The F-35 is only intended to dogfight as an absolute last resort. It's normal mode will be to detect the enemy without being detected, and to kill the enemy without being successfully attacked. In exercises it's had around a 20-1 kill ratio.
The fully networked nature of the F-35 brings huge advantages. One F-35 can use its radar briefly (the radar is also frequency-agile), find targets, and then relay target information to shooters anywhere in the area. In a recent exercise, a F-35 cued a Navy SM-6 missile from over the horizon to hit an air target.
This neatly works around concerns about limited F-35 weapon stores.
> The real issue however is that it won't be long before nations like Russia and China will be able to reliably get a weapons-grade lock on the F-35. Some people even think Russia already has this capability (and it's very realistic to think that they do).
First off, as the article points out, stealth is not perfect. It simply reduces the acquisition range of certain systems.
These towed decoys provide insurance in the case that stealth is defeated.
At any rate, there are physical barriers to putting F-35 detecting radars on fighters. IR is another matter, of course.
> Electronic warfare is progressing very quickly and might render stealth completely useless long before the next generation of planes is built.
You have it backwards. Electronic warfare is progressing very quickly, and will be use to vastly enhance the effectiveness of stealth aircraft at the expense of adversary systems.
The article makes it sound like the F-35's stealth isn't so great at avoiding detection, but it's there to frustrate weapons trying to lock onto it:
> Stealth fighters, as we know them today, are not highly optimized to evade a broad range of radar types. Instead, they are optimized to give fire control radars used to actually engage targets, as well as detect them in many cases, a very tough time. The classic appendages of a fighter aircraft—nose, tail surfaces, exhaust nozzles, and even wings—do not lend themselves to broadband radio frequency low-observability, but they are conducive to maneuverability and speed. So, while aircraft like the F-35 are effective at hiding from the most threatening radar types, and especially when viewed by those sensors from certain aspects, with the frontal-hemisphere profile being most optimized, they are less adept from doing the same when it comes to radars operating at lower frequencies or when viewed from rearward angles.
BVR It's quite limited by its limited weapons load. Disregarding external weapons (if it uses any, it's no longer stealthy) it will either have 2 long range missiles or 4. Most likely the former, if it wants to also accomplish an attack mission in which it will use 2 bays for ground attack and 2 bays for medium range AA.
Now consider that it's not uncommon in BVR to launch 2 missiles at each BVR target in order to raise the chances of a hit. So basically: a stealth F-35 can attack one aircraft in BVR Then it is out of missiles. An aging fourth gen opponent will likely carry six. So the math doesn't work out in favor of the F-35 in BVR if it faces even two fourth gen aircraft. It likely fire and turn back - because it's out of AMRAAMs after the first engagement.
Any airforce with a huge fleet of aging 4th gen fighters and a lax attitude towards losing them and their pilots, can be a very effective defense against F-35's.
I wonder how much less stealthy it using external weapons. I mean, it's not like an AMRAAM has a gigantic radar signature already. Is radar signature additive? Would an F-35 with external missiles have a radar signature of an F-35 + those missiles, or does having those missiles attached to the body have some sort of interaction that makes the whole signature much bigger?
Because if mounting missiles externally results in reduced but still a decent degree of stealth, you can cram 8x AMRAAMs and 2 sidewinders on the F-35.
They probably can do that even now, the question is about distance of such lock. If F-35 has a high lock distance advantage especially with AWACS in the back - it will have much higher probability to win the fight.
Um, what?
Russia invaded far off lands when they had the capacity, don't think they wouldn't do it again if their economy and population weren't shrinking.
Specifically the 3 major components has to be of the 5th generation - body, engine and radar. The SU-57 body is pretty much there. The radar isn't there yet where it was promised and is required to be (ie. distance, number of tracked items, etc.). The worst situation is with the engine. Russia still doesn't have 5th gen "stealth" engine. What is being flown currently is "4.5" gen - a well improved 4th. You can see it clearly here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sukhoi_T-50_Maksimov.jpg