The F-35 Thread

[Maior]

I wasn't so sure F-35 supercruise is really an F-35 forte. I guess it will fly very easily and accellerate well in the high subsonic-transonic regime, but mention supercruise as one of its qualities through which it would gain an A2A advantage seems over the top. I guess a Typhoon would do better in that regard, no? Sometimes it seems like we inflate the F-35 into being an F-22.

 

It was shown in testing that the F-35 can supercruise at Mach 1.2 for at least 150nm stints. That's more than enough to enter the AO and leave it very fast without AB. The F-22 is on another level. It's supercruise speed is Mach 1.7.

 

the Eurofighter probably has better dogfighting characteristics that apparently even the F-22 has troubles matching (Red Flag 2012). So yeah. It'll be a better dogfighter. The question is will it be more cost effective? The F-35 technologically wise is probably at a better stage in sensor fusion and integration than any aircraft in existence. This gives it's pilots better SA than anything else they encounter. That's the whole philosophy behind it's design. It will by no means however be the slouch that some people paint it to be in a dogfight.

 

One final note on supercruise; it was not an operational requirement for the F-35 however, the aircraft was able to achieve it. This is just an added boon to the airframe. Again, I feel like people don't listen. It's not the performance of the F-35 where you can pick on it. It's the whole package compared to the alternatives available and it's useless to discuss "this vs that" aircraft as well. You can focus on discussing the F-35 whole system (with all assets involved in the operation like EWACS and other support units) attacking a good IADS as compared to 4+ generation assets attacking the same system. And then consider defence. Because I have a feeling that VLO will not be of such use on the defence as it is on the offence. And it all comes down to cost effectiveness and that's the truth of it. heck, the Russians are making strides in Plasma stealth and the French Rafale's are so good at active cancellation stealth that they could fly interdiction missions in Libya without the escort of SEAD assets. The Rafale is also able to supercruise at mach 1.2 and it's a much prettier bird...

 

 

EDIT: Completely missed the post of marcos. Sorry about that. The answer was in most part addressed by Pyroflash (thank you about that too) however, I'll add just one more nugget. Atmosphere abortion also includes IR, you are very right. However, with proper calibration, you can get decimal resolution of temperature from satellites so, unless the weather is cloudy, you can get a pretty good picture. An AESA can get a fix without you even realising it was there. AESA is by no means a passive like system. It's very active. So active in fact that you cannot tell if you got a lock or not. Let me give you an example:

 

Imagine there are five main frequencies (a,b,c,d,e) on background radiation. A normal RADAR emits in one of them so, a RWR gets the background radiation, plus the increase in a certain waveband from RADAR (suppose b). So, after a period of time, the RWR will detect (a,B,c,d,e) and now knows that there's a RADAR transmitting in b. The AESA however can transmit in a,b,c with much less power needed. so, the RWR will take a lot longer to even realise that something is locking on to it. In fact, it can even be "blinded" since the AESA can change it's frequency fast enough that the RWR will not be able to accumulate frequencies over time as well. Now, other than the fact that the Typhoon has state of the art RWR which is not common at all, the F-22 Raptor RADAR was probably working on practice mode in a much limited band of frequencies. After all, what's the point of developing state of the art RADAR with utmost secrecy if you end up creating a chance to give it all away?

 

As per your physics, well, besides you not taking aspect into account again, the sites you provided though entertaining, don't give you values for the wavelenghts we are discussing here. Absortion coefficients are different for the range of temperatures they consider (90-110ºC) than to the values normal jet engines and rocket engines produce (699K and 3,755K respectively). They are different mainly as they are not as well absorbed by the atmosphere as are values on the temperature ranges you mentioned.

Then, you have to take into account that in the upper atmosphere there is way less absorption.

 

Check

http://amazing-space.stsci.edu/resources/explorations/groundup/lesson/basics/g17b/graphics/g17b_atmosabsorb.jpg

 

So you see, up at 60 or 80K feet, IR radiation is much less absorbed than in lower altitudes. Making the dominant factor in detection, temperature which again, varies with T^4.

