Rand-StudyFuture-of-Air-Combat

[A.S]

Aircombat, Past, Present and Future (unclassified)

 

http://www.scribd.com/doc/7774389/Rand-StudyFuture-of-Air-Combat

 

:book:.............:prop:

 

...cool read.

[Boulund]

Interesting read!

[Boberro]

Interesting article you know :)

[topol-m]

Although its not a bad article there are some pretty funny stuff in there like: some theoretical 2020 scenario where 4 F-22 destroy 48 flankers with no loss. Hellooo, are you serious? That could be possible only if the sukhois are piloted by some clonings of the dog Laika and not by real pilots. Also to make "correct" assumptions about J-XX and PAK-FA before they are even presented and before there are some reliable stats is, well surreal. It is very possible that these aircraft are better than F-35 (as a future backbone of USAF) in certain aspects, as it is surpassed in several ways (especially in air combat) even by some modern fighters.

[A.S]

Your fault, if you take every word as granted ...its like reading newspapers..... the only thing you can trust in is the actual date....if at all :lol:

[MoGas]

Your fault, if you take every word as granted ...its like reading newspapers..... the only thing you can trust in is the actual date....if at all :lol:

 

:clap_2:

[GGTharos]

Which ways would those be? :)

 

Although its not a bad article there are some pretty funny stuff in there like: some theoretical 2020 scenario where 4 F-22 destroy 48 flankers with no loss. Hellooo, are you serious? That could be possible only if the sukhois are piloted by some clonings of the dog Laika and not by real pilots. Also to make "correct" assumptions about J-XX and PAK-FA before they are even presented and before there are some reliable stats is, well surreal. It is very possible that these aircraft are better than F-35 (as a future backbone of USAF) in certain aspects, as it is surpassed in several ways (especially in air combat) even by some modern fighters.

[topol-m]

Which ways would those be? :)

 

Maneuverability, speed, payload, etc...It`s gonna turn into another thread if we begin a complete comparison.

[GGTharos]

It has plenty of payload and adequate speed as well as range. You need TVC to beat it in maneuverability ... and it has a serious SA advantage over almost anything else out there.

[Force_Feedback]

Your fault, if you take every word as granted ...its like reading newspapers..... the only thing you can trust in is the actual date....if at all :lol:

 

Yeah, funny, but my tax-euros are being spent on the F-35, and my government says, as a reason for that purchase: RAND said so.

Given all the past corruption hustles with Lockheed, I'm not surprised if some politicians here got some nice accounts on some African banks with lots of tax-free money. Oh, the joy the F-35 would bring with the whiny people over here, where they complain about modern airliners making too much noise, 151 dBa here we go...

 

But seriousely, that think tank is only taken serious by the defence industry as a means to secure orders, then they keep the cost overruns at 48-49%. Smart bastards, but it's about time to realise that it's your money they're spending on limos and nice private jets.

[topol-m]

It has plenty of payload and adequate speed as well as range. You need TVC to beat it in maneuverability ... and it has a serious SA advantage over almost anything else out there.

 

It may have plenty of payload with external pylons but in order to keep its main advantage (which it will have just till PAK-FA and J-XX come out) you have to sacrifice it - so 2 AAMs and 2 bombs is far from plenty. Comparing it with the su-30MK for example -the su has 12 external weapon stations (8 000kg). The "adequate" speed - well just facts: su-27/30 beat it, mig-29 beats it, Gripen and Eurofighter beat it, Rafale beats it, ah yes Harrier doesnt beat it. In terms of meneuverability - even non TVC fighters like mig-29 and Typhoon beat it.

[GGTharos]

It may have plenty of payload with external pylons but in order to keep its main advantage (which it will have just till PAK-FA and J-XX come out) you have to sacrifice it - so 2 AAMs and 2 bombs is far from plenty.

 

It is plenty for the day one kick-down-the-door task. That is the entire purpose of it.

 

Comparing it with the su-30MK for example -the su has 12 external weapon stations (8 000kg).

 

It sure does - an on day one, it'll be getting eaten by SAMs and fighters while the F-35 will be penetrating defenses and destroying them. That is the difference. What use are 8000kg of ordnance on 12 weapon stations when your target is a SAM that can see you coming forever by comparison to the F-35?

