Although both aircraft belong to the fifth generation of stealth fighters, the F-22 Raptor and F-35 Joint Strike Fighter were designed with different priorities. The F-22 remains the world’s premier air superiority fighter, optimized for defeating enemy aircraft in highly contested airspace. The F-35, meanwhile, emphasizes multirole flexibility, advanced sensor fusion, networked warfare, and strike operations across land, sea, and expeditionary environments.

Rather than replacing one another, the two aircraft complement each other within the U.S. military’s modern air combat doctrine.
The F-22 Raptor dominates air-to-air combat by securing control of contested skies, while the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter delivers unmatched versatility through precision strike, intelligence gathering, electronic warfare, and network-centric operations. Together, they form the backbone of modern U.S. and allied fifth generation air power.
| Specification | F-22 Raptor | F-35 Joint Strike Fighter |
|---|---|---|
| Generation / Type | Fifth Generation Air Superiority Fighter | Fifth Generation Multirole Fighter |
| Manufacturer | Lockheed Martin, Boeing | Lockheed Martin |
| Crew | 1 | 1 |
| First Flight | 1997 | 2006 |
| Operational Service | 2005 | 2015 |
| Maximum Speed | Mach 2.25 | Mach 1.6 |
| Supercruise | Yes (without afterburner) | No |
| Combat Radius | Approximately 590 miles (950 km) | Approximately 670 miles (1,080 km), F-35A |
| Ferry Range | Around 1,840 miles | Around 1,380 miles |
| Service Ceiling | Over 65,000 ft | Approximately 50,000 ft |
| Internal Weapons Bays | Yes | Yes |
| Maximum Payload | Approximately 8,000 lb internal | Up to 18,000 lb combined internal/external |
| Radar | AN/APG-77 AESA | AN/APG-81 AESA |
| Electro-Optical System | Limited | EOTS with Distributed Aperture System |
| Helmet Mounted Display | No | Yes |
| Electronic Warfare Suite | Integrated | AN/ASQ-239 Advanced EW System |
| Estimated Unit Cost | Approximately $143 million (flyaway, historical estimate) | Approximately $82 million (F-35A production aircraft) |
The F-22 was engineered specifically for penetrating dense enemy air defenses while remaining virtually undetectable by radar. Its airframe incorporates edge alignment, internal weapons storage, radar absorbent materials, and optimized engine inlets that contribute to one of the lowest radar cross sections ever achieved by a production fighter.
Its twin engine design also provides greater redundancy and exceptional survivability during high intensity combat.
The F-35 sacrifices some extreme stealth optimization for greater mission flexibility. Although its radar signature remains exceptionally low from frontal aspects, its design incorporates additional sensors, communications equipment, and multirole capabilities that inevitably create engineering tradeoffs.
Where the F-35 excels is in its ability to avoid detection through superior electronic warfare, passive sensing, and information dominance rather than relying solely on low observability.
Advantage: F-22 Raptor
This is where the F-35 establishes a clear technological advantage.
The AN/APG-81 AESA radar is integrated with multiple advanced systems including:
Instead of presenting pilots with separate radar, infrared, and electronic warfare information, the aircraft combines all sensor inputs into a single tactical picture.
The F-22’s APG-77 radar remains among the world’s most capable air-to-air radars, offering exceptional detection range and low probability of intercept. However, its original avionics architecture predates many of the networking and fusion capabilities found in newer aircraft.
As a battlefield information node, the F-35 is widely considered the most advanced combat aircraft currently in operational service.
Advantage: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter
The F-22 primarily carries:
Its emphasis remains air superiority rather than deep strike.
The F-35 supports a far wider inventory, including:
Three operational variants further expand its flexibility:
The F-35 has accumulated hundreds of thousands of flight hours across numerous allied air forces and has participated in combat missions over the Middle East and Europe. The F-22 has also seen operational deployments, primarily providing air superiority, precision strike, and deterrence missions, but its fleet size and export restrictions limit its global footprint.
Advantage: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter
The comparison between the F-22 Raptor and the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter is not about identifying a universal winner. Each aircraft was built to dominate different aspects of modern air warfare.
The F-22 remains the benchmark for air superiority, combining unmatched stealth, supercruise, high altitude performance, and exceptional agility to secure control of contested skies. Its design is optimized for defeating advanced enemy fighters before they can pose a threat.
The F-35, in contrast, is a highly connected multirole platform designed to gather, process, and share battlefield intelligence while conducting air to air combat, precision strike, electronic attack, intelligence collection, and close air support. Its versatility, lower procurement cost, and widespread adoption by allied nations make it the cornerstone of modern coalition airpower.
For the U.S. Air Force, the two aircraft are most effective when employed together. The F-22 clears the airspace and establishes air dominance, while the F-35 leverages its advanced sensors and multirole capabilities to execute precision strikes, coordinate joint operations, and enhance situational awareness across the battlespace.
Get real time update about this post category directly on your device, subscribe now.
