[Damn computer just ate a reply 😡 ]

Airframe life? That will be solved with new airframes 😉

The concept of the F-14 is a long ranged BVR killer… the concept for the F-22 is…. a long ranged BVR killer.

Do we need swing wings? They give the F-14 its long range, top speed, acceleration and payload capability off a carrier deck, so yeah, I’d say we need them.

We do not need Phoneix per se – but, with the room/weight available, you can build a missile that far outranges the 120D – something akin to a KS-172.

If you update the F-14 you are not where you are with the F-18 E/F – not even close. For a start, you’ll lighten the existing airframe through better materials, you’ll lighten the engine, whilst also providing more thrust and greater fuel efficiency – all that translates into is an even better range, with more load lugging capability – moving the F-14 even further ahead of the F-18s in this regard.

The F-18 E/F program was a mistake, that money would have been better spent on the Tomcat airframe, not the Hornet. That mistake cannot now be rectified (unless the Navy are willing to stick up the same amount of money again).

As for the F-14/F-18 acceleration.

The F-18 is a draggy airframe, it cannot even break Mach 1 at sea level.

Here is some extracts from a flight journal article:

Another aspect I had not considered – with the wide spacing of the two engines, the F-14 is ideal for using TVC to augment roll (as well as pitch) control, thus reducing somewhat the manouverability difference between the F-14 and F-18.

I think it is possible to upgrade the F-14, yeah you can equip it with AIM-9X, thrust vectoring engine nozzle, Meteor and AIM-20, new avionics and preferebily a new engine with higher thrust.

It was possible, the reason it is not done is simple. it is more profitable a new aircraft like the F-18E than an upgraded F-14 with an old airframe.

You could argue you can open the F-14 production line but i think that is impossible now and build now F-14E would have ended up spawning a very expensive F-14 variant , so at the end the F-18E is the best option for the US military complex.

MiG 23, maybe my English is not so great, so I try to reformulate: neither Iraq nor Serbia were less capable than NV to fight back US. The fact that USSR was no longer (actually in Feb. 1991 it still was) has nothing to do with the subject. After all USSR did not participate in the Vietnam War. It only delivered fighters and SAMs to NV and trained its pilots and ground personel. Exactly what they did for Iraq and Serbia.

Any ground radar could pick the F 22, if this one is at 20-30 km, and of course, a well guided SAM can hit a raptor. So, what’s your point?

As for Russians having aircraft more agile than the f 22–no, they don’t. Russian AF does not operate a single TVC aircraft. When you will learn the differnce between a prototype and an operational aircraft, ley me know. As for the Chinese XXJ, as well as the Russian PAK FA they are probably in the stage known as “artist concept”:) . Which mean the first flight of the first prototype could be in 10 years, in the best situation (of course, if they really mean to build something better than the f 22).

The PAK FA has been reported to be not in early design stage, russian news and military statements claim this year the PAK FA will make its first flight, in 2007!:eek: at the latest will be 2009

Also it has been reported that Russia is interested in building two fifth generation fighters and that India at least is participating in one of the programs.

The MiG-35 is basicly the MiG-29OVT and it might be the winner of India`s tender for a new fighter;) we will know it soon by the way

The S-400 just started operational deployment in the Russian air defence forces.

So up to Februray 2007, the Russian programs are more less running at a pace with the same delay the Su-27 was introduced when the F-15 entered service, remember the F-22 will fly for at least 40 years 😉 so it is not very late to claim the F-22 will have competition soon

MiG be serious. A MiG-23 with an AL-41 is not just going to instantly become on par with an F-22 in accleration and turning with just an engine. That’s just not resonable and it;s just what BDF is talking about above.

No BDF is talking without knowing, in term of acceleration and turning, the Al-41 with give a similar thrust to weight ratio to the MiG-23, as high as those of the F-22.

He claims no!:eek: it is not possible:eek: , but his base is first not a study of MAPO MiG niether an study from a Russian university.

The computer software the russians used has predicted a very similar turning capability at several speeds and altitudes and an improved acceleration.

