mig-31bm. But what sense does it makes to keep a less capable, much more expensive platform in service is simply beyond me :confused
alot cheaper to keep the F-22 and upgraded them than to throw them aways and buy equal amount of F-35
JSF – Joint Strike Fighter
Join = multiple countries making that aircraft / aircraft served both airforce, Navy, marine
Strike = F-35 will replace strike aircraft such as A-10, AV-8B
Fighter = F-35 replace multirole fighter such as F-16, F-18
A non argument. Nokia has developed cellphones far longer than Apple.
1) military technology are keep alot more secret than the civilians one
2)making phone is too general what should talk about is certain technology that make the Iphone different from previous phone, for example multi touch screen. And I didn’t see Nokia making multi touch screen before Apple
.
looks like DAS believers had a collective brain-fart and came to the delusion DAS has the range of IRST
DAS is basically an IRST, and any IRST are affected by cloud, rain, snow, moisture… etc.
normal IRST only have longer range because they can zoom ( narrow their FoV significantly ) but that doesn’t mean they are not affected by weather
mig-31bmOnce again.. this example is an application of your logic, not mine.. you said that SA is everything and kinematics mean a little, then OK, let’s agree with your stance and build A-A armed B-2s..
The fact that you disagree with your own arguments speaks volumes.. 😀
i have already explained that a B-2 is very expensive compared to a F-35, and you said ” they can buy 1 B-2 to replaced 10 F-35″ , so i have to explained another obvious thing that is ” 1 Aircraft can’t be at 2 place at the same time”
and for your information many weapon manufacturer actually experiment with subsonic stealth UCAV carrying AAM for future, so it obvious that they also think VLO characteristics and SA are more important than kinematics
You will be shocked to learn that but nothing in my life is dependent on what you believe or don’t..
it not about what i believe in, what i tried to say is, you cant pretend to be related to military when you demonstrate little to no knowledge about tactics, avionics, or aerodynamic.
Besides that, I have never claimed I had anything to do with military..
you said you witness the “testing” of system similar to DAS for infantry
Jitter and latency are errors in the first place.. the 3rd gen HMDS does nothing more than remove the errors which should not have been there, in the first place… Of course, for the F-35 worshippers that means “adding new functions” 😀
Jitters, and latency errors are part of reasons why some pilot doesn’t like DAS as much as his eye, But with these errors removed, DAS will be alot better ( sure eye are still gonna provide better resolution, but that doesn’t mean DAS isn’t good, it provides 360 degree search/track of enemy )
I see a big difference between should be and is. Wake me up when you have grasped the concept of these words.
in this situation
is =100%
should be = 100% ( unless the sensor broken)
F-35 is just a piece of metal and composite. Not extremely pretty, I admit, but neither is the J-20.. Nothing to hate about either one.. .. 🙂
again, you trying to deny something that is obvious to everyone here
Wait up few years and see..
it is pointless to talk about something that you have almost zero information about
mig-31bmDifferent situation.. I don’t know the primary role of the Su-35S in the RuAF but I assume it’s A-A, not A-G..
no, it is exactly same situation, you just said if F-35 is better at AA then just replaced all F-22 with F-35
so same logic, why not replaced all Su-35 with PAK-FA?
why not replaced all mig-29 with su-27
In the case of the F-35, it is primarily a striker
No F-35 is a multirole fighter just like F-16, F-18, Typhoon, Rafale, Gripen
.. Our local fanboy club has fallen for a belief that it’s almighty DAS
and the fact the modern missiles does required you to point the nose in exact enemy’s position to launch
somehow manages to completely delete the drawback the bird has in kinematics
Andraxxus have demonstrated that it have compatible turn rate with F-15E, F-16 in same mission profile
. If we’re gonna believe that, then we have come to a conclusion that the USAF’s primary strike asset is a better A-A performer than the USAF’s primary air dominance asset. If true, then the air dominance asset makes no sense, anymore. Just build another 187 F-35s, assign them to today’s F-22 squadrons and the Raptors can go to AMARC. You get cost saving and fleet commonality and increase the A-A performance at the same time.
f-22 is a better interceptor due to speed , it’s missiles will have more energy but that doesn’t mean if they were to face of F-22 would necessary win
What makes you think that the T-50’s or J-20’s sensors will be worse? Or LO for that matter? What exactly do we know about its stealth, at all?
