“The Su's ability to go high and fast is a big concern, including for F-35,” the Air Force official said.The National Interest has a fascinating article on the SU-35 and how it might fare against our 4th and 5th generation fighters.
Once again Air Power Australia (APA) is being proven correct. The people confirming? Air Force and Naval Aviators. More is known about the truth of this plane than is being publicly disclosed...and the impression I get is that it isn't good. Check this out from a Navy flier...
One U.S. Navy Super Hornet pilot—a graduate of that service’s elite TOPGUN school—offered a sobering assessment. “When taken as a singular platform, I like the Su-35’s chances against most of our platforms, with perhaps the exception of the F-22 and F-15C,” the naval aviator said. “I suspect the F/A-18E/F can hold it’s own and F-35 has presumed stealth and sensor management on its side.”How is sensor fusion and "limited" stealth going to help you in a fight when the other guy is flying faster, higher, has AESA and IRST to track your movements and can outrange you? I haven't even talked about the advantages that threat forces have when it comes to missile tech!
The most chilling part of this article? We're still talking about "old" Russian tech and aren't taking into account the J-20 and J-31 or the PAK-FA! From the quotes from the aviators its obvious that we need to start a crash 6th gen program NOW just to maintain EQUALITY...forget about hopes of superiority!
Any comments on how the exercises in Malaysia went ??
ReplyDeleteThat might give us a clue.
This shows one of the great weaknesses of the F-35: it isn’t a dogfighter. Notice the pilot specified the F-15C…that’s the best dogfighter of the F-15 family with a 100:1 kill ratio in Israeli hands. (The E model is more of a bomber that can still fight well in air-to-air).
ReplyDeleteThe pro-F35 guys will immediately start talking about how good the F35 is BVR, how they will shoot down an enemy before the enemy detects them. F35’s are stealthy, not invisible. The same engine that is making us reinforce the new LHA class to withstand the heat is far from invisible in IR, and the Russians are no slouches in IR detection.
Plus, who says the ROE of a given conflict will even let us shoot anyone BVR? Especially if we are at the start of the conflict. Here’s a very likely scenario:
2015: Syria: You are an F-35B pilot about drop smart bombs on an ISIS target in Syria. So far, Syria and Iran have both been flying sorties against ISIS without engaging US or allied fighters. We have a strict ROE of only firing if fired upon. Pres Obama has made several speeches where he stresses the need for regime change in Syria. ISIS is on the ropes (at least as an army, still plenty of terror attacks). The Syrians have nothing left to lose do they? Or maybe Iran is interested in testing us? Both interested in embarrassing the US and getting media attention about the potential for another decade long war…
You see a Syrian flight heading your direction. Do you shoot? No, you have seen them before and there have never been problems. They get closer but you get no signals they are targeting you. They get within visual range. Still no attack…until they are in close enough to not miss that big IR plume coming out your back end.
Dogfighting matters
the Air Force guy keep stalking about pilot skill and training:
ReplyDeletewhat happens when the Grand Sequestor keeps going and training and flight hours are cut? Compare that to a Russia that has access to plentiful fuel resources. Not that it is free, but they are liable to have as much use for cheap AvGas as the next guy.
Again, the reliance on "Stealth and broad-spectrum sensor fusion" sounds like the German reliance on the "uncrackable"Enigma machine or the French reliance on firepower and concrete to defeat a Wehrmacht invasion.
Or the way the just before Vietnam the US didn't need guns on fighters anymore because missiles were all they needed. And so the first F4's had no guns and were then shot down by Mig-17's with no radar but they did have guns. And surprise, surprise the F-35B has a lift fan instead of a gun...it can put one in the weapons bay but since they are supposed to be doing air support for the grunts, they wont be carrying one very often...we never learn.
Delete"Stealth and sensor fusion" to me sounds like "shoot and hope they don't see us"
the more i hear about sensor fusion the less convinced i am of its war winning potential. i'm speaking in layman's terms but it sounds like a capability we already have....AWACS. how that is going to win air battles is beyond me especially since we already have it---i guess they believe that pushing down that info down to the individual pilot will make a difference but i have yet to hear someone speak about it in a way that is convincing. SLDInfo is infuriating with this "shaping" this and that..."transforming" this and that...they use a bunch of flowery talk but never get to the meat of the message.
DeleteNot to mention that AWACS are not stealthy and are going to be to major targets (along with tankers) for an enemy. And the Russians were developing an Anti-AWACs missile KS-172 that may have been sold to India.
DeleteChina has to have this on their agenda
"Stealth and broad-spectrum sensor fusion"
DeleteIts called technology/engineering woo.
And those who push it, "woo-meisters"
everytime i visit other forums, the posters always deride APA's information and some even question mr Kopp's credentials. If i remember correctly , the guys in DefenseTalk (?) or DefenseTech (?) who claimed to be ex-military / contractors totally against Dr Kopp and APA.
ReplyDeleteWhile im not technically competent to even understand Dr Kopp's APA , i understand what he is trying to say and somehow i agreed with him in principle.. i cannot criticize Dr Kopp as i dont have the skill to even understand what he said lol..
