moon_lightRafale
For comparison, the combat capabilities of the Su-35 and Rafale choose a configuration with a range equal to:10,460 kg (equipment) + 100 kg (pilot) + 4700 kg (fuel) + 370 kg (2 Meteor) + 672 kg (6 MICA) + 4125 kg (3 EFT, 5295 kg of fuel) = 20 427 kg, the total weight of fuel 4700 kg + 5295 kg = 9995 kg.
The radius range of 1155 km, the range of 3300 km. Fuel consumption of 3 kg / kmRCS in this configuration.
RCS min. = 2.8 sq.m., on the pendants 3 PTB + 2 Meteor + 6 MICA = 11 points.
RCS = (2.8 m + 11 m) * 0.5 = 6.9 sq.m.Su-35
combat load
4 RVV-MD, 4 x 106 kg = 424 kg. 4 P-72 x 49 kg = 196 kg.
6 RVV-SD, 6 x 190 kg = 1140 kg. AKU-170E 6 x 61 kg = 366 kg.
2 RVV-BD, 2 x 510 kg = 1020 kg. AKU-58AE 2 x 186 kg = 372 kg.
424 kg + 196 kg + 1140 kg + 366 kg + 1020 kg + 372 kg = 3518 kg4 RVV-MD, 4 x 106 kg = 424 kg. 4 P-72 x 49 kg = 196 kg.
4 RVV-SD, 4 x 190 kg = 760 kg. AKU-170E 4 x 61 kg = 244 kg.
4 RVV-BD, 4 x 510 kg = 2040 kg. AKU-58AE 4 x 186 kg = 744 kg. distance of 200 km / 300 km, warhead. 60 kg.
424 kg + 196 kg + 760 kg + 244 kg + 2040 kg + 744 kg = 4408 kgTake-off weight in this configuration
17,550 (blank) + 100 kg (pilot) + 11500 kg (fuel) + 4408 kg (load) = 33,558 kg
Flight distance in this configuration with a load of 3300 km.
RCS in this configuration.
RCS min. = 2.5 sq.m.
RCS = (2.5 m + 12 m) * 0.5 = 7.25 sq.m.
rafale have bigger RCS than su-35s :confused: really
moon_lightWhat about, moon light:
:confused:
aircraft at fly higher altitude than F-35 will be easier to detect ( as the sky background is colder than ground background ) => dont really need very sensitive sensor
2- f-35 have apg-81 , RWR as well
moon_lightI hate versus threads 🙁
this not exactly a versus thread :p
moon_lightLooks like its a lot of fanboy trolling going on.
Apparantly…
[INDENT]…the F35 will be more agile than all other jets despite physical limitations saying otherwise. (Like wing loading, thrust/weight, drag coefficient etc)
we dont know for sure , these physical limitation dont say everything ( already make example before ( f-16 vs F-15 ) and we dont even know if J-20 can have better T/W and lower wing loading than F-35 or not
…kinematic performance has no impact at all. Firing missiles with 180 degree turns does only effect performance on other jets but not on the F35.
in the above situation enemy is coming at the F-35 so the closing speed of enemy will balance the reduced performance of the missiles , f-35 will only have to fire missiles turning 180 degree when enemy too close , otherwise it will turn before firing
…its pixel resolution of 1 pixel per sqm at <690 meters makes the EODAS so superior so no jet can’t get within 50km without being engaged first with a 180 degree Aim9x shoot.
F-35 have EOTS , APG-81 , DAS , ELINT as well , and dont just assume enemy will always come from behind f-35
…LPI is undetectable, despite the fact that several modern jets already have specially designed LPI-intercept antennas with interferometry. Only exception is the F35 that has superior RWR and thus can intercept LPI-signals as easy as pie.[/INDENT]
there are different level of LPI ,just because they designed to detect LPI does not mean they can detect AESA radar , and just like anti stealth radar , RWR that can detect LPI may not be able to detect it at long range
Could it be so that many are buying the hype and not actually reading the specs? Current IRST-systems from Russia will detect the F35 head on at around 45/50km (OLS35M) and from 90km behind. This is passive tracking that the F35 can’t detect without having eyes on the enemy first. And it is with yesterdays systems from Russia.
