Sukhoi passes into obselence as the 50th Raptor is delivered.
- Thread starter dannytoro
- Start date
aL-41F hasn't even finished development yet, but F119 is already on F-22. Flankers are using AL-31 series last time I checked.
F-15C would own flankers other than su-30mki/su-35.
What do I have to gain by favouring F-22? Remember, China gets Russian planes, not American planes.
As for F-22 having better system, of course it has better system. The amount of money LM and Boeing put into developing their different control systems is astounding. I bet Sukhoi doesn't pay anyone 40K per plane for just one part of the control system.
The fighter radar technology is obviously more advanced in F-22. When are the Russians going to get an AESA radar?
As for su-27 having better maneouverability, do you have any proof of this? F-22 is widely regarded as the best fighter jet, I don't think the onus is on me.
F-15C would own flankers other than su-30mki/su-35.
What do I have to gain by favouring F-22? Remember, China gets Russian planes, not American planes.
As for F-22 having better system, of course it has better system. The amount of money LM and Boeing put into developing their different control systems is astounding. I bet Sukhoi doesn't pay anyone 40K per plane for just one part of the control system.
The fighter radar technology is obviously more advanced in F-22. When are the Russians going to get an AESA radar?
As for su-27 having better maneouverability, do you have any proof of this? F-22 is widely regarded as the best fighter jet, I don't think the onus is on me.
Most likely yes. But i do not know english/american specifications, thats for sure.
You see, mister, i am not just VVS officer, i am IAS officer, which means i am a chief technician of the plane. Probably i do not know a damn thing about signal processing, since it's not my pro, but i now much more then you could imagine of turbofans. My specialisation is called "planer and engine". And i cannot see the reason to mention turbofans here.
It has. Su-47 (former S-37) has it.
I'll try to find a source. During my education major told us a story about some sort of joint usaf/vvs simulation fight, in which Russian team destroyed all the enermies without having a loss, using just ordinary Su-27s.
Just see their performance in air.
Eurofighter
New Member
I would like to go back to the invisibility of a F-22 on radar. isn't it true that china has spend a great effort in technologies that could beat the stealth features of US fighters? how is that paying off right now? I'm sure that even if there are some results it will be kept secret by the PLA, but still, anyone knows more about this?
And although it may be true that the onboard radar of a SU-27 (30) couln't see a F-22 beyond (what was it tphuang? 20 km?) a few kilometers, then what about ground based radars and/or AWACS?
And although it may be true that the onboard radar of a SU-27 (30) couln't see a F-22 beyond (what was it tphuang? 20 km?) a few kilometers, then what about ground based radars and/or AWACS?
Stealth really is a relative thing, the F-117 e.g. can most lilkely be seen by the best Russian radars today. B-2 is more or less a 'black hole', while the F-22 (I think, don't have any sources on this one, anyone has the RCS of the Raptor?) probably is somewhere in between.
The main argument in favour of the Sukhoi interceptors is really that they are cheaper, meaning they can be built in larger numbers, and the fact that they are a proven airplane. F-22 is still some years from being in full regular service, and in the meantime the main US interceptor is the F-15C and E. These two are still good, and should have more or less the same prestanda as the different Flankers.
1:4 is perhaps a good Raptor vs. Sukhoi loss ratio, but they are different generations, and it is impossible to say, because nowdays few engagements are fought simply between fighters without support from other factors (most importantly AWACS).
The Berkut is the aircraft that you could compare to the Raptor, but it is still perhaps ten years into the future evean if Putin starts giving it some serious funding.
The main argument in favour of the Sukhoi interceptors is really that they are cheaper, meaning they can be built in larger numbers, and the fact that they are a proven airplane. F-22 is still some years from being in full regular service, and in the meantime the main US interceptor is the F-15C and E. These two are still good, and should have more or less the same prestanda as the different Flankers.