So honestly it is refreshing to see some people still agreed with APA and not totally disregarding that site
APA, Goon, Kopp, Palmer and Sweetman were beating the drum on these issues long before i saw the light. and that's what has me scratching my head. i'm no rocket scientist and i can get the gist of this thing. guys that are alot smarter can too. but looking back on why i was so quick to shit can their thoughts is because it affected belief systems. you believe that someone that can order you up the hill won't lie when it comes to weapons procurement. YOU WANT to believe. you discount individual failings that you've witnessed because its just the institution clearing out dead wood. good guys that somehow went bad. then you realize better and some people refuse to see what is in front of them. it would affect belief systems if they're told that the prince or in this case, the airplane has no clothes.
Deletephysical courage is easy. confronting a foe when you're scared can be overcome by grabbing yourself by the balls and manning up. moral courage is harder.
our leadership needs the moral courage to say that they were wrong about the F-35 and that it should have been cancelled long ago.
Seriously now, why is the F35 given an "F" designation. It's a bomb-truck. Just like the F4 during the Vietnam War. The pilots and training relied wrongly on AAM which had reliability problems. The training regime was point-shoot-scoot.
DeleteThe F35 doesn't need to be a peer advisory to be proven wrong. Just get a good pilot flying a Mig-21, for example, in certain condition.
Can the F35 fight in low-, mid- or high altitude? This is one of the magic question.
@buntalanlucu. If you go on DefenceTalk and mention, APA, ELP, Sweetman, not sure about SNAFU!, be prepared to be banned. They don't tolerate any dissent when it comes to F35, they are very proF35 and they will just gang up on you and whatever....don't waste your time. Some of the other threads are pretty good but I don't bother any more on the F35 thread.....
DeleteAs others have mentioned, the big problem for F35 is the growing threat of of better or equal IRSTs by Russia/China. The big reason behind F35 "survival" is LO, permitting the F35 to get close undetected or thru "radar gaps" plus SA permitting better team work. The problem as I see it, USAF and others are assuming their LO is always going to be better than the bad guys, he will turn on his big radar and emit a big juicy signal. What happens though when the bad guys have decent frontal LO, stay radar passive, have decent SA themselves and data-link all their info coming from their better/equal IRSTs? The bad guys being in bigger fighters like SU35, PAKFA or J20 have more missiles than F35, might even have as good or better than US AMRAMM capability, (USAF Achilles heel being it's missiles), they can stay silent and unleash a massive volley using data from their ISRTs.....at best, even if F35 gets close and shoots first, the bad guy response might be as equally devastating and now both surviving forces are in a knife fight WVR where apart for a few F35 fan boys, which would you chose to be in a WVR fight?
PAKFA being kinetically closer to the F22, just about everyone out there says you want to be in a F22 compared to F35 for A2A combat, I don't see any reason why I would chose the F35 over PAKFA for WVR combat....Again as other before have mentioned, that's even assuming the ROE let's you use AMRAAMs....
@NICO, yes i noticed the one-sided ban hammer on DefenseTalk forum.. it might clean up trashy topics but it certainly discouraged people to post in there. i see not many new topics on the forum last time i visit , and they also pretty fast to ban pro-russian poster as trolls.. The funny thing, i noticed that some of these ban-happy administrators in DefenseTalk also frequent other forums to talk about F35 and got slagged by most people in other forum..
Deleteas for F35 , i am curious why those F35 proponent assume their enemy wont reach technical parity on avionics and EW ? i was thinking , if the enemy using Sukhoi SU35 airframe with avionics/EW parity with F35, then USAF/USN/USMC will be left with weaker airframe (cannot be upgraded) and subject to being another Brewster Buffalo in the footnote of History...
BTW Anyone can tell me What is that GIGANTIC Tail on every Sukhoi SU27 derivatives ? a jammer ? a parachute cone ? a rearward looking radar ? an RWR gear ?
@B. I think the problem comes from a very specific American mind set. Most Americans don't travel much overseas, maybe they go once in their life to France, Italy or UK....As I was talking to someone on Facebook that is very PRO F35, he can't even understand that China is working like crazy to catch up with USA in EVERYTHING, their engineering schools are packed and they send the best and brightest to US universities, etc...you don't think that's not going to have an effect on US technology capabilities in 5, 10 or 20 years? Look where their economy was 20 years ago and where they are now, they are hungrier and more determined than us, US citizens are very content ( truth being we are fat, dumb and lazy) and think that the status quo will never change.....
DeleteSorry to say this guys but I don't always listen all that much to most of what you guys say because I don't know the backgrounds, experience of the people on the internet, some people I have learned to value their opinion here on SNAFU, ELP, Navy Matters, Salamander,etc but I don't know if this PRO F35 guy on Facebook is really an expert or just some 13 year old kid that thinks that USA is always number 1 in everything... I travel a lot, been numerous times to China, I know some of the Chinese experts and just listened recently to the previous CEO of INTEL, that's the people I LISTEN TO, not some kid on the internet or people that have been "brainwashed" by the media and politicians that USA is always NUMBER 1!!! YEAH, WE ARE THE BEST, even when in the top 50 universities for software and programming, the USA only fields ONE school anymore, a field this country used to dominate....that won't have an effect in 5, 10, 20 years?!? What about other fields? When a CEO of INTEL says this country is in deep shit and falling back FAST, that's someone's opinion I value.....
