SU-35 vs F-22

[GGTharos]

I'm curious, does the Su-35 have a capability to fire at targets based on what the RWR detects? Otherwise the Su-35 is still at a disadvantage:

 

Here's another question: If it can compute a solution from an RWR contact, what is the accuracy and reliability of this solution given that:

 

-APG-77 automatically varies power

-APG-77 automatically varies frequency

-APG-77 automatically varies PRF

-APG-77 automatically varies pulse length

 

[EDIT] Sniped by GG himself. :)

 

Oops :D

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

EOS is very short-ranged when it comes to search compared to radar, even the modern suites. This is why they haven't replaced radar as the main sensor on fighters.

Without quoting the rest of your post, let me just say that F-22 was built as a very powerful OFFENSIVE weapon system. While for decades, Soviet Union and Russia was on DEFENSE and almost everything they built was a defensive in nature. Thus, Su-35 is built to work with powerful GCI and ground based radar jammers. therefore, I don't know how effective, relatively weak, airborne radars can be when entering a theater where opponent is using GCI an ground based jammers. And I am sure that F-22 and Su-35 will do their best to fight on its own terms. One will try to go BVR and the other one will work hard to get into EOS range. And Stalth is visible from hundreds of kilometers away by ground based radars, rihgt? Thus, defensive system with GCI, and jammers would be a real challenge to any aggressor, including F-22.

 

Reminder: SAM = Stealth STOP! note: see GG's signature.

Edited May 15, 2014 by =4c= Hajduk Veljko

[outlawal2]

So what was the reason, then? Just being curious, here, as I just saw the vid. I know they thought it was the pressurized vest, at some point, but pilots have been experiencing the same problems after the vest removal, from what I've found.

 

As I understand it, some 50 cent part in the oxygen replenishment system had been replaced with an inferior grade material and was breaking down and giving off particulates that the pilots were then breathing.. Once they figured this out and replaced the part with the correct original specification the issue went away...

 

What does tick me off about the whole thing isn't really that they had an issue, ((Stuff happens with complex equipment) I am ticked because the Air Force refused to listen to their pilots and it took 60 minutes to rattle their chains enough to get them to fix it.

 

No excus for that BS..

[GGTharos]

The USAF/USN/US Army employ portable ground based jammers, as well as Compass Call aircraft, Growlers, and other fun things. You already know about AWACS, the JTIDS/Link-16 systems etc, so if you want to add GCI etc into the context, you have to consider those things as well.

 

As for stealth planes visible for hundreds of km on EWRs, I don't know - this is a very tricky issue to answer because RCS reduction in general basically works on a wide spectrum, almost regardless of what it is optimized for.

 

But, let's assume that it is the case that long-wave EWRs can see such planes far away, I think it is a fair assumption.

 

Having made that assumption, we now have to make another fair assumption: The designers of the stealth aircraft know this, as does the air force.

 

EWRs themselves cannot guide weapons or provide firing solutions - the radars that can though, tend to operate in the radio bands that stealth is very effective against.

 

If you want to set up a US invading Russia defending scenario for the sake of the argument (And excluding the nuclear scenario), then the challenge is for Russia because their weapon systems capability has just been seriously diminished.

 

I'll point out that those stealth planes are coming in with a fleet of (Stealth :) ) cruise missiles, dedicated ECM assets to blind EWRs, and the ability to shoot at the other guys first and possibly keep shooting without being shot back at much.

 

But now we're not longer talking F-22 vs Su-35, so I'm not sure how this helps this thread.

 

Maybe it's better to think about say, a 4v4 in a closed arena :)

 

Without quoting the rest of your post, let me just say that F-22 was built as a very powerful OFFENSIVE weapon system. While for decades, Soviet Union and Russia was on DEFENSE and almost everything they built was a defensive in nature. Thus, Su-35 is built to work with powerful GCI and ground based radar jammers. therefore, I don't know how effective, relatively weak, airborne radars can be when antring a theater where oponet is using GCI an ground based jammers. And I am sure that F-22 and Su-35 will do their best to fight on its own terms. One will try to go BVR and the other one will work hard to get into EOS range. And Stalth is visible from hundreds of kilometers away by ground based radars, rihgt? Thus, defensive system with GCI, and jammers would be a real challenge to any aggressor, including F-22.

[OutOnTheOP]

Kulbit. :)

 

Which the F-22 can also do, and is useful in ACM, because....?

[OutOnTheOP]

Without quoting the rest of your post, let me just say that F-22 was built as a very powerful OFFENSIVE weapon system. While for decades, Soviet Union and Russia was on DEFENSE and almost everything they built was a defensive in nature.

 

Su27/ Su35 are in no way whatsoever "defensive" aircraft.