1:4 is perhaps a good Raptor vs. Sukhoi loss ratio, but they are different generations, and it is impossible to say, because nowdays few engagements are fought simply between fighters without support from other factors (most importantly AWACS).
The Berkut is the aircraft that you could compare to the Raptor, but it is still perhaps ten years into the future evean if Putin starts giving it some serious funding.
do you have some serious reading problems? I did say "assuming it gets that close".
about the anti stealth radars, they are ALL ground based. What they do is to look for a whole in a particular part of the EM spectrum. These systems are passive. There is the Czech Veras, which was denied to China, and some Ukranian stuff.
All this means that fighters must be vectored in by ground control, while means they are flying blind.
about the anti stealth radars, they are ALL ground based. What they do is to look for a whole in a particular part of the EM spectrum. These systems are passive. There is the Czech Veras, which was denied to China, and some Ukranian stuff.
All this means that fighters must be vectored in by ground control, while means they are flying blind.
The russians has proven themselves to be superior in terms of aerodynamics and sheer manueverbility, no question about that. The average Su-27 or Mig-29 is actually better than an F-15 in terms of aerodynamics.
However in terms of technology and equipment. America is definitely better. Radars (AESA,APG-68(V)9), engines (GE, P&R) with higher thrust ratio, avionics, you name it. Also what's the use for manuevers if you can have a missiles like AIM-9X or AMRAAM which can turn 9 Gs when the average pilot usually black-out around 7 Gs? And besides manuevers are useless if it comes to BVR, which is the main doctrine of the USAF and their AWACS.
Well, I got this from the ATS board along with the source.
Eurofighter Radars Didn't Spot F/A-22s
Yes, there were simulations back in 1992-93 between the USAF and the Russians,the Eagles vs the Flankers but sorry, there were no winners, those were purely friendly simulations. This has been confirmed by both USAF and Russian pilots. There's also a source somewhere, when I have the time I'll post it.
However in terms of technology and equipment. America is definitely better. Radars (AESA,APG-68(V)9), engines (GE, P&R) with higher thrust ratio, avionics, you name it. Also what's the use for manuevers if you can have a missiles like AIM-9X or AMRAAM which can turn 9 Gs when the average pilot usually black-out around 7 Gs? And besides manuevers are useless if it comes to BVR, which is the main doctrine of the USAF and their AWACS.
Eurofighter said:
Well, I got this from the ATS board along with the source.
Eurofighter Radars Didn't Spot F/A-22s
Aluka said:
Yes, there were simulations back in 1992-93 between the USAF and the Russians,the Eagles vs the Flankers but sorry, there were no winners, those were purely friendly simulations. This has been confirmed by both USAF and Russian pilots. There's also a source somewhere, when I have the time I'll post it.
Agility has actually increased in importance since that is the surest way of making a missile miss (if employed togheter with chaff/flares/ECM).
On missiles, this is also a field where USSR/Russia have been the leading country. The first super-agile missile was the Soviet R-73, the second was the Israeli Python-4, and only fifteen-twenty years later have the US gotten their AIM-9X and ASRAAM's operational. In medium-ranges, AMRAAM is probably the best in the world, while long-range is dominated by the Russians after the withdrawal of the Phoenix (MiG-31 and associated missiles). The use of long-range missiles is in question though since aquiring a good long range radar fix is becoming harder due to increased stealth, often strict ROE's and the fact that the longer the missile is in the air, the longer time the intended target has to avoid it.
On missiles, this is also a field where USSR/Russia have been the leading country. The first super-agile missile was the Soviet R-73, the second was the Israeli Python-4, and only fifteen-twenty years later have the US gotten their AIM-9X and ASRAAM's operational. In medium-ranges, AMRAAM is probably the best in the world, while long-range is dominated by the Russians after the withdrawal of the Phoenix (MiG-31 and associated missiles). The use of long-range missiles is in question though since aquiring a good long range radar fix is becoming harder due to increased stealth, often strict ROE's and the fact that the longer the missile is in the air, the longer time the intended target has to avoid it.