The problem of the MiG-23 or all the earlier aircraft was not speed but estemina, the aircraft could not fly long without afterburner, the problem was the engines not their airframes, their engines would basicly gulp of the fuel sooner than keep them flying for a long time at supersonic speeds

Yes it is true, you can fit better engines to the F-15, F-16, Mirage 2000 and will be as good as the F-22 in terms of supercruise and super agility, however the US aircraft defence industry deems necesary replace the older jets because number one, they need sales and number two their aircraft is so expensive they need to argue their aircraft is inmune to detection and offers something better than a upgraded fourth generation

All thes argument the MiG-23 or X fighter won`t be as good to the F-22 in terms of supercruise or super agility is totally flawed, see The MiG-29OBT has shown it is capable of doing the boomerang maneuvre, the F-22 even has not shown that maneuvre, the boomerang is basicly a yaw turn of 360 degrees or to put it in easier terms it is a 90 degree AoA screwing turn

source:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJOlt7arl9s

sourcehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qx2Bgw2e8Zo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wuy4b_9g0kc

The demonstration flight of Mig-29OVT on MAKS2005 was performed under endless applauses. You could think it’s not the aircraft but UFO in the air which can move against all the physic laws. “Double Kulbit”, “Boomerang”, another “Kulbit”. All this aerobatics is not only about to impress the show visitors and to attract the potentional buyer’s attention. Successful usage of these figures in the dogfights will not leave any chance to the opponent – there is no need to get on enemy’s tail hardly and spending time – flash-like flip and the plane is in the aim of rapid-fire gun.

sourcehttp://www.aviapedia.com/fighters/mig-29vft-video-smotr

Better at what?
Flipping the trust sideways in 1% of the flight time is better than hiding the nozzle IR emissions in 100% of the flight time?:confused: I don’t think so.

There are many 2D games that were better looking than early 3D games.:rolleyes: Adding an extra dimension doesn’t always bring benefits. At least not from the first try.
The Mig-29 nozzle way of vectoring the trust is not the most efficient way devised. There is active flow control in the X-36:cool:
The whole TV overall value in combat is a debated issue. F-35 TV nozzles were dropped from the production model for now.

TV will one day be introduced as a successor to flight control surfaces when engines become sufficiently reliable. Another decade till then:p

regards,
lantinian

man understand this the MiG-29OBT has better response n terms of agility and is a very advanced machine, IRST systems are the most difficult to fool day by day because any aircraft will heat up unless it is built of silica tiles like in the space shuttle, however you still will need to cool the jet stream the engine produces, the reality the F-22 still emits heat, the B-2 uses silica tiles in a small scale but it increases the price too high and basicly insulates the internal airframe but won`t insulate the external part of the F-22 engine the air will still be hot.
Insulating the Shuttle is expensive and the same is for the F-22 specially if you want to have a large fleet so i doubt the whole F-22 is build with silica tiles protections and the Russians and many other nations day by day increase the sensitivy of their IRST systems.

The silica tiles will insulate the heat generated by the nozzles and won`t heat up the external airframe surface, yes but it won`t stop the air from heat up and the jet stream produced by the engine from being hot, yes you can apply a flat engine and it will cool down faster, but still the engine exaust jet will retain some kinetic energy and some heat

Also it adds up weight and increases the cross section and air drag, that is the reason the AL-41 has a round cross section and the F-35 does not use a flat nozzle but just the serrated nozzle.

Beside you do not know if the Russians also have used silica tiles in the al-41F nozzles to reduce the IR emissions of the Su-35BM and the PAK FA

On order to bring more credibility into my opinion I decided to watch all those videos of fighters with TV on YouTube, just to make sure I got the correct perspective. I came up with the following visual observations.

This is a very good video to compare with great explanation as to the usefulness of the maneuvers. http://youtube.com/watch?v=XOgMigr1q7Q&mode=related&search=

Why does the Russians always assume thet the battle starts after the two planes pass one another? Or is that the only scenario where Super maneuverability plays out to their interest ? Too bad

These are the visual conclusions that I made:

Russian planes (SU-37 & MiG-29 OTV) in comparison with the F-22:
– perform the “spin around the axis maneuvers” with higher rotation speed than the Raptor and sustain them for less time to avoid slowing down too much as thay don’t have such powerful engines as the F-22.
– Always came out of the extreme maneuvers with a nose down attitude, to pick up speed as they cannot hang in mid-air like the Raptor
– used their afterburners much more (especially the MiG-29)
– Do not Carry Weapons

Some other non visual observations about the Russian fighters only:
– are always flown by test pilots and not regular pilots (I guess because they don’t have them in service)
– Su-3X can maneuver to full potential at only 50% of fuel
– Such extreme use of trust vectoring in the Russian aircraft is only possible by overriding the safe flight control system limits in production fighter such as the SU-30MKI
– Russians use the TV outside to expand the flight envelope of the aircraft, while Americans use to within
– Russian planes do not offer the level ot situational awareness, the F-22 pilots enjoy

