SU-35 vs F-22

[OutOnTheOP]

This topic is quite difficult, but I think at least the most will agree, that finally the pilots capability will make the difference, if the technology gap is not so big, like between F22 and Su35.

 

Some replay

 

F 117, as far I know, not in active duty anymore, have different reason, but one is for sure, detection probability gets higher, as east technology advanced.

 

Detection range , To detect a missile like Amram, I think is much more than 50nm in a combined Air defense environment, as there work more radar systems together, everything is linked over datalink, systems be smarter,. Faster.

 

I know that a HARM can be detected from a Patriot system ( shoot with safe distance in training environment ), HARM is much bigger than Amram, but this was 15 years ago.

 

S400 is according experts the best SAM system in the moment, much more capable as Patriot, I am sure they can detect an Amram 50nm ++.

 

Another thing are passive radar, comes also up in the 90's, Chinese bought it, not sure where they are today with this technology, but if they are successful, sure they will produce big qty, like the DF-21D.

 

 

F22, the production line are closed, as this system is to expensive ( I think they figure out, it is not worth the money, that's why they close the lines, otherwise the would keep the lines sleeping, for the case they need more, or they work on something better)

 

the states live since years on credit, how many J-20 can be produced from 1% of China BIP? How many T50 or Su35 they can buy for 1%BIP?

 

The reality is that the US reduce research, because of economy reasons, which leads that other country's like China, India with their strong growing economy can afford and attract all this technology company's and people, to work on their projects.

 

195 F22, what they can do, globally shared on all hotspots, How many Su35 , T50 will be out there? As this models will be also on export after a while.

 

As long there is no conflict, where the F22 have to deal with modern east Air defense environment, we will not know it can be detected or not, but fact is that a clean F22 vs. Su35 want be happen, as for sure there are modern land, sea and Airborne radar, optical and acoustic systems , which work we'll together, update the Su35 via datalink, make it difficult to keep undetected all the time.

 

I guess we will not know.

 

Ohhhhh kay. I'm gonna have to comment, since you seem to be running on the same "if counterfire radars can detect mortar shells, surely they can detect stealth aircraft" thing as a guy a few pages back. Firstly: what is the detection range for PATRIOT/ S300 against a HARM-missile sized target?

 

Second, the F-22 has a SIGNIFICANTLY smaller RCS than even a 60mm mortar bomb. Also, counterfire radars are generally staring arrays that only look at a fairly small part of the sky: they don't actually search the whole sky, they just look at two (sometimes one) horizontal band. They look for where an item breaks that band (on the way up), then breaks it again (on the way down) and calculate the trajectory off those two points. This allows them to REALLY focus their energy, and also to have a very high scan rate, since they're looking at a pretty small sector of sky. Also, they can really only calculate trajectories of BALLISTIC objects. So if the object is, say, a missile that is launched at 30*, flies half it's flight, then turns to 50* and is subsequently detected, then the radar is going to think the launch point was at 310* from the detection point, NOT the true 330*.

 

So, even assuming that the hostile radar DOES detect a non-stealth missile fired by an F-22 (or F-35), that does not make it as simple as "following the track back to the launching aircraft": unlike a mortar bomb on a predictable, ballistic trajectory, the F-22/35 can (and likely will!) maneuver and change course after launch. It will no longer be where it was when it launched. Additionally, the MISSILE is maneuvering, which means that when (if) the hostile radar detects the missile, the reverse azimuth of the missile may no longer point back at where it was launched from. Sure, it might get you close, but knowing where the steath aircraft is to within 10 or 20 km still isn't going to help you out a lot (and the same can be said about the "use an RWR to find where the stealth aircraft is) trick: it might get you in the ballpark, but then you have to survive long enough to get into that search sector and actually FIND the damn thing, and the whole time, the F-22/35 is moving to avoid you. And probably also lobbing missiles at you. Likely from vastly superior airspeeds and altitudes.

 

That's really not much of a recipe for success.

[six.dof]

I think a lot of people over estimate the stealth technology, all information that be discussed here, are mostly from the internet, like " role out the numbers" who can role out real numbers for the F22, was not the first time, to state technology and capability, to push the opponent back or in expensive research to follow up, there is a technology War, all information that be public accessible, are " Marketing" information, to support this War, proof to the own people that the money is not spend for nothing, the truth, is only to a limited people accessible, pilots upwards, the technician who repair this stuff, even they know how to operate, don't know how well it works under operation condition.

Therefore 95% of all discussion! same as DCS ( if it comes to system capabilities ) are based on those information, even pilots are involved, they have to keep the reality otherwise they go in trouble.

 

On some events as Red Flag, the equipment runs on low capability mode, as even " friends" don't like to share the truth.

And if a 2000 kill the F22, who knows, maybe is better, or just had a lucky day, War is not a one man or one system show,.Afghanistan is a very good example, how a high tech Army can be defeated.

[Scrim]

You have no idea what you're talking about. What is failing in Afghanistan is a restrictive strategy made up by politicians, not the modern technology.

[OutOnTheOP]

War is not a one man or one system show,.Afghanistan is a very good example, how a high tech Army can be defeated.

 

Straw man argument. Also shows your complete lack of understanding of how an insurgency works: in an insurgency, you don't have to (and usually cannot) defeat the conventional army. The goal is to "beat" the local population (often literally!) into supporting (or at least fearing) the insurgents more than they support (or fear) the conventional army. If the civilian population fears what the insurgents will do to them more than they want what the conventional forces can give to them, the population will support (begrudgingly) the insurgents.

 

The forces in Afghanistan have never, on the tactical battlefield, won a true victory against either the US OR the Soviets (though they came a hell of a lot closer against the Soviets!). I assure you the US has killed a lot more Afghan insurgents than the other way around; problem is that none of that matters, it only matter which side the civilian population decides to cooperate with.

Edited May 18, 2014 by OutOnTheOP

[Basher54321]

I think a lot of people over estimate the stealth technology,

 

Afghanistan is a very good example, how a high tech Army can be defeated.

 

 

What you are missing is that stealth is just one factor in the equation - and its actually been a part of aerial combat since day 1. For example hiding aircraft from the primary sensor (the mk1 eyball) by painting camouflage on the aircraft or by coming out of the sun.

 

F-22 capability is a combination of more than just VLO.

 

 

 

That's a very poor analogy to make and has no relevance here - Afghanistan is a country with hardly any resource and certainly cant pay for its own invasion like Iraq can. The most powerful armies have failed in Afghanistan simply because all they do is hemorrhage money and blood over a long period of time with little gain. Happened to the British, the Soviets and now NATO - all the insurgents have to do is last out until the political will goes!

[Basher54321]

 

 

That video was not staged.

 

Nice one :smartass:

[NineLine]

I believe it was a magazine (AirForces Monthy, IIRC) that reported that Typhoons won 4 of 8 BFM engagements. But still, not a whole lot from American sources. Reportedly the Luftwaffe Typhoons will be returning to a Red Flag this year, so we'll see what happens.

 

Well my point was we wont, sure we will see plenty of unverified stories, but they dont publish anything from the exercises do they, not officially? People will take away what they want to believe and not try and find out how much of it is based in fact...

[JNASova]

Well, well, well. You made a point that doesn't mention the F-117. However, let us analyze this in more depth than you seem to be willing to go to.

 

We have no idea what the geometry of that engagement was, or what the load outs of the aircraft were. Either aircraft might have been loaded with disproportional stores options, or nonequivalent fuel loads. There is always the HUGE factor of pilot skill. If you watch the video you will notice that the Rafale does pretty much nothing but High-Yo-Yo's that entire fight. Despite this, the Raptor is giving him one hell of a time. Nothing is proven performance wise in this film. According to earlier reports, the French claimed a kill on a F-22 with a Mirage 2000. Are you going to start claiming the Mirage 2000 is therefore far superior?

 

While were at it, here is definitive proof the the F-15 is a huge waste of money and the P-51 Mustang is still the best fighter in the world. Jet engines are a huge waste of time. Just like Stelt.

 

 

That video was not staged. Took place online, the eagle pilot was just dumb, or trolling. At the end, I get kicked for team killing. I was returning fire however. In the video you will see that the F-15 fires a burst from its Vulcan at me twice.

 

Nice video.:thumbup:

There are confirmed "kills" of F 22 by F 16,flown by US pilot,Eurofighter flown by german pilot,Rafale flown by france pilot.For Mirage 2000 (flown by UAE pilot) kill,many sources clame it was "pilots had some fun".

So,fifth generation fighter,need vector thrust,to gain 4th generation jets manuverbility.From what we've seen at airshows,that mean even less chance agains Su 35.Does not act as a good investment.

All modern fighters have strong ECM.So,I soppose low probability for long range kill.Thay also can dodge the missile at log ranges.F 22 must come closer to "burn" thry enamy ECM and fire the missile.At that point,pilot can only hope that enemys sensores are enable to detect his radar radiation and has no radar wich can detect and track F22.There is no 100% guarantie for that.If is detected by enemy and have incoming missile,F 22 can only to run and hope that AMRAAM will do the job.If come to close,have 50% chance to survive fight agains 4-th generation jet,and 0% if he meet Su 35.

 

I dont say it is bad plane.I say there is nothing revolutionary about F 22 in air-to air fight.F 22 have some chaces in some circumstances to use his stelth design to avoid to be detected and by some time in critical phase of A-A battle,but nothing 100%.The best evidence for my argument is that even the American army came to the conclusion to cancel the project.If F 22 offers so revolutionary advantage, America would invest the last dollar in the project.

[SFJackBauer]

Nice video.:thumbup:

There are confirmed "kills" of F 22 by F 16,flown by US pilot,Eurofighter flown by german pilot,Rafale flown by france pilot.For Mirage 2000 (flown by UAE pilot) kill,many sources clame it was "pilots had some fun".

So,fifth generation fighter,need vector thrust,to gain 4th generation jets manuverbility.From what we've seen at airshows,that mean even less chance agains Su 35.Does not act as a good investment.

All modern fighters have strong ECM.So,I soppose low probability for long range kill.Thay also can dodge the missile at log ranges.F 22 must come closer to "burn" thry enamy ECM and fire the missile.At that point,pilot can only hope that enemys sensores are enable to detect his radar radiation and has no radar wich can detect and track F22.There is no 100% guarantie for that.If is detected by enemy and have incoming missile,F 22 can only to run and hope that AMRAAM will do the job.If come to close,have 50% chance to survive fight agains 4-th generation jet,and 0% if he meet Su 35.

 

I dont say it is bad plane.I say there is nothing revolutionary about F 22 in air-to air fight.F 22 have some chaces in some circumstances to use his stelth design to avoid to be detected and by some time in critical phase of A-A battle,but nothing 100%.The best evidence for my argument is that even the American army came to the conclusion to cancel the project.If F 22 offers so revolutionary advantage, America would invest the last dollar in the project.

 

You are assuming several things:

 

- that the F-22 didnt splashed or at least put the Su-35 into defensive before getting into WVR

- that the F-22 doesn't have at least an equally powerful jammer as the Su-35

- that an airshow is proof of a real-life combat situation

 

If there is nothing revolutionary about the F-22, then why the hell Russia is investing in PAK-FA?

 

And being able to:

 

1) use your radar to scan the airspace, without being detected by the enemy RWR from long ranges

2) close the distance without being detected by the enemy radar

3) using datalink to share real-time information between all the aircraft and even the missiles in the air in order to ambush the enemy

 

Does not present a significant advantage?

[GGTharos]

Nice video.:thumbup:

There are confirmed "kills" of F 22 by F 16,flown by US pilot,Eurofighter flown by german pilot,Rafale flown by france pilot.For Mirage 2000 (flown by UAE pilot) kill,many sources clame it was "pilots had some fun".

 

You keep talking about propaganda etc, so why aren't you pointing out the propaganda here? Maybe you didn't think about it?

 

Here are some clues: It takes a lot of dead F-16's/Rafale's/Typhoons/F-15's to get that one kill on a Raptor in a realistic exercise.

 

How about this part which I would imagine should have been very obvious to you since you understand propaganda so well:

 

There are no HuD videos/images of F-22's killing anything. Think they never get any hits, or maybe it's that F-22's aren't being sold to other countries?

 

It's funny how you talk about those confirmed kills, but you conveniently fail to mention that the F-22's exchange ratio is somewhere in the neighborhood of 30:1.

 

I dont say it is bad plane.

You are. Just read back through the stuff you're posting.

 

I say there is nothing revolutionary about F 22 in air-to air fight.

Yes, there is. And I'll point to your bias and lack of understanding that you displayed when talking about ECM. Guess what: F-22 has ECM as well. It also has much lower RCS, so when the F-22 is burned through its opponent's ECM, that opponent still has a long way to go to burn through.

 

F 22 have some chaces in some circumstances to use his stelth design to avoid to be detected and by some time in critical phase of A-A battle,but nothing 100%.The best evidence for my argument is that even the American army came to the conclusion to cancel the project.If F 22 offers so revolutionary advantage, America would invest the last dollar in the project.

No, they wouldn't. The project was cancelled by politicians, and the number required by the USAF was for a full expeditionary force, not home defense.

 

RED FLAG isn't the only exercise out there. If you know the right people you will hear that there are 4v8 exercises there with 4 F-22's against 8 upgraded F-15C's, and the F-15's can win with difficulty if the F-22's have their luneburg lens on. Once the lens is off, the F-15's have no chance. And those guys are running with full capability, not RED FLAG style.

[GGTharos]

But let's assume my statement is wrong and that it was detected and shot down with radar. The shoot down happened very close to the radar system (Once again as far as I know.).

 

This is in fact what happened. The engagement was started at ~17km.

[Basher54321]

Nice video.:thumbup:

There are confirmed "kills" of F 22 by F 16,flown by US pilot,Eurofighter flown by german pilot,Rafale flown by france pilot.For Mirage 2000 (flown by UAE pilot) kill,many sources clame it was "pilots had some fun".

 

Yes - expect an F-104 could also win against it - unrealistic 1v1 exercises have nothing to do with aerial combat.

 

 

 

So,fifth generation fighter,need vector thrust,to gain 4th generation jets manuverbility.From what we've seen at airshows,that mean even less chance agains Su 35.Does not act as a good investment.

 

Again airshow performance has nothing to do with aerial combat - actually TV could be seen as a hindrance in some cases.

 

The F-35 doesn't have TV and it's capable of wiping the floor with both F-22/Su-35 etc ;)

 

 

I say there is nothing revolutionary about F 22 in air-to air fight.

 

Then you would be very wrong - it's not even a fair fight. Any 4th Gen jet is on the defensive against 5th Gen even if they don't know it............ :thumbup:

[Invader ZIM]

Actually, I find the flexibility of AESA radar systems rather amazing.

 

 

 

 

The effectiveness of a modern fighter radar is determined by a combination of its radiating power and Low Probability of Intercept (LPI) features that prevent the radar from tripping off alarm systems in a target. These typically include using a narrow beam that is hard to spot from off its boresight; only transmitting radar pulses when necessary; spreading the radar pulses over a wide band so there will only be a very small signal on any one band (Frequency Hopping); or varying transmission parameters such as pulse form, frequency, or PRF, jumping around in an unpredictable fashion, not staying in one place long enough to register.

 

The radiated power is largely dependent on the antenna aperture.

 

Increasing the radiated power will increase the range of the radar but unless it is accompanied by LPI it will also announce the presence of the radiating aircraft to sensors on an enemy fighter that still does not have you in its radar range.

 

In an AESA radar individual TR modules can be assigned the role of Radar Warning Receivers allowing a radiating aircraft to be picked up the target aircraft, instead of the other way around!

