Sukhoi Su-47 vs F-22 Raptor

[FuldaGap]

Seriously, could you read up and educate yourself before making statements like the ones you're making?

 

Start reading about the F-22 and maybe you'll actually learn something ...

 

Then you should seriously stop talking about it and making statements as to radar performance, shouldn't you? ;) That's a friendly suggestion, not said in malice.

 

The other truly amusing thing is how ridiculously little knowledge people display about the integrated capabilities of the F-22

 

Go ahead. Do the math. ;) Do it ;)

 

 

 

Dictionary: :book:

patronize: pa.tron.ize /ˈpeɪtrəˌnaɪz, ˈpæ‑/[pey-truh-nahyz, pa‑]

:smartass:2.to behave in an offensively condescending manner toward: a professor who patronizes his students.

 

 

 

 

For a moderator, you sure like to pick a fight ;).

 

...not said in malice :music_whistling:

[Teknetinium]

GG dont compere economy whit Russian technology, One demonstrator is enough they have nukes protecting them, and if u think in that matter, Americans would have more problems whit building their F-22s then Russians their Su-47s, when all material and parts are stopped by Russians from Europe by subs or air to air missiles. Russians Have everything they need whit in their borders to build su-47.

Edited February 19, 2009 by Teknetinium

[Boberro]

Guys I see topic expanded well :)

 

In my opinion even if let's say Su-35 would be better than F-22 in most aspects, there is another aspect - quantity. How many do Russians have own Su-35? And compare it to F-22 amount. Sometimes more quantity can defeat better quality but even on this area RuaF is in worse situation. Worse in tech and amount space.

 

I like Russian planes, but if I would have to choose, I would choose F-22.

[Teknetinium]

Why are u compering this in world war III scenario. just compere the machines between each other.

 

Its like compering who has longest dick whit out asking the woman who was the best.

Edited February 19, 2009 by Teknetinium

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Yes. The F-117 was engaged successful after the planets and stars were aligned to ambush it. That should already tell you something, and to make it very clear, it was the exception that proved the rule ;)

No, the F-117 was engaged after several dozens of other airplanes, including many SEAD were in the air, with two AWACS airplanes on duty as well(one over Hungary and other somewhere over Albania or Adriatic Sea). And soon after, UK canceled the purchase of the F-117 fleet.

 

Don't get me wrong I did not say F-117 is a bad airplane ... But it is not a miracle in the sky.

 

PS

I don't believe in astrology! Do you?

 

Reminder: SAM = Stealth STOP! ;)

[Vault]

Su-47 design is even better then F-22 it takes more fuel more weapon inside, If Russians will use AESA or something else is unknown, witch engines unknown,u all can speculate who will detect who first and kill. But that will not lead anywhere. The question here is if Russians have Technology to produce radar reflecting materials for Flyable machines or something else as plasma. Everything else as radar, radar warning receiver, battle situation awareness and so on is already achieved to F-22s standard or better.

 

Russia doesn't want the Su-47 it wants the PAK-FA and MiG-35's. The Su-47 was a demonstrator and IS inferiour to the F-22. The wing design is unique but unable to supercruise. One thing Russia doesn't have in it's borders is a $65 Billion dollar budget to build a 5th generation fighter that will be able to realistically challenge the F-22. Russia can only dream for a budget of this size and in this life you get what you pay for. If Russia has a $15 Billion dollar budget they'll get $15 billion dollar 5 gen fighter.

Edited February 19, 2009 by Vault

[Vault]

GG dont compere economy whit Russian technology, One demonstrator is enough they have nukes protecting them, and if u think in that matter, Americans would have more problems whit building their F-22s then Russians their Su-47s, when all material and parts are stopped by Russians from Europe by subs or air to air missiles. Russians Have everything they need whit in their borders to build su-47.