 

The MiG21 and MiG29 were, ARGUABLY, defensive, as their role was point defense. However, the MiG29 was built for forward point defense of lead army groups... which is not a terribly defensive thing. The assertion that Russia built weapons "only for defense" is a very misleading bit of (incredibly naive) propaganda.

 

Yes, I am sure that the 50,000 tanks the Soviets built throughout the Cold War were TOTALLY just for purely defensive purposes :music_whistling:

[Angel101]

No Su-35 will not turn the radar on, it will use EOS. F-22 has very advanced and powerful radar, however, when it turns it on, it says "I am here". Thus F-22 will do all it can NOT to turn its radar on, instead it relies on off/board sensors for targeting and i think, even guidance of missiles.

 

Su-35 has 3D vectoring engines option.

 

And I did say that F-22 has some technological edge, for sure.

 

Reminder: SAM = Stealth STOP! note: see GG's signature.

 

Are you sure that Su-35 can detect F-22 radar? IIRC F-22 has a low obserbavility radar, that means something that it send pulses in diferent freq. to avoid detection by rwr. Or at least the old ones.

[nwbasson]

Are you sure that Su-35 can detect F-22 radar? IIRC F-22 has a low obserbavility radar, that means something that it send pulses in diferent freq. to avoid detection by rwr. Or at least the old ones.

 

ALR-94. The SU-35 is nice and all, but I would rather be in the Raptor if I had to choose between the two.

[ФрогФут]

F-22 may have a better radar

By the way. All numbers I read about F-22 and Su-35 radars (Some research from Russian scientists, based on probably some early info on F-22 (book about radars from 2005) was telling F-22 can get comparable ranges for the similar targets only in much smaller zones + could use max output power only for short periods of time. Was that false info, old info and the radars are upgraded or what?

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

By the way. All numbers I read about F-22 and Su-35 radars (Some research from Russian scientists, based on probably some early info on F-22 (book about radars from 2005) was telling F-22 can get comparable ranges for the similar targets only in much smaller zones + could use max output power only for short periods of time. Was that false info, old info and the radars are upgraded or what?

Very interesting. I did not even know any of that. That's why I used a word "may" when I said that F-22 "may" have a better radar.

[Scrim]

And Stalth is visible from hundreds of kilometers away by ground based radars

 

If you disregard that troublesome factor called "facts", yes. But if we take the "fact" factor into account, the reply will more likely go along the lines of: :megalol:

 

I mean, it's not like stealth planes were first built pretty much solely to be invisible to SAMs, which happen to use ground based radars. It's also not like that stealth planes only once in world history have actually been spotted and shot down with the help of a ground based radar, right?

[outlawal2]

And another pointless thread debating 2 dis-similar approaches argued vehemently by folks that have little useable knowledge about ANY of it (other than internet search pages)

 

Please let it go and just walk away...

[nr1jc]

the "SMART" is strong in this one^^

[Pilotasso]

By the way. All numbers I read about F-22 and Su-35 radars (Some research from Russian scientists, based on probably some early info on F-22 (book about radars from 2005) was telling F-22 can get comparable ranges for the similar targets only in much smaller zones + could use max output power only for short periods of time. Was that false info, old info and the radars are upgraded or what?

 

F-22 has dynamic EM emissions profile. A form of this was simulated in the DID F-22's (EMCOM levels) and it was used to balance stealth and active sensors usage in order to avoid as much as possible any chances of being picked up by passive sensors, airborne or otherwise (even with LPI).

 

This is probably the reason behind some of the comments that APG-77 may be "worse" than other radars, specially when APG63V3 from the same manufacturer which has comparably more peak output and potentially even longer range (why restrict output when the F-15 has the RCS of a barn anyway?).

Edited May 15, 2014 by Pilotasso

[GGTharos]

There are two possible physical issues for any ESA radar that I am aware of:

 

- Cooling

- Optical aberrations of the beam at the edges of the useable azimuth

 

There is also the fact that the APG-77 is basically gen-1 AESA for the USAF, so the TR modules may be less reliable than newly manufactured ones.

 

Even if true, I would imagine all of this info is now out-dated. Updating of F-22 systems has been constant, despite what you'll read in the press.

 

By the way. All numbers I read about F-22 and Su-35 radars (Some research from Russian scientists, based on probably some early info on F-22 (book about radars from 2005) was telling F-22 can get comparable ranges for the similar targets only in much smaller zones + could use max output power only for short periods of time. Was that false info, old info and the radars are upgraded or what?

[JNASova]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gJ4XpUZIZI

 

Here are some datas abouth F 22.Source-west.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gJ4XpUZIZI

 

Here are some datas abouth F 22.Source-west.

I remember this episode, it just happened, that I watched it live when it aired.

 

Rachel Maddow of MSNBC is not an aviation expert, however, most of what she said in this report is factually correct.

[winz]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gJ4XpUZIZI

 

Here are some datas abouth F 22.Source-west.

Jesus, I think I just became dumber just by watching this...