 

The "adequate" speed - well just facts: su-27/30 beat it, mig-29 beats it, Gripen and Eurofighter beat it, Rafale beats it, ah yes Harrier doesnt beat it. In terms of meneuverability - even non TVC fighters like mig-29 and Typhoon beat it.

 

They beat it in top speed, sure, but they're still subsonic cruisers. And they're draggier when the F-35 isn't carrying externals, so it can likely beat them in acceleration and sustained maneuvers.

As for the MiG-29 and Typhoon beating it ... -maybe-. How do you know? I mean, the F-35 already beats an F-16. F-16's have been shown to beat MiG-29's when flown right (And vice versa of course) so ... you don't really have an argument there.

 

If you had said that 'the F-35 does not have an overwhelming maneuvering advantage over other fighters' then I'd agree with you ;)

[Boberro]

Your fault, if you take every word as granted ...its like reading newspapers..... the only thing you can trust in is the actual date....if at all :lol:

 

Yess :)

 

Although its not a bad article there are some pretty funny stuff in there like: some theoretical 2020 scenario where 4 F-22 destroy 48 flankers with no loss. Hellooo, are you serious?

 

I could agree a liitle far time to do theories but... there is always but... maybe RU loses are too exxagerated, but tell me how many does Russia have NEW Sukhois? You can count with prototypes. Knowing really slow RU progress in production (unfortunetely :C) of new aircrafts I am a bit afraid about 2020. Also tell me with what weapons Russians are gonna to kill enemy? With ERs? Or new prototypes whose for years are still in labs?

 

 

 

That could be possible only if the sukhois are piloted by some clonings of the dog Laika and not by real pilots. Also to make "correct" assumptions about J-XX and PAK-FA before they are even presented and before there are some reliable stats is, well surreal. It is very possible that these aircraft are better than F-35 (as a future backbone of USAF) in certain aspects, as it is surpassed in several ways (especially in air combat) even by some modern fighters.

 

Hope soon we will get PAK-FA. But now there is even no any prototype. And I said with slow RU progress from plan -> development -> serial production I don't believe with 2012.

 

It may have plenty of payload with external pylons but in order to keep its main advantage (which it will have just till PAK-FA and J-XX come out) you have to sacrifice it - so 2 AAMs and 2 bombs is far from plenty. Comparing it with the su-30MK for example -the su has 12 external weapon stations (8 000kg). The "adequate" speed - well just facts: su-27/30 beat it, mig-29 beats it, Gripen and Eurofighter beat it, Rafale beats it, ah yes Harrier doesnt beat it. In terms of meneuverability - even non TVC fighters like mig-29 and Typhoon beat it.

 

Yess Su-30MKs have big payload but in fight they won't be equipped FULL MAX payload anyway. They use SARH missiles.... whose are I would say weak. Also radar is weaker. So... ;]

Edited April 17, 2009 by Boberro

[Alfa]

Although its not a bad article there are some pretty funny stuff in there like: some theoretical 2020 scenario where 4 F-22 destroy 48 flankers with no loss. Hellooo, are you serious? That could be possible only if the sukhois are piloted by some clonings of the dog Laika and not by real pilots. Also to make "correct" assumptions about J-XX and PAK-FA before they are even presented and before there are some reliable stats is, well surreal. It is very possible that these aircraft are better than F-35 (as a future backbone of USAF) in certain aspects, as it is surpassed in several ways (especially in air combat) even by some modern fighters.

 

No offense topol, but I think you need to read the article again ;) .

 

The author is exactly casting doubt on:

 

a) the level of "qualitative" superiority that US forces can expect over a Chinese opponent and..

 

b) whether even the most optimistic assumptions of technological superiority would be enough against the "quantitative" superiority of the Chinese in a hypothetical clash over Taiwan.

 

If you look at page 50 and 51, you will see that he deliberately assumed an unrealistic US success rate and unrealistic low ditto for the Chinese in order to show that even then it might not be enough.

[topol-m]

It sure does - an on day one, it'll be getting eaten by SAMs and fighters while the F-35 will be penetrating defenses and destroying them.

 

 

I doubt the F-35s will so easily penetrate a strong defence with mobile and camouflaged S-400 or future even more improved versions of SAMs with 500+ km detection range working together with AWACS and long range ground based radars. If it was so easy in Russia the official language should have became the american english by now.

 

Yess :)

 

Also tell me with what weapons Russians are gonna to kill enemy? With ERs? Or new prototypes whose for years are still in labs?

