F-16.net

Active Member Joined: Aug 28, 2006 Posts: 191

"Not sure about the rest of the world, but the US was specifically concerned with the capabilities of the designs. Those were many reasons 90% of the current defense programs are running now...ie...Fighter/Sub programs."

I wasn't talking about the US military, I was referring to american aviation enthusiasts like those found on this site. The comments about the Pravda article is some way reflected the same biased notions the article put forth. The US military always respected the Russian designs as they should have, just as they will when the next Russian design comes out. All you have to look at is the introduction of MIG-25 and the US's reaction as one case study and a indicative microcosm of the whole.

F-16.net Sponsor

Elite 1K Joined: Jul 20, 2005 Posts: 1035 Status: Offline

Ahhh, I understand bf-fly...well I think most comments here are in reference to the article itself and its extreme lack of correct information. I don't think anyone here has doubts about the hardware's past/present/future, moreover the way its used in combat and the training that goes into employing it properly...those are area's that are lacking attention. Like my previous comments on Cope India; if you only train so you'll win every time, your only increasing your chances of being blown out of the sky. I was very pleased that someone 'got' a Raptor at the Flag. Not that the pilot lost, but that a potential weakness was exploited, found and can now be trained to the Raptor pilots to make them even more efficient....Check

Elite 3K Joined: May 10, 2004 Posts: 3103 Status: Offline

Quote:

All you have to look at is the introduction of MIG-25 and the US's reaction as one case study and a indicative microcosm of the whole.

You mean how we thought it was the Super Jet of All Time, designed the F-15 to spank it, and ultimately found out that it wasn't half of what we thought it was when Belenko gave us a good look at it?

Quote:

Part of the reason why the F-22 took so long has nothing to do with performance. It pushed no barriers that hadn't been pushed before by the 117 and B-2. It wasn't the first stealth. Performance wise yes, but not dramatically so. It's the combination of each that makes it what it is. The 22 was first put to paper in the early 80's, and entered squadron service 20 years later. A fair percentage of that time was BS time. Ask Ben Rich of F-117 fame, or read his book. If pressed, on a wartime footing like WWII, or as the SR-71 was built, the US could have built an airplane with 95% of the capabilities of the F-22 in about 4-5 years.

Actually, I can name several. Neither the F-117 or B-2 was an air to air platform. Niether had to have a radar to spot other jets with. Something revolutionary about the F-22 which is VERY classified is how you put a radar in the nose of a stealth jet which can receive the echos of radiated energy, yet still deflect other energy so that the radar antenna doesn't blow the whole stealth thing. The F-22 also pushes the barriers when it comes to high speed operation of stealth jets. How do you keep the enemy from finding you on IR? Good question. Trouble is for everyone else (aside from the USAF), the Raptor's done a good job. Just ask the RAF exchange pilot in the USAF F-15 who had a Raptor in his HUD during Red Flag and wasn't able to get a weapons system to track on it Wink

.

Personally, I'm really glad we didn't go the 95% of the Raptor route Thumb

! Most of that time wasn't really BS time, but software development and testing time. Something like 50%+ of the Raptor program's cost was in software. Combine the sensor fusion, netcentric capabilities, low observability and you've got a great jet. Put the best trained pilots you've got in it and you've got an even better package.

Yes, I believe one should always respect enemies and their weaponry. No, I don't believe that all Soviet jets are trash, but I will say that I'm glad I don't have to go into combat in the MiG-29 and MiG-23 I got to sit in at Nellis - too many buttons and switches and BS - I'll take HOTAS, thanks.

My opinion is that for all the reasons stated before and quite a few others, the F-22 is the king of the skies and anything 95% of what it is will, in all probability, go down in flames just like any other Legacy platform.

If you have any doubts about the Raptor, just go chat with the Adversary pilots at Nellis. They'll tell you how boring it is to launch, get to the range, get told you're dead, tank, head back to the range, get told you're dead, tank, and head back to base without seeing your adversary Smile

.

[EDIT]

I almost forgot to add that all the bashing we've done on the Pravda article can be backed up with fact. If they'd got thier Sierra straight in the first place, this thread never would've happened Cool

.

Active Member Joined: Aug 28, 2006 Posts: 191

"My opinion is that for all the reasons stated before and quite a few others, the F-22 is the king of the skies and anything 95% of what it is will, in all probability, go down in flames just like any other Legacy platform."

That assumes simplicity in the tactical environment. Take Red flag and give the Aggressors a mach 2 supercruiser with F-117 level stealth. Wanna bet more than 1 F-22 will get shot down?

Active Member Joined: Aug 28, 2006 Posts: 191

Quote:

"ll I think most comments here are in reference to the article itself and its extreme lack of correct information. I don't think anyone here has doubts about the hardware's past/present/future, moreover the way its used in combat and the training that goes into employing it properly...those are area's that are lacking attention"

One pulled from page one, prior to my first post. (There are others similar):

Quote:

"The Russians do somethings VERY well. They produce some of the world's most beautiful women, they have great caviar, they've got possibly the world's best novelists, but, sorry, complex aerospace engineering just isn't one of their fortes."

