Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

What's a ratio of 1:6 to 1? Do they mean 1.6 to one?

Good, fast, cheap. Choose any two.

Come let's eat grandpa!

Use punctuation, save lives!

Posted

How is it the other way around when the JSF sports better radar, better defensive measures and definitely a smaller RCS?

 

Did Saab simulate F-35's with radars on in 'missile seeker beacon' mode?

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Posted (edited)

Or did they pit it against the SU-35 #4 for their simulations?

Edited by Panzertard
  • Like 1

The mind is like a parachute. It only works when it's open | The important thing is not to stop questioning

Posted
How is it the other way around when the JSF sports better radar, better defensive measures and definitely a smaller RCS?

 

Did Saab simulate F-35's with radars on in 'missile seeker beacon' mode?

 

This article should mention more details to proove these statements. Its pretty easy to say some precise ratio like 2:1 or 1.6:1 but its interesting if we can see the data used, the conditions leading to that ratio. The meteor is a nice missile but it has just a little longer range than the R-77 which in theory should mean the Gripen will fire first (and that will be true until R-77-PD enters the scene). But the difference is not huge and considering the more powerful radar of the Su and the use of ECM this little difference in ranges could become even more insignificant. Also the bigger payload of the su will allow it to use more than 1 missile per target and attack several targets at the same time so imagine how many R-77 could be fired by 4 Su-35s...etc. etc. We need more data how exactly this ratios have been achieved.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Posted (edited)
This article should mention more details to proove these statements. Its pretty easy to say some precise ratio like 2:1 or 1.6:1 but its interesting if we can see the data used, the conditions leading to that ratio. The meteor is a nice missile but it has just a little longer range than the R-77 which in theory should mean the Gripen will fire first (and that will be true until R-77-PD enters the scene). But the difference is not huge and considering the more powerful radar of the Su and the use of ECM this little difference in ranges could become even more insignificant. Also the bigger payload of the su will allow it to use more than 1 missile per target and attack several targets at the same time so imagine how many R-77 could be fired by 4 Su-35s...etc. etc. We need more data how exactly this ratios have been achieved.

 

There are doubts the R-77 is actualy in service within the RuAF. This missile hasnt been upgraded for years. Only the Indian Airforce has it in numbers but its downgraded with no datalink. R-77-PD has been cancelled in favour of other projects. Current status of those projects are not clear though. The chinese also are researching for their own.

 

Meteor will be uncontested when it enters service kineticaly speaking. As of this date is in advanced stage of testing and when it enters service it will have more than double the range of any other missile currently in service.

 

If SIM's are simulating missile ranges and BVR tactics geometrics then Su-35 will be hopeless. If Su-35 ECM carateristichs are taken in account (unknown but imagine israeli jammers on it) then The tide could very well be lopsided torwards F-35 (gripen left with HOJ probably), specialy if its simulated with the meteor.

Edited by Pilotasso

.

Posted

The missile itself might have longer range, but the Su-35 should be seriously out-performing the gripen in high altitude flight and speed, as well as in radar capability - so I would give the first shot to the Su-35 anyway, personally.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Posted

The R-77 is dead since 2000, Russians are building '5th gen' weapons now, the first of which are public, the Kh-38 series (replaces Kh-25), no doubt they are also testing new A-A missiles as well.

Creedence Clearwater Revival:worthy:

Posted

THanks FF - looks like the 38 is actually somewhat analogous to the Harpoon/SLAM.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Posted
The R-77 is dead since 2000, Russians are building '5th gen' weapons now, the first of which are public, the Kh-38 series (replaces Kh-25), no doubt they are also testing new A-A missiles as well.

 

Nice to know that. Can`t wait to see the new russian missiles.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Posted
This is how the test might look ...

 

 

:D

 

Precisely. That was the image that appeared in my brain when i saw those ratios but instead of F-22 there was the Gripen :)

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Posted
This is how the test might look ...

 

 

:D

 

hahhahaha Peyoteros you are almost godlike as I am :D

 

Great funny summary how tests could look :D

Reminder: Fighter pilots make movies. Bomber pilots make... HISTORY! :D | Also to be remembered: FRENCH TANKS HAVE ONE GEAR FORWARD AND FIVE BACKWARD :D

ಠ_ಠ



Posted
Some interesting info about PAK FA and its weapons: http://www.infuture.ru/news.php?news_id=168 ( russian )

 

Thanks, man. The last info i saw about it was that its first flight is sheduled to be in august 2009. Though when the aircraft will be shown to the media is still unclear. I hope in 2010 i`ll have a new desktop wallpaper ;)

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Posted (edited)

Supposedly PAk FA was to fly in 2009 after some delays. Lets see if all this marketing has susbstanciation.

 

EDIT:

Reading the article, the plane shall have about 34000lb class engines (divided by 2 powerplants) wich makes less than half that of the F-22 and less than the 42000 mark on the F-35 (a single engined plane). The russian plane also contemplates 12 hardpoints wich makes me believe stealth is not russias main concern. While PAK FA seems away from the US 5th gen aircraft it falls nicely into the Eurofighter category of designs.

 

There seems to be also a light version of that plane, heavier than the f-16 but much lighter than the F-35. Both will share same overall features just like Mig-29 had in relation to the Su-27. Lets wait and see.

Edited by Pilotasso

.

Posted (edited)
34000lb class engines (divided by 2 powerplants) wich makes less than half that of the F-22

2x34000 is less than a half of 2x35000? Fanboy math is like women logic...

Edited by DarkWanderer
  • Like 1

You want the best? Here i am...

Posted
2x34000 is less than a half of 2x35000? Fanboy math is like women logic...

 

 

You didnt even read the article at all or read my post properly. Then talk about women logic.

 

I said DEVIDED BY 2 ENGINES DUH... :P

 

you rushed and tripped yourself

.

Posted (edited)
You didnt even read the article at all or read my post properly. Then talk about women logic.

I've read your post. Point is, the PAK FA is going to be equipped with AL-41F engines whose rack thrust is 40,000lb class, while from your words it's 17,000. So it's someone else who've "rushed&tripped".

Edited by DarkWanderer

You want the best? Here i am...

Posted

While the math is still wrong, the Raptor's engines are tuned to 39000lbs thrust a piece.

 

2x34000 is less than a half of 2x35000? Fanboy math is like women logic...

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...