I contend that one of the many reasons this country is having such a hard time with the F35 is the skills (poor) of our engineers and their lack of experience. The problem will only get exacerbated with the new 6th Gen fighter since how many of the engineers now working on F35 will end up working on FXX? Not as many as some of you guys think....which means we are going to do some even more high tech crazy sh#t with engineers with even less skill and experience than the guys working NOW on the F35.....oh yeah, that's not a recipe for disaster. Just my 2 cents....
I'm not sure what the big tail is on the end of Sukois, not sure if it's always the same thing, I think for Su34 bomber, it's a rear facing radar and for the other fighters it's a RWR. IMO....maybe someone knows more about them than me.
@NICO
Deletethans for your insight,, it is deep and disturbing , it reminded me of this article :
Seven steps in the life cycles of great powers
Glubb Pasha learned that different empires had similar cultural changes while experiencing a life cycle in a series of stages that could overlap. He generalized about empires having seven stages of development, identifying these successive ages as follows:
1. The age of outburst (or pioneers).
2. The age of conquests.
3. The age of commerce.
4. The age of affluence.
5. The age of intellect.
6. The age of decadence.
7. The age of decline and collapse.
Each stage helps progression to the next as the values of the people change over time. Military, political, economic and religious developments all influence an empire's people to act and believe differently over time.
Thing is , after the Vietnam war no major air battles have been fought between peer opponents ( maybe you could count 1982 israel vs syria ) .
ReplyDeleteJust because you've kept the fox out of the henhouse for a while doesn't mean the fox wouldn't appreciate a nice chicken dinner should you turn your back.
DeleteThe SU-35 is a classic example of evolutionary development. Take a good platform, keep modifying it and making it better in successive models. There is no reason the US can not do this with the F-15 as the basis of the SU-35 was the SU-27/30.
ReplyDeleteThe latest F-15 Saudi Advanced model is a major step forward as the plane has fly by wire flight controls. Boeing is funding the development with of course the sale potential of the aircraft as in the Saudi case. Imagine if just a small fraction of the $160B (over budget) that has been pissed away on the F-35 program had been funneled into say an F-15 program that might produce an F-25 variant. There is all kinds of tech that could go into the plane if the gov't actually funded development for it rather than sending all the gold into the F-35 program.
The F-15 SA model is now a "cheap" aircraft compared to the F-35. The first step for the Air Force should be to fund the development of a F-15G "Wild Weasel" version then follow that up with a modernized version of the C version to act as additional air superiority fighters to work with F-22s.
The cost of these programs would be a fraction of what is spending spent on the F-35, while the actually combat value would be huge as well as providing newer airframes back into TACair.
i only want to see two things with the F-15. install the F-22 engines and then fly by wire, maybe add thrust vectoring and lets see what it can do.
DeleteIronically, Lockheed has a decent replacement for the F-35 already. and they tried selling it to India:: The F-16IN Super Viper. It has has AESA radar, conformal fuel tanks for greater range, built-in EW, and a helmet mounted cuing system. All while keeping the normal maneuverability.
DeleteI prefer the Eagle, but that production line is closed, while the Block 60 line for the F16 is still open and offering variants. The UAE has one like the -16IN above and they are also offering an upgrade called the F-16V to Singapore which retrofits it. But they can only charge 60 million or so for a new F16 variant while they can five F-35A's for the bargain price of half-a-billion dollars.
F16 past the A model continiuosy lost maneuvrability due to ever more weight being piled on Conformal fuel tanks are no magic bullet the increase the drag considerably and unlike other ordinance can not be jetisoned. F15 is the only true air superiority fighter , F18 E/F was never even in the same league ,F18 is medicore air to air platform that is being kept relevant with advanced electronics ,remember E/F model is a product of brass gettin one over congress in supossedly just upgraded aircraft probblem is design is qiute cobled up.
DeleteSol, you described the F15 ACTIVE to a T.
DeleteMy personal opinion is that we needed to maintain an enhanced version of the F16 and F15, then the "advanced fleet" solely for air interception and deep strike duties. You have the more expensive, more complex aircraft tackle the riskiest missions, while the less expensive, less costly ones perform everything else.
There is no doubt the F15 ACTIVE variant for mass service would have been more expensive than the F15E even, although, it would have been less expensive than the F35 and more useful if it was actually in service.
An F-15 active would be easier to implement today than 10-15 years ago as the fly-by-wire flight control system for the F-15 is now available per the latest SA model.
DeleteThe question all the F-35 JSF advocates like LtGen Chris Bogdan and all who have gone before him need to ask themselves (and answer honestly) is:
ReplyDelete"What is America and its closest allies like Canada, Japan and Australia going to do in the post-2015 'stealth-on-stealth'/'counter-stealth' world where all the leading reference threats, both airborne and surface based, being proliferated around the world by some of the world's best capitalists, have the common design aim of going up against and defeating the F-22A Raptor and B-2A Spirit stealth bomber; especially when there are so few of the latter capabilities to be a persuasive deterrent let alone an effective defence?"
Affordability matters.
ReplyDeletePut EPE engines in to the SH and Growlers and USA will dominate the skies, specially the EW spectrum. If the Growler can detec, jamm and launch an Amraam to the F-22, to do it against the Su-35 or Pakfa won't be harder.
Super Hornet Air Superiority Fighter:
http://youtu.be/1nNajPYghAw
here's my question , from my layman point of view.. can american aerospace use their high performance airframe designs and make a new (read new as in newly produced) aircraft based of F14 / F111 / F15 all with latest engine and latest avionics and EW suite and STILL useful in the modern era aircombat ?