 

For example, the AN/APG-77 fitted on the F-22 Raptor has 2,000 TR modules. Operating purely as an RWR it can pick up enemy aircraft's radar from distances of up to 460 kilometers (250 nautical miles). The higher the energy radiated by the enemy aircraft radar, greater the APG-77's detection range. With all modules operating as radars, the APG-77 can acquire pick enemy targets up to 220 kilometers (125 nautical miles). Its use of LPI does not alert the enemy aircraft to its own presence.

 

Broadly speaking Russian radars tend to rely on radiated power for their effectiveness, leveraging the higher apertures of their radars facilitated by larger aircraft size and nose cross sectional area. American AESA radars blend radiating powere with LPI. Their higher software maturity levels facilitate use of the AESA for communication, gathering information electronic intelligence, locating electronic systems, classifying them, and warning the pilot of possible threats or high-priority targets.

 

And unfortunately info that was on aviation week at the following is no longer there: http://aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?channel=awst&id=news/aw020909p2.xml&headline=null&next=0

 

Text was saved though.

 

Ranges of the new lines of AESA radars are classified. But they are estimated at about 90 mi. for the smallest (aimed at the F-16 radar-upgrade market). The F/A-18E/F and F-35 (with radar ranges of 100 mi.) are followed by the F-22 (110-115-mi.). The largest is carried by the upgraded F-15Cs and Es (125 mi.). By comparison, the range for a mechanically scanned, F-15C radar is 56 mi. according to Russian air force intelligence. U.S. aerospace officials agree that an AESA radar "at least doubles" the range over standard military radars.

 

When coupled with the electronic techniques generator in an aircraft, the radar can project jamming, false targets and other false information into enemy sensors. Ranges for electronic attack equal the AESA radar plus that of the enemy radar. That could allow electronic attack at ranges of 150 mi. or more. The ability to pick out small targets at a long distance also lets AESA-equipped aircraft find and attack cruise missiles, stealth aircraft and small UAVs.

 

rather dated 2006 article:

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/fa-18ef-to-use-aesa-as-jammer-208213/

 

Block 2 version of US Navy fighter set to become first to use active array for electronic attack duties

 

Boeing's F/A-18E/F Block 2 Super Hornet is set to become the first fighter to use its active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar for electronic attack, with a planned software upgrade to allow its array of transmit/receive (T/R) modules to be used as a powerful directional jammer.

 

Under a "sensor integration" plan being drawn up, the Raytheon APG-79 AESA will be linked to the Raytheon ALR-67 radar warning receiver (RWR) via the fighter's fibre-optic network switch. The radar's ground mapping capability will then be used to pinpoint emitters detected by the RWR.

 

"This will allow us to begin single-ship geolocation of emitters," says Capt BD Gaddis, US Navy F/A-18 programme manager. The F/A-18E/F's BAE Systems ALQ-214 electronic countermeasures suite will also be integrated so the aircraft can jam emitters. "We will put the -214 jamming signal through the AESA T/R modules to put power on to the emitter," he says.

 

Although the capability has been widely discussed, it appears the Block 2 Super Hornet will be the first aircraft able to use its AESA for electronic attack. Rival radar manufacturer Northrop Grumman says its APG-77(V)1 and APG-81 AESAs for the Lockheed Martin F-22 and F-35, respectively, will have the capability, but it is not in currently funded plans.

 

fast forward to 2012 and the F-22 fleet: http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/usaf-fields-first-upgraded-f-22-raptors-369886/

 

The unit's flagship, tail number 4115, is the first aircraft to be equipped with the modifications, which add a synthetic aperture radar (SAR) capability, electronic attack, better geo-location capabilities to find enemy radars, and the ability to carry eight 113kg (250lb) GBU-39 small diameter bombs (SDB)

 

The Northrop Grumman APG-77 radar's SAR mode creates black and white photo-quality images of the Earth's surface, allowing pilots to pick their own targets, while the new electronic attack capability allows the F-22 to jam enemy radars using the sensor.

 

We've created a monster, golden Eagles, F-16's, anything with AESA radars could ruin your day with electronic attacks and LPI. :D

Edited May 18, 2014 by Invader ZIM

[JNASova]

You keep talking about propaganda etc, so why aren't you pointing out the propaganda here? Maybe you didn't think about it?