Just consider the possibility (or rather impossibility) of a F35 performing a 180 degree engagement under these circumstances at say 30km or so when the enemy has OLS35M, Pirate or something more modern. There is a very good reason why other jets have experimented with it and ditched it (rear engagements). The range loss is too great. But it looks good in commercials so it might actually stay.
you can look at spec of EOTS , ATFLIR , sniper-xr seem much better than ols-35
moon_lightI wont argue against that as it is very sensible.
But IRST systems of today have pretty fast scan speeds so I would call the search time negligeable.
what the scan time ? , or you just assume it be small
What is needed is high resolution (as in pixel/m² at long range, not high resolution imaging chip), fast enough scan speed and good sensor fusion. Also, the sphere the EODAS creates prohibits magnification of the imagery. This means that the same 10 year old camera could be used by competitors with a different lens and by that getting 10 times longer detection range (at the expense of a narrower search band).
EOTS have high resolution than DAS
This is what the F35 is going to face @ 2018.
* Enemies that have advanced high resolution IRST-systems with higher resolution/detection range than the EODAS.
* Enemies with more powerful jammers (like the Flankers)
* Enemies with more modern radars
* Enemies with radar warning receivers that can track LPI fairly easy.
* Enemies that can kill supporting AWACS from 400 km range (like MiG 31 with R37)
* Enemies that have superior kinematic advantageWhat the F35 offers at the same time
* Lower radar cross section, possibly first shoot capability if the AWACS can lead the way. Using the own radar makes the F35 a target unless the enemy doesn’t have semimodern RWR.
* IRST that has wider search than the rest but lower resolution than all modern competitors. Luftwaffe might be an exception. Unless the F35 has another IRST-system apart from the fixed magnification 6 camera setup this will be the case.
sensitive IRST still need laser finder range to lock target => F-35 still have advantage in BVR
yeah enemy may have much more powerful radar but F-35 have much much smaller RCS => first look , first shot
turning on powerful jammer is basically like turning on a light in a dark room ( same as old radar
no RWR claim they can detect AESA radar and use the information to lock target yet and even if they can F-35 can fly in formation with only 1 aircraft turning on the radar and data link to the other
EOTS can be use as IRST as well
And then we have a plethora of cool stuff that has been defeated in other arenas. One of them is DIRCM that was defeated by using IR tracking with better dynamic range and better filtering (Shtora being one example that now is scrapped). Sure, DIRCM might give an edge for up to 10 years until new seekers are being installed on a wide basis. Also it will have trouble with multiple incoming IR seekers.
yes DIRCM will have trouble with multi incoming IR missiles and may be filtering as well but not dynamic range ( btw filtering also reduce sensitive )
DIRCM is a temporary solution that works on legacy systems when fired one at a time.
DIRCM have more than one turret , so it more likely able to deal with at least 2 missiles at a times
moon_lightYou do realize that you haven’t really explained anything here? Once again, if T/W and wing loading are not important for agility, then what is? And please don’t come back with “it depends on multiple factors” type responses as this doesn’t say squat.
iam not saying they are not important all i say was higher T/W + lower wing loading doesnot automatically equal a better fighter in dogfight ( already gave you example F-16 vs F-15 )
Nope. It is Scooter who needs to prove his claims first. He is the one making the original claim #765. Funny that I don’t see you jumping over him and ask for evidence but you seem more than ready to demand it from me.
cause from my point of view i can see the evidence and agree with his comment while i donot agree with your
And here we get to the point. 😉
You are not seriously expecting me to take that as some kind of argument, do you?
usa have more experience in make , operate stealth aircraft than other country ( just like russian have experience in operate supersonic antiship missiles )
moon_lightGood. T/W or wing loading do not make the aircraft more agile, right. What does, then?
more complicated than that but one of them is aerodynamic design ( wing shape , intake ) , engine thrust at different altitude ..etc ) , also many other factor will affect out come of a dogfight not just turn rate or climb speed , something like roll rate , dive speed affected it as well
if T/W and wing loading alone make one aircraft superior to the other in wvr , then F-15 would be much better dogfight fighter than F-16 but the fact is opposite
Frankly, I got enough of ****s doing nothing except asking evidence. Give me this, provide that, prove this.. No.. I will not provide anything.. The original claim was that F-35 will deal with the J-20, why don’t you demand data from Scooter to support that, first?
because you sound more biased to me :p ( i know this answer is not very good but come on if you can say sth , you need to know that people may ask you to prove it )
When it comes to other fighters, suddenly weight plays a role in agility? Why doesn’t it with the F-35?
