The F-35 has been in the headlines repeatedly in recent years. Whenever a news outlet needs an example of gratuitous military spending, you can bet a picture of Lockheed’s banner jet will find its way into the article. If someone’s in the mood to post a bit of patriotic motivation, the F-35’S incredibly advanced technological abilities are among the first to be flaunted, and conversely, anytime someone hopes to draw clicks by claiming the U.S. has lost its edge in military technology to its competitors, the F-35 is again put on display, with each of its (honestly numerous) shortcomings brought to bear for the sake of argument.
To be honest, it can be easy to get a bit confused about where the U.S. really stacks up when compared to the modern jets being fielded by the competition. China’s J-20 and impending J-31, and Russia’s SU-35 are often compared to the jet that is expected to become the workhorse fighter for a new generation of NATO countries… and to be perfectly frank, not all the stats look good for us. Because the F-35 wasn’t ever designed to serve specifically as an air superiority fighter, it should come as no surprise to any of us that it doesn’t stack up well against competitors designed specifically for air-to-air engagements. Under a direct comparison of classically considered tenants like maximum speed, maneuverability, or fuel range, the F-35 falls short of both China’s and Russia’s top military jets.
Of course, dogfighting was never part of the plan for the F-35, and its state of the art communication and target tracking suite of systems ensures our birds will be able to locate, identify, and engage with its opponents well before the Russian or Chinese jets are able to respond – meaning the F-35 may well be able to compensate for its inability to outrun or out-turn other jets simply by being better aware of the battle space… but something about maintaining an operational standard of never getting caught with our britches down is concerning. In a real peer-to-near-peer war like one we’d find ourselves in with a country like China, we’d have to assume that not every engagement would be to our advantage, and that sometimes our men and women in harm’s way will be expected to perform under circumstances beyond the scope of equipment’s intended use – as we’ve seen in every war since men started sharpening sticks.
So if the F-35 is a sniper intended to engage opponents from a distance and escape undetected, what do we do when it’s time to go toe to toe with the best fighters our enemies could muster? In the minds of many, that’s a perfect opportunity to show off America’s less discussed 5th generation fighter: the F-22 Raptor.
Unlike the F-35, the F-22 has been operational for years, and has already been used in a number of intercepts of foreign aircraft over international waters. It also trumps the F-35 in performance tests like maximum speed, rate of climb, and maneuverability, delivering figures that match or exceed that of the competition. Like the F-35, however, the F-22 also comes equipped with a top of the line suite of electronics that allow for a scope of the battlefield experts don’t believe can be matched by our opponents. While it lacks some of the pilot interface technology the F-35 boasts, the F-22 can still muster an over-the-horizon awareness of targets that would leave most jets destroyed before they were even sure they were being engaged.
The only problem is, President Obama’s administration gave the F-22 program the ax after Lockheed Martin had only fulfilled a bit more than half of the initial order. With 187 completed F-22s, and fewer than 130 combat operational, the U.S. Air Force received only about half of what they believed they needed to ensure America had the best air superiority fighter fleet on the planet. Of course, at the time, President Obama believed wars with near-peer adversaries were a thing of the past, relegating the F-22 to the shelf of weapons without a war. International developments in the years since that 2011 decision have proven the former president wrong, of course, as we prepare for potential conflicts with nations fielding their own 5th generation fighters… some, like the J-20, modeled exactly after stolen designs of our own, now cancelled for being too capable (and expensive), F-22.
While some have argued that the United States doesn’t need the F-22 thanks to the capabilities of our existing fleets of fighters and the anticipated capabilities of a fully functioning fleet of F-35s, and there’s certainly merit to some of their points, the F-22 has demonstrated its value as an air support aircraft thanks its speed, payload capacity, and tiny radar signature. Pulling F-22 production out of mothballs would certainly bolster our country’s defenses – but is doing so a sound financial decision?
It would seem probably not. F-22 production has been stopped since 2011, meaning many of the assets allocated to building these jets have since been redistributed to other efforts or simply left to rot. In order to kick-start production, a significant initial investment would have to be put forth, possibly removing any financial incentive for using an existing platform rather than moving forward with one that is currently under development.
