REVscene Automotive Forum - Russia tests stealth fighter jet built by Sukhoi

REVscene Automotive Forum (https://www.revscene.net/forums/)

- Vancouver Off-Topic / Current Events (https://www.revscene.net/forums/vancouver-off-topic-current-events_50/)

- - Russia tests stealth fighter jet built by Sukhoi (https://www.revscene.net/forums/604302-russia-tests-stealth-fighter-jet-built-sukhoi.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hondaracer (Post 6793735)

how can you compete against billion dollar jets?

sure the F22 may have lost in "mock" simulations, but isnt the F18 like 165-0 in dog fights? the F22 is superior in every way and your telling me it's going to lose in a dog fight?

In a air to air fight with BVR missiles - the F-22 is superior, yes, especially with stealth and its faster supercruise ability.

If you put the F-22 vs the EF2000 in a dogfight, the F22 will lose. The EF2000 is more maneuverable in a dogfight and can out-turn the F-22 in close combat. It's a smaller, nimbler plane, and is half the price ($120m for F-22 vs $65m for EF2000).

The F/A-18 is/was probably the best multi-role fighter out there - it does well as an air-to-air fighter, and as a bomb truck for ground support. So far, it hasn't really come across opponents that can give it a good run for its money... considering that it's mostly come up against obsolete Migs and Mirages in the Middle East.

The one supposed loss in the Gulf War was never confirmed - a kill by Iraqi Mig-25 with a radar guided missile.

Quote:

Originally Posted by keitaro (Post 6793750)

the f-22 is more of a shoot first, ask questions later type fighter. Can't even see it coming, and bam! your locked on w/ a AIM-7 or AIM-9 coming at you. The chances on getting into a dog fight has become rare.

Yep. Most air-to-air combat will take place in BVR with radar-guided missiles.

The AIM-120/120C replaced the AIM-7, btw.

Quote:

Originally Posted by roastpuff (Post 6793602)

Air superiority is nice and dandy, but it doesn't do jack for the ground forces who have to hold the captured territory against insurgents and local resistance.

:facepalm:

Yea, the American can wipe out the entire country if needed. It's just that they can't use their full power due to many polical reasons.

The insurgents on the other hand are not playing by the rules. They dun even care if they kill their own commerades.
Posted via RS Mobile

Quote:

Originally Posted by Noir (Post 6793846)

:facepalm:

What, are you going to bomb every village that an insurgent is hiding out in without regard to collateral damage? :p

Air support is nice, but danger close situations suck.

Quote:

Originally Posted by roastpuff (Post 6793789)

Ef-2000 is a 4.5 gen aircraft and F-22 is 5gen. both planes and sustain mach speed without use of afterburners.
F-22 has advanced avionics but ef-2000 doesn't lag far behind. that said its not only the machine that makes and breaks aerial combat. its the aircrew.
and many other things.

if need more info. read this http://defensetech.org/2004/06/24/india-1-usaf-0/

a plane as old as mig-21 can defeat a f-15 due to its small radar signature

anyhow read this
its not about F-22 vs PAK-fa, but 4.5 gen vs 4.5 gen. 3 gen Air crafts vs 4 gen. etc. but ull get the point
http://newsfromrussia.com/world/2004/06/30/54664.html

Quote:

Pages:

The American military amazed Moscow and the Russian media by saying that Russian-made fighter planes were superior to their American equivalents. How can these flattering revelations be explained?

BREAKING NEWS
Russia Tests Fifth Generation Fighter Jet

Russia's Fifth Generation Plane on Maiden Flight
More...

General Hal M. Hornburg told USA Today that India's Sukhoi Su-30 MKI multi-role fighters have been successful against F-15 C/D Eagle aircraft in mock combat. In fact, the Indians won 90% of the mock combat missions.

USA Today reported: We may not be as far ahead of the rest of the world as we thought we were, said Gen. Hal Hornburg, the chief of the Air Combat Command, which oversees U.S. fighter and bomber wings...The F-15Cs are the Air Force's primary air superiority aircraft...[and] the results of the exercise [were] wake up call.

The Inside the Air Force official newsletter also discussed the "Russian victory," and reported even more details. F-15 C/D Eagle fighters were pitted against not only Su-30 MKI fighters but also MiG-27s, MiG-29s, and even the older MiG-21 Bisons, which also performed well. The fighters not only defeated the F-15s but the French-made Mirage-2000 as well. According to the Washington ProFile Web site, the results of the exercises surprised the American pilots.

Meanwhile, Russian military experts and aircraft designers did not seem surprised by these victories. The Sukhoi general designer, Mikhail Simonov, has repeatedly told RIA Novosti and other news agencies the Su-27 Flanker and the Su-30 MKI, a modified version of the Flanker, which are now in service in the Indian Air Force, were developed in the 1980s in response to the F-15 Eagle. Moreover, Soviet designers had stipulated far superior specifications. Consequently, Russian experts were not particularly surprised that the performance of the fighters matched their specifications.

Why did an American general publicly admit this fact four months after the exercises?

India's Su-30 MKI fighters and F-15 C/D Eagles from Elmendorf Air Force Base, Alaska, engaged in mock combat exercises in February 2004. However, no one mentioned that India won three of the four exercises at the time.

Russian fighters first defeated their US rivals when Sukhoi and MiG fighters had just started being shown at international aerospace shows in the early 1990s. At that time, several Su-27 fighters, under the command of Maj.-Gen. Alexander Kharchevsky, the head of the Lipetsk center for retraining air force pilots, went to Canada to demonstrate their impressive potential. (President Vladimir Putin flew in a Su-27 to Chechnya.)

