F-22 Raptor: News and Discussion

In the likely war between NATO and Syria, US air force will certainly use F-22. In the other hand, Syria -it will be more accurate to say, russian's staff- will use S-300.
I would be curious to see what would be the efficiency of S-300, against F-22 ?
If someone among you could answer to this question.

Regards.

Syria doesn't have S-300. A pre-war contract said that the first system will be in the country by 2014 and operational by 2015-16.

Anyway, I don't think S-300 would help much even against 4th gen fighters.

“Syria to need up to a dozen S-300 batteries to protect itself – Russian general
Interfax-AVN Online
Friday, May 31, 2013
Document Type: OSC Summary . . .

Syria needs at least 10 battalions of Russian S-300 air defence missile systems in order to be able fully to protect its territory from possible air attack, former Russian Air Force C-in-C Army General Anatoliy Kornukov told the Russian military news agency Interfax-AVN on 31 May.

“Based on the size of Syria’s territory, they will need 10-12 S-300 battalions (Russian: “divizion”; strictly, the next force level up from a battery, i.e. battalion), which would see to it that the country is protected,” Kornukov said.

“According to him, that kind of potential will make it all but impossible to set up a no-fly zone over Syria,” the report said.

“Each S-300 surface-to-air missile (SAM) system consists of a command post equipped with radar for detection and up to six 5Zh15 SAMs linked up with it,” the report added.

A month to train Syrian crews

It will take up to a month to train Syrian crews to operate the S-300, Kornukov told Interfax-AVN. “Certainly, our specialists will have to train Syrian colleagues if they get these systems. Everything here will depend on the diligence of those to be trained. It will, however, take between two weeks and a month,” Kornukov said.

Asked how long it would take to deploy the S-300 once in Syria, Kornukov said that “everything depends on the site where these systems are to be positioned”. “It will take some time to reach the site, although to deploy them proper will take no more than a couple of hours,” he said. It is, he noted, a conservative estimate to take account of the need for “additional adjustments after transit”. “Ordinarily, however, our systems can be deployed within five minutes,” Kornukov added.

Almost impossible to jam

No electronic warfare system in the world can suppress the S-300 completely, Kornukov also told Interfax-AVN.

“As far as protection from electronic countermeasures is concerned, we have not yet tested the S-300 in a combat environment,” Kornukov admitted. He went on to recall an occasion when countermeasures were deployed by “our Bering Strait neighbours”, which, however, did not prevent the success of that particular combat training mission.

It would, however, be wrong to say that the S-300 is totally immune to electronic countermeasures, Kornukov also said. “There are electronic warfare systems, including ours, that can affect its combat operation,” he said. A “smart commander”, however, can find a way round and still hit his target.

“Kornukov, however, declined to explain exactly how the S-300 could resist suppression by electronic countermeasures,” the Interfax-AVN report added.

(Description of Source: Moscow Interfax-AVN Online in Russian — Website of news service devoted to military news and owned by the independent Interfax news agency; URL: http://www.militarynews.ru)”

As Sa'iqa wrote:Syria doesn't have S-300. A pre-war contract said that the first system will be in the country by 2014 and operational by 2015-16.

Anyway, I don't think S-300 would help much even against 4th gen fighters.

At first we are already in war, and the differents communiquees, intends to mislead the ennemy. Syria, won't say if the S-300 is there or not, it is part of the war. The S-300 is already in Syria, and already be ready, even though it takes more than several years to train syrian soldiers, noone said they are noone to use them, if they are several thousands russian soldiers in Syria with goals to use air defense.
In Vietnam during the war, most of vietnamese soldiers were not enough mature to use the SAM-2, and there you saw severa hundreds of soviet specialists that downed several hundreds US aircrafts.
US is well aware about the S-300 capacities, and they feared of this kind of SAM, for that reason, they are looking for coalition, included many european nations, but they failed. The solution could be Saudi Arabia that launched an attack against Syria by land, with tanks, meanwhile US navy will launch cruise missiles.
The great question is how can russian electronic warfar defeat US electronic war ?
Could the russian electronic team and hardware match with US's one ?
For that reason, I suspect US will use its F-22 that are already in Gulf to attack Syria and Iran, in order to defeat the S-300. For that reason I think the russians will quickly deliver not only S-300, but maybe a more sophisticated hardware.


