because it has the same engine, its power to weight ratio decreased. This means it's even less manouverable than the original F-35.

Overall, the F-35 is not as good as we would like to believe, however, it is the best in the VTOL class. It is nowhere near a top trump fighter.


EDIT: shit, didn't see the necro.

Edited by CoLT, 03 May 2008 - 08:04.

[̀̀̀̀█]

O wow... Neither did I. I pulled it from the first page anyway, and it's still a good discussion. My bad.