Air Superiority and Strike Fighters improvement suggestions

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Air Superiority and Strike Fighters improvement suggestions

      This is a thread for improving fighters. Any generally agreed suggestions towards improving or rectifying issues with the Fighter Tech will be added to the front page of this thread. If any suggestions are implemented by CoN the Front page will adapt to the updates.


      Here are some upgrades that have been suggested for Stealth Aircraft:

      Upgrades for Air Superiority Stealth Fighters:

      IRST (lv.2)

      Anti-Stealth upgrade, so it can properly counter the Stealth Strike Fighter and other Stealth fighters (Day 19)

      Carrier Operations upgrade (lv.3)

      Giving it the ability to Operate from aircraft carriers (Day 24:Requires Lv.3 Naval Fighter research)

      Supercruise (lv.4)

      Increased Movement Speed. (Day 26)

      Upgrades for Stealth Strike Fighters:

      Air-Air Armament Upgrade (lv.2)

      Improving air combat stats (Day 21)

      Carrier Operations upgrade (lv.3)
      Giving it the ability to operate from aircraft carriers. (Day 24 Requires: Lv.3 Naval Strike Fighter research)

      Anti-Ship Missiles (Lv.4)
      Increasing the Anti-Ship attack stat. (Day 27)


      Needed Changes to the US Strike Fighter Tech Tree:
      The Western (US) Doctrine Strike Fighter Tech tree needs to change. The F-15C is not a strike Fighter, it is a air superiority fighter. It should be removed. The Tech tree should be as the following:
      F-111A Aardvark
      F-15E Strike Eagle
      F-15SA
      The benefits of this is that the Animation skins won't need to change for US Strike Fighters. The F-15SA is a significantly upgraded F-15E.



      Wrong Pictures on the Eastern Doctrine Naval Air superiority Fighters
      The Tier 2 and Tier 3 Naval Air Superiority Fighters are using each other's pictures. The Su-33 is using the MiG-29K picture and the MiG-29K has the Su-33 picture on the unit's info page

      The post was edited 8 times, last by Lord Aodhan: CoN have updated Stealth Fighters changing some stats and finally giving them radars. So I have changed the thread into to accommodate this :) and also updated to be more in tune with current debate ().

    • I second this! The stats seem logical (except a 13 for the strike fighter, I think that may be a tad high, but 12 seems ok to me for some reason.) and based in reality. As of now I view the stealth air as pointless builds due to infrastructure reqs. Why bother if I can have all the non-stealth with level 2 bases?
      -Nobody cares about the Alpha, it's all decided by the Omega.
    • Ace_lvl_9000 wrote:

      I second this! The stats seem logical (except a 13 for the strike fighter, I think that may be a tad high, but 12 seems ok to me for some reason.) and based in reality. As of now I view the stealth air as pointless builds due to infrastructure reqs. Why bother if I can have all the non-stealth with level 2 bases?
      Yh I know right, considering all the requirements to build, research and how expensive they are you would expect much better stats. I will reduce the Strike Fighter Jet attack down to 12.5. That way when you get the air-air armament upgrade it has an equal chance of beating Air-Superiority fighters on the attack (Still inferior on defense). I've just started to build Stealth Air units in my games, they seem kind of pointless now compared to Lv.7 Strike Fighters and Air Superiority Fighters which are so much cheaper to build thanks to the Streamlined Production upgrade and requiring low-level air bases to build.
    • Well dude, I stopped reading a few lines in. F-16s are not air superiority fighters, not at all. And its one of my main issues with the game. The F-15 is supposed to be the "strike fighter" and the F-16 is supposed to be the " air superiority" fighter. Which is a complete role switch. I hope I wont need to argue that case.

      Now obviously Im referring to the F-15 C/D/E and not the F-15SE, The strike variant of.. IMO the greatest jet currently flying. F-22s, F-35s all rubbish.


      But yea, the air superiority fighter and the stealth variant should have their ground attack stats lowered.. Not that they are too high now however.