 

Russian technology? Where? I don't see any!. All I see is a few demonstrators and old fighters that are unfit for the skies. Russian nukes? All Russian nukes have ever been successful at is killing poisioning their own people and land ask any Russian person who lives around the Mayak Chemical combine who have to live with billions of curies of weapons grade plutonium.

[GGTharos]

No, the F-117 was engaged after several dozens of other airplanes, including many SEAD were in the air, with two AWACS airplanes on duty as well(one over Hungary and other somewhere over Albania or Adriatic Sea). And soon after, UK canceled the purchase of the F-117 fleet.

 

The F-117 was engaged after its sortie information was leaked. That's all there is to it. They knew where to stick their SAMs to get in the way.

 

It is the exception that makes the rule.

 

The F-117 purchase was cancelled because the F-35 was on the way and the F-117 is a hangar queen.

[Groove]

Omg, Hajduk, how many times in the future you plan to bring up that LUCKSHOT on that F-117 over Serbia as a prove that stealth are not stealth?

 

How many sorties by stealth bombers were flown before this LUCKSHOT occured? Please, some new story, but not that F-117. Thanks!

 

[Vekkinho]

Guys I see topic expanded well :)

 

In my opinion even if let's say Su-35 would be better than F-22 in most aspects, there is another aspect - quantity. How many do Russians have own Su-35? And compare it to F-22 amount. Sometimes more quantity can defeat better quality but even on this area RuaF is in worse situation. Worse in tech and amount space.

 

I like Russian planes, but if I would have to choose, I would choose F-22.

 

 

^^^^^^

I second that, that's the whole point, I already said here before (look at my previous posts) that there's only 1 Su-47 and 381 F-22 (soon).

 

Although that rear hemisphere facing radar of a Su-47 was a good idea, IMHO!

 

Guess the tides have changed, NATO was maybe afraid of 500+ Fishbeds and 10000 T-62 entering Europe during Cold war but now has the same doctrine.

 

>100 planes VS 4,5 flyable (not combat ready) Fulcrums of YuAF was the Allied Force scenario. Please let's not talk again of single F-15C CAP squad 'cause AFAIK CAS, Strike, PinPoint tasked flights of Tornados, Hornets and Falcons can carry MRM and SRM too! (Whoever denies this fact is dead wrong).

 

So, now that we all accepted the fact that NATO and US of A have adopted Warsaw pact doctrine I must add that quality of quantity was improvedwhich caused enormous increase of funds needed!

 

OK, there's gonna be 381 F-22 out there or some factions simply state that that's the quantity needed to establish and maintain airsuperiority over planet Earth in the next few decades.

 

One thought bears to mind, it's an equasion, there's like 660 of F-15C in USAF (520 in active duty and 140 in ANG) + 220 F-15J in Japan, 60 in Saudi Arabia + unknown number in Israel (not less than 60 if you ask me!) totaling with at least 950 F-15 airframes of all types (A,B,C,D,E,J,I) in active duty.

 

By comparing qty of 660 USAF Eagles with 381 USAF Raptors you'd get a 1.73 factor (single Raptor = 1.73 Eagles) but if you compare expenses where single Eagle-C is worth 70mil US$ and single Raptor is in the neighbourhood of 200US$ you'll get a 2.85 ratio!

 

I don't expect Iran, India, China, N. Korea or Russia to present any danger in the future so 381 Raptors must be a pretty adequate fleet to chase and strafe that Stinger armed Mujas!

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

One thing Russia doesn't have in it's borders is a $65 Billion dollar budget ...

We don't have that kind of money either. We borrow, and borrow and borrow ... If we don't stop borrowing we will end up as Soviet Union. Then F-22's will be in the same shape as many MiG-29's are in Russia. Do you know how much in total debt our country is? Approximately 70 trillion dollars. Astounding number as reported buy CNBC yesterday. 70 trillion dollars is annual gdp of the entire planet of earth.

 

Therefore, think twice before you say "we have money ...".

