PAK FA > The Rest

Debate finish. 😎

Not sure how you can reach that conclusion so readily. PAK FA does seem to have some unique advantages compared to other 5th generation designs, i.e. yaw-axis maneuverability and high AOA. Other than that, it’s difficult to say how it will actually stack up unless we have access to technical documents like EM diagrams and the like. Visual inspection can only go so far.

There appears to be a very different operating philosophy for the RuAF, whose primary concern is air defence- remember this is not the Soviet Air Force. I think the PVO has experienced something of a renaissance with S400/500 and all the new and upgraded systems that complement them. Amazingly, the Su-35S is packing very sophisticated radar/EW/ESM kit including agile/LPI beam steering integrated with a system comparable to AN/ALR-94 and L-band AESA IFF interrogators.

There’s also (yet) another Russian defence electronics manufacturer which claims it has developed ‘cheap n cheerful’ GaN AESA modules for the C-band and X-band which are ready for production (though not LTCC) and good to go. At an average power rating between 15-20W, can you imagine such a 1,200 element system aboard the Su-35S on a gimballed/swashplate replacing the current PESA?! All it would need then would be a data linked L-band, either land (Nebo-M) or air (something like ‘Wedgetail’ perhaps to be seen in the upcoming A-100?), or a podded/conformal system for the MiG-31BM. Evidently, the AESA missile seekers have a specific anti-stealth quality.

The notion that only a stealth fighter can effectively counter a stealth fighter is pretty much a fallacy as such an integrated combo would make a formidable anti-stealth system, and hence preclude the need for a medium class LMFS type until the 2030s, which would then be a de facto 6G platform.

As for the PAK-FA, the Russkies probably feel it’ll replace at least 1 MiG-31 and a couple of Su-27s and hence the T-50’s eyewatering cost may pay-off perhaps as soon as the medium term.

JMTs.

I’m not sure about that.

http://en.ria.ru/military_news/20130411/180584483.html

No mention of whether it will be the PAK-FA or some clean sheet design, so don’t just assume that it will be the T-50.

A side note, is the information about the T-50 on Wikipedia correct? The avionics section seems…convoluted.

Kinda pathetic that Keypubs is now attracting the likes of Tu 160 and mig-31bm. Reminds me of F-18Growler. I can only hope that they’re trolling and not being serious.

And for most intents and purposes, WVR fights are something to be avoided when both sides have HOBS missiles. Aircraft kinematics are limited by the human body and a WVR missile like AIM-9X can turn much quicker. Relying solely on aircraft kinematics to win WVR is very risky since the WEZ of these missiles is so big. Expect plenty of mutual kills.

OK, genius, then please explain me how would you engage an enemy stealth fighter on BVR..

It’s not so much being able to engage at BVR as it is being able to engage and shoot first. Whichever aircraft has the best combination of stealth, sensors (SA in general), kinematics, and countermeasures will likely have the element of surprise and therefore a big advantage. Reducing everything to pure kinematics is grossly oversimplifying matters.

I’m rather curious about the prospects of a stealthy compressor. Given that the compressor face is practically directly facing the front and the geometry of the compressor itself doesn’t seem to lend itself too well to stealth, I’m not sure how big of a difference these new materials will make.