PDA

View Full Version : F-22 Raptor vs f-35 Joint Strike



Rawr
05-21-2010, 07:53 AM
I forget who I was arguing with this about, it originated from comments about military cutbacks and the cease-production of the F-22 but I was saying I loved the f-22 raptor, and the opponent was saying that the f-35 is basically the same thing as the f-22. So I decided to post the basic breakdown of the two jets.

F-22 Raptor:

* Crew: 1
* Length: 62 ft 1 in (18.90 m)
* Wingspan: 44 ft 6 in (13.56 m)
* Height: 16 ft 8 in (5.08 m)
* Wing area: 840 ft² (78.04 m²)
* Airfoil: NACA 64A?05.92 root, NACA 64A?04.29 tip
* Empty weight: 43,430 lb (19,700 kg[2][183])
* Loaded weight: 64,460 lb (29,300 kg[184])
* Max takeoff weight: 83,500 lb (38,000 kg)
* Powerplant: 2× Pratt & Whitney F119-PW-100 Pitch Thrust vectoring turbofans
o Dry thrust: 23,500 lb[185] (104 kN) each
o Thrust with afterburner: 35,000+ lb[2][185] (156+ kN) each
* Fuel capacity: 18,000 lb (8,200 kg) internally,[2][183] or 26,000 lb (11,900 kg) with two external fuel tanks[2]
Performance

* Maximum speed:
o At altitude: Mach 2.25 (1,500 mph, 2,410 km/h)
o Supercruise: Mach 1.82 (1,220 mph, 1,963 km/h)
* Range: 1,600 nmi (1,840 mi, 2,960 km) with 2 external fuel tanks
* Combat radius: 410 nmi[182] (471 mi, 759 km)
* Ferry range: 2,000 mi (1,738 nmi, 3,219 km)
* Service ceiling: 65,000 ft (19,812 m)
* Wing loading: 77 lb/ft² (375 kg/m²)
* Thrust/weight: 1.08 (1.26 with loaded weight & 50% fuel)
* Maximum g-load: -3.0/+9.0 g



F-35 Lightning II:

* Crew: 1
* Length: 51.4 ft (15.67 m)
* Wingspan: 35 ft (10.7 m)
* Height: 14.2 ft [nb 1] (4.33 m)
* Wing area: 460 ft² [59] (42.7 m²)
* Empty weight: 29,300 lb (13,300 kg)
* Loaded weight: 44,400 lb (20,100 kg)
* Max takeoff weight: 70,000 lb[nb 2] (31,800 kg)
* Powerplant: 1× Pratt & Whitney F135 afterburning turbofan
o Dry thrust: 28,000 lbf[241] (125 kN)
o Thrust with afterburner: 43,000 lbf[241] (191 kN)
* Internal fuel: 18,480 lb (8,382 kg) [nb 3]

Performance

* Maximum speed: Mach 1.67[242] (1,283 mph, 2,065 km/h)
* Range: 1,200 nmi (2,220 km) on internal fuel
* Combat radius: 610 nmi (1,110 km) on internal fuel
* Service ceiling: 60,000 ft[244] (18,288 m)
* Rate of climb: classified (not publicly available)
* Wing loading: 91.4 lb/ft² (446 kg/m²)
* Thrust/weight:
o With full fuel: 0.84;
o With 50% fuel: 1.04 B:
* g-Limits: 9 g[nb 4]




While they do look similar, you'll notice the f-22 is a good deal bigger and uses 2 powerplants, while the f-35 uses a single beefed up one. The F-22 has a significantly further range, and much higher top speed. You'll also notice that the f-35 isn't equipped with supercruise capability. The F-35 also does not have thrust vectoring, making it a far inferior air-to-air fighter (though it wasn't really designed for air-to-air fights). Last of the basics, F-22 stealth, f-35 not so stealth.

If you wonder why not produce an F-22?

Average cost:
F-35: $35 million
F-22: $120+ million

XX0wnsXY
05-21-2010, 08:28 AM
People really discuss this shit?

acolyte_to_jippity
05-21-2010, 08:42 AM
f-35. no question. that was from the x-plane competition. that plane kicks ass. raptor's incredible too, but f-35 definately.

however, a-10 warthog would kick either, as would a spooky gunship (oh my fucking god it's a flying castle) or a good old f14 tomcat

Kavinsky
05-21-2010, 10:14 AM
the baby raptor for the brand new vtol system thats a hell of alot more reliable than the shit system on the harrier
and he's the one that brought it up, not me.