 

Those temperatures mean that Rockets are producing roughly 833 times more energy than jet engines (no AB). As an extra piece of candy, apparently the cooling system on the engine of an F-22 allows you to touch to AB section even when running at full military power. How's that for cool?

Edited February 25, 2013 by Maior

[marcos]

No, the F-15C really is that much better than the MiG-29 (in BVR). Arguing that the MiG-29 can even hold a candle to the F-15C in BVR is an absolutely ridiculous statement.

What about a Flanker? Have a look at the other thread. What do we really mean by BVR?

 

Although not the same argument, the F-35 should, at least, be able to beat most all 4th gen fighters in air combat. It might not be as good as the Tiffy or Raptor in some respects, but it doesn't have to be.

The F-35 struggles against regular 4th gen wrt performance nevermind 4.5th gen. I know it's not everything but one day it could be important. I don't think it can be dismissed out of hand.

 

It depends, current work on GaN based core chips and MMICs will allow for almost a 16 fold increase in current radar power efficiency. This, for an AESA radar, is absolutely staggering since that allows for a near doubling of the effective range without a substantial decrease in resolution.

They're certainly an improvement but nowhere have I seen anything like 16 times mentioned. Even a 16 times increase in transmitted power would only double range.

 

AESA is really a wholly different beast than a mechanically scanned array. A Tiffy detected an F-22A's RADAR. What mode was it in? Do you even know what kinds of modes that the AN/APG-77 can operate with? I don't, and I'm fairly certain that you don't either.

I don't know either, just picked up on pilot gossip. It was referenced in a few publications like The Aviationist. I don't think the Typhoon can pin-point the source all the time but it knows it's there, so it isn't 'passive' in its affect.

[marcos]

More information on missionized gun pod.

 

http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2010armament/TuesdayLandmarkADouglasParker.pdf

 

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

It is waste of time trying to say the F-35 is not going to be a very good aircraft. It will be very good, there is no question about that. The biggest enemy of the the entire F-35 program is not the quality of the aircraft, but the cost of it.

[Maior]

What about a Flanker? Have a look at the other thread. What do we really mean by BVR?

 

 

The F-35 struggles against regular 4th gen wrt performance nevermind 4.5th gen. I know it's not everything but one day it could be important. I don't think it can be dismissed out of hand.

 

 

They're certainly an improvement but nowhere have I seen anything like 16 times mentioned. Even a 16 times increase in transmitted power would only double range.

 

 

I don't know either, just picked up on pilot gossip. It was referenced in a few publications like The Aviationist. I don't think the Typhoon can pin-point the source all the time but it knows it's there, so it isn't 'passive' in its affect.

 

A flanker? like the SU-27S that is the main version in Russian inventory? A piece of tech from the 80s who needs constant lock on a target to score a kill since it can't carry the R-77? The F-15C is superior to that one as well.

 

Again with the "F-35 struggles vs this or that". How do you know? Have you seen it? have you done it? As far as I know the F-35 was never used in military exercises so what do you know that the rest of us mortals that don't work on the project do?

 

Regarding RADARs and other stuff, check my edit in my previous post.

 

Ah, the 16 fold increase is done in a way smarter than increasing raw power. AESAs don't work quite like other RADARs. Look at the Irbis-e from the Su-35. It has a power output of 20kw. Best of the PESA RADARs. Compare to the F-22 12kw AESA. The F-22 RADAR while not as powerful can detect targets further away. So, less power bigger detection range. I use SAR imagery in my line of work and I can tell you right now that signal modulation is an incredible tool.

[Pyroflash]

Ah, the 16 fold increase is done in a way smarter than increasing raw power. AESAs don't work quite like other RADARs. Look at the Irbis-e from the Su-35. It has a power output of 20kw. Best of the PESA RADARs. Compare to the F-22 12kw AESA. The F-22 RADAR while not as powerful can detect targets further away. So, less power bigger detection range. I use SAR imagery in my line of work and I can tell you right now that signal modulation is an incredible tool.