This war is not a simple war, this conflict will determine what will be the next decades. Either, the oligarchy wins, and the world will be dive up in the worst dark barbaric baleful era that it had never known. It is not surprise, if all oligarchy's allies stand up besides US.

Or the new world will rise, with the end of globalization, and new nations era, with more justice, more equality. The oligarchy, will risk to loose even its harbours, as US and UK. I hope Syria, will win and will be destroy this awfull area that is promise for all of us.

This ultimate war is far more important than the secund world war.

As Sa'iqa wrote:Syria doesn't have S-300. A pre-war contract said that the first system will be in the country by 2014 and operational by 2015-16.

Anyway, I don't think S-300 would help much even against 4th gen fighters.

That's a very silly statement As Sa'iqa; I would expect more from you.

As part of an integrated defense system with EW capabilities, Radar sites across the country, fighter aircraft in support, SHORAD systems, medium-range missile systems, MANPADs, etc... they will most certainly blow everything out of the sky including F-22 Raptors or whatever else.

By their own or as part of a broken, obsolete AD system that's full of holes they will be countered with jamming and overwhelmed with anti-Radar and A2G missiles, guided bombs, etc...

That one S-300 won't help Syria much - simply due to sheer numerical advantage NATO has. To halt NATO Syria would need 10-12 S-300 batteries, coupled with modern long range radars and various other systems (BUK, Tor) covered by Pantsirs.

As for now most of Syrian AD is obsolete - Kub, S-75, S-200, ZSU 23-4 etc.

As Sa'iqa wrote:That one S-300 won't help Syria much - simply due to sheer numerical advantage NATO has. To halt NATO Syria would need 10-12 S-300 batteries, coupled with modern long range radars and various other systems (BUK, Tor) covered by Pantsirs.

As for now most of Syrian AD is obsolete - Kub, S-75, S-200, ZSU 23-4 etc.

Right you are; the Syrian AD has also taken a battering due to equipment & personel losses to the rebels (and Israeli airstrikes), defection, reassignment of manpower, etc...
They can't operate in the most optimal places to secure Syrian airspace because much of the Syrian territory is occupied by the rebel forces.

Do they have to destroy every attacking aircraft to be successful?

I would suggest the Russian official was talking about 10-12 batteries of SA-10 to protect the whole country... the Syrian government forces don't hold all of the country and therefore don't need to protect it all.

If it needs to protect specific areas and specific targets then much fewer systems would probably do.

Equally used properly... in a shoot and scoot mode with skill and cunning it can inflict losses and harrass NATO quite effectively.

How many pilots is the US prepared to lose?

flamming_python wrote:
As part of an integrated defense system with EW capabilities, Radar sites across the country, fighter aircraft in support, SHORAD systems, medium-range missile systems, MANPADs, etc... they will most certainly blow everything out of the sky including F-22 Raptors or whatever else.

By their own or as part of a broken, obsolete AD system that's full of holes they will be countered with jamming and overwhelmed with anti-Radar and A2G missiles, guided bombs, etc...

Xavier Moreau -highly skills and very competent french officer- explained
http://www.realpolitik.tv/2013/08/la-russie-et-lonu-contre-lotan/
that even with old hardwares -meaning without S-300 -, syrian air defense could downed a significant aircrafts, I know that US is well aware that in case of war, their all old 4th generation fighters could match S-300 with many difficults, causing severe losses of US pilots. In spite of severe losses of syrian army, -the terrorists rats are there for this purpose- do not forget that Syria has a strong and very reliable ally Russia. Many russian specialists are there, in order to use syrian air defense, and sustain their arab collegues.