[Vekkinho]

Why are u compering this in world war III scenario. just compere the machines between each other.

 

Its like compering who has longest dick whit out asking the woman who was the best.

 

 

Yeah! :thumbup:

[Teknetinium]

Russia doesn't want the Su-47 it wants the PAK-FA and MiG-35's. The Su-47 was a demonstrator and IS inferiour to the F-22. The wing design is unique but unable to supercruise. One thing Russia doesn't have in it's borders is a $65 Billion dollar budget to build a 5th generation fighter that will be able to realistically challenge the F-22. Russia can only dream for a budget of this size and in this life you get what you pay for. If Russia has a $15 Billion dollar budget they'll get $15 billion dollar 5 gen fighter.

 

 

I dont know how mutch American dollar was worth at that time Germans were outside Moscow.

Edited February 19, 2009 by Teknetinium

[Vault]

In my opinion even if let's say Su-35 would be better than F-22 in most aspects, there is another aspect - quantity. How many do Russians have own Su-35? And compare it to F-22 amount. Sometimes more quantity can defeat better quality but even on this area RuaF is in worse situation.

 

Boberro this scenario is exactly what the F-22 was designed for, fighting against overwhelming odds and engaging multiple 4-4.5 gen platforms.

[Vault]

I dont know how mutch American dollar was worth at that time Germans were outside Moscow.

 

:poster_offtopic:

[GGTharos]

Guess the tides have changed, NATO was maybe afraid of 500+ Fishbeds and 10000 T-62 entering Europe during Cold war but now has the same doctrine.

 

Uh, no, it certainly does not. I don't think you understand what doctrine means.

 

>100 planes VS 4,5 flyable (not combat ready) Fulcrums of YuAF was the Allied Force scenario. Please let's not talk again of single F-15C CAP squad 'cause AFAIK CAS, Strike, PinPoint tasked flights of Tornados, Hornets and Falcons can carry MRM and SRM too! (Whoever denies this fact is dead wrong).

 

The reason for bringing up relatively simple engagements has nothing to do with the war; it has to do with aircraft comparison. Don't mix those up.

So, now that we all accepted the fact that NATO and US of A have adopted Warsaw pact doctrine I must add that quality of quantity was improvedwhich caused enormous increase of funds needed!

 

Again, this is a statement in error. NATO has not adopted a warpac doctrine.

 

OK, there's gonna be 381 F-22 out there or some factions simply state that that's the quantity needed to establish and maintain airsuperiority over planet Earth in the next few decades.

 

Actually they need 760, but the 381 is the 'make do with' number.

 

One thought bears to mind, it's an equasion, there's like 660 of F-15C in USAF (520 in active duty and 140 in ANG) + 220 F-15J in Japan, 60 in Saudi Arabia + unknown number in Israel (not less than 60 if you ask me!) totaling with at least 950 F-15 airframes of all types (A,B,C,D,E,J,I) in active duty.

 

They're not all in active duty. A large number of those is retired/scrapped. The production run of x many aircraft isn't meant to all happen at once - it happens over time, so you have always y aircraft 'on hand', replacing olds ones as new ones come in.

 

By comparing qty of 660 USAF Eagles with 381 USAF Raptors you'd get a 1.73 factor (single Raptor = 1.73 Eagles) but if you compare expenses where single Eagle-C is worth 70mil US$ and single Raptor is in the neighbourhood of 200US$ you'll get a 2.85 ratio!

 

Except what you didn't count into this ratio is the fact that the Raptor eliminates the need to drag along a lot of expensive SEAD/ELINT/EW aircraft, and along with that, the tankers and fuel they'd have to use. That probably evens the ratio out nicely, and it still keeps a staggering exchange ratio in combat.

 

I don't expect Iran, India, China, N. Korea or Russia to present any danger in the future so 381 Raptors must be a pretty adequate fleet to chase and strafe that Stinger armed Mujas!