 

 

Su-30MKs have big payload but in fight they won't be equipped FULL MAX payload anyway. They use SARH missiles.... whose are I would say weak. Also radar is weaker. So... ;]

 

 

Well i`ll tell you: the RVV-AE is not a prototype (and the last thing i`ll call that missile is "weak" especially when a lot of experts consider it better in some aspects than Aim-120 and thats just the first version, not the improved ones that are coming), and by 2012-2020 the RVV-AE-PD surely won`t be a prototype and the K-100 or similar missile should begin serial production too, and probably some other that we know nothing about too. So no, Russia won`t be using R-27 in 2020 nor will China or India.

 

I don`t think Zhuk-A/AE or Irbis-E are weak radars. In fact i think they are one of the best, and it`s not even 2020.

Edited April 17, 2009 by topol-m

[GGTharos]

I doubt the F-35s will so easily penetrate a strong defence with mobile and camouflaged S-400 or future even more improved versions of SAMs with 500+ km detection range working together with AWACS and long range ground based radars. If it was so easy in Russia the official language should have became the american english by now.

 

Perhaps you don't understand what a nuclear deterrent is? ;)

Perhaps you also don't understand that the F-35 was designed to deal with just those threats you mentioned. You really don't get it; the F-35 is it's own sensor net, self-escort, corridor-maker, and stand-off jammer. In addition to this, they'll have dedicated stand-off jammers, JSTARs, and other fun things helping them out, as well as wild weasels to do their job.

 

Get this through your head: SAMs are speed bumps, unless you have a really sucky or in some other way inadequate Air Force.

 

 

Well i`ll tell you: the RVV-AE is not a prototype (and the last thing i`ll call that missile is "weak" especially when a lot of experts consider it better in some aspects than Aim-120 and thats just the first version, not the improved ones that are coming), and by 2012-2020 the RVV-AE-PD surely won`t be a prototype and the K-100 or similar missile should begin serial production too, and probably some other that we know nothing about too. So no, Russia won`t be using R-27 in 2020 nor will China or India.

 

Well let me tell you, the R-77 isn't in danger of catching up with the AMRAAM yet. For political and technological reasons, it is an inferior (though dangerous) weapon. Meanwhile the USAF is looking to develop JDRADM.

The K-100 isn't even a factor, nor is the R-77PD.

 

And those 'experts' you speak of have either learned better or are still repeating old rethoric. ;) There is just one advantage that the R-77 has over the AIM-120: A bigger motor. And even that's starting to get eroded now.

 

I don`t think Zhuk-A/AE or Irbis-E are weak radars. In fact i think they are one of the best, and it`s not even 2020.

 

They are certainly not weak, but they're still behind the USAF's AESA's, which are also only getting better.

 

So in conclusion, while you're babbling about imaginary future or potential future aircraft, the reality is that when those aircraft manage to become a factor, the USAF will have pulled another five steps ahead of them again, as has happened /now/. The flanker finally catches up in radar technology to the F-15C and what happens? ...

 

Those darned americans go and stick an AESA on the thing, upgrade AMRAAM, and start developing a new missile. Ah, I nearly forgot, they stuck a datalink on it as well.

 

You're doing your analysis through rose colored glasses of 'what will be one day' ... what will be one day is great. The other side will have pulled even farther ahead by then. Right now, that's how it works.

[topol-m]

 

 

the USAF will have pulled another five steps ahead of them again, as has happened /now/. The flanker finally catches up in radar technology to the F-15C and what happens? ...

 

You're doing your analysis through rose colored glasses of 'what will be one day' ... what will be one day is great. The other side will have pulled even farther ahead by then. Right now, that's how it works.

 

Oh god, another thread where we go: white is black, no black is white, no white is black...Learn from history people. Once it was thought that F-4 was the best fighter, so advanced that it should have wiped out all opposition - the reality some "inferior" migs destroyed dozens and not with missiles but with canons. Once it was thought the Mig-25 was so "low" tech that it had to be stolen, parked in Japan, and carefully examined - you know just for training. Once it was thought the U-2 is invulnerable: the reality - shot down, and not just once hehe. Many times the russian SAMs have been underestimated - the result was allways nice...And not just SAMs - occasionally american soldiers in Vietnam used to throw away their M-16 and use Ak-47 - and with good reason the AK won`t blow up in your hands saying hello to your right eye, or stop firing in a middle of a fight. And so on and so on.