As US is well aware about this fact, I believed that US would use their 5th generation.

A last word about the so-called campaign with cruise missiles against syrian air defense, Xavier Moreau said in interview that the results against Serbia was pitable. Do not forget that Serbia did not lose its war because of US-Nato raids, not all, this is because Russia in that time betrayed Serbia, and forced them to accept the US propositions. In these propositions, all conditions matched the serbian side. Serbia was not at knees.
This last point is very important to be mentionned.

How many pilots is the US prepared to lose?

0 of course!
0 aircraft.........
SAM  US F-22

Has S300 even been deployed in Syria yet?

Sheytan great to see you here, your insight on Iraq's military has been very very interesting on other forums!

And ofc this F-22/S-300 story is fairy tales.

sheytanelkebir wrote:Has S300 even been deployed in Syria yet?

Something has been deployed and that for sure but that "something" does not make S-300 operational system.

Russian stated that by the second half of 2014 all systems will be in place and operational but they also stated that by Autum 2013 deliveries will start.

TR1 wrote:Sheytan great to see you here, your insight on Iraq's military has been very very interesting on other forums!

And ofc this F-22/S-300 story is fairy tales.

Thanks TR1! Its always a interesting to read your comments on the defence sector.

RE the F22; Sadly there's still a lot of "VENIK" types who actually do a disservice to the militaries they champion by spreading obvious nonsense...

sheytanelkebir wrote:

TR1 wrote:Sheytan great to see you here, your insight on Iraq's military has been very very interesting on other forums!

And ofc this F-22/S-300 story is fairy tales.

Thanks TR1! Its always a interesting to read your comments on the defence sector.

RE the F22; Sadly there's still a lot of "VENIK" types who actually do a disservice to the militaries they champion by spreading obvious nonsense...

Why nonsense? LOL  

OMG..F-22 can't be shot down because IS STEEEEEALThhhh!!!  

US have airbases in all middle east..and its common knowledge they have been deploying
F-22s in Saudi Arabia..

http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2012-04/30/us-amasses-stealth-jet-armada-near-iran

But also have read reports of them in Jordan.. and some Israelis in forums claim there are F-22 in Israel too ,but thats not confirmed..but anyway.... and all this makes perfect sense..since they are useless in US main land. no one is going to attack with combat jets america.So even if the story is Fake ,as it looks.. since the source is
unknown .
.
Is totally possible and totally logical for an F-22 to be destroyed by air defenses..and exactly in the way the story says. ''Stealth'' invented by a Russian scientist ,who helped US design their stealth planes ,does NOT means planes are immune  to be detected by Radars , but that have lower Radar signature to traditional radars.. nothing more and nothing less.  Russia Sukhoi engineers own scientist say F-22 can be very detected by Irbis-E aesa radars ,already in service..in their combat planes at beyond visual range distances.Another thing is F-22 low radar signature only works against X-band radars.. but cannot hide against L-band radars ,that Russian latest planes also have. Neither can hide to other technology Russia have like sensitive Infra red optics sensors and others technology they already testing .

http://rt.com/news/russia-new-surveillance-system-974/

“Russia defense ministry...Every civilian or military object, be it airborne or on the ground, uses various systems emitting radio waves. It could be radar stations, communication systems, navigation GPS and GLONASS complexes, radio altimeters etc. Aircrafts have thermal and other sorts of wave emissions. The principles of physics cannot be escaped, even by American stealth B2 and F22 military aircraft. The task of MIIS is to spot such emissions, get exact coordinates and track the movement”

Long story short.. i don't see the 'Non-sense' here ...other than your nonsense logic.  