Instead of missiles and artillery shells, Russian and American fighter planes used aerial cameras to record their mock air-to-air battles. American fighters were disappointed to learn the results of exercise - their cameras had not captured any Su-27s. The Russians, however, had filmed their rivals' vulnerable points from just about every angle.

Russian pilots owed their impressive success to the Su-27's spectacular performance and its substantial thrust-to-weight ratio. The fighter's unsurpassed performance has already become well known throughout the world because no other fighter (except MiG fighters) can execute such impressive stunts as Pugachev's Cobra and others.

The F-15, the F-16 and the F-18 have wide turning radii. Russian fighters, on the other hand, can turn on a dime by merely switch on their afterburners.

Apart from in Canada, MiG-29 fighters also fought mock air battles with South Africa's Mirage-2000s. Again, the Russia planes defeated their enemies.

Chief designer Arkady Slobodskoi, the supervisor of the MiG-29 program, said, "if our plane is within range of an opponent and has a direct shot, the enemy can be considered destroyed. It only takes 5-6 machine gun bursts."

The United States, which is aware of the impressive combat potential of Russian fighters, had even purchased a squadron of MiG-29s from Moldova after the Soviet Union disintegrated. (That squadron was deployed at an airfield near Chisinau.) Germany, which had obtained a number of MiG-29s after reunification, helped repair the Moldovan fighters. Both Germany and the United States now use these aircraft to train their pilots, so that the pilots can cope with the 7,000 Russian fighters in the world. Britain's Military Balance magazine estimated that India had more than 500 Russian-made fighters. It was therefore not surprising that Indian pilots could defeat their American rivals, despite the U.S. Air Force's intensive combat-training programs.

On the other hand, American pilots have not confronted any serious adversaries for a long time. The U.S. Air Force dominated the skies over Yugoslavia in 1999 and in Iraq in 1991 and 2003. Iraqi planes were grounded during both campaigns. Therefore, mock combat is the only way to amass experience.

The long standing American Air Force mentality prevents its pilots from confronting their Russian counterparts because any possible setback would be detrimental to morale. An American Air Force pilot must be convinced that he can and must defeat the former "theoretical enemy." At the same time, these problems do not exist for mock combat exercises against Indian pilots because any defeats can be explained by inadequate training.

Why did the United States inform the world about its setbacks? Neither Russian, nor U.S. generals like to do this.

The explanation lies on the surface: The U.S. Congress discusses defense spending for the next fiscal year every June and therefore, top American military officials started talking about events in February 2004 now.

i'm no aviation buff so this may sound stupid but is/was achieving mach speeds without after burners a big achievement?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hondaracer (Post 6794186)

i'm no aviation buff so this may sound stupid but is/was achieving mach speeds without after burners a big achievement?

endurance, and (low) radar signature (less infra red signature) more stealth.
high thrust to weight ratio.

Supercruise is a must for fifth gen aircrafts.

better video of t-50

Quote:

Originally Posted by bengy (Post 6793507)

Too bad all that tech ain't doing shit for them in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlo mein (Post 6793575)

I'm confused. The US military has full air superiority control over Afghanistan and Iraq thanks to the F-22 and other air/anti-air technology. I'd say its working.

Quote:

Originally Posted by roastpuff (Post 6793602)

In Iraq and Afghanistan, they didn't even face any *real* air to air challenges. Total overkill against the old 2nd/3rd generation fighters that they had - not even mentioning the "pilots" that the Iraqi air force fielded.

The F-22 was designed to be better than anything available from any country around the world. In this situation having the F-22 is overkill, but the F-22 was designed before these two Middle East conflicts occured.

Having total air superiority is something that gives the US a huge battlefield advantage. With full control of the skies, the US can launch A-10's, F/A-18's, helicopters, AC-130 gunships, and UAV's. It allows them to give air support to forces on the ground as well as troop/asset transportation and reconnaissance.

Air superiority is secondary in the modern battlefield because there is NO battlefield.

Unless the US adopts a "Fuck You" foreign policy and bomb the living beejesus out of mid-east towns, ultra-modern air combat vehicles are pretty redundant in imposing real damage.

What they need are more UAV's and better recon.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tool001 (Post 6794210)

endurance, and (low) radar signature (less infra red signature) more stealth.
high thrust to weight ratio.

Supercruise is a must for fifth gen aircrafts.

better video of t-50
YouTube- Pak Fa (T-50) First Flight Full Video

lol why are russian women so hot yet the men so ugly. Like nature selected all the good genes when a girl is born and when a boys is popped out, he's automatically shafted with teh ugly stick lol.

looks like an enlarged YF22 + YF23 hybrid.

shame they didnt further use the concept on the SU 47 golden eagle...

hate to admit it, but in a dogfight, skills matter the most. american pilots usually have more hours clocked in, while the russian ones are usually fresh recruits not knowing how to use their planes to full potential.

Su 37 does have the edge over F22 in dog fights though.. but knowing how american pilots are trained, i'd say the americans have the edge on this one.

so let me get this straight.

N. Korea spends money on nuclear weapon.
Russia spends money on stealth fighter jets.
USA spends a lot of money in military in general.
Japan spends money on sex toys/dolls.

Quote:

Originally Posted by orange7 (Post 6794391)

and canada spends money in paying off people, police have wrongfully arrested and/or beaten.

Quote:

Originally Posted by orange7 (Post 6794391)

im leaning more towards gundams for japan. :thumbsup:

Quote:

Originally Posted by tofu1413 (Post 6794411)

im leaning more towards gundams for japan. :thumbsup:

Yes... nothing like beating another country down with a 50 foot plastic model.

:p

Seriously though with all this talk of Russia trying to move their military forward, you can only think of what would happen if Modern Warfare 2 becomes real.

big towering thing= psychological affect.