      However I do disagree hugly with the idea of having the stealth aircraft carrier capable. That is highly unrealistic mate. "Squat to p_ee" is a slag the navy pilots give the air force as they "flare" before landing. This being because they have such a lovely gentle landing. Where as the navy aircraft landing on the carriers have to get the hell on the deck! and the planes take quite the beating, but they are designed for this. The F-22 sure as hell cant do this, those planes are soo delicate no wonder they are rarely used. They are not used in Iraq and Syria right now, for fear an extremest group use a .50 Caliber to take it down. (Ever wonder why like.. 40% of the F-22 fleet is available)
      Plus there are huge issue with maintenance etc, not to mention size.
      The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants
      - Thomas Jefferson

      Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself.
      - Milton Friedman

      Know your enemy and know yourself and you can fight a hundred battles without disaster.
      - Sun Tzu
    • Eternus wrote:

      what I'm missing in area of stealth airplanes is radar - it's serious disadvantage in terms of recon. Also cost of inventing and building stealths comparising it to stats of normal airplanes is prohibiting me from making stealth airplanes important part of my force (with exception of stealth long range bombers).
      The planes wouldnt be stealth planes if they had radar......
      The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants
      - Thomas Jefferson

      Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself.
      - Milton Friedman

      Know your enemy and know yourself and you can fight a hundred battles without disaster.
      - Sun Tzu
    • Eternus wrote:

      there is something called passive radar, do you know?
      Passive radar really isn’t radar, it is a radio-frequency receiver that “listens” to microwave & other RF transmissions. It picks up transmissions but doesn't sent any out.
      The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants
      - Thomas Jefferson

      Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself.
      - Milton Friedman

      Know your enemy and know yourself and you can fight a hundred battles without disaster.
      - Sun Tzu
    • it's better than nothing. In terms of this game stealth airplanes could have smaller range radar, but should have one. Now they are blind and need other units to recon. On longer distances it could he hilarious.

      btw real stealth airplanes have radars, or sort of radar purpose sensors. But generally they don't use them so would not be easier to detected. In terms of game such an option (switch on/off radar) would not happen any time soon if ever.

      The post was edited 2 times, last by Eternus ().

    • Oceanhawk wrote:

      The F-22 sure as hell cant do this, those planes are soo delicate no wonder they are rarely used.
      The reason why the USAF choose the yf-22 over the yf-23 was because the USN believed it could be adapted to naval use better so it could replace the F/A-14. The F-22A obviously can't land on Carriers since it would need a strengthened Air-frame and a arrestor h**k (Why is h**k censored?). In the end the USN, like the USAF decided to pursue the F-35 JSF instead to fulfill it future fighter requirments. The Russian Su-27 was adapted to Naval use into the Su-33. USN had the same idea for the F-22, but like most USN plans since the 90's it never went anywhere (the plan never took off :D ).

      It's worth noting I suggested it as a upgrade that would require researching lv.2 Naval fighters first. The F-35C is a naval variant of the F-35 JSF and the Russians plan to modify the PAK FA for carrier use like they did with the Su-27 and MiG-29M. So there will be naval stealth strike fighters in the future. Many expect the Chinese to do the same with either the J-20 or J-31.

      Considering how long it take research the Stealth Fighters and how expensive the upgrades are most people wouldn't do it, and obviously you would need a carrier to use them. But if you really want to use Stealth fighters it would be a cool and realistic upgrade. Like I've said in previous posts not everything in the CoN tech tree exists. Some things were concepts or plans that never materialized or a future projects in development or in construction. So considering their was a plan to have a Naval F-22, it is therefore feasible for it to be a upgrade. Either that or CoN releases new naval stealth fighter jets.