 

Yeah, exactly, there is a lot of new tech coming down the pipeline that will drastically change the way people perceive AESA RADARs. Particularly in the T/R module packaging and design process fields. Efficiency is going to go up, and SNR is going to go down, a LOT. Better yet, they are going to be much cheaper than they are now. This also isn't down the road tech either. This is stuff that is here, right now, at the doorstep, just waiting for someone to actually produce it. I know EADS (probably Raython as well?) is screaming like mad for a company to step up.

 

The SNR reductions BTW are going to come mainly from the new SiGe MMIC core chips that they want to produce to replace the older GaAS chips.

 

Basically they are trying to get rid of GaAs as the mainstay or AESA T/R modules. It isn't very efficient, but they can make it pretty cheaply, and easily, which is why it is there right now. I've no idea why the decision was made to also include that material in the signal pipeline, since it produces a heck of a lot more noise, and relies on a gigantic 400nm process because of severe impurities. However now that it is going bye bye. The SiGe replacement can interface directly with CMOS architecture, meaning that digital signals can be processed far faster and easier than having to go through the complex transformation process out of a non-integrated GaAs chip.

 

The drawbacks are that since they can now use <22nm process in the arrays, the failure rate per silicon wafer is going to go up by orders of magnitude due to the high rejection of the silicon process when it comes to impurities in the batch. Also there are some switch routing issues that will occur due to the inability to get conventional microwave switching to work with the SiGe core chips. This however, already has proposed solutions, and is expected to be all but fully resolved.

Edited February 26, 2013 by Pyroflash

[wilky510]

The F-35 struggles against regular 4th gen wrt performance nevermind 4.5th gen. I know it's not everything but one day it could be important. I don't think it can be dismissed out of hand.

Most of the aircraft it will struggle heavily against, we're built as dedicated AIR SUPERIORITY fighters, ie Typhoon and Su-35. So if these aircraft aren't better than a dedicated built from the ground up strike fighter, their designers failed horribly (which they didn't.)

 

Keep in mind, this aircraft was built from the ground up as a strike fighter, just like the Su-34. Look how 'beefy' that thing is compared to the Su-27. Do you expect the Su-34 to win in WRT fights against the Tiffy and F-22 too?

 

 

At the end of the day, too many people are comparing to the F-16, which it will be replacing so it has that right to. But the F-16 was built as a dogfighter, and then later turned into a bombtruck that carried out most of the strike missions for the USAF. It's apples and oranges. You can't compare the two. They were built with different mind sets and a different era. USAF effectively saw how strong a stealthy strike aircraft is and will be on the battlefield.

 

You know, i hope people at this rate keep underestimating the F-35, so when the fight actually comes, they'll be in a surprise because it won't be as bad as people put it out to be. The aircraft has the best sensor fusion to date over any aircraft, and pilots will tell you just as they like to able to turn hard, they like centralized, easily readable battlefield information just as much.

[WynnTTr]

Most of the aircraft it will struggle heavily against, we're built as dedicated AIR SUPERIORITY fighters, ie Typhoon and Su-35. So if these aircraft aren't better than a dedicated built from the ground up strike fighter, their designers failed horribly (which they didn't.)

 

Keep in mind, this aircraft was built from the ground up as a strike fighter, just like the Su-34. Look how 'beefy' that thing is compared to the Su-27. Do you expect the Su-34 to win in WRT fights against the Tiffy and F-22 too?

 

 

At the end of the day, too many people are comparing to the F-16, which it will be replacing so it has that right to. But the F-16 was built as a dogfighter, and then later turned into a bombtruck that carried out most of the strike missions for the USAF. It's apples and oranges. You can't compare the two. They were built with different mind sets and a different era. USAF effectively saw how strong a stealthy strike aircraft is and will be on the battlefield.

 

You know, i hope people at this rate keep underestimating the F-35, so when the fight actually comes, they'll be in a surprise because it won't be as bad as people put it out to be. The aircraft has the best sensor fusion to date over any aircraft, and pilots will tell you just as they like to able to turn hard, they like centralized, easily readable battlefield information just as much.

Yes and having knowledge of how well the F-16 did I'm wondering why, with the cost of the JSF program, that they didn't build something like the F-16, the aircraft they're replacing, so that it can be a true multi-role aircraft.

