MM11It is the single most important feature of the puzzle in future warfare. Even the no nonsense Russians who do not spend money on new tech until absolutely necessary are going for Stealth. Which means it is going to be key. I think Europe simply missed the fifth gen boat ! . Thankfully America can supply them with F 35 🙂
Europe set other priorities. People forget about when the Rafale/Typhoon were designed and what requirements were specified! The UK indeed intended a stealthy strike aircraft as the replacement for the Tornado and finally gave up its own efforts when the US granted access to the F-35, which is a cheaper option than developing a complex manned combat aircraft all alone. Stealth definitely provides a huge tactical advantage, but I wouldn’t bet my ass on stealth working perfectly as some suppose here. Stealth isn’t that new anymore and the principles are known. Anti stealth technologies, more advanced sensors and even new stealth technologies and ECM are researched and also actively developed and tested. In a few years the situation might look quite different, though no one can exactly predict what there will be in 5-10 years. We have yet to wait.
The EF/Rafale will never get into a WVR battle with the Raptor. The Raptor has Thrust Vectoring to counter any HMS advantage the Euro canards have ( the Rafale like the Raptor do not have it yet) And the Raptor is going to get its on HMS anyway
That’s a pretty optimistic assumption, anyway the operators of all these aircraft are allies so you won’t see them fighting against each other, but with each other! HMS+TVC weapons can offset TVC advantage to a large extend, let alone that TVC is just useful in certain regimes of the flight envelope.
MM11If it is meeting/exceeding expectations, then is “hype” the correct word though?
You can also hype a product by verbaly degrading the competition. That doesn’t mean the type doesn’t meet the specs. And what are the specs in that direction anyway?
And which avionics package on the Fulcrum/Flanker before 1990 was superior to the F-15C/F-16C/F-18C/F-14D?
HMS, IRST, datalinks on all aircraft. R-73, longer ranging R-27ER, complemented by BVR capable IR missiles R-27T/ET.
Which they copied from the Israelis and the Python.
That is certainly one of the most ridiculous assertions.
MM11Isn’t EF Typhoon with AESA and TVC a friggin overkill vs Pakistani JF-17 Thunder ?
It doesn’t have the range to be effective on the Chinese side.
Who knows what the chinese fields in the future the IAF would like to counter. CFTs and AAR might significantly extend the types operating radius.
MM11But if the product isn’t meeting their expectations, why would they want to keep buying it? If anything, they’d be making a fuss about why something’s not performing well.
Who says it doesn’t meet its expectations or that something is not performing well? I think you don’t get the point or at least you don’t want to.
MM11Why would the USAF hype a product, if they didn’t like it? They’re not selling anything. They’re buying.
Supporting LM and trying to ensure that they will receive a sufficient number. No one says they don’t like it, yet hype can easily be used to ensure no one threatens the program or cuts the numbers. Though that doesn’t work on all occassions as the F-22 shows.
MM11He was being facetious.
Demonstrators. Wow.
All they’ve demonstrated is that Russia is very good at producing a one off demonstrator.
What do we see in production? Incrementally improved variants of old designs…
Somewhat.
Show routines are meaningless when talking about combat.
If you guys would actually bother to inform yourself about non US systems you wouldn’t come up with such uninformed conclusions. Mig as well as Sukhoi started researching and designing 5th generation fighter and their related technologies back in the 1980s just around the time when the USAF conceived the ATF. Prototypes were under construction when the SU collapsed and this resulted in delays. In the end the RuAF decided that they would neither take the MiG MFI nor the Su-47 and opted for a new design instead. This became known as PAK FA and Sukhoi is contracted to develope this new aircraft internal designation T-50.
While the MiG MFI and Su-47 single prototypes were eventually declared as technology demonstrators the russians were researching and even developing a lot of related technologies. They gained quite some experience when it comes to materials, engines, flight controlls and even avionics and a lot of this stuff flew into upgraded variants for existing designs. Now there is another spin off from the PAK FA project the Su-35. Very much like technologies and experiences gained with the F-22 were reused on the F-16 blk 60 for example.
In your little the US is all world that doesn’t take any notice, because there is no interest and what you don’t know does simply not exist or is not true.
MM11Taxi trials?
You are kidding, aren’t you?
Airshow routines? Well obviously performing acrobatics is all it takes to produce a successful combat aircraft. ‘
He obviously spoke about the MiG 1.44 demonstrator, originally planned as a 5th gen fighter prototype. This aircraft conducted taxi tests back in 1994 and was flown 2 times in 2000.
The aircraft performing airshow routines was the Su-47 Berkut aka S-37.
These aircraft contributed to the Russian industries research of new technologies, and are contineously ignored by some here.
Hence why you see see Airforces lining up to buy SU-26 Sukhois instead of SU-30 Sukhois…
Was that an ironical comment?
MM11Childish personal attacks. :rolleyes: You can do better than that. I said European fanboys, no need to feel offended if you are not one.
Well though I don’t consider myself a fanboy, I’m a european with a focussed interest on european designs, though that doesn’t mean I’m not interested in US or Russian designs as well.
Fact is fanboys can be found everywhere and there are no “better” fanboys here or there. Much of the arguments from the US supporters here were no less fanboyish or better for that part.
MM11I believe the MiG 5th gen fighter did some high speed taxi trails a few years back, does that count? Oh and the FSW flanker did some pretty airshow routines.
It were actually MiG MFI and Su-47 you speak about and these aircraft ended up as technology demonstrators, though they were originally conceived as 5th gen prototypes. Something most people forget about when claiming russia has not invested anything in the 5th gen development before PAK FA, as I already pointed out before. The lack of knowledge and understanding leads to a lot of faulty conclusions.