Russian themselves said T-50 focused more on kinematics than Stealth
about sensor USA have operate AESA radar for far longer than Russian or China
mig-31bmIn other words, it has not been demonstrated.. 🙂 That’s what I thought… Makes all your previous arguments as good as invalid..
Thanks for clarification..
So if flying in test equal haven’t been demonstrated then what count as demonstrated?, using in actual combat?
by that analogy then all these 5gen, 4.5 gen haven’t really demonstrated anything spectacular in actual combat, may be we should revert to the good old 4 gen like F-16, F-15, their kill/death ratio far surpassed any 4.5, 5 gen fighter
mig-31bmJust this one, the rest for when i will not be busy…
You have just read wrong the part about the powerful A2A armament etc, etc… it was referred to the comparison between interceptors (thinking more about f-104/106 and Bac Lighting than Mig-25/31) and Air superiority fighters…
F-35 doesn’t fall into neither of those two categories,and by a very large margin
Define air superiority fighter?
F-35 isn’t an interceptor like Mig-31, it isn’t a air superiority fighter like F-15C ( if that what you taking about)
F-35 is a multirole fighter just like F-16, F-18, F-15E, Su-30/35, Rafale, Typhoon, Gripen.. etc
I have no idea about J-20, J-31 but from what i know they want to make PAK-FA multi role as well
mig-31bmSC M1.75 ?
Mig-31 combat radius at mach 2.35 is 720 km
And, forgive me, the practical utility of such a thing against a real life opponent?
Winning an hide and seek game?
“Most pilots shot down didn’t see the enemy coming”
Erich Hartmann
“the easiest time to shoot an enemy down was when he was trying to shoot someone down himself”
Geoffery Wellum
they shot down like few hundreds AC themselves so iam pretty sure they know what they talking about
You can see it coming behind your F-35 as having better kinematics it is gone in a lag pursuit staying outside your visual range (a quite standard interception procedure).
this is a lag pursuit, i dont understand why you think it is out side visual range
It close distance, being faster than you it can do it easily and when your DAS would notice it,with all probability its IRST have not just seen, but also got a lock on you.
Now, what would be your own move and how can DAS help you ? It would probability just give you a non stop, multispectral, high definition flick of the couple of missiles with your name written on them coming to award you with a new pair of wings :angel:.
with DAS you can lock and attack any thing around you, nothing can sneak up on you, that the point
and while PAK-FA, F-22 are faster than F-35, they aren’t that much faster than F-35 to the point that they can go from head on to behind the F-35 while the F-35 cant do anything
their superior would be a few degree turn/second top
mig-31bmNope, this is according to your logic, not mine.. I am not advocating SA at the cost of kinematics
..
no, According to your logic, you can buy 1 super expensive platform to replaced many cheaper one ( 1 B-2 for 10 F-35*)
i say that isnot possible because 1 AC cant be at 2 place at the same time
and my point about Arleigh Burke still stand, PAK-FA, F-22, J-20 all doesn’t have ability to face it
I had an opportunity to closely observe testing of one, at least remotely similar, thermal imaging based system for infantry. The basic idea was exactly the same as with DAS – 360deg SA for a future soldier, no chance of anyone sneaking up on him. Lots of fancy buzzwords and lots of bullsh!t involved, just like with DAS. I can’t comment on the results but you can see around whether any army is using it today..
it quite different between a soldier on ground and a pilot on the sky, also from what you demonstrated on here i dont think anyone believe you have anything to do with military any more
The 3rd gen helmet is primarily oriented to solving the teething issues like jitter and latency. Plus the former ISIE sensor was replaced by a new ISIE11 for increased night-vision acuity. None of that solves anything the pilot had to say about DAS.
jitter and latency affect visual capability alot of you ask me, no wonder he want to see by his own eye sometime
It’s you who is not paying attention. He says “in this aircraft no one should be able to sneak up behind me, that’s the whole point”.