 

Some planner along the way decided that it was better to totally depend on the F-22 for air coverage without taking into contingencies such as costs blowouts or budget concerns? I find it really hard to believe.

 

We have the benefit of hindsight and knowledge and we still build the F-35 as is?

 

What about those countries that don't have the benefit of the Raptor? - read every other country in the world. What do they rely on for air superiority? Well from your post it's definitely not the F-35.

[aaron886]

The F-16 is not a true multi-role aircraft. It's a lightweight fighter that has been cobbled into a multi-role aircraft.

[wilky510]

Some planner along the way decided that it was better to totally depend on the F-22 for air coverage without taking into contingencies such as costs blowouts or budget concerns? I find it really hard to believe.

I sure do. That's how they had it set up in the past wars. F-15C's had air to air roles, and the F-16's did most bombing missions in the gulf war.

 

So it's obvious to see the USAF wanted the F-22 fill F-15C's role, and the same for F-16 with the F-35.

 

They were just planning on getting 750 raptors for the air superiority role. Even with the raised costs, and concerns, they were planning on 380ish, which would've of been enough. I think everyone was shocked at the 187 number. The F-35 shouldn't still be needed for purely air superiority role. We have the Golden eagles to help out the Raptors.

 

 

Yes and having knowledge of how well the F-16 did I'm wondering why, with the cost of the JSF program, that they didn't build something like the F-16, the aircraft they're replacing, so that it can be a true multi-role aircraft.

F-16 started out a lightweight dogfighter. What made it a great multirole fighter was how easy it was to clear new weapons with it.

 

 

What about those countries that don't have the benefit of the Raptor? - read every other country in the world. What do they rely on for air superiority? Well from your post it's definitely not the F-35.

UK did a goodjob of setting up their airforce, they got the Tiffy for air superiority and F-35's for strike roles(if they get it). If an Airforce can't afford both aircraft, the F-35 will be fine. I'm not saying the F-35 is useless in the air to air role, read the last part of my last post. You just can't compare a typhoons performance to the F-35. They are built for different roles.

[marcos]

It is waste of time trying to say the F-35 is not going to be a very good aircraft. It will be very good, there is no question about that. The biggest enemy of the the entire F-35 program is not the quality of the aircraft, but the cost of it.

Oh absolutely. It will be very good but it does have significant shortfalls.

[marcos]

A flanker? like the SU-27S that is the main version in Russian inventory? A piece of tech from the 80s who needs constant lock on a target to score a kill since it can't carry the R-77? The F-15C is superior to that one as well.

Talking about later flankers.

 

Again with the "F-35 struggles vs this or that". How do you know? Have you seen it? have you done it? As far as I know the F-35 was never used in military exercises so what do you know that the rest of us mortals that don't work on the project do?

FFS. Do we really have to have these tit-for-tat arguments? The F-35 is a stealth aircraft and compromises were made for stealth. Links have already been posted with academics questioning whether its original spec. was good enough and it failed to meet that spec. It's a stubby aircraft with small wings and a so-so TWR. Performance is not its thing but don't worry it will still be very capable because of its stealth and sensors.

 

Regarding RADARs and other stuff, check my edit in my previous post.

If there's anything new you'd like to add put it in your next response.

 

Ah, the 16 fold increase is done in a way smarter than increasing raw power. AESAs don't work quite like other RADARs. Look at the Irbis-e from the Su-35. It has a power output of 20kw. Best of the PESA RADARs. Compare to the F-22 12kw AESA. The F-22 RADAR while not as powerful can detect targets further away. So, less power bigger detection range. I use SAR imagery in my line of work and I can tell you right now that signal modulation is an incredible tool.

Yes, it uses various different frequencies and processing algorithms to cut through noise. When you talk about power you have to be careful whether you're talking about input or output power though.

 

AFAIK, the Irbis-E still has better range than the AN/APG-77.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irbis-E

Edited February 26, 2013 by marcos

[marcos]

Most of the aircraft it will struggle heavily against, we're built as dedicated AIR SUPERIORITY fighters, ie Typhoon and Su-35. So if these aircraft aren't better than a dedicated built from the ground up strike fighter, their designers failed horribly (which they didn't.)