      Oceanhawk wrote:

      F-16s are not air superiority fighters, not at all. And its one of my main issues with the game. The F-15 is supposed to be the "strike fighter" and the F-16 is supposed to be the " air superiority" fighter.
      Well the F-16 was originally a lightweight air superiority fighter. But evolved into a multi role fighter jet. The F-15 went the same way from Heavyweight Air superiority fighter F-15A and F-15C/D to strike fighter F-15E. I suspect CoN just did it for animations sake so they wouldn't have 2 F-15 jets representing Air Superiority and Strike fighter roles. Easier just to have F-16 and F-15E.
    • Eternus wrote:

      it's better than nothing. In terms of this game stealth airplanes could have smaller range radar, but should have one. Now they are blind and need other units to recon. On longer distances it could he hilarious.

      btw real stealth airplanes have radars, or sort of radar purpose sensors. But generally they don't use them so would not be easier to detected. In terms of game such an option (switch on/off radar) would not happen any time soon if ever.
      Well maybe can add radar.. but when its off the aircraft is now "stealth"
      The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants
      - Thomas Jefferson

      Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself.
      - Milton Friedman

      Know your enemy and know yourself and you can fight a hundred battles without disaster.
      - Sun Tzu
    • Lord Aodhan wrote:

      Oceanhawk wrote:

      The F-22 sure as hell cant do this, those planes are soo delicate no wonder they are rarely used.
      The reason why the USAF choose the F-22 was because the USN believed it was more capable of being a Naval Fighter to replace the F-14. The F-22A obviously can't land on Carriers since it would need a strengthened Air-frame and a arrestor h**k (Why is h**k censored?). In the end the US, like the USAF decided to pursue the F-35 JSF instead. The Russian Su-27 was adapted to Naval. USN had the same idea for the F-22, but like most USN plans since the 90's it never went anywhere.
      It's worth noting I suggested it as a upgrade that would require researching lv.2 Naval fighters first. The F-35C is a naval variant of the F-35 JSF and the Russians plan to modify the PAK FA for carrier use like they did with the Su-27 and MiG-29M.

      Considering how long it take research the Stealth Fighters and how expensive the upgrades are most people wouldn't do it. But if you really want to use Stealth fighters it would be a cool and realistic upgrade. Like I've said in previous posts not everything in the CoN tech tree exists. Some things were concepts or plans that never materialized or a future projects in development or in construction. So considering their was a plan to have a Naval F-22, it is therefore feasible for it to be a upgrade. Either that or CoN releases new naval stealth fighter jets.
      *Cracks fingers*
      *Coffee ready*

      All Russian planes are tanks, they are battle hardened unlike most newer American aircraft. (F-22s, F-35s) The F-22 is a failed program, it is literally killing its pilots. The F-22 was simply to fast as well nor could it ever be adapted to handle a carrier landing. The SU-27 is not a stealth aircraft, many aircraft can be adapted for carrier landings, maybe we will even see the saab gripen go all the way and have a sea gripen cousin. The F-16 was going to be the USN's strike aircraft. Welp.. no point having one engine over the sea....


      The JSF has no combat ability nor stealth ability what so ever. The Pak FA wont become a carrier based aircraft, as it is not capable of any carrier operations other than a french or an american carrier. Simply put needs a proper carrier for it to even be considered able to have carrier based ops.

      And because 1 plane can do "carrier based stealth" doesnt mean we should add it... Really we need 3 or 4 doctrines doing such a thing. Id really hate to see CoN become some silly futuristic game. And think right now its doing perfect, just need them LHDs ;) .

      And I highly disagree just because it was proposed means its feasible.. There are lots of other factors to take into account. Some proposals are stupid and some remain proposals for $$$ reasons
      The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants
      - Thomas Jefferson

      Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself.
      - Milton Friedman

      Know your enemy and know yourself and you can fight a hundred battles without disaster.
      - Sun Tzu
    • Lord Aodhan wrote:

      Oceanhawk wrote:

      F-16s are not air superiority fighters, not at all. And its one of my main issues with the game. The F-15 is supposed to be the "strike fighter" and the F-16 is supposed to be the " air superiority" fighter.
      Well the F-16 was originally a lightweight air superiority fighter. But evolved into a multi role fighter jet. The F-15 went the same way from Heavyweight Air superiority fighter F-15A and F-15C/D to strike fighter F-15E. I suspect CoN just did it for animations sake so they wouldn't have 2 F-15 jets representing Air Superiority and Strike fighter roles. Easier just to have F-16 and F-15E.
      The F-15E is a strike fighter. And then there is the more or less forgotten.. F-15SE Silent eagle.. Which I dont feel gets the attention it deserves since it probably has the best stealth ability of any fighter aircraft out there. On the basis of failures from competition.
      The F-15 Outta get the air supremacy role. The F-16 I believe outta get the strike role and maybe the 3rd tier can be an F-15E... which is the F-15 from the air sup role but with much darker camo like most Es have.
      The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants
      - Thomas Jefferson

      Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself.
      - Milton Friedman

      Know your enemy and know yourself and you can fight a hundred battles without disaster.
      - Sun Tzu

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Oceanhawk: Dam Gripen letters I mix up ().

    • Oceanhawk wrote:

      Lord Aodhan wrote:

      Oceanhawk wrote:

      F-16s are not air superiority fighters, not at all. And its one of my main issues with the game. The F-15 is supposed to be the "strike fighter" and the F-16 is supposed to be the " air superiority" fighter.
      Well the F-16 was originally a lightweight air superiority fighter. But evolved into a multi role fighter jet. The F-15 went the same way from Heavyweight Air superiority fighter F-15A and F-15C/D to strike fighter F-15E. I suspect CoN just did it for animations sake so they wouldn't have 2 F-15 jets representing Air Superiority and Strike fighter roles. Easier just to have F-16 and F-15E.
      The F-15E is not a strike fighter, the F-15SE is the strike eagle. And then there is the more or less forgotten.. F-15SE Silent eagle.. Which I dont feel gets the attention it deserves since it probably has the best stealth ability of any fighter aircraft out there. On the basis of failures from competition.The F-15 Outta get the air supremacy role. The F-16 I believe outta get the strike role and maybe the 3rd tier can be an F-15SE... which is the F-15 from the air sup role but with much darker camo like most SEs have.
      OK, I am absolutely going to have to jump in on this one. First off the F-15E is absolutely a strike fighter, but is more accurately described as a multi-role aircraft. The reason combatant commanders love the Strike Eagle is literally because weapon load crews can quickly attach a very wide variety of armaments to meet the fast changing missions of modern combat. You could load a Strike Eagle with nothing but air to air missiles and it would absolutely dominate the air because of it's max load out threshold, or you could say "actually, I want to level a mountain." Then load nothing but JDAMS and it would easily fill the role of a strike fighter. It's especially good at targeting due to there being a second "pilot" or weapon systems officer in the backseat (the F-15E is a two seater.) Brigadier General Mark Slocum, the former Seymour Johnson AFB (a Strike Eagle base) Wing Commander used the analogy "It's our vending machine in the sky, if you want something for the mission we've got it."

      Although that's very cool and it can carry a huge and diverse load out what it means is a sacrifice in maneuverability and range. I was speaking with a pilot yesterday about whether the Split-S was still effective with modern aircraft to escape an engagement (the answer is sometimes/situational) and what came up is the fact that the Strike Eagle due to its load has to drop either a lot of firepower or a fuel tank to gain the maneuverability to engage 1v1 with just about anything it comes across like the MiG 29 - 35. At a minimum our F-15E's fly a two ship just for this reason. The first will try to stay alive long enough for the second to engage and defeat a more maneuverable target. Air to Air missiles simply aren't advanced enough yet to eliminate maneuverability from the picture, because, even though you don't have to point your nose at the target, you're still limited to just over a 180 degree targeting range. (E.G. You couldn't fire a missile and have it engage something behind you, it'd have to be between 9o'clock and 3o'clock =180 degrees.