ReplyDeleteor is this LO business a must for the future Aircraft to be considered worthy fighter ?
i remember B52 getting constant upgrade but it is only useful against weak enemies, like the AC130 gunships that very useful in interdicting ho chin minh trail but become useless when NVA bring in SA2 and SA7 in Steel Tiger
What the rest of the world seems to have embraced is that stealth is too expensive.
DeleteEven our rivals, the Russians and Chinese, have embraced a force mix that has a salient of LO/Stealthy aircraft, but the majority of their fleets are going to be plain jane Gen 4+.
It is only the US Air Force that has embraced the challenge of having an all stealth fleet
There is also an intersection point of IRST technologies along with self jamming and/or projected jamming occurring. When traditional stealth technology is weakened by both passive radar tech along with optical tech then it's value for such a high price becomes compromised.
DeleteIt would appear that the larger value proposition going forward is having aircraft with RCS reduction techniques, while applying jamming or EW tech and having optical tech for search. On top of that, adding better "arrows" by looking at Ramjet BVR missiles, with a 2-way data link and/or better seeker-head tech.
One thing people forget is that if Ruski SU24 can toast Aeigis system you could bet F35 could be denied BVR shot by EW action on part of the enemy more complex the system more ways there are to make it fail.
ReplyDeletethat story was never confirmed and smelled, no correction, reeked of Russian propaganda.
DeleteThat story of a Su24 EW version frying an entire Burke class destroyer had a bunch of holes in it. One, if true, why would Russia show such a powerful weapon on such a stupid mission? You keep that kind of capability for a real hot shooting war. You don't advertise it and let USN come up with a counter. Not sure how one could produce such a powerful signal to fry not just the AEGIS part but pretty much stop all the other electronics onboard, I hope that Sukoi crew already had children because with that strong of a signal, they won't have to worry anymore about contraception, they're sterile now....the only thing I could find was some sort of EMP, if it's that strong, doubt that the Sukoi would still be flying, it would have blown up.....plus, how the hell did the Russians know in what state of depression was the crew after the incident?
DeleteYeah, need to hear a little bit more to that story with some more credible sources.....
i dont really know the truth about that donald cook incident, but after the sukhoi flyby the ship immediately dock into near y friendly harbor and not long afterwards it move out from black sea.
Deletea normal routine and planned move ? or because of something that the SU24 flyby ? if i recall there's 2 SU24 in the incident, one standing by at a distance, one buzz the ship..
about the AEGIS, what if the shutdown was intentional by the skipper , to avoid getting their AEGIS signal monitored/analyzed by the evil russkies.. then the scuttlebutt on the ship heard the AEGIS shutting down and they think the russian plane did it with their EW ? then one of the crew said so to his mate in other ships and the rumor of russian super SU24 diabling AEGIS spread like wildfire ?
then again , barring EMP discharge over the ship, is it possible to disable an AEGIS radar system via Electronic Warfare ? i mean disable, not degrade the capability..
sorry but i see no indication from anything i've ever read about the Russian air force or navy that would indicate that they have that level of technology available to perform that type of feat. as a matter of fact they're struggling to get back to being a blue water navy again. lets be honest. they're fighting tooth and nail to get a couple of LHDs. the air force is buying SU-35's that have their origins in the Soviet Union, not Russia so you're talking about a force that is improving well but not equal to a Burke class destroyer.
Deleteto Solomon
Delete@ i see no indication from anything i've ever read about the Russian air force or navy that would indicate that they have that level of technology
@
Sir, what about that?
http://immortaltoday.com/khibini-m-jammer-blinded-aegis-destroyer/
Russian jamming tech showed good result in Georgia 2008 in neutralizing advanced Georgian's AA system, developed for them by our Ukrainian “brothers”.
infanterie, did you look through the rest of the articles on that site? It's nothing but "The bestest equipment in the whole world!!!" articles. I say that the bias on that site is extremely steep.
DeleteSome examples:
Igla SAM – the best mass produced MANPADS
Verba MANPADS – the best portable air defence system in the world
More importantly, ECM efficiency is never about the equipment but the flexibility of the human behind the emitter to play frequency and wavelength games with your radar. You can have the most powerful pod in existence, but if you don't use it right, you might be better off not using it at all.
to Owl
Delete@I say that the bias on that site is extremely steep. @
Agree totally. But I'm not guilty that I've found concentrated info about Hibini M))))) Meanwhile rumors go that very this station was used in “Donald Cook” incident....
If there was even an incident. Some people just think that if a system does not kill everyone coming into range, it's a failure. Others think it's smarter to ask before you shoot, just in case the plane happens to have a designation like MH-17 or if you want to avoid WWIII. Especially in *international* waters?
DeleteI mean, seriously, if all ships were allowed to kill foreign planes that get close at will, how many pot shots would the Chinese have taken at the US by now?
@If there was even an incident.@
DeleteAgree. We have no reliable proofs of the accident by now. But my in initial post was about Hibini tec and its possibility to jam Aegis. I do not affirm the incident be in realty.
Russian disabling AEGIS would be litteraly an nuclear test : All US navy depends on AEGIS.
DeleteIt's always easier to JAM than to DETECT so, after what, 20 years of AEGIS existence, and so much progress in informatics I don't see why they couldn't JAM a 20 years old big radar...