yes he say ” NO ONE should be able to sneak up on me in this aircraft ” why? because DAS
Yes, shape would be a solid starting point if they only wanted to minimize RCS. But they obviously wanted something else..
the things is even if they copy the whole shape, they still have to deal with LPI datalinks, LPI radar, RAM, RAS, EM leak.. etc so they decided to sacrifice part of stealth to gain more kinematic, f-22 shape isn’t the best for aerodynamic purpose
Pretty much all currently developed 5th gen fighters have a very solid chance to be better than the F-35, yes.. They don’t have the shape/size restrictions the F-35 had (due to F-35B).
actually the F-35B weight problem leading to modifications that reduced weight of all f-35 versions by 1500 lbs
BTW, there can be no hatred against a not living object like an aircraft. The only thing what I find disturbing about the F-35 are people surrounding it, talking nonsense…
cut the crap really, why you try to deny something so obvious like you hating the F-35? or you like the Rafale? , i know that, you know that, everyone here know that, why bother denying at all?
I’m sensitive to the perception that I am defensive about opinions on Chinese aerospace, so I’ll make it clear that the intention of my following question isn’t about Chinese aerospace, but the logical soundness of your claim. Do you have any actual evidence on why the J-20, J-31 isn’t?
let me put it this way, it completely nonsense to say J-31, J-20 will have better kinematics characteristics than F-35 and use that as a point to bash F-35 while nothing is known about J-31, J-20 yet
For example : would it be reasonable for me to say Meteor, Aim-120D are ****ty because RVV-SD will be alot more agile than them? while i have absolutely no data about RVV-SD fly characteristics?
so you think DAS has the same range as Skyward G, just wider FoV, somehow ? (less range than visual that is)
Skyward G is the IRST on Gripen NG, which btw have directional DL
IR radiation are absorbed by rain, snow, smoke, cloud, moiture.. etc so it doesn’t really matter what IRST you use, if the weather is too bad for F-35 to use DAS then your favorite AC cant use it’s IRST either
mig-31bmNor one of them is focused in Kinematics, the one focused on it are MiG-25, MiG-31 and generally all Interceptors, meaning that they were on purpose designed to have the most possible of it at the expense of other flight characteristics,most notably turn rate.
turn rate, climb rate, roll rate, dive rate, acceleration rate, celling, speed are all related to kinematics
Air superiority fighters instead try to still have the most possible of it butcoupled with excellent performances in all others flight characteristics +
PAK-FA and F-22 sacrificed extreme speed and altitude to have good turn rate, Mig-31, mig-25 do it the other way round. No information about J-20, J-31 yet
powerful A2A armaments and dedicated avionics and enough combat persistence to effectively gain effective control of an aerial battle space.
i dont see why you consider F-35 doesn’t have powerful A2A armament, or delicated avionics, or lacking combat persistent
Now, one of such planes can evolve in a good deep strike or multirole fighter like it happened with F-15E, F-14D or Su-30 but a F-35 in an air defense role?
and why cant F-35 be used in air defense role?, it have excellent VLO characteristics, excellent SA, it’s kinematics is comparable to F-15E, F-16
Ok, now the problem is that THEY can see you. Expecially when you flight at 60-65k feet.
the point of VLO is they cant detect or cant track you by their FCR, if they can see you as easy as normal fighter then no one would bother making stealth fighter
Wake up and stop dreaming: this is not the age of DAS but the era of low frequency radar, metric wavelength, AESA upgraded P-18, 3D Nebo + data fusion with X and L band radar. Or their Chinese and Iranian equivalents.
low frequency radar isn’t something new, you have that since WW II, it still have exactly same disadvantage
1) accuracy too low for weapons guider
2) too huge in size to put on fighter or even ship
with their huge size and the fact that they doesn’t move around alot , low band radar are the perfect target for cruise missiles
P/s : the L band slat on PAK-FA, Su-35 isn’t a radar but an IFF system
They can see you with enough precision to send salvo of latest generation SAM missiles against you with a discrete chance of success, let’s imagine about guiding 5 gen fighters to intercept you.