There were others like it. But comment/perspective on this is not out of line nor something I've created.

Elite 3K Joined: May 10, 2004 Posts: 3103 Status: Offline

Well, let's see...

A Mach 2 supercruiser with F-117 level stealth... First, does it have the IR suppression of the F-22? Does it have the sensor fusion? What are the pilots like? What's the maneuverability? How big is the jet - what's the visual signature? How good is the camo job?

In this case, I would argue a couple of plusses on the side of the F-22. Neither side is likely to get a radar lock on the other, so it's back to the days of a knife fight in a phone booth. Visual tally. Next, the F-22 has some good LO on the IR spectrum otherwise that Eagle driver at Red Flag would've taken a good AIM-9 shot at him. How good is the other jet? Assuming equal IR signatures and failure of the F-22 to get an AIM-9 shot off, you're looking at classic fighter vs. fighter combat with guns again. Now it's down to maneuverability, thrust to weight, and most of all pilots.

Since we have no specs for the other jet other than cruise of Mach2 and radar low observability, we really can't say what would happen. Especially without any info on the pilots of the adversary aircraft.

No real way to say what would happen, but I'd still bet on the jet with the USAF fighter pilot in the cockpit.

Active Member Joined: Aug 28, 2006 Posts: 191

Quote:

If you have any doubts about the Raptor

I didn't say I have doubts about the Raptor, just it's fools play to degrade Russian capabilities, talent, and ingenuity

Elite 1K Joined: Jul 20, 2005 Posts: 1035 Status: Offline

bf-fly wrote:

give the Aggressors a mach 2 supercruiser with F-117 level stealth. Wanna bet more than 1 F-22 will get shot down?

Sure things may change! Of course the argument here would be that the F-22A actually exists.

Fun fact of the day: Ironically, 'pravda' means 'truth' in Russian.

Active Member Joined: Aug 28, 2006 Posts: 191

Quote:

Sure things may change! Of course the argument here would be that the F-22A actually exists.

Are we not talking about the future? Nothing exists until it exists if you want to play that game.

In about 8-10 years or less, there will be Chinese and Russian 5th gen aircraft likely squadron service. They may be the same plane, they may be different. But they WILL be 5th generation aircraft, not 4.5 or 4.5+ or 4.5+++ or whatever nomenclature is in fashion today.

They will be fast, stealthy, and deadly. They will be built in half the time of the F-22, and designed by computers of 2007-9 vintage, not 90-99 vintage. The will have sensor fusion, they will supercruise, they will be super maneuverable, they will cost less, and they will present a viable challenge to the F-22.

Active Member Joined: Aug 28, 2006 Posts: 191

Likely as soon as 2012-15

Elite 1K Joined: Jul 20, 2005 Posts: 1035 Status: Offline

Dude...your 'what if'ing' us to death...let it go. Comments were made in reference to the article and your taking it personally. I mean sure...if you want to believe what you wrote above, no problem! Don't worry about the fact that they have not produced a 4th Generation fighter, much less incorporated any amount of stealth into the existing jets. Of course its a big deal using 'new' computers to design them rather than 'older' computers...not. Go back to your movie...presumably 'Firefox'...and relax. Check

Elite 1K Joined: Jul 20, 2005 Posts: 1035 Status: Offline

Oh, by the way...its annoying when you post every few minutes as you apparently read more info off some other site...when you post, copy all the information they've posted at once. Check

Active Member Joined: Aug 28, 2006 Posts: 191

When several people respond to you you can't respond to each at the same time. I suspect I've been around longer than you judging by your attidude and behavior. Those if's are will be's. If you don't know what a J-10 represents then that's your lack of knowledge, not mine. Stop looking at the fine print and look at the big picture. I've avoiding fighting with you because I remember you from before. Have a nice day.

Elite 1K Joined: Jul 20, 2005 Posts: 1035 Status: Offline

A J-10 represents an awesome attempt by the Chinese at producing a new fighter. They copied the hell out of the cancelled Lavi project. Further, for any combat benefit, you'd have to attach a refueling boom to it. They put in an older pulse doppler RADAR system with a 100KM detection range. Basically, it can track many less targets than other modern aircraft and can attack far fewer at the same time than most modern aircraft. So to answer your question, a J-10 represents a flaming hunk of metal, decending at a high rate of speed...assuming it ever meets our air force anyways. I'd say your typical F-16 or F-15 would have no problem with it. Oh and you can see that I've been around here longer than you...if you look, it will tell you when I joined along with my location and my number of posts. Its viewable to the left of the posts you see here....Check

F-16.net

Forum: F-22A Raptor

F-22 Raptor bashing courtesy of Pravda