MM11The worst are the European fan boys. Because they do not have a stealth fighter design in the tunnel even (unlike Russia, China, India) they will undermine stealth and big up EW measures big time. 😮
Harsh words for someone who actually don’t even comprehend most of the data/information available to him.
MM11The problem is that you haven’t seen enough detail as to what the results were, just a ‘summary’ of it to know just how “similar” they were.
Well I agree that 1:1 or less doesn’t mean all are equal.
Yes they have.
On what grounds?
No, different results all away around. Similar DOES NOT = same.
Similar is not same. Fact is the results of the F-15, F-16 and F/A-18 against advanced MiG-29/Su-27 variants (probably MiG-29SMT/Su-30MK like) are ~similar to the results of the Rafale, Gripen, Typhoon, Su-30MKI and F/A-18E/F against a near future threat (Su-35 being most likely). That might well indicate that the scenarios weren’t that much different.
Interestingly the F-35 achieves just about half the exchange ratio against the less capable/sophisticated threat. And that is where I start to wonder and question credibility of the study.
I well remember another USAF study after Cope India or so where they said the Su-30MKI would virtually win EVERY BVR encounter against the F-15, to convince the right people to buy more Raptors.
No, just so inferior to the F-35 that the DETIALED difference between them was felt unnecessary to report.
Which shows the clear bias again and makes you wonder if that wasn’t just another half hearted effort to hype/sell the own product.
To cut it short, it looks like another LM/USAF propaganda story made up for one purpose: marketing.
MM11I think the point is less that these aircraft all perform at the same level, as they all have the same result when going against the F-35.
Not necessarily, but the question was concerned in relation to the supposed threat aircraft not XY against the F-35.
MM11Because most of them are questionable at best. Name one that is actually a glaring reality in air to air combat.
Well the Gripen, Rafale and Typhoon are all in service since quite some years, they are operational with their original customers and most export customers and they have participated in a number of international exercises and proved them self to be effective in A2A against the teens. I’m certain there some out there which can outline the leaked/reported results for the Gripen and Rafale. For the Typhoon I have gathered a bit more specific info. Vastly superior WVR and BVR performance, even against 3-4 times the quantity of thread aircraft.
Unless you mean “no glaring reality in A2A” as “no real air combat record”, which would apply to the F-22 as well, let alone the F-35 which is not even a glaring operational reality at all, I don’t see your point.
By the time of the F-22 Lockheed had already had decades of experience with stealth aircraft. Show us which stealth aircraft Sukhoi has been flying for 20 years.
Late 70s to late 80s are decades? Wow.
@wrightwing
The PAK FA and J-XX haven’t even flown yet, so it’s a bit premature to say how they look compared to the F-35.
But it’s ofcourse not premature to compare an aircraft in it’s early test stage… Ok to be fair the F-35 is at least a fair margin ahead over the PAK FA or J-XX when it comes to a real existing design.
@Scooter
Please, what the F-35 is going to be outclassed by the Russian PAK-FA that doesn’t have 1/10 of the experience as Lockheed Martin in 5th Generation Fighters. Nor, has it even had the funds to close the gap via research or espionage…………..China on the other hand only success is the current J-10. Which, is basically on par with 30 plus year old designs like the F-16. That while are still capable in todays terms. Yet, are hardly a threat to 5th Generation Types like the Lightning or Raptor………..
Ah yes the russian never built competitive aircraft at all and ofcourse they stood still and did nothing and russian engineers are paid as well as american engineers. Sorry but there is a bit of an apples to oranges comparison!
There only hope is to force the F-35 into a WVR Enagement. Yet, the odds are still not good…………
Remember, the Crusader with its Magics AAM’s had the same problem! What do you think there odds were against the Mirage 2000 back in the 90’s…..
Another example would be a F-5E vs F-15C……….Really, the arguement hardly holds water.
Here’s another……………that would be like a Japanese Zero trying to get a Corsair, Mustang, or Thunderbolt into a slow turn dogfight………
Great comprisons :rolleyes:
@djcross
To expect Russia/China to come from a position of no experience in Gen 5 jets to parity with F-22/F-35 without spending their national treasuries of Rubles/Yuan is pure fantasy.
As said before the amount of money spent can’t be compared as the russians were ever cheaper and so they are now. PAK FA development is about 10 bln $ development costs, excluding what has been spent since the early 80s. For russian conditions this is quite a huge sum and should compare quite well to the sums the US invested.
@pfcem
According LM…
MM11Its also a “big leap” to assume that even when the PAK-FA and/or J-XX are fielded. That either would be the equal of the F-35………….As Lockheed Martin has a great deal more experience with 5th Generation Fighters than Russia or China.
With stealth in an operational form yes. The Russian are working on 5th gen technology since about the same time as the US. The collaps of the Soviet Union prevented types like the MiG MFI or Su-47 to enter service, they weren’t built as simple technology demonstrators in the first place. Stealth is not that new at all and technology has advanced. The Russians developed a lot of technologies for a 5th gen fighter before and they built on that when designing the PAK FA (hint AL-41 for example).
MM11If the VLO type has an exchange ratio of 3:1 or greater but the non LO/VLO types range from say 0.75:1 to 1.25:1 what difference does it make ‘treating’ the non LO/VLO types as simply ‘near 1:1’?
I’m simply sceptical about the similar results of so much different types.
The others have been around a long enough time (or are derived from a type that has) that the data is well enough known.
Rafale or Typhoon that much longer “around” than the F-22?
No, different results.
For the F-35 yes.
Similar not being the same…
You have to take into account, that those types being involved were different! From the two different sources it doesn’t really matter if it is a F-15, F-16, F/A-18E/F, Gripen, Rafale or Eurofighter they are all quite similar. Sounds unlogical to me.
And just what about the results do you find sceptical?
I think I have explained that often enough.
Sign In