What I can conclude is that a pilot executing these maneuvers in the Russian planes:
– will be exposed to higher G-values and may black out:mad:
– will have less time to shoot its weapons inside the maneuver
– will present a larger Infrared Target
– will be able to execute the maneuver in a smaller speed envelope
– will have to pay attention to altitude much more
– will have none or less weapons to fire with
– will require advanced training
– will expend its fuel faster
– will “enjoy: higher accident rate
– may not be able to recover if an engine or vectoring nozzle fails
– May not be allowed to do them at all while in combat.:mad:

Bottom line: F-22 is the only plane at the moment that might someday demonstrate the Russian air show maneuvers in actual combat.:cool:

Regards,:)
lantinian

Lantinian

The MiG-29OVT has a 3D thrust vectoring nozzle that makes it better that the 2D F-22

see the videos can compare

watch this video

source

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8441SqKOaL8&mode=related&search=

By that logic I can shoot down a Flanker with a potato canon. :rolleyes:

What logic are you claming? the only thing i said to you is the Russians as the americans claim things The Russians claim their S-400 can be used against stealth aircraft maneouvring; the americans their F-22 is a stealth fighter that most likely will be invisble to almost all known detection and weapons systems

If you understand that you will understand the Russians as the americans are applying a commercial strategy to sell their weapons, but as far as combat both can be true, however see that you are not proving your point, first we do not know the real capabilities of both systems because both nations won`t publish all the data they have, they will simply will claim what their advertizing and commercial strategies let them;)

And you know that SA-3 radarguided or TV-guided with radio command guidance is?
When you see a F-117 than can you shout down a F-117, with a SA-3!
What has this to do with Radar?
And Bistatic (Serbien), you must know the right direction! Therefor need you a spy in the NATO,
which supplies you with the exact air lanes. The Serbs bring the F-117 only with russian help down!
Why, with Bistatic has you only a detections spot of 5km in 15-20km distance!

When the F-117 was designed was the computing power still limited, therefore diamond. With the B-2 could Nortrop compute a continuis curvature. The RCS of B2 is only half the size of a F-117. What mean you how less is then the F-22 RCS?!

And you think with RAM can you make a Su-35BM invisible for Radar, with all this 90° Superreflectors?
You can maybe reach a RCS ~ 5m2 with many tons of RAM.:rolleyes:
A F-22 see your Su long befor the Su see the F-22!:diablo:
The Su-35BM radar antenna has 2db lesser gain as the N011M.
Lesser is more badly.
And your Su-35BM can’t lift a VHF radar and no Kolchuga!

Kolchuga
*That Kolchuga can detect US stealth aircraft by their radio and radar emissions. Whilst technically possible, no stealth aircraft radiate when in battle, so this mode of operation is militarily irrelevant.

*Kolchuga is sufficiently sensitive to detect US stealth aircraft from unconventional sources of RF emissions, including radiation from exhaust trails and electromagnetic interference from the engine. (Technically the power levels of these sources are likely to be so small, if at all, that there would be insufficient energy for Kolchuga to measure these effects at one site, let alone the two or more required for triangulation. They would also be almost impossible to distinguish for normal background RF noise and would not appear like the conventional emissions types Kolchuga is designed to receive and analyse).

*Kolchuga is sufficiently sensitive to operate as a bistatic radar receiver and hence exploit other transmitters in the environment. (This is likely to be true for the specific case of forward scatter in which the radar cross section of even a stealth aircraft can become very large for a few moments. However, achieving forward scatter simultaneously in two or more receivers is geometrically impossible, so triangulation would not work. Secondly, unless Kolchuga has been specifically designed to work as a bistatic radar receiver with a certain radar type—and there’s no evidence of Kolchuga being deployed in conjunction with specific radar types—then it will lack the essential matched filter required to reliably detect reflected pulses in the presence of noise. Therefore, if this effect works at all, it is likely to be unreliable and fleeting).

Enthusiastic russian sources often make claims such as “[Kolchuga] is head and shoulders above all American, Russian, French, Czech, or Brazilian developments in this field”
Such claims are unsubstantiated and pure speculation, as the performance and even existence of many ESM systems are highly classified and not deduceable by ELINT.

Why you do not understand two aspects? first stealth does not mean the aircraft is invisible to radar, it still reflects and scatters radiation back, and emits heat, second both russian and americans are claiming things upon commercial interests

According to Russian literature the S-400 will be affective against stealth aircraft even maneouvring,
According to Western literature the F-22 might evade even the S-400

The serbs said their radars did indeed detect the F-117 and another curious thing there is expeculation among even western authors that even the Iraqis were close to detect or detected some times the F-117.

The serbs in few words said the F-117 was detectted and killed using radars or in very real few words the F-117 was shot down by the Serbs because Stealth did not work