Versus. Su-35 vs. F-35: a clash of two tactics
What will be more interesting, the very possibility of a collision of two systems on "neutral" territory or its consequences, is still difficult to say. However, for some reason, I do not want to discount this possibility.
Yes, today NATO is making statements that it won't do anything in Ukraine. However, it is worth remembering what movements took place in November-December on the other side of the Ukrainian border, in Poland, Romania, and so on. One can also recall how the Russian side stubbornly talked about maneuvers on its territory, and that in Ukraine everyone can sleep peacefully.
The bottom line is that today it’s not worth talking about some kind of gentlemen’s agreements at all. It's funny after 1991, and after March 2014, it doesn't look serious at all. Kindergarten is the junior group of world politics, nothing more.
So there is absolutely no faith in promises today, so today Stoltenberg said one thing, and tomorrow his successor will say (and cooler if he does it right away) completely different.
Therefore, there is a possibility of a clash between NATO and Russian forces on the territory of Ukraine. Perhaps it is small, but to say that the word of the North Atlantic allies in the military bloc is harder than a diamond is completely for optimists.
By the way, this year Dave Majumjar of The National Interest, known to us, spoke very frankly about the possible confrontation between the Su-35 and F-35.
True, old Dave spoke in the sense that neither Russia nor China would be able to build a real air fleet from fifth-generation fighters and use it. Unlike the US, of course. The fifth generation is expensive both to build and to operate.
Therefore, American aircraft will have to deal with the descendants of the Su-27 in all variations, from the Su-27 Flanker itself to the Su-35.
You can not discount the F-15, F-16, F / A-18 of all modifications, of course, the old aircraft will go into battle first against the no less new Su-27 and MiG-29, but it is the aircraft of the latest designs that will be thrown into the bowl scales with stones capable of turning the tide in the sky.
The Americans, however strange it may seem, are not sure of the total superiority of the F-35 over the Russian opponent. And in fact, the way it is, and the reason for this is not even the combat and flight characteristics of the aircraft, but the elementary tactics of warfare.
Everything is very clear here: the F-35, using the information support of the satellite constellation and AWACS aircraft, relying on its own stealth, will have to be the first to detect the enemy and strike at him.
Demanding something more from an attack fighter (according to Majumjar) is not worth it, especially using it as an air superiority fighter. But after all, the F-35 was not intended for this, despite the fact that the United States positions it (and advertises it) as a multi-role fighter.
However, destroying equipment and other targets on land and water is also a completely normal job for a fighter-bomber or fighter-attack aircraft.
Therefore, if the F-35 meets in the sky with the Su-35, then it will not be a meeting of equal opponents who set approximately the same goals. F-35s will go to their targets on the ground, and Su-35s will do everything possible to ensure that the targets remain intact.
Therefore, everyone who today compares the F-35 and Su-35 is doing it somewhat incorrectly. Aircraft differ not so much in performance characteristics as in tactics of use.
If we start with tactics, then most likely it will look like this: the F-35 link will go as covertly as possible, without using its radars at full capacity, and the AWACS aircraft or satellites will lead the link. In such a situation, "foreseeing" will be on the side of American aircraft, and therefore they will have a chance to detect the Su-35 first.
And will AIM-9 or AIM-132 go further?
But no. Alas, there are no AIM-35Ds or European Meteors in the standard F-120 combat set of weapons. The F-35 simply does not have long range missiles, and short and medium range missiles against the Su-35, which has the R-37 - sorry, not serious.
If the Russian fighter were blind and deaf, but its radar is quite capable of detecting the F-35 OUTSIDE the range of the latter's missiles. This is a very serious moment, because in this way a certain parity is obtained: the F-35 sees its enemy, but until a certain point it cannot do anything with it. But if the Su-35 sees the F-35, then there will be a steak. Possibly with blood.
Yes, stealth and excellent sensors are the strength of the F-35, which pilots simply must implement, but ...
It will be easier, having discovered the Su-35 using any means of observation, the F-35 link can simply change course and, in simple terms, “dump into the fog”, calling for help F-22, F-15, in general, anyone who will try to compete with the Su-35.