it does affect F-35 agility that why it not as good as other fighter when flying clean ( RAM , DAS , DIRCM all increase weight of F-35 , if you want to put them on other aircraft , their weight also increase as well = less agile , that what i mean )
Yes, some of that can be assumed. It will most likely have superior kinematics, higher speed and more powerful radar. T/W or wing loading I can’t say. Same about RCS.
i can understand that j-20 may have more powerful radar due to bigger nose ( assume that it can get an AESA in future ) however F-35 is quite smaller , and also made by USA ( a lot of experience ) so it will be more likely to have smaller RCS
kinematic , speed , T/W , wing loading => we dont know for sure ( no evidence at all ) so dont just assume one superior in the other , and none of us even know how much these things affect a fighter in a dogfight
moon_lightbtw sorry if iam too annoying for you guy :p no offense so be 😎
moon_lightgot a question on MiG-29 vs F-15?
email this guy
he look so asian
moon_lightDon’t place your bets yet. HOBS/EODAS/DIRCM on the F-35 can only help to partially balance out all the negatives of the aircraft layout like high thrust to weight ratio, limited energy-manoeuvrability diagrams, mediocre acceleration at higher speeds, high energy bleeding rates etc..
You can’t make an A-6 Intruder a dogfighter just by hanging blings on it – because there is no reason why other manufacturers could not do the same.
already said before higher T/W + lower wing loading doesnot equal more agile or dominate in dogfight ( look at the F-16 vs F-15 )
and at the moment you dont have the energy-maneuvrability diagrams for f-35 and j-20 yet
the point about high energy bleeding rates also nonsense , at what altitude , what speed exactly ?? ( big wing = less wing loading but also cause more drag at low , medium altitude )
the F-35 is not an A-6 and putting DAS , DIRCM , RAM on other aircraft will make them heavier too = less agile than they normally are
not to mention we dont even have any information about J-20 but you simply assume it will have superior aerodynamic , higher T/W , lower wing loading , better RCS , better radar than F-35 ;);) and magically it will also have all the DAS , JHMCS , DIRCM ( and all these things will magically weight 0 kg , dont require any airframe modification , dont require electric power 🙂 ) 😀 oh you such as fair person ;):D
P/S : you may try not to believe but HOBS missiles + DAS make maneuver ability pretty much irrelevance ( just like how gun affect a fight between two people of different physical strength )
moon_lightAgreed but we can estimate even today that the odds are not exactly in the F-35’s favor. The J-20 will most likely have overwhelming kinematic advantage and J-20by the time the J-20 enters service I would not bet on supremacy of the electronics used on the F-35, anymore.
based on what exactly :confused::confused: dont even have a proper engine now, dont have TVC , and what make you think it will have better aerodynamic ? , how you know F-35 wont have new engine in future version when J-20 in service :confused:
and also higher T/W and lower wing loading doesnot equal dominance in dogfight , it much much more complicated than that 😎 look at the F-16 and F-15 , f-15 have much lower wing loading , higher T/W , higher top speed. but in dogfight with F-16 , the F-15 will simply become food 😉
not to mention you always be like J-20 , T-50 will always get much better electronic , engine ..etc in future version while F-35 will have to stick with what it get from the start no matter how many year past by
moon_lightThat means Chinese will have no HOBS missiles, no DAS and no DIRCM?
ok let me say it this way ” if 2 man go on a gun fight ,it doesn’t matter if one of them stronger than the other 😉 “
hope you understand what i mean
moon_lightF-22, true.. But F-35 capable to handle the J-20?
How exactly?
already explained like a thousand times before 😉
BVR => f-35 more likely have smaller RCS ( US experiences ) => better
WVR even if J-20 more agile , HOBS missiles + das + DIRCM will do the job
and we not even sure if J-20 more agile than F-35 or not 😉
end of story
moon_light^
well i think you are right
btw i just have a wild thought 😎 probably A-10 is the best gun dogfighter :diablo:
airframe immune to bullet ( almost impossible to shot down by cannon ), 30 mm gun with a lot of bullet and high destructive power :diablo:
moon_lightacceleration/climb rate/top speed, larger radar aperture, supersonic turn rate.
but rafale have smaller rcs :confused: , more agile , in practice simulations it win against ef-2000
Sign In
