A small question, if both the competing types of fighters have their radar on at full power, won’t the RWR detect each other first rather than first indication from their own radar returns?

not actually but it allowes fighter to disengage and run back…but that depends on its fuel ,manueverbility,and supercruise:D …
in Tiksi shootig range they were MiG-31 kamcatka vs Su-27 irkutsk fights and it was always the foxhound that aquired its target and kept lock it seems its Zaslon-M is a good jamming platform too only a very low flying Su-30 flankers had a chance to aquire a lock using hills as coverage but still at same time as Foxhounds.You do get a warning but Flankers had if i remember quote something like 20 second to get away but by that time it was too late and they just couldnt and mothership would catch them up.so they could only dive and get only 2/1 exchange ratios,…and I wonder would EF-2000,Raffale,F-35s have endurance to run away from flanker.certainly not from the Su-27BM,ore MiG-31s [35].

More the reason for India to purchase Super Hornets until the PAK-FA comes on line. Which, will be 15-20 years from now………..If, the PAK-FA runs in to difficulties they could go with the International F-35.:D

Why when it will be better then F-35 [bigger,2 engined,more range! a requirement F-18 is bad] ,and the offsets form pak-fa will be much greater then f-35 ore f-18. with india having good deal in its construction,electonics, etc.India then would even insist for it to arrange some assembly factories for it,like it was in case of sukhoi MKIs.now thats a lot more of cooperation then any other competitor can provide.

I’m not sure how effective F-22 is as a strike aircraft ATM or whether it makes sense @ all.

Although it seems a lot of people may not see the imediate use or need for F-22 @ all, today or tomorrow or in the next 5 years, but who knows what may happen in 10 – 20 years it could be quite effective and useful in some conflicts or situation at that time.

Most of the aircraft are designed with 20-30+ years lifespan and as such for future needs, it may not be “war on terror” forever, maybe a different war, who knows…

Hey Flex, is that you in the pic…? it is always interesting to see what “invisible” people look like…:):cool:

I mean, we talk to people, argue with them agree with them, whatever, but it strange we don’t know who we are talking to…:o

Hmmm may try that myslef, put pic of me up there in the corner…

regards

Well i dont think so not even in some future its the design limitations stealth ,aerodynamics….the bays are very long but slim ,not deep enough ,not good for bombs,anyways i know we call the MIG-31 the flying gastank with a fuel fraction of 0.4 but to see F-22 with 0,45 or slightly more and it caries it all internaly and weapons too its contribution for ground strike is minor….if carried externally like normal in other aircrafts this bomb payload would negate milions poored into stealth and make it much less survivable.

Might be the R-37 or as Flex points out it if Sukhoi have their way it is more likely to be the KS-172 or a derivitive.

suprisingly the novators with 750kg 400km range then R-37 600kg 300km.proving ramjet isnt all that better then 2 stage solid[more higher trajectory-no need for air].
but still Zvezda is in da game with kh-37mod. proposal 150km range with just 170kg. [4 missile payload for migs and, 6 or more for flanker],but foxhound will have to some “deep modernisation” in case r-37 doesnt work out “deep modernisation” i love that word ,yes for upgraded zveroboi ,screw pak-fa.raptors will get lost inthe vastness of siberia,anyway pak-fa is for primarely —export and profit will be used to buy just few planes for domestic defence for the public to show them [cold-war thinking] look we have same [or better] fighter then americans.

if i were an fighter i guess i would be a bear looking MiG-31M

oohhhh i thought yours favourite was MiG-23FF [frutty & fresh] 😀

what was the name of that manuver that tricks f-15s pulse-doppler radar and makes flanker dissappear from it.? 😉

I wonder if it was a fizzle. Or if the reason they went so tiny is because they don’t have much fissile material on hand and didn’t want to waste it all on one bomb.

Reading the links i was thinking the same.Plutonium is valuable since they are putting it into warheads now.Also depends on composition of rock [granite,ferrite,sandstone], its harness,melting point,.perhaps they overdone it as they try to weaponase it [reducing size and shape] and failed.also its a small country they dont have deserts or tunda to test it.it could contaminate water supplies of half of country,soil too,eartquaqes…also population is close etc.no need for something of big bang to be certain it would work.principle is what matters.

Look how many control surfaces has the MFI Mikoyan prototype

add to that thrust vectoring and you will see this aircraft was very complex to control
]

well to my memory mig-mfi is a twin-finned delta configuration featuring total off 16 control surfaces + 3D tvc.so its better there then f/a-22.
…. that picture of su-47 in braking is very good mig-23[mldf] whats its landning roll in normal weight [half fuel and 4 r-77] compared to f/a-22.

too bad the ruaf doesnt see it that way!! the interceptor isnt a one all do all sollution if it would have been then we wouldnt have seen F-22A but something like a stealthy mig-31 in the USAF and similar aircraft in the RuAF but even had the cold war progressed ( remember F-22 is a cold war product) things would have been similar , but russia in addition to the PAKFA would have had mig-31 and posibly something more advanced because of the clear and imminent Bomber thread from the US!!!

thats because of sukhoi lobbying.
now look at enourmous range projected for mig mfi prototype.4000+km
now look at the wing surface area [since were talking about general dimensions and size].f-15-55.7m2,,,f/a-22-78m2…mig-mfi-90.5M2..the mig-31 61,5…
Al-41f in mig-mfi was in 1 side r-15-300 was on the other side.shut down in flight,restarted,but no yanking was noticed by pilots. software was modified to compensate but r-15-300 was very ok vs al-41f.now al-41f gives 11,3 kg thrust per 1kg weight. flankers al-31s are 8-8,5.since you wanted that bad i can tell you that r-15-300 can produce 10,1+,higher temparature makes shorter engine life.if more expencive matererials and processing are used in the high pressure turbines it can go the distance of your praise p&w… r-15-300 was so superb at its time like rest of 31 equipment,so it kept some of that advantage-its very good today.