Now, given that,
funny that you taking about SAM
Do you actually believe that flying at 60k ft and mach 2 will make you invulnerable to SAM even if your aircraft being detected?
modern SAM can even shot down ballistic missiles that fly at mach 8-9 and come down from 100k ft so no! , without VLO and SA you will be death meat to SAM as much as normal aircraft
it would IMHO more important to know how f-35 (but also the others) would perform at 60/65 tens feets instead, the ones necessary for not being spotted by such radars.
.
low altitude will favor F-35 more, since low wing loading caused alot of drag at low altitude
mig-31bm…turns out that even in spite of the poor visibility in F-35,
pilots still take visual over DAS, try againF-35 pilot Major John Wilson speaking of DAS
“It’s got limited utility, it’s for general awareness only… You can’t really target with it unless it’s something really big, or if it’s like a boat on the water you can see that… It’s just for general awareness, what’s underneath me, what’s around me… It’s cool, to be honest with you I don’t really use it all that often, the reason being is that if I really want to see what is underneath me I will just look outside, I will just roll up. It doesn’t take that much longer for me to just bank up there airplane and look… Because I can see it with greater clarity… It’s just an added benefit. That is not the primary function of those cameras.”
yes you can see things with greater clarify by your eye than an IR camera, however, you dont have light at night and visual light wave are absorbed more by smoke, moiture in air
you forget about the most important part of DAS, it prevents enemy from sneaking up on the fighter from behind ( as the pilot also said in his interview) , some can sneak on him if he fly an F-16, no one can sneak on him if he fly an f-35
mig-31bmNo prob with that. You can cut ten F-35s for each one. It will surely be much cheaper to operate one aircraft instead of ten.
BTW, the cost of B-2A were $896mil, $2.1bil was total program cost divided by the number of airframes.
1 B-2 cant be at 2 place at the same time
and with your logic may be we should stop buying fighter and spend all money on Arleigh Burke, no PAK-FA or F-22, or J-20 will be a match for it
“Age of DAS?” don’t be ridiculous. The system is of secondary importance in A-A..
:rolleyes: and how do you know that
If not even pilots seem to appreciate it much, then who does?
firstly, he didn’t talk about the latest generation of the helmet intergrated with DAS ( the previous generation lack many features, I think SpudmanWP already explained that in F-35 topic)
secondly, if you pay attention he said nothing can sneak up on him if he is on a F-35, while even on a F-16 with perfect bubble canopy, enemy can still sneak up on him
Nonsense. If they really wanted to focus on overall RCS reduction but did not know how, they would have simply copied the shape of the YF-23 who was said to be more stealthy than F-22.
oh yes , all they have to do is copy the shape from picture on the internet no exact measurement needed, RAM, RAS, LPI radar, LPI datalinks, RE leaking .. etc doesnt matter at all.
I have little doubt it will be better.. But that also depends on the engines used (something tells me the engines we’re seeing today are not the final solution).
of course you never have a doubt that anything is better than F-35 given your hatred for it, you still haven’t provide any actual evidence on why J-20, j-31 is better than f-35 in term of kinematics, let alone much better
The same applies to T-50 or J-20.. and pretty much every stealth design from now on..
you are the one who said all you need is kinematics then you can engage and disengaged at will even if everything else isn’t equal, the point is you cant engage or disengage from something that you dont know is there, thus VLO characteristics and SA is very important
and you still haven’t answered my question, how many G do you think the Raptor, PAK-FA actually pull at 60K ft?
mig-31bmSimilarly, if stealth and SA is what matters, then all nations would end up building B-2 copies carrying eight different 360deg coverage systems, armed with 68 AMRAAMs.
each B-2 cost around 2 billions USD each, and is a hangar queen
BTW, which part of the F-22, PAK-FA or J-20 does not seem to be focused on kinematics, in your books?