      Understanding those limitations it's clear as to why the F-16 is better in the air to air role (with only an air to air load out.) In an air combat role, the F-16's maneuverability and combat radius (distance it can fly to enter air combat, stay, fight and return) exceed that of all potential threat fighter aircraft. This is more or less due to giving up some weapons weight, the lighter aircraft is more maneuverable than the F-15E though. So if it comes down to an even pilot skill 1v1 nightmare of an F-15E coming up on the F-16, the 16 would win the fight. That's simply how it would work out on paper 1v1.(It is also why we use 16's at Red Flag as the aggressors, because it forces pilots to use their wingmen more often to get out of those 1v1's)
      (source: I'm public affairs @ the aforementioned Strike Eagle base)
      -Nobody cares about the Alpha, it's all decided by the Omega.
    • Ace_lvl_9000 wrote:

      Oceanhawk wrote:

      Lord Aodhan wrote:

      Oceanhawk wrote:

      F-16s are not air superiority fighters, not at all. And its one of my main issues with the game. The F-15 is supposed to be the "strike fighter" and the F-16 is supposed to be the " air superiority" fighter.
      Well the F-16 was originally a lightweight air superiority fighter. But evolved into a multi role fighter jet. The F-15 went the same way from Heavyweight Air superiority fighter F-15A and F-15C/D to strike fighter F-15E. I suspect CoN just did it for animations sake so they wouldn't have 2 F-15 jets representing Air Superiority and Strike fighter roles. Easier just to have F-16 and F-15E.
      The F-15E is not a strike fighter, the F-15SE is the strike eagle. And then there is the more or less forgotten.. F-15SE Silent eagle.. Which I dont feel gets the attention it deserves since it probably has the best stealth ability of any fighter aircraft out there. On the basis of failures from competition.The F-15 Outta get the air supremacy role. The F-16 I believe outta get the strike role and maybe the 3rd tier can be an F-15SE... which is the F-15 from the air sup role but with much darker camo like most SEs have.
      OK, I am absolutely going to have to jump in on this one. First off the F-15E is absolutely a strike fighter, but is more accurately described as a multi-role aircraft. The reason combatant commanders love the Strike Eagle is literally because weapon load crews can quickly attach a very wide variety of armaments to meet the fast changing missions of modern combat. You could load a Strike Eagle with nothing but air to air missiles and it would absolutely dominate the air because of it's max load out threshold, or you could say "actually, I want to level a mountain." Then load nothing but JDAMS and it would easily fill the role of a strike fighter. It's especially good at targeting due to there being a second "pilot" or weapon systems officer in the backseat (the F-15E is a two seater.) Brigadier General Mark Slocum, the former Seymour Johnson AFB (a Strike Eagle base) Wing Commander used the analogy "It's our vending machine in the sky, if you want something for the mission we've got it."
      Although that's very cool and it can carry a huge and diverse load out what it means is a sacrifice in maneuverability and range. I was speaking with a pilot yesterday about whether the Split-S was still effective with modern aircraft to escape an engagement (the answer is sometimes/situational) and what came up is the fact that the Strike Eagle due to its load has to drop either a lot of firepower or a fuel tank to gain the maneuverability to engage 1v1 with just about anything it comes across like the MiG 29 - 35. At a minimum our F-15E's fly a two ship just for this reason. The first will try to stay alive long enough for the second to engage and defeat a more maneuverable target. Air to Air missiles simply aren't advanced enough yet to eliminate maneuverability from the picture, because, even though you don't have to point your nose at the target, you're still limited to just over a 180 degree targeting range. (E.G. You couldn't fire a missile and have it engage something behind you, it'd have to be between 9o'clock and 3o'clock =180 degrees.