 

Rachel Maddow of MSNBC is not an aviation expert, however, most of what she said in this report is factually correct.

Factually? Maybe... Blown out of proportion without any context? Yep. Like the part when she mentions the F-22 cannot fly low because it's armor is so light it can be penetrated by ground fire... Well, yes, it is... Like the armor of any other aircraft....Even the A-10 is lightly armored (when compared to IFV) and can be penetrated by ground fire ( when you don't count the titanium bathtub around the pilot)

Edited May 16, 2014 by winz

[TAW_Blaze]

"Technologically incapable to communicate with any other warplane."

 

"Stealth washed away by rain."

 

Those seriously made me roll off my chair. The only thing this video proves is that they don't want to do anything other than bash something.

 

The Raptor may have been unnecessary so far but not one person in the entire world could have predicted what's going to happen 20 years on or even more. Also, one does not simply get shocked by how much it costs to develop something that's leaps ahead of current technology. It's like asking the space shuttle program to be cheap.

[dumgrunt]

someone actually posted a link to that "news" feature to assert the raptor is crap...

 

Just.

 

Wow.

 

that is all.

[EtherealN]

It's like asking the space shuttle program to be cheap.

 

Hilariously though, it was "sold" as precisely that: cheap. Indeed, it was even claimed that it would MAKE money. :D

 

(In the end it turned out maintenance costs and all of that were far higher than anticipated, meaning that it was not as "profitable" as intended for commercial contracts.)

[GGTharos]

Factually incorrect or taken out of context.

 

Rachel Maddow of MSNBC is not an aviation expert, however, most of what she said in this report is factually correct.

[Kaktus29]

its much more complicated as stealth triumphs no matter what..

 

ECM suites are improving all the time and are more or less as important as stealth features of planes..

 

Who says F22 will see and range the Su-35 from 100 km? ..with a strong ECM suite F22 won't be able to lock and burn through until 20 miles.. so tell me, do experts on this forum know for sure EOS can't find a supercruising fighter at 20 miles? we don't know.. which is why real defense analyst know war against opponent with 4++generation planes versus f22 is not 100% done deal for the raptor..

 

war is messy, much of systems that change and alter the equation of what wins where is actually hidden, so no, we will not google it out and make our assumptions of who wins..that is childish and stupid.

 

remember, when hitler attacked USSR german spies had more or less checked everything USSR had, from planes, numbers, technology etc.. yet still were surprised to find T-34 tank and ability to manufacture it in big numbers.. USSR hid the project tremendously well, even to their detriment as to have it as an ace card..

 

Fact is, war is messy, unless US battles Afghanistan, Libya there is no way F22 will rule the skies against a real opponent who unites against the threat.. that is just reality..

 

Otherwise US would be already "testing" F22 over Moscow and Beijing..

[USARStarkey]

its much more complicated as stealth triumphs no matter what..

 

ECM suites are improving all the time and are more or less as important as stealth features of planes..

 

Who says F22 will see and range the Su-35 from 100 km? ..with a strong ECM suite F22 won't be able to lock and burn through until 20 miles.. so tell me, do experts on this forum know for sure EOS can't find a supercruising fighter at 20 miles? we don't know.. which is why real defense analyst know war against opponent with 4++generation planes versus f22 is not 100% done deal for the raptor..

 

war is messy, much of systems that change and alter the equation of what wins where is actually hidden, so no, we will not google it out and make our assumptions of who wins..that is childish and stupid.

 

remember, when hitler attacked USSR german spies had more or less checked everything USSR had, from planes, numbers, technology etc.. yet still were surprised to find T-34 tank and ability to manufacture it in big numbers.. USSR hid the project tremendously well, even to their detriment as to have it as an ace card..

 

Fact is, war is messy, unless US battles Afghanistan, Libya there is no way F22 will rule the skies against a real opponent who unites against the threat.. that is just reality..

 

Otherwise US would be already "testing" F22 over Moscow and Beijing..

 

Ah yes. You did an excellent job here of positing how all of the F-22's advantages are based on assumptions because of unknown variables, and then used all of these unknowns to make your own absolute statement: " Fact is, war is messy, unless US battles Afghanistan, Libya there is no way F22 will rule the skies against a real opponent who unites against the threat.. that is just reality.. "

 

I congratulate you on your logical consistency:lol:

[Kaktus29]

@usar lol.. the assumptions are yours.. i used evidence from history that proved my imperative.. you still keep your assumptions calling them evidence .. my picture looks much clearer..

 

same as with F117, amazing stealth, nobody can touch it, boom, okei maybe its not 100% bullet proof, but F22 IS.. i'm telling you.. for real. why? who da hell knows.. cuz i said so)lol..

 

fact is, no, its far from assured thing.. as i said, if it were so assured, F-22 would be already importing democracy in Moscow and Beijing..