In general, the F-35 corresponds to the tactics of air warfare, in which one of the warring parties is trying with all its might to gain air superiority. This is how you can minimize your losses and cause maximum damage to the enemy.
In order to gain air superiority, the US Air Force seems to have aircraft that can handle such a task. All the same "Raptors". There is some skepticism in the words “seemingly” and “may”, since there are doubts that the F-22 can be the factor that will remove the Su-35 from the path of the F-35. But this is generally a separate conversation.
The whole problem is that, as we have already seen from recent examples, the implementation of plans and optimal solutions is far from always possible in a war.
If we consider the hypothetical situation in the sky of Ukraine, then there will be parity. The territory of Ukraine will become an arena, and both sides will work from airfields outside Ukrainian territory. Russian - from their own (which is happening now), NATO representatives - from Romanian or Polish.
All territories have radars that perfectly scan almost the entire territory of Ukraine. Let me express the opinion that our radars are doing a little better than the Romanians or Poles. The western part of Ukraine will be under better control from NATO, the eastern part - from our side.
The satellite constellation is our headache. Americans and Europeans have more satellites, I won’t judge the quality because there is simply no information, but there are holes and gaps in the most luxurious network. It is a fact.
Therefore, in terms of observation, we can say that the parties will be equal.
Naturally, there are things that interfere with the operation of surveillance systems. Yes, not all, but they are. Electronic warfare systems are one of the components of an air war, since a blind aircraft is not weapon. Here, Russia has an advantage, since those electronic warfare systems that the Russian side can put up to fight against aircraft are a big stone in the scales. And it’s not at all about the over-praised Krasukhas, there are more efficient stations that can significantly complicate work aviation the adversary.
In conditions where everyone sees everyone, and the "gray zone" in the central part of Ukraine can become an exception, the F-35 loses many of its useful properties. Of course, more accurate guidance from AWACS aircraft is good, but if enemy radars see you, this is of little use.
In addition, in a real war, everything goes wrong. Therefore, such an alignment is quite possible, in which the F-35 pilots will have to rely only on themselves.
Agree, this is a normal situation in a war, when someone yells, demanding support, and someone higher up the career ladder does not give this help.
The Americans believe that in such a situation, F-35 pilots should simply take and use the strengths of their aircraft and not allow enemy pilots to use the weaknesses of the F-35. That is, the F-35 should reach the target as stealthily as possible and hit it, and if you have to fight, then do it from behind the line of sight.
Given some of the features of the F-35, namely its frankly low speed, problems are promised here. Afterburner cruising speed of the F-35 is only 850 km / h. Maximum afterburner - 1,6 M or 1930 km / h.
Su-35 in afterburner mode produces 1300-1400 km / h, and afterburner 2,3M or 2500 km / h.
Such a big difference in speed suggests that the F-35 has little chance of safely getting out of the detection area. Especially if it will be seen by radars both in the air and on the ground.
Plus, at short and medium distances (namely, the F-35 missiles work on them), the American aircraft does not have decent maneuverability for combat, while this is the norm for the Su-35.
Yes, today many people say that modern air combat is long-range combat. Whoever has better detection systems and more tenacious missiles will win. And you can forget about maneuverability.
True, the Americans themselves admit (weapon expert Bill Swiftman) that their AIM-9X can easily be confused by dynamic maneuvering, and the more actively an aircraft can maneuver in battle, the more the range of a confident missile launch at it decreases.
It turns out an unpleasant moment: in order to destroy the Su-35, the F-35 must come closer, to the distance of a confident launch of at least medium-range missiles. Thus, all the advantages in stealth are leveled by the rather powerful and very successful, according to many world experts, the H035 Irbis radar, which, in conjunction with the R-37 missiles, may not give the F-35 a chance to attack at all.
Luck? Perhaps this factor plays a certain role in modern air combat, but it is still better to rely on the range of radars and missiles. Because the most “invisible” aircraft will sooner or later sparkle in the radar beams. And for the pilot of the F-35 it will be very unfortunate if it is the Irbis of our Su-35.