 

Keep in mind, this aircraft was built from the ground up as a strike fighter, just like the Su-34. Look how 'beefy' that thing is compared to the Su-27. Do you expect the Su-34 to win in WRT fights against the Tiffy and F-22 too?

 

 

At the end of the day, too many people are comparing to the F-16, which it will be replacing so it has that right to. But the F-16 was built as a dogfighter, and then later turned into a bombtruck that carried out most of the strike missions for the USAF. It's apples and oranges. You can't compare the two. They were built with different mind sets and a different era. USAF effectively saw how strong a stealthy strike aircraft is and will be on the battlefield.

 

You know, i hope people at this rate keep underestimating the F-35, so when the fight actually comes, they'll be in a surprise because it won't be as bad as people put it out to be. The aircraft has the best sensor fusion to date over any aircraft, and pilots will tell you just as they like to able to turn hard, they like centralized, easily readable battlefield information just as much.

You can't compare a JSF to an Su-34. An Su-34 is more of an F-111.

 

I realise that the JSF was designed as a strike fighter and yes, I agree, that probably is why its performance is a compromise. It will rely on stealth and data fusion where others will rely on performance.

[Silver_Dragon]

F-111 vs Su-24 / F-15E vs Su-34 has a matched compare.

[Maior]

Talking about later flankers.

 

 

FFS. Do we really have to have these tit-for-tat arguments? The F-35 is a stealth aircraft and compromises were made for stealth. Links have already been posted with academics questioning whether its original spec. was good enough and it failed to meet that spec. It's a stubby aircraft with small wings and a so-so TWR. Performance is not its thing but don't worry it will still be very capable because of its stealth and sensors.

 

 

If there's anything new you'd like to add put it in your next response.

 

 

Yes, it uses various different frequencies and processing algorithms to cut through noise. When you talk about power you have to be careful whether you're talking about input or output power though.

 

AFAIK, the Irbis-E still has better range than the AN/APG-77.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irbis-E

 

The F-15C has never gone up against modern Flankers. We were discussing it's advantages in high energy dogfights and BVR capabilities. Which the F-15C by the way, is still the undefeated contestant. That is, until the F-22 sees some action. The F-35 has a higher speed (Mach 0.6 to Mach 1.2) and can keep it very well since it has lower drag so, the humble F-35 will have an energy advantage vs 4th gen fighters for sure. Not talking about 4+ gen.

 

Regarding F-35 performance, I did post some numbers that show that the aircraft is no slouch. Why you keep insisting on the performance side of it I do not know.

 

My previous edit was because I missed your post and I was the last poster. You posted in the meantime so it got stuck there.

 

Well, wikipedia sources are all Russian from the manufacturer and go clearly against Physics. It has long been argued in other fora, that there is in fact a typo with those numbers. Taking into account known quantities such as peak power output and antenna size. The F-22 Radar has more resolution and range than any PESA RADAR. The IRBIS-e is very good mind you, just last gen.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

The F-15C has never gone up against modern Flankers. We were discussing it's advantages in high energy dogfights and BVR capabilities. Which the F-15C by the way, is still the undefeated contestant.

F-15C has never fought anything in its own class, or anything "modern". Also, all the fights I know of, F-15 had an overwhelming tactical advantage, some time in numbers, sometime in support from other aircraft and etc. This is not to say that F-15 is bad aircraft. But, when you say something, you need to put it into perspective.

[Kaktus29]

@Hajduk ..i agree.. actually the only mock combat that took between Su-27 and F-15 was in 1992 when Russians visited US.. they did the mock up and no way, F-15 lost clearly..

 

there was no way F-15 could keep up with Su-27..

 

the mock up was set in this fashion:

 

F-15 in front of Su-27 with one mission to break the "lock" that Su had..that is to move away from Su-27 nose.. and then they repeated the thing vice versa with Su-27 ahead of F-15 ..

 

in both cases Su-27 had no problem keeping up the F-15 in lock and running away from him in vice versa position..