Even if the news is fake.. which i think it is..only because no credible source.
It will be totally foolish ,for the US airforce ,to NOT test the Syrian defenses with their last generation planes
that Russia have been helping to design.if US ever test the F-22 radar signature in a real war environment , Then flying near Syria borders and or near IRAN borders is the perfect place. Since both are countries that they are pushing for war but also because is its believed they have some modern defenses.

And lets not forget Iranians ALREADY captured an advanced US stealth drone that was supposed
to be 'undetectable'

https://youtu.be/g-jdL7FyYDA

here is another 'nonsense' just for you ,F-22 being owned by a regular light combat jet.

Rafale defeats F-22 Raptor
https://youtu.be/DQTCDa665S4

There are also more "Nonsense" reports that already the F-22 have been defeated in real exercises by F-15's ,Eurofighters and others.. Anyone with half a brain knows no technology is immune to counter technology.
specially when the country have the talent to do it.


Look at This report made by US RAND Corporation (hired by Pentagon) military simulations says about
how US stealth planes will do in real combat vs modern RUssian combat jets..


https://youtu.be/ITbGBmaqQkk


The only nonsense here is the ridiculous propaganda that exist about every technology US made.
And their Stealth planes takes the first place. As if F-22 and F-35 can't be shot down.Reality is they can , just like any other plane ,they just require the right equipment and weapons to do the job . Weapons and systems that already Russia have.  It will be very foolish for US miss the opportunity to Test Syrian air defenses with their latest generations combat planes.. and test if it is detected and how far they detected ,even at the risk of losing one. Because if is done more or less in secret will not matter..they will learn a lot in the experience.

IF the F-22 is so incredibly good.. it will never have been canceled..
The F-35 cost 200 million each and is not far from the F-22 price when was about to be produced in mass . Virginia class Submarines and aircraft carriers that US already have too many of them are infinitively more expensive ,cost billions and US do not cancel their production. Reality is the F-22 is a design failure , not only have major design issues that kill pilots ,but many other critical issues with their electronics and maintaince that are too long to name..but also . Just like the F-117.. that was shot down by an old soviet Sam (another stealth myth).. is not as good as advertised ..and do not have a chance to hide from decent Russian defense systems like latest S-300s or more advanced ones made to counter stealth planes.. Neither can hide from latest combat planes radars designed specifically to detect them.

Vann7 wrote:Why nonsense? LOL  

Because there's absolutely zero evidence for the crap they're spouting. Remember when Venik claimed half the USAF got shot down over the FRY? That B-2s were falling out of the sky? Non. Sense.

Vann7 wrote:US have airbases in all middle east..and its common knowledge they have been deploying
F-22s in Saudi Arabia..

F-22s have been deploying to Al Dhafra in the UAE.

Vann7 wrote:And lets not forget Iranians ALREADY captured an advanced US stealth drone that was supposed
to be 'undetectable'

Nobody intelligent ever claims stealth makes you invisible.

Vann7 wrote:IF the F-22 is so incredibly good.. it will never have been canceled..

It wasn't cancelled, they just put a limit on production. If it was cancelled they wouldn't be deploying to places that are not Saudi Arabia.

Last I read over at mp.net was that f-22 manufacturing tools were shelved, meaning production stopped. They are not building nay new ones. But are keeping the toolings for just in case.

Because there's absolutely zero evidence for the crap they're spouting.  

There is as same evidence that the event happened than not.. The news the original source
was posted by an American 'newspaper. so you have there 1 claim.. While the source could be
questioned ,you can't say for sure is crap.. because no one knows.. and the F-22 can be shot down.
Is not invisible

F-22s have been deploying to Al Dhafra in the UAE.

And there are F-22 in Saudi Arabia too.. and Jordan.. there are reports about that..

Nobody intelligent ever claims stealth makes you invisible.