| |
| Price | |
| Our Rating | |
| Manufacturer | Lockheed Martin Lockheed Martin |
| Category | Fighter Jets Fighter Jets |
| Name | F-22 Raptor F-35 Lightning II |
| Manufacturer | Lockheed Martin, Boeing Defense Lockheed Martin |
| Country of Origin | United States United States |
| Type / Role | Air Superiority Stealth Fighter Multirole Stealth Fighter |
| Generation | Fifth Generation 5th |
| Status | In active service In Service |
| First Flight | September 7, 1997 December 15, 2006 |
| Introduction / In Service Since | December 15, 2005 2015 |
| Number Built | 187 operational units 1,200+ (as of 2025) |
| Operators | United States Air Force USA, UK, Japan, Israel, Italy, Australia, and others |
| Length | 62 ft (18.9 m) 51.2 ft (15.6 m) |
| Wingspan | 44.5 ft (13.6 m) 35 ft (10.7 m) |
| Height | 16.7 ft (5.1 m) 14.4 ft (4.38 m) |
| Wing Area | 840 sq ft (78 mยฒ) 460 sq ft (42.7 mยฒ) |
| Empty Weight | 43,340 lb (19,700 kg) 29,300 lb (13,300 kg) |
| Maximum Takeoff Weight (MTOW) | 83,500 lb (38,000 kg) 70,000 lb (31,800 kg) |
| Internal Weapons Bay | 3 total (1 centerline, 2 side) 2 (up to 5,700 lb payload) |
| External Hardpoints | 4 (non-stealth configuration) 6โ10 (up to 18,000 lb total) |
| Maximum Speed | Mach 2.25 (2,414 km/h) Mach 1.6 |
| Range | 1,840 miles (2,960 km) 1,380 mi (2,220 km) |
| Combat Radius | 530 miles (850 km) ~670 mi (1,080 km) |
| Service Ceiling | 65,000 ft (19,800 m) 50,000 ft (15,240 m) |
| Rate of Climb | 62,000 ft/min (315 m/s) 45,000 ft/min |
| Thrust-to-Weight Ratio | 1.26 0.87 |
| G Limits | +9 G +9 |
| Engine Type | Pratt & Whitney F119-PW-100 turbofan Pratt & Whitney F135-PW-100 |
| No. of Engines | 2 1 |
| Thrust (each) | 35,000 lbf (156 kN) 43,000 lbf |
| Thrust Vectoring | Yes (2D pitch vectoring) Yes (on F-35B variant) |
| Fuel Capacity | 18,000 lb (8,200 kg) internal ~18,500 lb internal |
| Gun | 1ร M61A2 Vulcan 20mm cannon GAU-22/A 25mm cannon (F-35A) |
| Missiles (Air-to-Air) | AIM-120 AMRAAM, AIM-9 Sidewinder AIM-120 AMRAAM, AIM-9X |
| Missiles (Air-to-Ground) | JDAM, SDB AGM-154 JSOW, AGM-158 JASSM |
| Bombs | GBU-32 JDAM, GBU-39 SDB JDAM, Paveway II/III, SDB I/II |
| Hardpoints | 4 external (optional) 6 external + 2 internal |
| Payload Capacity | 18,000 lb (8,200 kg) ~18,000 lb |
| Radar | AN/APG-77 AESA radar AN/APG-81 AESA |
| Radar Range | 125+ miles (200+ km) ~150+ km |
| Electronic Warfare (EW) System | AN/ALR-94 suite AN/ASQ-239 suite |
| Targeting System | Integrated multi-sensor fusion EOTS (Electro-Optical Targeting System) |
| Helmet Display | Standard HUD (no HMD in baseline) HMDS Gen III |
| Navigation | GPS/INS GPS/INS with terrain-following |
| Autopilot / AI Assistance | Digital fly-by-wire Advanced flight management |
| Communication | Intra-flight data link, secure comms MADL & Link 16 secure data links |
| Radar Cross Section (RCS) | ~0.0001 mยฒ ~0.001 mยฒ |
| Stealth Features | Radar-absorbent materials, internal weapons RAM coating, internal weapons bay, edge alignment |
| Infrared Signature Reduction | Engine exhaust shielding Yes |
| Sensor Fusion | Yes Full 360ยฐ data integration |
| Networking Capabilities | Limited Link-16, proprietary data link Distributed data-sharing with allied units |
| Special Export Versions | None (export restricted) F-35I (Israel), F-35A (Japan), etc. |
| Major Conflicts / Deployments | Syria (2014โpresent) Middle East operations (Iraq, Syria) |
| Notable Operators | USAF (Air Combat Command, PACAF) USAF, USN, USMC, RAF, IDF |
| Combat Proven? | Yes Yes |
| Mission Types | Air superiority, interception, precision strike Air superiority, strike, SEAD, ISR |
| Unit Cost | ~$150 million (flyaway) $80โ100 million (variant-dependent) |
| Development Cost | ~$67 billion (program total) ~$400 billion (program total) |
| Program Name | Advanced Tactical Fighter (ATF) Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) |
| Funding Countries | United States only USA, UK, Italy, Netherlands, Canada, Australia, etc. |
| Upgrades Planned | Avionics, radar, networking, sensors Block 4, Tech Refresh 3 |
| Future Replacement | NGAD (Next Generation Air Dominance) NGAD (2035+) |
| Export Restrictions | U.S. Congress export ban U.S. FMS approval required |
| Notable Achievements | First operational 5th-gen fighter Widest global fighter program in history |
| Competitors | F-35 Lightning II, Su-57, J-20 Su-57, J-20, Tempest, KF-21 |
|
The information provided on TheDefenseWatch.com is for general informational purposes only. While we strive to ensure the accuracy, completeness, and timeliness of our content regarding defense and aerospace products, technologies, and specifications, we cannot guarantee that all information is 100% accurate or up-to-date due to the evolving nature of military technology and classified data. TheDefenseWatch.com does not warrant the reliability, suitability, or availability of the information for any specific purpose. Users are advised to consult official sources, such as manufacturers, government publications, or defense agencies, for precise and verified data before making decisions based on our content. We are not affiliated with any defense manufacturers, governments, or military organizations mentioned. Opinions, reviews, and ratings reflect expert analysis but are subjective and should not be considered endorsements. TheDefenseWatch.com is not responsible for any errors, omissions, or consequences arising from the use of this websiteโs content. External links are provided for convenience and do not imply endorsement. TheDefenseWatch.com reserves the right to update or modify content without prior notice. By using this website, you agree to our Privacy & Cookies Policy.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Accept Read More