Which brings about another important factor to be considered: despite being one of the most advanced pieces of military hardware on the planet, the F-22 is now already outdated. The F-22 is based on a platform that was under development for decades – meaning a concerted effort to field an all new air superiority fighter, like efforts underway for a MACH 6 capable long-distance recon bomber SR-72, could provide an aircraft that doesn’t just compete with Russia’s Su-35 or China’s J-20, but leaves them in the dust.
Of course, we’d have to finish mulching up hundred-dollar bills to feed through the jet inlet on the F-35 first… so it may be a while.
Want to see what the F-22 is capable of? Check out the video below.
Images courtesy of the U.S. Air Force, Lockheed Martin, Aviation Week
Join our community. To comment on this article please join/login. Here's a sample of the comments on this post.
Thanks for the article. Where to start on this? I think the first place we have to start is with 21st Century air-to-air combat. It ain't nuttin like it was 50 to 100 years ago. We are currently using really old F-15s for our fighter planes and they have had a 100% success rate in "dog fighting" because they have shot down every enemy aircraft they faced at one mile or more. There was NO eyes on cutting and turning gun fighting. What should that tell you? EVERY ONE of those dog fights was won by the electronics warfare and weapons systems and not one of them was won by the aircraft capabilities for dog fighting. If you beefed up an old Fokker D-7 from WWI so it could carry and handle those systems, it would have won those fights, ALL OF THEM. besides, wood and canvas don't give as much of a radar return as metal. 21st Century dog fighting is about radar, IR, computers, and missiles. Will there never be another eyes on cutting and turning dog fight using guns? There probably will and it would be a good idea to be able to win it, so you better keep the guns and the ability to dog fight. It is becoming increasingly obvious that our idiot politicians, media, and other experts screwed up big time when they stopped the F-22 program. It has reached a point to where you would have to be completely ignorant or a complete idiot to not see that. The F-22 is the best plane for playing that game because it returns less radar signature than any other plane and has IR suppression, which no other plane has. The extremely small radar signature means it will be much more difficult to just find the plane before it can shoot you down, it will be much, much more difficult to get a radar based weapons lock and it will be much, much easier for the F-22 to break that lock. The IR or infrared suppression means it will be much, much harder to get an IR lock and much, much easier for the F-22 to break an IR lock. Those two things give the F-22 a massive advantage in air-to-air combat. What does that mean? That most likely, you are going to have to survive long enough to get close enough to go to manually controlled guns in eyes on cutting and turning dog fighting to get the F-22, which will be pretty difficult to do. No plane on this planet would be even close to a match for that baby in a dog fight. Knowing that, if they can get all the problems solved, the F-35 should be able to win most of its dog fights too but, yes, would be outclassed in an eyes on cutting and turning dog fight with guns, which would be rare. One of its most glaring deficiencies is that it has no IR suppression and would be vulnerable to IR missiles. Right now, the Chicom planes are junk (China has to keep buying Ruskie planes to get their engines, EW, and radar, which doesn't leave much of the Chicom planes that is worth keeping) and the Ruskies are still lagging behind a bit. IF it ever gets to where our planes AND their planes can beat the other guys EW and missiles, then both sides will be forced to go to manually operated guns and cutting and turning at close quarters. At that point, the F-35 will suffer heaving losses, the F-22 should still win most of its fights (with everything else equal - the quality of the pilots is a biggie here), and, if push comes to shove, you bring in the F-16, which is still one of the best dog fighting planes in the world and, with the best trained fighter pilots in the world, it will do fine, especially with a little ECM. As far as speed, until the SR-72 starts flying, there isn't a plane out there that can out run an air-to-air missile. To cover our butts, we need more F-22s or better planes. I read somewhere that the plans for the F-22 were mysteriously lost or stolen. Why do I have trouble believing that Lockheed's Skunk Works lost the plans for the F-22 instead of keeping them around to improve on for later aircraft?
Great article Alex. The image named "F-35 (left), F-22 (right)" shows two F-22 (two engines) and no F-35.