No but the actions speak louder...'Non sense' could only mean its impossible to happen..
when in reality is very possible. THere are F-22's all over the middle east in US bases.. and it will be
very foolish for them not to test F-22 lower radar signature against Syrian air defenses in case they choose to later attack the country.. and see if Syrian defenses can detect it.. FLying over Syria airspace is not even required..you can test Syrian defenses by just flying near Syrian border. Every Modern combat jets have sensors that tell you if you have been detected or not. So the story makes perfect sense ..even if the story was all invented . But nobody knows for sure.

It wasn't cancelled, they just put a limit on production.  If it was cancelled they wouldn't be deploying to places that are not Saudi Arabia.

the F-22 production was canceled by the white house.


https://youtu.be/KaoYz90giTk

No more will be done.. and the ones they made will be the total.Not even there are plans to upgraded or fix its major problems.since requires a major redesign of the plane to fix it.. simply Is a failed project and the pentagon now plans to use F-35 instead as its replacement. and there are no other plans.

There are even more problems that those mentioned.. in the video.. like electrical power issues ,pilots
who gets trapped inside the plane..

http://pogoblog.typepad.com/pogo/2006/04/why_is_this_man.html

or oxygen contamination problems that killed pilots. Why they are not allowed to be fly at high altitudes. F-22 is just another RAH-66 Comanche.. that was also canceled. difference is the F-22 was canceled very late.  is a dead project and the few that works will be only used for special missions.

Vann7 wrote:There is as same evidence that the event happened than not.. The news the original source was posted by an American 'newspaper. so you have there 1 claim..

There is no evidence that it happened. Someone printing something on the internet is not evidence unless they're simply trying to prove they can type or that their internet works.

Vann7 wrote:While the source could be questioned ,you can't say for sure is crap.. because no one knows..

Yes I can, because there is a complete and total lack of actual evidence that this ever occurred. Including a complete and total lack of evidence that S-300s are anywhere inside of Syria.

Vann7 wrote:and the F-22 can be shot down.

Never said it couldn't.

Vann7 wrote:Is not invisible

Never said it was.

Vann7 wrote:And there are F-22 in Saudi Arabia too.. and Jordan.. there are reports about that..

F-16s are in Jordan, and Raptors have never been to Saudi. The Saudi rumor probably came from stuff like this: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=692_1335638824 There you've got a report talking about the Raptors being somewhere (which was in fact later confirmed as the UAE), together with Saudi's talking about Iran.

Vann7 wrote:'Non sense' could only mean its impossible to happen..when in reality is very possible.

No, nonsense means it makes no sense. My car is red. I live in a house. If you wrote about me jumping my black motorcycle off of my apartment complex, that'd be total nonsense.

Vann7 wrote:the F-22 production was canceled by the white house.

Production. Not the whole program. Otherwise there would be zero in service.

As Sa'iqa wrote:That one S-300 won't help Syria much - simply due to sheer numerical advantage NATO has. To halt NATO Syria would need 10-12 S-300 batteries, coupled with modern long range radars and various other systems (BUK, Tor) covered by Pantsirs.

As for now most of Syrian AD is obsolete - Kub, S-75, S-200, ZSU 23-4 etc.

You are indeed more optimistic that US Pentagon generals on the Syria briefings ,when they told SYrian defenses are 'Complicate'
and to create a no fly zone there will be ' expensive and with significant plane loses.' in their own words.  Syria have Pansirs-S1 ,and Buks systems and Tors too.. those are not 'Obsolete air defenses' but modern Mobile defenses, that can intercept not only planes but its missiles. and engage cruise missiles or ballistic that NATO use.  MObile Pantsir with pasive Radars also can shot down easily
the F-22 if it comes at its range. The F-22 cannot hide its heat signals unfortunately. And if active its radars will be Un-stealthy too.
on top that stealth does not turn planes invisible to radar but only a lower signature .  Syria also have modern Radars setup by Russia to enhance Stealth detection at decent distances. So Syria don't 10 batalions of S-300s to defeat NATO.. all they need is to Shot down a dozen of combat jets and perhaps a warship with their Yakhonts to provoke an end to the conflict.