XX0wnsXY
05-21-2010, 10:49 AM
the baby raptor for the brand new vtol system thats a hell of alot more reliable than the shit system on the harrier
and he's the one that brought it up, not me.

Lol. Kavinsky were you the one arguing this with rawr?

Rapedollar$
05-21-2010, 10:57 AM
by spooky i assume you mean a specter gunship...

Christmas
05-21-2010, 11:01 AM
f-35. no question. that was from the x-plane competition. that plane kicks ass. raptor's incredible too, but f-35 definately.

however, a-10 warthog would kick either, as would a spooky gunship (oh my fucking god it's a flying castle) or a good old f14 tomcat

An air-to-ground aircraft?

It could possibly survive, but no way does a hog beat either the 35 of 22.

Nemesis
05-21-2010, 12:29 PM
the f-35 is the one that can hover right? it can helo around if it wants to.

Clone
05-21-2010, 02:00 PM
but can you use it during the Zombie apolcalypse?!?!?!


http://zombiegamerz.webs.com/death_by_zombies.jpg

Clone

ZERO
05-21-2010, 02:53 PM
The 35 has vertical takeoff that from what I understand is the "big" feature.

However I think it is stupid b/c we can use droids for air to ground but we need humans for air to air so if your trying to save money why not cut the 35 for droids and then just build more 22s.

Now let me tell you why they really cut the 22. If you look at the 22 specs and then compare to Chinese air defense you will see that is was built to attack china. However becuase they own us they decided that we can not make that plain any more and as a result we do not. It is no different from what we did to England after WWI ever wonder how the nation that always had the most powerful navy was a joke in WWII read you history of US UK finance relations following WWI and it is a replay of US China today.

Kavinsky
05-21-2010, 04:53 PM
and christmas calls ME pessimistic pfh.

Clone
05-21-2010, 05:42 PM
The 35 has vertical takeoff that from what I understand is the "big" feature.

However I think it is stupid b/c we can use droids for air to ground but we need humans for air to air so if your trying to save money why not cut the 35 for droids and then just build more 22s.

Now let me tell you why they really cut the 22. If you look at the 22 specs and then compare to Chinese air defense you will see that is was built to attack china. However becuase they own us they decided that we can not make that plain any more and as a result we do not. It is no different from what we did to England after WWI ever wonder how the nation that always had the most powerful navy was a joke in WWII read you history of US UK finance relations following WWI and it is a replay of US China today.

wasnt there a canadian Plane that would have been the fastest in the world if it wasnt for the american government that wanted Canada to stop its design and manufacture? its called the aero or avro or something if i remember right....

Clone

ZERO
05-21-2010, 06:42 PM
The aero also known as the MIG used by the soviets was canceled for the obvious reason that the KGB took over the project and stole the technology. This was also why the US started making all its advanced weapons in nation only after that. (at least from what I heard)

Nemesis
05-22-2010, 01:52 AM
The aero also known as the MIG used by the soviets was canceled for the obvious reason that the KGB took over the project and stole the technology. This was also why the US started making all its advanced weapons in nation only after that. (at least from what I heard)

uh, no thats pretty wrong. Clone i know what you're talking about, the CF-105 Arrow fighter was suppose to be one of the best interceptors of the time, but due to Americans having to police the world the project was scrapped.

Rawr
05-22-2010, 03:39 AM
For the record, me and Kavinsky never argued it was just a point made. The F-35 has a lot of good points, especially the VTOL system, but I think that's only on 1/3 of them. Overall though I prefer the Raptor though, twin powerplants with thrust vectoring, supercruise, and on some, stealth capabilities, make it an unmatchable force in the sky. I will concede the point that the raptor was designed to clear the air for other vehicles while the F-35 was not designed with that specific purpose.

edit: for proof of purpose check out the standard arms on each, very different.

ZERO
05-22-2010, 08:43 PM
uh, no thats pretty wrong. Clone i know what you're talking about, the CF-105 Arrow fighter was suppose to be one of the best interceptors of the time, but due to Americans having to police the world the project was scrapped.

Yea that is correct, I do not know what I was thinking. :headache: