Kristof Goovaerts , as I said, stealth has it’s problems and is not an invisibility cloak.
Daniel Richards

We seem to agree on the fact that stealth does not mean invincibility. And it has to be said that there is indeed only one confirmed downing of an F-117 (and possibily another one hit but not not fataly damaged). But I have to point out it was downed by a single ‘lucky’ SA-3 launcher, not nearly the integrated air defence system it was designed to counter. Also succes during Desert Storm against Iraqi air defence by account of massively overwhelming numbers and technological/training advantages. I would not use those results as a gaurantee you’ll be able to suppress or overcome modern Russian integrated air defences.

As far as I’m aware the F-22 does not have an EOS system on board, so the only way to stay invisible in my opinion (no radar lock-up, which would give the Ruskies advanced notice and a rough position) is to creep up on unsuspecting fighters hoping to get in Sidewinder range before they spot you. They will have to rely heavily on AWACS-support to gain and maintain situational awareness, so guess what every single Russian pilot and missileer will be hunting for. Once the AWACS-support is dealt with, you’ll have to rely either on ground based radar, or the F-22 has to turn on their radar, which again negates the stealth advantage.

I have no doubt the US airforce will turn out to be the victor, but it will not be a walk in the park.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.