F-22 and PAK-FA focused on kinematics, yes
but F-22 born before the age of HOBS and DAS
PAK-FA may be simply due to the fact that Russian didn’t have alot of experience with stealth before, so they decided to focus more on what they have more experience about ( kinematics)
about J-20? i dont see any reason to believe it will be better than F-35 in term of kinematics, we dont even know it’s exact weight and thrust yet
.Kinematics helps dictate the ROE even if nothing else is equal.It gives you capabilities to engage at will, choose your position, exploit the range of your weapons and then disengage at will.
you cant engage and disengage again something you cannot see, and just out of curiosity how many G do you think F-22 will turn at 60-65K ft
mig-31bmif kinematics is better solutions than Stealth and SA then all nations would end up using and making XB-70, YF-12, A-12 now, we wouldn’t have F-22, PAK-FA, J-20 or B-2.. etc
mig-31bmOk, name one RWR system mounted on ANY fighter capable of such? Currently, only few specialized ELINT aircraft can detect and listen such datalinks, and many times you see those aircraft skim the territorial airspace (~21 km) to get closer to signal and still, they are not always succesful. Somehow I don’t think you can shrink such equipment by 200 times in size, make it 20 times more powerful (so that range will extend to 40+ km) and make it several times more reliable, then put several of them on the aircraft to have omni directional coverage (which even dedicated ELINT aircraft or even ships lack).
You are completely ignoring the “transmit power” of the equation and the processing power. Theory is good, but in theory Wifi, microwave ovens or cheap walkie talkies also operate at 2.4 GHz range. Just like these, datalinks have insufficent transmit power to ping a RWR. Even if one makes the RWR capable, it needs supercomputer level processing power to discriminate from other noise sources.
i dont know exactly how powerful the transmitting power of data link is
what i know is aircraft can guide their missiles by datalinks all the way to target, if the data link is powerful enough for the receiver antenna on missiles to received and use the information, the RWR should be able to detect it too ( of course background noise could be a problem, but i guess they can get around that with better software to find some characteristics of data link that background noise doesn’t have) , i dont think they would spend money and time to make stealth datalinks if it doesn’t bring any benefits
.
As far as I know, ADVENT is neither funded, nor developed for upgrading F-135 engines. Its a new engine, and Pratt Whitney is NOT a contractor. 15% thrust increase was claimed by original engine builder and part of AETD, so I take its much more realistic. Saying goal of ADVENT is to drop fuel consumption by 25%, is talking about expectations of an nonexisting engine; compared to a non-specified engine.
actually buider of AETD also claim reduce fuel consumption by 25 % and increased range by 30%
The successful review with leaders from the US Air Force, Navy, NASA and Lockheed Martin, followed testing of the industry’s first and only adaptive-cycle, three-stream engine in 2014. GE’s AETD engine extends aircraft operating range by 30%, improves fuel consumption by 25% and increases thrust by more than 10%. GE‘s AETD engine could be ready to power the US military’s most advanced combat jets by the mid-2020s.
http://www.geaviation.com/press/military/military_20150617.html
mig-31bmWay better looking than Super Hornet. Some angles are better looking on EF2K than Rafale. They are all better looking than Gripen.
Rafael is the best looking out of these Euro canard
mig-31bmOther than some PR advertisment, what is “stealth” datalink, really? Theoratical discussions are good, but I am not aware of anything on any known/projected aircraft that can detect good old TKS-2-27, Lazur, link-16, MIDS etc datalinks let alone capable of detecting and pinpointing the target location.
Stealth data link are datalinks at high frequency, directional precise beam thus they are harder to detect by RWR, by contrast, normal datalinks are omnidirectional, thus they are alot easier to be detected, of course RWR won’t allow pin point geolocation of aircraft, but it still give you general direction of them
True, F-35 may not gain full 5k pound, but it wont get 20% thrust improvement like F-15 either. F-15A to F-15C transition gained it 2000 lb in 7 years in service, F-16A to F-16C transition gained 2500 lb in 9 years in service. F-35 is yet to integrate half the weapons its supposed to carry. Some ~2500lb weight gain looks highly possible to me.
I cannot confidently say its performance will worsen, but 2030’s F-35A (or whatever it will be called) won’t be much different the current F-35A aircraft
but ADVENT engine also improve fuel consumption of F-35 by 25%, wouldn’t that counter the weight gain of avionics?
F-35 internal fuel capacity is around 18498 pounds, so reduce 25% fuel load needed is around 4624 pounds decrease
Sign In