 

Here are some clues: It takes a lot of dead F-16's/Rafale's/Typhoons/F-15's to get that one kill on a Raptor in a realistic exercise.

 

How about this part which I would imagine should have been very obvious to you since you understand propaganda so well:

 

There are no HuD videos/images of F-22's killing anything. Think they never get any hits, or maybe it's that F-22's aren't being sold to other countries?

 

It's funny how you talk about those confirmed kills, but you conveniently fail to mention that the F-22's exchange ratio is somewhere in the neighborhood of 30:1.

 

You are. Just read back through the stuff you're posting.

 

Yes, there is. And I'll point to your bias and lack of understanding that you displayed when talking about ECM. Guess what: F-22 has ECM as well. It also has much lower RCS, so when the F-22 is burned through its opponent's ECM, that opponent still has a long way to go to burn through.

 

No, they wouldn't. The project was cancelled by politicians, and the number required by the USAF was for a full expeditionary force, not home defense.

 

RED FLAG isn't the only exercise out there. If you know the right people you will hear that there are 4v8 exercises there with 4 F-22's against 8 upgraded F-15C's, and the F-15's can win with difficulty if the F-22's have their luneburg lens on. Once the lens is off, the F-15's have no chance. And those guys are running with full capability, not RED FLAG style.

 

Nothing new.You clame whole the time I know I know,and belive me F 22 is the best.You have your opinion,and I respect it.But I ofer results of some exercises,even and video material + supported by statemets of the Airforce of the France and Germany,not Russia.Both countries are friendly with USA.

At video,we can see that F 22 cant shake of Rafale from his 6.About BVR agains F 22 and ECM usage,these are my assumptions.And all others can only to assume,becouse thats are Top secret military information.

[GGTharos]

Why do you ignore the results of the exercises showing that in a realistic exercise you will lose upwards of 10 planes for every Raptor you kill? Why did you not look for those results?

 

You have your opinion,and I respect it.But I ofer results of some exercises,even and video material + supported by statemets of the Airforce of the France and Germany,not Russia.Both countries are friendly with USA.

 

You should never expect to shake a capable pilot off your 6. I don't care what you're flying. This is a basic BFM fact.

 

At video,we can see that F 22 cant shake of Rafale from his 6.

 

Your assumption is wrong, and it's not wrong based on knowing what jammer one guy has and what radar another guy has - it's wrong based on physics. You need 4000 times the power to burn through against an F-22 than you would against a typical fighter.

 

About BVR agains F 22 and ECM usage,these are my assumptions.And all others can only to assume,becouse thats are Top secret military information.

[JNASova]

You are assuming several things:

 

- that the F-22 didnt splashed or at least put the Su-35 into defensive before getting into WVR

- that the F-22 doesn't have at least an equally powerful jammer as the Su-35

- that an airshow is proof of a real-life combat situation

 

If there is nothing revolutionary about the F-22, then why the hell Russia is investing in PAK-FA?

 

And being able to:

 

1) use your radar to scan the airspace, without being detected by the enemy RWR from long ranges

2) close the distance without being detected by the enemy radar

3) using datalink to share real-time information between all the aircraft and even the missiles in the air in order to ambush the enemy

 

Does not present a significant advantage?

I'm not sure if I translated correctly, but I will try to give an answer.

 

- F 22 is able to put Su 35 in defesive position in BVR for some time,but Su 35 will put F 22 too.

- I do not assume that F 22 has no powerfull ECS like Su 35.I said ALL modern fighters HAVE powerfull ECS,so in that circumstaces I doubt at air-to-air kills at long distances.

- At airshow we can see abilities of the planes.Cobra,bell and other manouvers show what forces,angle of atacks and situations planes can take with out lossing control or engine failure....

 

As I said,stelt design can provide some usable advantages.So if you are world superforce,you must have best weapons.In the war with less well armed countries (USA-Yugoslavia, Russia-Georgia), a stealth aircraft and AESA increase the chances of success in missions.