What is the essence of American air combat tactics? There are only three principles: "First discovered, first shot, first destroyed." Basically, nothing new. But here with implementation now there can be problems. More precisely, with the appearance of the Su-35 on the arena, tactics will need to be revised.
The role of the hunter in a hypothetical air battle will be played by the Su-35.
Yes, it is not so luxurious with stealth, but R-37M missiles with a range of 400 km are an indisputable advantage. 4 R-37M missiles and 8 R-77 medium-range missiles can cover the entire conceivable range, turning the F-35 into a victim capable of snapping. Yes, it’s good to snap back, AIM-120s allow you to do this, but you still have to approach a confident launch distance of 100 km. Given that 300 km will have to go at gunpoint R-37M. Not the most pleasant and very exciting thing.
The Air Combat Lottery is a very, very fragile structure.
But the most unpleasant thing is that just in the "dog dump", or, as the Americans now call it, "knife fight", the best translation of the term is the Russian word "stabbing", the advantage is absolutely on the side of the Su-35.
The super-maneuverability of the Su-35, its ability to turn, “cobras”, “pancakes” gives it an advantage precisely in “stabbing”. Cannon, missiles, maneuver - and the F-35 has problems. The ability to fly at minimum speeds, instantly accelerate to supersonic speed, all these super maneuvers give the Su-35 an advantage in dynamic combat.
Close combat is not for the F-35. This is the domain of the Su-35.
The further we look at all these analyzes and reports on combat use, the more and more the image of the fifth generation fighter F-35 melts.
Lightning 2 is not a fighter. Too slow, too "tight" in terms of acceleration and climb, with a small number of missiles and very decent bombs - an image more for a bomber than for a fighter. Plus stealth, elevated to a rank.
So yes, the F-35 is a bomber with the ability to fend off enemy fighters with a certain amount of luck. Relying not so much on speed, maneuver and weapons, but on stealth and invisibility.
Of course, there are no fools in the American command and no one will set the task of gaining air superiority for F-35 pilots. For this there are F-15 and F-22. And it is with them that the Russian Su-35 hunter will have to deal.
Definitely, the case when the fifth generation aircraft will not have any advantages over the 4 ++ aircraft. If the confrontation took place in Syria, Afghanistan, Africa, where there simply aren’t as many working radars as in Europe, then yes, the F-35 would be the king of sudden strikes.
But the confrontation, albeit hypothetically, will be on the territory of the country, which is all in the field of view of hundreds of radars, and in such conditions it will not be easy to realize the advantage in stealth.
At the dawn of their appearance, these aircraft were nicknamed "stealth aircraft". Years passed, and as radars matured, aircraft became more and more visible to radar beams. And today they are correctly called just barely noticeable, since neither coatings, nor diffusers, nor new forms - nothing made the planes invisible.
In this regard, the aerodynamic forms of the Su-35, designed for maneuvering, do not provide advantages in stealth, but they are great for stabbing. And in our case, a fourth-generation aircraft is capable of becoming an executioner for a fifth-generation aircraft. And not because it is our plane, but the victim is American. It's just that the Su-35 was initially focused on implementing the principle of "find, catch up, kill." And the F-35 is to sneak up on the target as quietly as possible and destroy it with bombs or missiles.
Therefore, an inconspicuous small (and in fact the F-35 is actually smaller than the Su-35S) bomber is doomed in advance to become a victim of the fighter-hunter, which is the Su-35S. And there is nothing supernatural in this, this is a normal alignment in the fighter-bomber duet.
In the end, there was no confrontation. In the end, a lot still depends on the pilot. The fact that an experienced F-35 flyer has a chance to slip through unnoticed and hit a target in almost any country in the world - that is, that is. The fact that if the Su-35S pilot detects the Lightning, the F-35 will have very little chance of returning back is also a fact.
It's just that each aircraft has its own range of tasks that it can effectively solve.
Information