      Understanding those limitations it's clear as to why the F-16 is better in the air to air role (with only an air to air load out.) In an air combat role, the F-16's maneuverability and combat radius (distance it can fly to enter air combat, stay, fight and return) exceed that of all potential threat fighter aircraft. This is more or less due to giving up some weapons weight, the lighter aircraft is more maneuverable than the F-15E though. So if it comes down to an even pilot skill 1v1 nightmare of an F-15E coming up on the F-16, the 16 would win the fight. That's simply how it would work out on paper 1v1.(It is also why we use 16's at Red Flag as the aggressors, because it forces pilots to use their wingmen more often to get out of those 1v1's)
      (source: I'm public affairs @ the aforementioned Strike Eagle base)
      Sorry dude, I have the letters of the Saab gripen in my head. Dunno what I was thinking about at the start. Was a rough paddy's day

      F-15E is a strike aircraft, yep its the Cs that are the air supremacy.



      I stopped reading after that, as I think you wrote all of that after my stupid mistake
      Im editing that, lol. Anyway
      The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants
      - Thomas Jefferson

      Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself.
      - Milton Friedman

      Know your enemy and know yourself and you can fight a hundred battles without disaster.
      - Sun Tzu
    • Oceanhawk wrote:

      F-15SE Silent eagle..
      Which doesn't exist. The F-15SE is a concept 5th generation Strike Fighter based on F-15E. I think your referring to the F-15SA.

      I would like to point out that the F-22A you keep referring to is specifically designed for the USAF. But YF-22 is what it was developed from. If the F-35 can be modified into a carrier based aircraft than so could the F-22. Like I said previously the F-35 programme killed off any future raptors being developed or built. What ultimately killed off the F-22 was it's cost. The problems relating to the F-35 programme relate to software, small engine for aircraft weight and the stupid decision by the Marine Corps for the F-35 to have a SVTOL Variant the F-35B. The F-35B caused structural design flaws in the other two. The F-35A would have been a very competent aircraft and would probably been in service today if it wasn't for the F-35B. Although I secretly suspect most of the F-35 issues relate to it's manufacturer trying to milk the pentagon out of as much money as possible. Like seriously why did the F-14, F-15, F-16, F-18 rolled out so quickly and were proven to been very capable aircraft yet 20 years down the line the US suddenly looses the ability to design and build new aircraft.

      The F-35 does have stealth in the frontal arc. It probably the only thing it has going for it currently.

      The PAK FA naval variant will be designed to accompany Russia's new carriers which are going to start being built sometime in the late 2020's. Apparently it's intended to be launched via EMALs.
    • Oceanhawk wrote:

      Well maybe can add radar.. but when its off the aircraft is now "stealth"
      I don't get how stealth aircraft lack radar in game but the Heavy bomber has fully functioning radar like a strike fighter. Doesn't make sense. Surely the bombers should be the ones to lack radars?

      The F-22, F-35 have a single nose mounted AESA radar. The PAK-FA has 1 AESA radar, 2 L-band wing mounted radars and a rear X-band radar. I'm not sure if the Chinese have AESA radar though for their stealth aircraft, probably illegally cloned Su-30 radar, unless the data they stole from Lockheed Martin gave them the blue prints for advanced radars as well those stealth composites they seem to be using.

      It just strikes me as so odd that units which are so expensive and require so much to build are so poor when it comes to stats and capabilities. I really regret building stealth strike aircraft. Should off just built more Lv.7 Strike fighters, which are pretty much equal in stats and are so much cheaper.


      They must have radar!!! Whats the point of stealth aircraft if I can only use them in my territory where I can see hostiles.
    • Lord Aodhan wrote:

      Oceanhawk wrote:

      F-15SE Silent eagle..
      Which doesn't exist. The F-15SE is a concept 5th generation Strike Fighter based on F-15E. I think your referring to the F-15SA.
      I would like to point out that the F-22A you keep referring to is specifically designed for the USAF. But YF-22 is what it was developed from. If the F-35 can be modified into a carrier based aircraft than so could the F-22. Like I said previously the F-35 programme killed off any future raptors being developed or built. What ultimately killed off the F-22 was it's cost. The problems relating to the F-35 programme relate to software, small engine for aircraft weight and the stupid decision by the Marine Corps for the F-35 to have a SVTOL Variant the F-35B. The F-35B caused structural design flaws in the other two. The F-35A would have been a very competent aircraft and would probably been in service today if it wasn't for the F-35B. Although I secretly suspect most of the F-35 issues relate to it's manufacturer trying to milk the pentagon out of as much money as possible. Like seriously why did the F-14, F-15, F-16, F-18 rolled out so quickly and were proven to been very capable aircraft yet 20 years down the line the US suddenly looses the ability to design and build new aircraft.

      The F-35 does have stealth in the frontal arc. It probably the only thing it has going for it currently.

      The PAK FA naval variant will be designed to accompany Russia's new carriers which are going to start being built sometime in the late 2020's. Apparently it's intended to be launched via EMALs.
      I wouldn't say its a concept aircraft, it is in development. I have seen images but I believe they are just models : and I was refering to the Silent eagle not the SA, which is still a pretty good aircraft. Better than anything else in the region Id say.


      If the F-35 killed off all the raptors, why are the raptors supposed to fulfill the failing air to air role of the F-35. The idea that "because the F-35 can be modified into a carrier based aircraft.. so can the F-22" Is extremely silly. The F-35 was designed to fulfill the needs of the Airforce ( A, Conventional) Marine corps (VTOL, Dam obsession from the harrier) and the Navy ( Short take off variant) this is actually like one of the millions of flaws with the aircraft. It su_cks because it was designed to fulfil 3 types of aircraft needs, be stealth and be a multi role aircraft.
      (I typed.. then read on )

      If the navy and marines had no part of the F-35 program.. the F-35 would look completely different. Every single part of the plane is flawed btw.


      But yea, the F-15 are still the best in the world, F-16s, F-18s all great aircraft. And now they produce the useless F-22 and the even bigger crime against aviation the F-35 JSF ( Junk s1itty failure). Hmm... F-14 = Grumman, F-15, f-18 Douglas/Boeing and the F-16 being General Dynamics( guess now its lockheed). F-22, F-35 Both lockheed :/


      It will be interesting to see what happens with the Pak FA.

      (why is the word suc_ks censored?)
      The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants
      - Thomas Jefferson

      Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself.
      - Milton Friedman

      Know your enemy and know yourself and you can fight a hundred battles without disaster.
      - Sun Tzu
    • Lord Aodhan wrote:

      Oceanhawk wrote:

      Well maybe can add radar.. but when its off the aircraft is now "stealth"
      I don't get how stealth aircraft lack radar in game but the Heavy bomber has fully functioning radar like a strike fighter. Doesn't make sense. Surely the bombers should be the ones to lack radars?
      The F-22, F-35 have a single nose mounted AESA radar. The PAK-FA has 1 AESA radar, 2 L-band wing mounted radars and a rear X-band radar. I'm not sure if the Chinese have AESA radar though for their stealth aircraft, probably illegally cloned Su-30 radar, unless the data they stole from Lockheed Martin gave them the blue prints for advanced radars as well those stealth composites they seem to be using.

      It just strikes me as so odd that units which are so expensive and require so much to build are so poor when it comes to stats and capabilities. I really regret building stealth strike aircraft. Should off just built more Lv.7 Strike fighters, which are pretty much equal in stats and are so much cheaper.


      They must have radar!!! Whats the point of stealth aircraft if I can only use them in my territory where I can see hostiles.
      Again as I said, the F-22 and the F-35 Have listening radars. But they wont use their AESA radars encase someone locks onto them.
      The point of them is, you outta know where you enemies are. Or use force multipliers like some AWACS.

      Simply put, they easier to detect with when they using their radars to search for things. Harder to spot when not.
      The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants
      - Thomas Jefferson

      Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself.
      - Milton Friedman

      Know your enemy and know yourself and you can fight a hundred battles without disaster.
      - Sun Tzu