Second thing why Russia and USA develop new planes is export.

 

For the rest of you post

- Data link is old thing.MiGs 31 can kreate data link with each other.One fire the missile,but missile is guided by other MiG 31.Su 30 may serv like AWAKS plane and have data link with others.

- How much you can close the distance without being detected by the enemy radar,there is no guaratie for that.

[JNASova]

Then you would be very wrong - it's not even a fair fight. Any 4th Gen jet is on the defensive against 5th Gen even if they don't know it............ :thumbup:

 

Maby,when we are speaking about F 22.

[JNASova]

You should never expect to shake a capable pilot off your 6. I don't care what you're flying. This is a basic BFM fact.

 

Your assumption is wrong, and it's not wrong based on knowing what jammer one guy has and what radar another guy has - it's wrong based on physics. You need 4000 times the power to burn through against an F-22 than you would against a typical fighter.

 

1) Totaly wrong.

 

2) Maby,thats why I said it is assumption.

[GGTharos]

- F 22 is able to put Su 35 in defesive position in BVR for some time,but Su 35 will put F 22 too.

 

The Su-35 won't be able to find the F-22. And being defensive in RL is not like being defensive in DCS. Losing a 120 in RL is much harder. The Su-35 isn't some great anti-f-22 fighter. It's the last hurrah of the 4th gen Su-27 platform, just like the F-15C Golden Eagle upgrade is the last hurrah of the 4th gen F-15 platform.

 

If you want to claim Golden Eagle and Su-35 are equal-ish, fair enough, but F-22 is a completely different animal.

 

- I do not assume that F 22 has no powerfull ECS like Su 35.I said ALL modern fighters HAVE powerfull ECS,so in that circumstaces I doubt at air-to-air kills at long distances.

 

This is not necessarily true. Some jammers/radars are better than others, and so it some missile guidance. AIM-120 for example uses the M-link to help it reject jammers. How effective it would be against a Su-35 is a different question, but the point is that the Su-35 cannot sit there and do nothing - it has to defend.

 

- At airshow we can see abilities of the planes.Cobra,bell and other manouvers show what forces,angle of atacks and situations planes can take with out lossing control or engine failure....

 

It doesn't mean anything. You cannot tail-slide or do cobra with F-15, but every time it got into a dogfight with a MiG-29, the 29 got shot down. And I do mean dogfight.

 

 

For the rest of you post

- Data link is old thing.MiGs 31 can kreate data link with each other.One fire the missile,but missile is guided by other MiG 31.

 

This is incorrect. Guiding another plane's missile is a very tricky proposition and is done either with only very modern missiles, some of which aren't even in service yet, or it is done with the understanding that the radars of the two planes are using the same radio channels, which means that the two planes cannot easily make their own, separate engagements.

 

This is a technical detail. They will share targets with datalink, but they always guide their own missiles.

 

Su 30 may serv like AWAKS plane and have data link with others.

 

Sure, F-18s and F-14s could do this as well, plus they had the E-2. The USAF took its time with FDLs, it looks like they were confident that they could do without them for a while. Was this a mistake? We will never now, they all have FDL now :)

 

- How much you can close the distance without being detected by the enemy radar,there is no guaratie for that.

 

Yes, there is. It's math.

[GGTharos]

1) Totaly wrong.

 

Totally right. We're talking about well trained pilots, not DCS/Flight sim pilots. Shaking someone from your 6 in real life is the exception, not the rule.

[TAW_Blaze]

GG let the troll go :)

[Invader ZIM]

LOL, I guess it is sort of rude to spoil a guy's fanfiction.

[GGTharos]

I think he wants to know more about aviation. Mostly everyone starts out in this hobby believing certain things without necessarily understanding them or knowing much about the subject, which is quite broad.

[Invader ZIM]

Well, you have a point GG, I know I used to think sort of like that as a kid in the 80's about military equipment.

 

Getting into the defense industry sure was an eye opener to me even as an adult, and I'm still learning stuff.

[TAW_Blaze]

Well either way he's pretty persistent at repeating stuff that blatantly defy all logic.