Perhaps russian wanted to test it and were sure that US won't start the 3rd WW..
And do you think that you can shoot down a plane with hand held laser tag? It's always a question of power, jamming unit need to be or really high tech or have a more power... and it's hard to jam something such powerful as standard Aegis on ships. You can try but if full power of Aegis radar will concentrate on single plane it would probably not only jam it but also fry it's electronics.
DeleteThen there is this from Bryan Clark over at CSBA -
ReplyDeletehttp://www.csbaonline.org/2014/11/22/videos-commanding-the-seas-a-plan-to-reinvigorate-u-s-navy-surface-warfare/
While the Congressman's opening remarks are encouraging, the Senator's comments are indicative of one who prefers to drink the Kool Aide rather than think critically about the data and the facts.
Though, all in all, the presentation and related report say much about the current state of the art.
Im still trying to understand why Canada of all people would prefer to buy F35 instead of buying newly built modern F15 variant , which is perfect for patrolling canada's northen borders.. if the canadian want 'sensor fusion thingy' , can they just buy some modernized AWACS ? i assume the mission statement of RCAF is primarily to protect it's northen border area AKA act as a speed bump for north america..
ReplyDeleteim having a hard time believing that those great avionics and sensors in F35 cannot be implemented in other airframes (assuming they worked in F35)
TLDR : Assuming F35 program got cancelled , whats the best option for RCAF ? F15 airframe or F18 airframe (both using modern avionics,engines,CFT, LO improvement if possible)...
http://rt.com/op-edge/212115-lockheed-f-35-marketing-clout/
DeleteThat's a good question, because an F-15 variant is an excellent long range intercept and patrol aircraft for Canada's large land mass.
DeleteI seems the CDN govt is only focused on either the F-35 or the newest version of the F-18 Super Hornet.
@SuperRhino
DeleteDon't you just love Sprey. He just has cantankerous way of calling a turkey a turkey.
Canada has not bought one prototype yet -- that's huge, considering the tightness of the two countries on every other "national security" matter. Compare to Australia.
DeleteSprey reminds me a lot my first boss in Canada. An old grumpy Jewish guy, always swearing, with a dark sense of humor, very sarcastic and with a huge ego, but I loved to work with the SOB, a smart ass that was always right in his appreciation s and was very good in his business.
DeleteFor Canada I prefer the Rhino instead the Eagle for several reasons. It's stealthier and cheaper to buy and maintain, with reinforced landing gear for the artic, with very short take off and landing capacity, very maneauverable to landing in an icy and windy small airfield, very good in close dogfight and with a lot room to grow in ellectronics and sensors, combined with the Growler should be awesome to have. For better range should be nice to have them with conformal fuel tanks.
"...sensor management on its side."
ReplyDeleteThe Pentagon test guru, michael Gilmore, in National Defense Magazine, Oct 22, 2014:
--The aircraft's mission systems have yet to be tested in the F-35.
NOTE: The term “mission systems” refers to the avionics, integrated electronic sensors, displays and communications systems that collect and share data with the pilot and other friendly aircraft, at sea, in the air and on the ground.
If it hasn't been tested, and evaluated to meet the specs, it doesn't exist. Air battles aren't won with glossy brochures with fancy words about sensor fusion and gods-eye vision of the battlespace.
Seems that the Su-35 wins default because the F-35 cannot operate in too cold or too hot weather.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/tabid/223/Article/555558/luke-afb-changes-refueling-truck-color-mitigates-f-35-shutdowns.aspx
"We painted the refuelers white to reduce the temperature of fuel being delivered to the F-35 Lightning II joint strike fighter," said Senior Airman Jacob Hartman, 56th LRS fuels distribution operator. "The F-35 has a fuel temperature threshold and may not function properly if the fuel temperature is too high, so after collaborating with other bases and receiving waiver approval from AETC, we painted the tanks white."
"It ensures the F-35 is able to meet its sortie requirements," said Chief Master Sgt. Ralph Resch, the 56th LRS fuels manager. "We are taking proactive measures to mitigate any possible aircraft shutdowns due to high fuel temperatures in the future."
In the summer months at Luke AFB, temperatures can reach beyond 110 degrees. Painting the tanks white now will help prevent fuel stored in the tanks from over-heating.
Actually, there is a lot of brush over in straight out "top trumps" comparisons between aircraft. Russian aircraft tend to be more optimized for higher altitudes than US ones, even the MiG-29 vs F-15. It ties in to each country's tactics and strategy. US aircraft tend to operate better at lower altitudes, part of the low level bomber doctrine that was adopted in the past.
ReplyDeleteHow can I make this clearer...
Each aircraft engine is set for a specific altitude range that lets them perform the best, but once they get out of that range, their efficiency falls off. Russian and US aircraft have their "Max" set at different altitudes. The Russian ones just look better because they set it higher, the US don't want to operate that high because they are designed to go below enemy high altitude SAMs (i.e S-300/400). What is the point in operating in your enemy's most efficient weapons bracket? So they go lower.
This engine setting thing is also the main driving concept behind the Adaptive Versatile Engine that is supposed to equip the US's 6th gen fighter, the engine dynamics change in different environment and scenarios.
At a minimum we should upgrade the engines on the Super Hornet and do a crash program to get this AETD engine.
ReplyDeleteSolomon, did you knew about this website http://www.veteransnewsnow.com/ ?