 

here is the testimony of the Russians where they stated how the American pilots were surprised and also exhilarated of the awesome maneuverability of Su-27..

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nlQjaahjCXo&list=PL0MbdgzoObTYRn9ocofWJ7nrS32nVDNA8&index=67

 

please do not say Russian pilots lied about this.. it would make no sense..

 

same as when they asked the americans in 1997 to do dogfight with Su-37 vs. the Raptor for the spectators ..and the answer was amiss .. ))

[marcos]

The F-15C has never gone up against modern Flankers. We were discussing it's advantages in high energy dogfights and BVR capabilities. Which the F-15C by the way, is still the undefeated contestant. That is, until the F-22 sees some action. The F-35 has a higher speed (Mach 0.6 to Mach 1.2) and can keep it very well since it has lower drag so, the humble F-35 will have an energy advantage vs 4th gen fighters for sure. Not talking about 4+ gen.

Sigh, all these claims again. It's only faster if you load an F-15/F-16 up with tanks. Talking about the F-15's track record is really pointless. If an adult pub football team played primary school teams, they would always win. That doesn't mean the pub side is any good. A lot of the F-15's adversaries were unequipped as regards modern EW, avionics, training etc. Hell the Harrier FSR2 is undefeated as far as track record goes (23:0).

 

Regarding F-35 performance, I did post some numbers that show that the aircraft is no slouch. Why you keep insisting on the performance side of it I do not know.

Because I've also posted up umpteen charts to prove the matter in the past and I'm not about to re-do all that again. Somewhere in this thread or another F-35 thread you will find the original F-35 specification, which hasn't been met, and STR graphs for the F-15 and F-16 that show them to be better than the F-35 specification when running without large external stores. However, load them up with 2 2,000lb bombs and/or drop tanks and then things reverse. That was the design intent of the F-35 and it does that well. All-in-all it's a good aircraft, I just wish people would stop pretending that it scores A+ in every single category. It's performance is very much 4th gen. This argument has already been done to death.

 

My previous edit was because I missed your post and I was the last poster. You posted in the meantime so it got stuck there.

Well I guess it's lost then.

 

Well, wikipedia sources are all Russian from the manufacturer and go clearly against Physics. It has long been argued in other fora, that there is in fact a typo with those numbers. Taking into account known quantities such as peak power output and antenna size. The F-22 Radar has more resolution and range than any PESA RADAR. The IRBIS-e is very good mind you, just last gen.

There's no reason why a good PESA radar can't outperform an average AESA radar. It will always be more detectable and locatable though.

Edited February 26, 2013 by marcos

[marcos]

F-111 vs Su-24 / F-15E vs Su-34 has a matched compare.

The Su-24 was never really fast enough, or with enough carrying capacity to be in the F-111 league. The Su-34 isn't really a perfect fit either but then there isn't a perfect fit for the magnificant F-111.

[GGTharos]

@Hajduk ..i agree.. actually the only mock combat that took between Su-27 and F-15 was in 1992 when Russians visited US.. they did the mock up and no way, F-15 lost clearly..

 

Except no such combat actually happened, for very political reasons.

 

there was no way F-15 could keep up with Su-27..

There's no way a Su-27 will out-accelerate an F-15 at altitude, unless it's an F-15D with 3 fuel tanks ... which it was. :)

 

F-15 in front of Su-27 with one mission to break the "lock" that Su had..that is to move away from Su-27 nose.. and then they repeated the thing vice versa with Su-27 ahead of F-15 ..

... which no one ever does because it's a dumb setup. Generally speaking you cannot escape someone who's sitting in your control zone.

 

here is the testimony of the Russians where they stated how the American pilots were surprised and also exhilarated of the awesome maneuverability of Su-27..

... and then one day you'll look at what the airframe can actually do, from real pilot's manuals, and you will realize that this story is very fishy :)

 

same as when they asked the americans in 1997 to do dogfight with Su-37 vs. the Raptor for the spectators ..and the answer was amiss .. ))

Because no one does such dumb things, except for those who are not concerned with the safety of their spectators. All the airshow maneuvers performed by USAF crews are very strictly prescribed and controlled, for the safety of both the spectators and the pilots. Edited February 26, 2013 by GGTharos

[marcos]

Except no such combat actually happened, for very political reasons.