Syria also have powerful Jammers and decoys to fool NATO missiles.. so you will see on NATO radars way more Sam Sites that the ones are really deployed. Syria also have fake defense sites that looks very real on satellite and to electronic sensors. Syria do have upgraded S-200s missiles with 300km range that can be very effective is couple with Modern Radars defenses and the many mobile sams defenses Syria have. in Short ,i don't think NATO can create a No fly zone in Syria without their Alqaeda rebels support on the ground..  Because they cannot fight at visual contact and cannot see if what they radars see is real or a fake decoy. On top that their Mobile Sams can shot down planes without using any active Radar..that could expose its location.
,
NATO only have been fighting third world nations..with subpar defenses ,But never faced one with very capable defenses.

The major problem with Syria is not is defenses. they are good enough to cause many casualties. the major problem of Syria is that is in a very bad geographical location.. Bordering Enemies like Israel ,Jordan and TUrkey where by no coincidence NATO deployed Patriots defenses.
You also have Saudi Arabia and Qatar . with US-UK and France...

Is there any report about this? Evaluating AD potential is hard and it takes many variables - quality of AD systems, quality of communications, crew training. Syrian AD systems may be dangerous but AFAIK Yakhont has a smaller range than cruise missles on US warships.

As Sa'iqa wrote:Is there any report about this? Evaluating AD potential is hard and it takes many variables - quality of AD systems, quality of communications, crew training. Syrian AD systems may be dangerous but AFAIK Yakhont has a smaller range than cruise missles on US warships.

Syria have customized migs.. to launch yakhonts.. according to Syrians with contacts inside. The they have also upgraded Mig-29 SM
which are very capable with digital displays and all that fancy stuff. They have been mostly using  Old planes against the Rebels and saving their best weapons for the special case of a major conflict from the outside..

You can check their facebook site ,they dont upgrade much ,but they have interesting stuff.

https://www.facebook.com/SyrianAirForce
 

Also this article shows a review of Syrian Defenses by former Russian Airforce military commander .

“Syria’s air defences are capable of giving an adequate response to strikes by the United States and its allies in the anti-Syrian coalition if they unleash war,” a former commander of Russia’s air defence forces told the Interfax news agency on Friday.

“Damascus today has about a thousand units of anti-aircraft rocket systems, and more than 5,000 anti-aircraft artillery systems of various types,” the former commander said.

The official did not rule out that Syria already has the advanced S-300 missiles, which could pose a serious threat to a Western air campaign.

“If Russia did not deliver the missiles, as its top leadership stated, Belarus or China could have done it on the quiet in 2010 or 2011,” he said.

Older Soviet systems, S-200 Angara and S-200V Vega “would be just as dangerous for U.S. aircraft and cruise missiles,” the Russian commander said, adding that the upgraded S-200V batteries constituted the backbone of the Syrian air defences.

The official described the long-range S-200 missile as “the best Russian system” developed to intercept the Pershing medium-range ballistic missiles the U.S. deployed in Europe during the Cold War.

“The modernized S-200V missile performs like a well-trained dog: just tell it ‘attack’ and it will get the enemy no matter what evasive action he tries,” he said.

Syrian air force no walkover, says Russia

www.thehindu.com/news/international/syrian-air-force-no-walkover-says-russia/article5076279.ece

Syrian defenses early in the conflict shot down a Turkey spy plane customized by NATO that was testing Syrian ECM capabilities.
And according to the Syrian Airforce they shot down also Israeli F-16s at least 1-2 of them. apparently using S-200s long range missiles.
however Israel claim at that time was their F-16 lost were do to 'mechanical failures' but that their pilots ejected and were safe.

Actually I don't think the loss of a dozen US pilots and aircraft and the loss of a ship would be very useful to Syria... I think the US would escalate their attacks if that happened rather than withdraw and that would be very bad for Syria.