ReplyDeletethe anti-EU-NATO-US propaganda is unbelievable...it pretends to be a US veterans website or something?
Thank a lot for guidance. Unbelievable!
DeleteWhat's wrong with being anti-EU-NATO-US? Is it a crime? This website and others contain many views which oppose US policy and practice. It's called democracy and good citizenship. Those not favoring negative comments on the government and its allies ought to consider living in a more repressive state where views other than the government's propaganda are forbidden. The fact that you find the comments are unbelievable is irrelevant to their freedom to publish them. I and others served time to preserve our freedoms, but now we see them endangered by thoughtless people. Not good.
DeleteProbably the USNavy will do it, if the A-35 prices continue to increase.
ReplyDeleteThe USAF should re-think built some F-16XL with the new sensors and redar to have cheap interceptors
General Dynamics F-16XL: http://youtu.be/ecM1-ISNeHE
What I don't understand is why avionics keep getting more expensive, is it the computing power, sensor, or the radar it self, anyone knows the keys to making a good aircraft is having a good air frame, good engine/engines, and of course good avionics however with the F-35 its sacrificing the first 2 (well sort of with the engines) and relying heavily with avionics but every year companies like Nvidia releases practical supercomputers with their Tesla and Titan series you would think that with avionics would get cheaper and cheaper to produce yet we are having an exact opposite effect and are getting more and more expensive!
ReplyDeleteWhy? It doesn't make any sense. Is it really all sensors and radar that are pushing the cost up, and not only that there is also the issue whit software with according to this link
http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/million-lines-of-code/
where not even in windows vista levels yet how can it be so bad! I guess at the end of the day it seems video game developers and other software developers would be better at designing aircraft avionics than aircraft companies. Then again I could be completely wrong and companies like LockMart are pushing in the latest hardware and software that world can buy then is this the case of vaporware.
All of this of course is speculation but it really has been bugging me Solomon, I mean if the smart phones we carry actually have more processing power than most fighter aircraft and all they need is sensors then what the hell is going on?
Well If the 6th Gen design that is currently being worked on works out. Considering it is being designed by Boeing and not LMT I have slight confidence that it will work out the proposed specs are impressive. Stealthiest plane ever made, top speed between Mach 3 and Mach 4, supposed to be as maneuverable if not more maneuverable then the F-22, will have a laser that can strike air targets, unknown payload of missiles and bombs or if it is to have a gun but it is supposed to do Strike, Air Superiority, ground support, precision bombing, and reconnaissance roles. Sounds more than a little too good to be true. However if it does workout it would be the greatest fighter aircraft ever built especially if they can keep the costs down.
ReplyDeleteThe Su35 is a good airplane but as all the Russian airplanes their engines are not as reliable as the americans. It's a big airplane capable to do amazing maneauvers but they take too much time to recover after every pirouette. They don't pass instantly from 0 to 100% full afterburner as the americans fighters. That's a big problem if you are facing a smaller fighter with better engines that can flight more agressivelly doing real dog fight maneauvers with total confidence in their engines. In a real combat or dogfight better to be in an aggressive, agile and maneauverable Super Hornet with great sensors and ellectronic gadgets BTW, than in a heavy Sukhoy with good aerodinamics caracteristics but not very reliable engines. As I say once, the 6th Gen fighter exist already, is the mix of SH/Growler combo that covers all the aspects of the "Stealth" electromagnetic spectrum and air dominance requirements.
ReplyDeletehttp://youtu.be/yVlmoNtcyhY
http://youtu.be/ni7tGNBMfD0
The hilarious thing is that during the 1990's the US Navy actually contemplated on using an Americanized SU-33 instead of the super bug in fact in 1997 they acquired 2 su27ub from Ukraine to test them out, how much more capabilities would it have if the Americanized su 33 had raptor's engines, the super bugs avionics and conformal fuel tanks?
Deletehttp://theboresight.blogspot.com/2009/07/painful-road-for-sukhoi-su-27-27-series.html
Who knows had that had happened, US and Russian relations would have been to a point that where Russia was part of Nato and the whole Ukraine crisis might have never happened. Just a thought.
F/A-18 Hornet 35 Year Anniversary: http://youtu.be/aAjlr9fIvio
DeleteSuperrhinoceront you just ate propaganda... if SU27 engine weren't reliable you would hear much about crashes...They currently develop new engine, that appears not reliable yet, but is the F135 reliable yet ? after 10 years ?
DeleteThe fact is that if they fly, they engine works...and the aircraft can operate.
And after that please :
"It's a big airplane capable to do amazing maneauvers but they take too much time to recover after every pirouette"
The aircraft that make cobra ? the most agile fighter over the world ?
It's not that simply, and advice taken on falling URSS Ally Su27 can't be relevant on nowadays SU27.
And, URSS always had better missiles than USA, just didn't have enough money.
Brahmos, KH XX, R XX ect have always better characteristics than US ones..
in 1985 mig 29 could launch 200km range missile to kill AWACS ( altrough unknown effectivness) ... AMRAAM just close nowadays this range...
Even if they weren't reliable, they could have so much of them ( in these country, only president steal money, not all LM&co monkeys )
the fact is that I believe that US industrials will kill USAF before Russia, with over the top accuracy.
US could have bought 20000 rafales, much more than all your enemies missiles stockpiles...