An Su-27 documentary said it did.

 

It's somewhere in one the 4 parts of this documentary.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Kk9UxB7eLE

Edited February 26, 2013 by marcos

[GGTharos]

And USAF pilots said 'LOL, both sides have rules against this sort of thing'.

 

http://www.clubhyper.com/reference/f15vssu27sm_1.htm

 

An Su-27 documentary said it did.

 

It's somewhere in one the 4 parts of this documentary.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Kk9UxB7eLE

Edited February 26, 2013 by GGTharos

[Kaktus29]

@GG ))) lol..

 

you said you can't escape the control zone? )) well, SU27 did.. escaped easily..

 

look, this story is not fishy, it is politically incorrect to state it, i do understand.. that is why they took the mock battle to the SEA and not above the airfield to potentially embarrass themselves and their nation..

 

US bought 2 Su-27 from Ukraine in what was it? 2009.. ? .. Trust me, if F-15 can outmaneuver the Sukhoi this would be on youtube all over the place.. yet it is not.. ) i rest me case..

 

give an F-15 to the russians and they will gladly comply and show the capabilities of F-15 in close dogfight..

 

Su27 is a superior aerodynamic design, i'm not talking electronics, radar, the first gen of F-15 was much superior than Su-27..but in dogfights not a chance..

 

and this is understandable, the sukhoi was built to defeat the f-15 in dogfight...while f-15 was built to gain energy and launch ordnance from height and position of SA and power..

 

Are you going to say that Sukhoi doesn't hold the record for fastest climb, and other 27 world records as well--the very records F-15 broke before the arrival of Su27?..

 

aaaa, political correctness.. i understand..

 

Americans were never able to admit defeat, when they did mock up in india with Su-30 same story.. lame excuses.. "but hei, we didn't have AWACS-so didn't the indians as well, but we couldn't use amraam.. of course, this could go on and on.. -but we were forbidden to use tomahawk missiles..

 

look, a mock up is a mock up. deal with it..

 

i strongly accept the words of russian pilots that this was the case of what happened, and usa pilots of course cannot accept it-its as i say politically incorrect thing to do so..

 

just ask yourself.. why no mock up battles of F-15 and Sukhoi now that US owns 2 Su-27? )) i know the answer you refuse to believe and accept) ..

[GGTharos]

look, this story is not fishy, it is politically incorrect to state it, i do understand.. that is why they took the mock battle to the SEA and not above the airfield to potentially embarrass themselves and their nation..

 

I uhnderstand that you do not have a shred of a clue of what it is that you are talking about, which is why you can't understand why the story is fishy.

 

If you think a Su-27 on military power alone can compete with an afterburning F-15, I have news for you: At altitude, it can't complete in acceleration even with afterburner. That should have been your first clue.

 

US bought 2 Su-27 from Ukraine in what was it? 2009.. ? .. Trust me, if F-15 can outmaneuver the Sukhoi this would be on youtube all over the place.. yet it is not.. ) i rest me case..

I'm not going to trust you because you don't actually know anything. The 'US' didn't buy the flankers. A private company did, to provide DACT training for the USAF - ie. the pilots can fly against a flanker that looks like a flanker, as oppose dto an F-15 that pretends to be a flanker. It really helps with training!

 

Su27 is a superior aerodynamic design, i'm not talking electronics, radar, the first gen of F-15 was much superior than Su-27..but in dogfights not a chance..

Really? What makes it a superior aerodynamic design? The fact that it gave up high altitude acceleration and top speed for better turning when low and slow?

 

and this is understandable, the sukhoi was built to defeat the f-15 in dogfight...while f-15 was built to gain energy and launch ordnance from height and position of SA and power..

No, the Su-27 was built to be 'the eagle killer' ... but it failed. There was a non-production prototype that took the Streak Eagle's records by a few scant seconds, but the production Su-27 isn't capable of out-performing the F-15 in that particular regime.

