or

had the Russkis decided to continue funding these two projects, which would’ve had more potential as an operation aircraft in the RuAF?

if these aircrafts were put into production, would the Russian aviation industry skip all aspect VLO aircraft (like the F-22) and go straight to a 6th generation?
i.e. Su-27 -> 1.44/su-47 -> 6th generation (maybe unmanned)

given that US style 5th generation aircraft may be financially unfeasible.

What’s makes these aircraft greater than 4+ Gen (Gripen, EF, Raf, SH, etc)?

Did they have ANY VLO aspects?

Any integrated avionics?

Advanced Radars?

All Aspect FLIR and IRST (ala 360 EOTS & DAS on F-35)?

Supercruise?

America tested a forward swept wing fighter and found that the benefits did not outweigh the problems.

How was the 1.44 any better than either of the eurocards?

From an article by Ariel Cohen
Washington (UPI) Jan 14, 2009

Moreover, the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning JSF’s reported [i]service ceiling of around 57,000 feet[/i] is superior to the Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-35 Fulcrum’s 56,000 feet and the Sukhoi Su-35 Flanker’s 55,000 feet. The Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning JSF also claims a significant advantage in maneuverability because of its smaller size, advanced materials and lightweight construction.

Wonder where he got that 57,000 foot number?

Could he have mistaken the loaded weight?

F-15s are getting AESA radars while the F-16s are not (yet).

Lookup JDRADM.

It is the planned replacement for the AMRAAM and HARM family of missiles.

It will have 3 seeker technologies. Active Radar (same as AMRAAM), Passive Radar (same type as harm), and IIR (think AIM-9x).

The hardest part of the missile will be the seeker/fuse. Yes, they will be one in the same to sonserve space. Boeing received a few contacts last year to do dev work on the seeker (SITES)

LordAssap — Question

Why do you point to an old LM PDF and say “1.6 mach MAX Limit” and say we “must believe it because LM printed it”, but we cannot believe LM when they say that they are an All-Aspect VLO aircraft INCLUDING IR suppression?

btw, They took out that “Limit” wording in most recent (Jan/Feb 2008) PDFs.

Gen Davis quote

The F-35 is a stealthy airframe. Because the F-35 is designed to fly and fight in even the most heavily defended airspace, stealth is an essential component of the jets’ design. The stealthy airframe is tailored for the mission of flying into the teeth of the most advanced air defences that the enemy can muster where conventional aircraft are vulnerable, Davis said. While the aircraft has a different radar cross section depending on which aspect angle is facing a threat radar, the plane meets the stringent requirements set forth by the U.S. military services based on more than 20 years of American experience with stealth aircraft design, Davis explained. Furthermore, stealth does not merely apply to an aircraft’s radar cross section, an aircraft’s infrared signature is similarly tailored to be less detectable by the enemy, Davis said. The sum total is an aircraft that is less vulnerable to the enemy from the air or ground.

Please stop posting Kopp’s Krap.

He has been debunked so many times it makes my head hurt seeing all his defenders as teh are made to look like fools.

I will try to answer this to your satisfaction without using too many sources.
A. Norway “Executive Summary” PDF
B. Norway Program Summary PDF
C. LM “Setting the Record Straight” RTF Press Release
D. Livescience article quoting Program director gen. Davis and Lead test pilot Beesley
E. Lt. Col. James Kromberg, first military F-35 pilot
F. Code One article with Beesley
.

1) Supercruise. — Will it get to 1.7 like the F-22… no, but 1.2 is likely

NOT according to L-M themself if you have an official refresh feel free to post it otherwise this is another legend forum trying to survive reality.
This is probably the one are where the F-35 has the least amount of supporting documentation. While, IIRC, LM has never said “Cannot or will not supercruise”, they probably have said “was not designed” or “was not a requirement”. If you have some direct quotes from LM to the contrary, please post them.
In the F-35’s potential to this capability, it’s very possible when you consider that (with a full fuel and internal warload) it’s acceleration is about the same as a clean F-16 block 50 (ref D). There are also plenty of interviews with test pilots (ref E) where they are always impressed with it’s acceleration. Other pilots have said chase planes have had to use AB to keep up the F-35 (ref F). This while being fully fueled and loaded and aerodynamically clean. The potential is there, we just have to wait for the testing program to catch up.

2) High Max Ceiling. — Not known at this time but must meet or beat the specs of the fighters it replaces as stated in RFP.

WRONG: As requiered 35.000ft.
According to last years program docs (ref B and attached photo) the F-35 has already hit 38000 while still very early in the SDD flight test phase. This is nowhere near the MAX. Again, we shall wait to see where the SDD flight tests take us.

3) EM Low Observability — No problem

Yes problem: Way lower than F-22.
I did not say it was the same as the F-22. It is still “All-Aspect VLO” (ref A, D) that will be able to detect and engage any 4th gen aircraft before the F-35 itself is detected and engaged.

4) IR Low Observability. — Not as good as F-22, but better than 4th gen. Check the a$$ end of the F135 and you will see very thick, white “feathers” in the exhaust nozzle. The only reason they would have to be thick is that they are not made out of metal.

Sorry mate every single engine curently inmservice posses these but NO IR superssion measure as such i.e engine case AND exhaust cooling.
LM and USAF have always sad that the F-35 has IR suppression tech. These include fuel-based cooling of the body and treatments to the engine nozzle (ref A, D and photo below)

5) High maneuverability. — In a recent flight test (with the weight UN-optimized AA-1 airframe) with a fully loaded (both fuel and 5000 lbs of simulated ordnance), the pilot stated that it accelerated as good as a clean F-16 Blk 50 and maneuvered almost as well as the F-22.

For your info, the current generation of AAMs needs to pull 3 X a target amount of Gs to score a kill WITHIN its NEZ, which means a 7.0 or 7.5 Gs aircraft is history even out of the NEZ.

I leave the 9 G version off the hook as in many scenarios other aircrafts will be limited to 9 Gs too but…

When one CAN pull 11 Gs it’s another story alrogether and does a LOT more for survivibility than limited EM L.O. expecialy vs an IR AAM when your engine runs hotter than anything else in the world and isn’t colled as much as some concurent.
If you have some hard numbers to the AIM-120’s and AIM-9x’s G ability, please post. Otherwise, from what I have seen in the past, they are in the 30-50g range. FYI, the AIM-120D that will be here next year gets HOBS and longer range as well as all the other improvements. That will mean that the F-35 will be able to use any missile it carries, not just the AIM-9x or AIM-132, to take a HOBS shot in a WVR fight. High-g maneuvers are getting less and less relevant. That being said, the F-35A (the version being discussed here as an Air Superiority candidate) will still be able to do 9g all day long.

I am sorry, but a 2g difference will never make up for total lack of significant EM and IR suppression that the EF has.

Also note in ref A and the photo below that LM plans 6 internal AIM-120Ds to be part of Block 5 in 2017.

All that being said, who do you believe about the F-35’s abilities? The USAF, USMC, USN, BAE, and 10+ governments around the world who have seen the classified info…. or websites that bash the F-35 without ever having any access to the classified info.

I choose to believe “the hype” until proven otherwise.

I believe that the F-35A will make an excellent Air-Superiority fighter.