Fabsther, while I do agree with your point on Russian Engines being reliable and not just Reliable enough.....I do believe that the US does not have 20,000+ pilots lying around to power up those 20,000 Rafales.
DeleteIf you belive the Canadians need an untra reliable aircraft to patrol their large territory with few airbases and environmental hazards and low population, then the Russians are in the same boat. A boat thats more than 2 times bigger than Canada though.....with China, the stans, and EU-NATO-USA, Japan, North/South Korea all surrounding them.
@Jose Arjona
DeleteIf you think Russian engines are reliable just look for Indian airforce statistics and how many russian fighters they have lost.
The Sukhoy maneauvers are good for entertainment but not for combat, are pure ballistics and any time they do their famous cobras they fall from the skies like rocks and need a lot of time to recover. Even worst when they carry weapons. Listen this USAF pilot talking about the Sukhoys in clean configuration agianst the F-15 with tanks and weapons in the Red Flag.
http://youtu.be/WKEa-R37PeU
http://youtu.be/3gX_vZB-2nE
Have you acrually been involved with the exploitation of real jet aircraft??
DeleteLook at the russian jets in eastern european service, and then compare.
And that comentator in the video above is just an ignorrant dumbass.
Yes Jose Arjona and while you look into Indian Airforce Statistics do note that we have been under perennial sanctions until very recently and that whole collapse of the Soviet Union thing back in 1991 where most Airforces sourcing Soviet spare parts had no factories to source from and had to literally beg borrow and steal for parts. If the Russian Engines were not as reliable as they are.....we would have had even more crashes.
DeleteAlso note that most of our pilots untile very recently had not Intermediate Jet Trainers which meant that they went from Gliders and Piston Aircrafts straight into Advanced Jet Trainers (Also Very Recently) or in the other case striaght into the Migs and Mirages. Now that is a huge learning curve and the Clearly Unfortunate reason for a lot of our crashes. Heck, General Motors are more probable to make an unreliable car than NPO Saturn is to make a Jet Engine.
Can I assume even without opening those two above mentioned links that they belong to a particular Colonel Fornhoff ?
Yup.....just opened the links.....Fornoff it is.
DeleteStorm Shadow, you beat me to the punch. Anyway, though I know Fornoff was wrong on a couple of technical details like the make of the engine to say one, I bet he does have a wealth of Information on the manoeuvere and Flight path aspects that I as a layman just cant get a hold of.
Sarabiv, the biggest problem of the indian air force is not pakistan or china but the massive buearucracy in india, cmon look at the tejas development.
DeleteTejas is not a Bureacratic mess, it is a Scientist-Airforce Force mess. One expects the "on 2 year deputation" bureacrat to give it a nonchalant look and then be done with it when promotion/transfer time comes. But one just cant remove the blame from the guys making it 24/7 and the guys who will end up using it 24/7. Its these 2 factions that have time and again not come together to make a good weapon system. One of the very few cases of developers, military men and scientists and contractors comming together was the Kolkata Class Destroyers and look at that project. Minimal delays and a decent end product.
DeleteWell, look at what time pakistan had the JF-17 and also an example the T-50 in korea.
DeleteYou just had to hire dassault or mig early to do the major works with indian engeneers learning along the way
Looks like Dassault will get its wish ultimately, as will Sukhoi with these next two purchases.
DeleteMy simple point was that if india had payed some money to dassault or mig to design the tejas( while leaarning along the way) , this fighter would be already operarional 10 years ago.
DeleteAnd indian engeneers would me making the "mark III" version now .
Also indian weapons diversity, just look at how many types of short range A-A missiles india has.
R-60,R-73,Magic-2 and now AASRAAM.
If they had made the BraMos thing with a jetfighter design, maybe they would have more than 100 by now.
Well whatever does happen in the aviation industry, happens, I just like speculation, and what if's, on a more personal opinion I do hope that the F-18 E/F/G get their advance super hornet upgrades they definitely need it though I would like for those F414 to have power closing to the 30,000 lbf range without sacrificing fuel, thermal signature, engine life, and add thrust vectoring anything to improve and already good platform.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteAn Americanized Su-33? If the Navy couldn't get the new F-14Ds it wanted what chance in hell did they have of getting the Su-33? There was no way such an idea was taken seriously. By today we could have an "F-14E" with features similar to the proposed "AST21" upgrade. Brand new avionics including a huge AESA radar, the AIM-152 long rang air-to-air missile, new engines, etc. Operating costs would probably still be higher than the F/A-18, but nowhere near as bad as the old F-14As used to calculate costs back in the '90s.
DeleteI admit I am biased but the Super Hornet was something of a mistake, but a mistake we have made work.
The time a fighter goes super sonic is less than 2% of its cycle life and almost never reaches its max speed.
DeleteThe Tomcat has 30% more top speed and range for its delta configuration, but in dogfight was not as maneauverable as the Rhino for its 20% bigger wing loading having the same thrust to weight.