 

And while the flanker has excellent ITR, what you fail to realize is that it doesn't define a dogfight. I know, you like to forget what the real Top Gun was all about - you know, not the movie, but the school of DACT?

 

Are you going to say that Sukhoi doesn't hold the record for fastest climb, and other 27 world records as well--the very records F-15 broke before the arrival of Su27?..

No, I'm going to tell you that a specially modified non-production Su-27 prototype took a record from a modified production F-15A by just a few seconds. The production flanker is not capable of climbing like an eagle does.

 

aaaa, political correctness.. i understand..

Aaaaa, poor Kaktus, never looked at the actual performance charts for both aircraft, have you? .... I understand.

 

Americans were never able to admit defeat, when they did mock up in india with Su-30 same story.. lame excuses.. "but hei, we didn't have AWACS-so didn't the indians as well, but we couldn't use amraam.. of course, this could go on and on.. -but we were forbidden to use tomahawk missiles..

You mean when they had 30 Indian planes vs. their 4 F-15E's pretending to be Pakistani F-16's or some Chinese fighter variant?

 

look, a mock up is a mock up. deal with it..

Yes, exactly. You deal with it.

 

i strongly accept the words of russian pilots that this was the case of what happened, and usa pilots of course cannot accept it-its as i say politically incorrect thing to do so..

 

just ask yourself.. why no mock up battles of F-15 and Sukhoi now that US owns 2 Su-27? )) i know the answer you refuse to believe and accept) ..

There are plenty of mock battles. These mock battles are done for training pilots, not for our amusement with respect to these threads.

 

Do you recall the bruhah about F-15C's kicking Indian Su-30 tail? What's up with that? Is it politically incorrect for you to mention this? Or do you want to make excuses like 'Indian pilots are not as good as Russian pilots' maybe, or that 'Indian Pilots were not experienced' ... something else maybe?

 

I find it funny that you 'strongly accept the Russian pilot's words' when those are nothing but advertisement for certain countries to buy flankers. Because you see, if you know the performance parameters of both aircraft, you start wondering WTF it is that they're talking about - the details of the story just don't add up.

 

http://www.clubhyper.com/reference/f15vssu27sm_1.htm

Edited February 26, 2013 by GGTharos

[Kaktus29]

all that you wrote makes no sense in the challenge russians gave for F-22.. and russians were challenging it with Su-37 back in 2000 or so.. the one who refused were US not Russians..

 

you speak pilots lie to sale their products.. well, if the pilot is ready to have a mock up in front of audiences i say he knows his plane. but you know your charts and claim f-15 is better dogfighter than su-27 because you know chart)

 

again.. why don't we see one clip of f-15 outturning the sukhoi in usa? now that US has the ability to train against sukhois.. something you even admit is true.. you wrote the fact that sukhois in usa is nothing important..its just sukhoi instead of f-15 flying with sukhoi coloured scheme)) no, its a big deal, its something that can actually give you the answer who would win and out turn who in dogfight.. and since no videos are out there. i will assume its the sukhoi kicking ass..

 

look, your gestapo ways are really annoying man, if you don't agree with someone's statement you don't need to PROVE them wrong. you can say in civilised manner:this are the reasons i believe this is not so, and i believe this is so..

 

but you just ..i don't know man, you are a moderator dude, relax, give people the ability to have their own opinion and defend their opinion.. this is something you do not allow..its very gestapo approach man.. not cool..

 

i wrote what I believe happened and which version of fact i choose to believe .. you can write yours.. but you cannot deny me what i wrote. i am not doing the same to you.. if you believe, seriously.. that since Su-27 came to US(the one bought by US) were not used in serious combat mock up battles with F-15.. and that from all this mock ups not even 1 video is posted on youtube.. and that this is because F-15 is kicking sukhois ass..than this is your belief.. i accept it, i do not agree with it, but accept it..

 

i have a different approach of how to understand this things..

 

and we say goodbye and write something else.. this is how civilised people talk and write..

 

i hope to god you don't ban me now.. you are quite the character GG ..quite the character.. )lol