I rather suspect the air defence assets and anti ship assets of Syria are clearly enough to make the US rather happy to accept alternatives like the removal of chemical weapons as an alternative to an air attack.

Any initial attack by the US will be via cruise missiles to soften the Syrians up a bit.

Against an SA-2 battery that means two missiles coming in at once at low level would allow a very good chance of penetration because very low level targets are hard to track and engage reliably and as only one target could be engaged at a time the second would probably penetrate the inner defence ring and destroy the main radar. Once that is down most subsequent cruise missiles can be used to take out the missiles themselves and other buildings in the area.

Against more modern SAMs however like Pantsir you can't target such a small mobile system with cruise missiles so they can manouver around and defeat incoming cruise missiles in large numbers meaning the main SAMs remain operational and a threat to any aircraft.

Cruise missiles are not cheap and are not held in US stocks in their thousands. About 120 cruise missiles were used against Libya and a similar number would be about their limit for most operations. This means that air defence units stationed near the borders can listen and monitor the skies so even if they don't detect cruise missiles till they are within 10km they can pass information back to other units operating near the intended targets to alert them so they are ready to engage.

Even ancient systems like OSA are very good at defeating cruise missiles as shown in Iraq in the 1990s, with newer systems offering even better performance... and that ignores modern fighter aircraft that could also run down cruise missiles and shoot them down with IR guided AAMs like R-73 and even R-60MK.

http://www.airforcetimes.com/article/20140202/NEWS04/302020005/Air-Combat-Command-s-challenge-Buy-new-modernize-older-aircraft

Gen. Michael Hostage, head of Air Combat Command said :

The F-22, when it was produced, was flying with computers that were already so out of date you would not find them in a kid’s game console in somebody’s home gaming system. But I was forced to use that because that was the spec that was written by the acquisition process when I was going to buy the F-22.

I ask you, wether the SU-35 could match with F-22 ?
Because US Air Force acknowledges that the F-22 is not the so advanced fighter as it was usually claimed.

In fact, I remembered that the Phantom II during the Vietnam's war, was allegedly so advanced, it did not need any gun. Just only air to air missiles, because in that time of supersonic era, the old dogfight was the past.
It was thought like this.
Nevertheless, when the old subsonic, and without radar' Mig 17 downed several Phantom II, and F-105 with guns, it was shock in the US air force. They quickly added guns to the Phantom.
However it diid not prevent to lost several hundreds of Phantom II, and F-105. The concept of the air to air missiles dogfights was wrong, as stealth technology nowadays.

My feeling is the russian SU-35 is enough against either F-22, or F-35, because of his strong Irbis-E AESA radar.

That is meaningless, honestly.

S-300 computers are even laughably older. It is still a monster system.
You know what kind of hardware the Space Shuttle flew on? Annnncient.
Hell tommorow you could go and buy a more advanced CPU chip (in terms of die size) than anything the S-400 has.

And yes, the F-22s RCS reduction is specifically aimed at commonly used airborne radars, like for example Irbis.
It WILL detect the F-22, but strictly speaking, from a much closer distance than it would detect another Su-35.
It ain't magic, but it also isn't like the Americans put all this effort at RCS reduction and all their attempts completely flopped.

Su-35 also costs like 1/3rd of an F-22.....

The most common chip in military equipment is the humble 486... simply because it is cheap and reliable and fast enough for most tasks.

Put a brand new untested chip and the heat and vibration and dust and then freezing conditions avionics can be put through will destroy them.

The Phantom was not the only aircraft go into service without a gun because at the time they believed missiles could do the job.

The British stopped making fighter aircraft completely because they decided that manned aircraft were obsolete and SAMs would defend their skies so effectively no aircraft could survive.

Clearly they were wrong... the Sparrow had mediocre performance and it was rapidly found that smaller lighter enemy aircraft were very dangerous close in. The raw power of the engines in the F-4 being its one saving grace. The enemy missiles were not that good either at the time.