What i`m saying the russians are not far behind technologicaly and sometimes are even ahead of their real or potential adversaries producing some unique and without counterpart pieces of weaponry and all this with the limited budget and financing they have. While others swagger with their achievements spending billions and billions for weaponry every year. I wonder if this overspender and Russia could change places what would the picture be? I`ll tell you - in this fictional scenario Russia would be light years ahead from the rich boy, compared to the several years that it is behind it (just in some fields) right now.

Edited April 18, 2009 by topol-m

[GGTharos]

Practice what you preach, 'cause you sure didn't in that post up there ;)

 

Oh god, another thread where we go: white is black, no black is white, no white is black...Learn from history people.

[A.S]

"klugscheisser"-debaten ? :megalol:

 

I always said: "who underestimates the russians must be stuipid" ....but i also like to add ...to much saga and vodka in the past ;)

Edited April 18, 2009 by A.S

[GGTharos]

Russia has done some interesting things - they just do them differently. ;)

[Kula66]

Interesting article ... not just 'Wow the F-22 will trump all".

 

Why is it that people have such a hard time beliving that the F-22 is such a massive leap in technology? Like the F-15 over the Mig-21. The other side will catch up, probably faster than last time.

 

All those IRBMs raining down on vulnerable bases, VHF radars, IRST sensors, volleys of AAMs, limited numbers of F-22s (especially given recent events) spread over multiple simultaneous conflicts, long transit distances, vulnerable tanker assets and the US carriers only fielding the barely comparible F-18E ... certainly an interesting scenario.

 

If some emerging technology does crack the stealth shield, the USAF assets are going to be awefully vulnerable.

 

But hey, China is a major trading partner, her future is dependant on world markets.

[Boberro]

Well i`ll tell you: the RVV-AE is not a prototype (and the last thing i`ll call that missile is "weak" especially when a lot of experts consider it better in some aspects than Aim-120 and thats just the first version, not the improved ones that are coming), and by 2012-2020 the RVV-AE-PD surely won`t be a prototype and the K-100 or similar missile should begin serial production too, and probably some other that we know nothing about too. So no, Russia won`t be using R-27 in 2020 nor will China or India.

 

I don`t think Zhuk-A/AE or Irbis-E are weak radars. In fact i think they are one of the best, and it`s not even 2020.

 

I'll wait until 2012 and I would like to see serial production :) Let's wait. I stay with this they MAY (but rather they won't do this for many many years...) develop new missile but... they won't be able to buy it in bigger amount... due of price - I think it won't be cheap, maybe I am wrong here.

 

About radars I didn't mean they're weak overall. But compared to USAF, are weaker. This is important.

[topol-m]

And how for example are these 2 radars weaker, especially the FGA-35? Or the Irbis-E combined with advanced electronic countermeasures and electronic warfare system and able to detect fighters at approx. 400km or targets with RCS = 0.01 square meters at ranges out to 90 kilometers. And interesting how are western design radars performing in detection of similar sized objects?

[59th_LeFty]

I know these are all hypothetical, but...

 

Other things which PLAAF would need for such scenario:

 

- Enough fuel, AND fuel resupply - that 48 Flankers require 50ton fuel for one takeoff (where from? Iran? routes would be blocked instantly)

- Maintenance of equipments - virtually everything what includes even a bolt or a wheel; no mention the difficult systems like aircrafts

- Support of ammunition (that 300+ AAM must be in place)

 

Do they really have it all?

[Wilde]

Other things which PLAAF would need for such scenario:

 

- Enough fuel, AND fuel resupply - that 48 Flankers require 50ton fuel for one takeoff

An Airbus A380 consumes 5 times the amount of those 48 Flankers. And no-one seems to be concerned about flying an Airbus A380 to Shanghai because of a hypothetical shortage of fuel there. Indeed there are probably quite a few airliners starting from Chinese airports across the day. ;)

- Maintenance of equipments - virtually everything what includes even a bolt or a wheel; no mention the difficult systems like aircrafts

Them Chinese people are assembling pretty much the majority of all computers being sold in the entire world. It's safe to assume they could have a few hundred of their 1.3 billion inhabitants capable of maintaining a fighter plane.

- Support of ammunition (that 300+ AAM must be in place)

 

Do they really have it all?

The amount of equipment is not a problem for them. The question is, if they have quality pilots or if they indeed fly like monkeys as assumed in the study.