 

So everyone should get rid of nuclear weapons since they aren't being used, right? And why develop new ones anyway ;)

[GGTharos]

But do you understand how this dept works?

 

We don't have that kind of money either. We borrow, and borrow and borrow ... If we don't stop borrowing we will end up as Soviet Union. Then F-22's will be in the same shape as many MiG-29's are in Russia. Do you know how much in total debt our country is? Approximately 70 trillion dollars. Astounding number as reported buy CNBC yesterday. 70 trillion dollars is annual gdp of the entire planet of earth.

 

Therefore, think twice before you say "we have money ...".

[Vault]

Hajduk the US's wealth is based on black gold (that's why all oil is traded in dollars) the US does have big debt but it also has alot of potential money. Now if you threaten the US's wealth like Iran just have by attempting to trade oil in Euro's then the US's wealth will be in danger. The US are far from short of a buck.

[lomcevac]

We don't have that kind of money either. We borrow, and borrow and borrow ... If we don't stop borrowing we will end up as Soviet Union. Then F-22's will be in the same shape as many MiG-29's are in Russia. Do you know how much in total debt our country is? Approximately 70 trillion dollars. Astounding number as reported buy CNBC yesterday. 70 trillion dollars is annual gdp of the entire planet of earth.

 

Therefore, think twice before you say "we have money ...".

:huh:

For God's sake! Do you just pull this stuff out of your ass or do you actually do any research?

http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/

[lomcevac]

Dictionary: :book:

patronize: pa.tron.ize /ˈpeɪtrəˌnaɪz, ˈpæ‑/[pey-truh-nahyz, pa‑]

:smartass:2.to behave in an offensively condescending manner toward: a professor who patronizes his students.

 

 

 

 

For a moderator, you sure like to pick a fight ;).

 

...not said in malice :music_whistling:

 

Yes, let's nevermind the patronizing you or others in the argument are doing... :music_whistling:

 

OMFG!!! I'm doing it too!!!!

Edited February 19, 2009 by lomcevac

[lomcevac]

GG dont compere economy whit Russian technology, One demonstrator is enough they have nukes protecting them, and if u think in that matter, Americans would have more problems whit building their F-22s then Russians their Su-47s, when all material and parts are stopped by Russians from Europe by subs or air to air missiles. Russians Have everything they need whit in their borders to build su-47.

 

Naw, that couldn't be a WW3 scenario, could it?

 

Why are u compering this in world war III scenario. just compere the machines between each other.

 

Its like compering who has longest dick whit out asking the woman who was the best.

 

Oh, ok, it's not. My bad. :music_whistling:

 

So we compare a tech demonstrator with an operational fighter. Well, we can tell which aircraft HAS a dick, at least.

 

Yeah! :thumbup:

 

:huh:

[GGTharos]

If I get out of hand someone will moderate me. Since I'm participating in the discussion I won't moderate it myself unless something really blatant and nasty happens.

 

I'll even moderate myself if I must! :P

[lomcevac]

If I get out of hand someone will moderate me. Since I'm participating in the discussion I won't moderate it myself unless something really blatant and nasty happens.

 

I'll even moderate myself if I must! :P

 

Damn! But you've got a troll infestation at worst, or a mass disregard of reality at best.

 

Did I say that out loud. Well, I better shut up before the ban stick hits me in the forehead!!! :megalol:

Edited February 19, 2009 by lomcevac
Moron fever's catchy...

[GGTharos]

You did, it just might :P

 

People have opinions and they're entitled to them, and they're entitled to ... discuss them. Not entitled to call other morons or whatever. So edit that post ;)

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

:huh:

For God's sake! Do you just pull this stuff out of your ass or do you actually do any research?

http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/

I quoted my source. It was on CNBC, sometime yesterday afternoon. The information was presented in the form of a chart. And discussion was about a total debt, including Social Security, medicaid and everything else. Again, my source is CNBC.