[galaxyLogic]

Everybody of course would like to read a ranking of all fighter jet planes me included. Not like who is fastest or has most ammunition but who has the best rate of survival. This could perhaps be determined by some sort of simulation. Would not make sense to put them into an actual fight really. Countries who own the planes would not want the enemy to know their weaknesses.

[KMag]

Rate of survival under what circumstances? Even for the simple case of pairwise one-on-one dogfights, there could easily be a rock-paper-scissors scenario where there's no single dominant plane.

Also, the data would be from simulations. Outside of Ukraine, there haven't been many fighters of advanced nations shot down in decades.

[yobbo]

There were rumours of an Isreali F-35 targeted and damaged (but survived) by some old Russian AA system, maybe BUK? This was based on observed events and movements. Of course, we would never know, which is correct and appropriate.

The topic of "spectral stealth" is complicated. It is vulnerable to systems of networked radars, among other things. It is one feature that may be very useful, but it is not a "panacea".

[red-iron-pine]

Russian BUKs and S-400s in Syria repeatedly and consistently tracked Israeli F-16s. In an actual shooting war they'd have gone down, fast, and the Israelis knew it -- which is why they bought into the F-35. Price was good and, like, "stealth".

There is little to suggest that the Israeli F-35 was taken down by a missile; the sources involved are not especially credible. Eurasia Times, for example, is basically Russia Today (RT) and is not really trustworthy. Most of the posts elsewhere, e.g. Quora, are from questionable accounts and aren't credible either.

It's possible it happened and they're spinning it as something birds -- which is pretty lame and damning if true -- but most of the pro-shot-down points are difficult to take seriously.

[yobbo]

Nothing is known, but if we assume the basic events are not fabricated, then the behaviour of an F-35 was somehow altered by a fired missile. If such a missile detonated within a radius of maybe 30-40m (or something) then damage would have been substantial. If greater than maybe 100m (or something) there would only be mild damage, but that means the missile wasn't tracking the target. This scenario would also not be surprising.

If true, I don't think it necessarily presents the F-35 poorly. But it's only a rumour. And if true, it most likely would be classified as secret, since reporting it would be like handing the enemy a damage assessment report.

[gpderetta]

And in Ukraine, the life expectancy of anything flying above treetop has been very very low (admittedly F35 would fare better than its competitors here).

[galaxyLogic]

I just wonder if there are such simulations. My guess is there are. They are simulating nuclear weapons too.

[KMag]

More than 20 years ago, I wrote networking portions of such simulations. Even for the unclassified components for those simulations, many of the components were still both commercial secrets and considered munitions under ITAR export controls.

Terrain maps beyond a certain resolution are classified. As I remember, the somewhat lower resolution terrain maps were still ITAR controlled munitions. Some of the radio propagation models are classified.

Even half-way decent simulation outputs are likely also classified.

In my case, for the most part, the simulations were used to shorten the turnaround time in the early prototyping stages, and also a fair amount for the sales team to sell military hardware to governments.

[fnrslvr]

You might want to track down the information they release from multinational training exercises like Red Flag. Reportedly the F-35 has put in multiple dominant showings at Red Flag since its debut. I'm not sure how complete the information they release from these exercises is, though, and some of the aircraft involved (most notably the F-22) are notoriously restrained to keep the true capabilities of the platform secret.