The Rhino is way simpler and cheaper to maintain, its stealthier and with great sensors and radar. At the end is just the advanced and cheaper version of the Tomcat bit with less top speed and range, with buddy buddy capacity and electronic warfare capacity too in the G version.
http://media.defenceindustrydaily.com/images/AIR_F-18E_Refuels_F-14_lg.jpg
tha last f-14 tomcat demo: http://youtu.be/rAwRx4XceGg
Delete2012 Miramar Air Show - F/A-18E Demo: http://youtu.be/79YUX5GAfDc
-They don't pass instantly from 0 to 100% full afterburner as the americans fighters. -
DeleteIf you actually knew what you were talking about and it's clear by your comment you don't. Or heck you could have watch some vids of su-27 family in airshows or carrier takeoff and landings etc. The Al-31 engines are know and have earned a reputation for having a best spool up of any engines in it's class in it's heyday and high tolerance to severely disturbed air flow.
Sure, tell that to the Indians that asked to take off each one of their Sukhoys with one minute of difference in the Red Flag.
DeleteThe best one in its class is this guy
http://youtu.be/uNyNg0Wrbgg
http://youtu.be/CNugoJLPHQw
Good god man, give it a rest if your facts about engines are based off what Fornoff said. He even got the make and type of the engine wrong apart from the Radar. How on earth does an Air Force fighter pilot (If he was an fighter pilot or even a spokesman) get the type and make of an aircraft engine and radar wrong if he was before the exercise provided a detailed docket of information about the aircraft he was pitted against ? And then to base his opinion about take off delays of a fictional engine that wasnt even there ?
DeleteAgain, I do believe that there is some element of truth in what he is saying and that video has already been debated to death on sites like F16.net and Foxtrot Alpha etc. But dont take his "opinion" as gospel truth.
For the record we did not take 50-60 aircraft to Red Flag. Even at 50-60 there is a huge variation of 10 even though i am sure he was given an exact docket stating the number and type of aircraft at play in that exercise during any given time. If the Indian Air Force did request for a 1 minute interval then that would apply to the 1 and a half dozen of aircrafts that we did send and not to the entire batch of 50-60 aircraft all in one go which would need that 1 hour of taking off time if there was only 1 airfield in operation for everyone. A big if. His mathematics here and his logic stemming from his understanding about the engines is doubtfull here. Take the positives from it, take the negatives as well and lets leave it at that. In anycase, no sukhoi has ever been categorized as a hanger queen based on engine reliability.
The covert intelligence communities Highest Award to the first operator who somehow sows the seeds of discord in this Sino-Russian Su-35 deal.
ReplyDeleteCatch this tidbit? ---
ReplyDeleteThe addition of the electronic attack (EA) capability complicates matters for Western fighters because the Su-35’s advanced digital radio frequency memory jammers can seriously degrade the performance of friendly radars. It also effectively blinds the onboard radars found onboard American-made air-to-air missiles like the AIM-120 AMRAAM.
If true to any percentile, then the BVR is no long important argument goes away in a real big hurry...
Interesting weren't the Russians working on a long range heat seeking missile that they would use in tandem with radar guidance?
DeleteTwo years ago we had the fighter intended to defeat such aircraft in production! The F-22. Even if it didn't have VLO stealth it is even better than the Su-35 when it comes to the realm of the "high and fast".
ReplyDeleteThere is certainly room to improve upon the F-22's capabilities as well. A HMDS, IRST, and side-looking AESA arrays are all possibilities. It would cost some money for sure but the F-22 platform has what you're looking for. Some more internal fuel would be great but that would require some extensive redesign.
Yet nobody wants to pay for a "purebred" air-superiority fighter these days so we are trying to do too much with the F-35. The JSF was supposed to complement the F-22 when it came to air-to-air combat, not do it all alone. The F-35 is more oriented towards the strike/attack mission and the design clearly reflects that. What would help the F-35 (and F-22) is a new AAM to replace the AIM-120.
I see a huge problem being budgetary limitations. The USAF also needs a new bomber and new weapons for it, especially if this "Pacific pivot" is actually going to happen. As for the Navy I fear they're out of luck and won't get something with great high and fast performance until a supposed "6th generation" fighter. Until then they will be busy enough trying to get their surface fleet figured out.
There is only one way we can settle this argument. A face off. F22 vs Sukhoi. Like stormshadow said in the very first comment...we need more details on the Malaysian exercise. All I can find even after a lot of google search is still political and both sides happy pieces about the exercise and not enough details as to what exactly happened there. Anyone here has some more detailed links ?
ReplyDeleteFailing that, Red Flag/Cope India with Sukhoi-30Mki vs. F22. And this time both Airforces bring their own AWACS and mobile ground radars. Not 6 vs. 6 but a full squadron vs. squadron with its own mix of experienced and new pilots. No restrictions on BVR/WVR and weaponry.
DeleteI know there will be plenty of people who will be cautious about each party showing off some deliberately hidden capabilities like Radar but both nations need this kind of exercise with no BS rules. The US needs it for obvious reasons and India needs it so that we can also prepare for what to expect from these Gen 5 aircrafts. The next time we go into a board meeting with the Russians regarding the PAK-FA and its FGFA varient we enter into a meeting having that F22 experience under our belts.
that'll never work. the US is worried about both China and Russia and India is too close to Russia for our likes. its a great idea but we're just not that close yet.
DeleteTouche. International Politics.
DeleteBut wouldnt a more limited level of exercises between the 2 planes be more suitable ?
Su-35, a good old refined Su-27, THE mainstay of russian airforce, it can't be dismissed as harmless. PAK FA is actually a graduation exam for a new generation of aviation engineers, it can take off but unlikey will enter mass production.
ReplyDelete