Forum: F-22A Raptor

I know the raptor has stealth and would probably win a BVR situation but in a close up dogfight who would win, and isn't the Su-37 the only plane that can out turn a Raptor? Does the AMRAAM 120D stand up to the R-77M version or the MDBA since it doesn't have a ram jet?

F-16.net Sponsor

People post these questions all the time and I know we have covered the Sukhoi variants. If the 22 and the 37 got into a fight, why would the 22 give up the advantage and close to within visual range? It wouldn't happen, the 22 would take the shot from a long distance and the fight would be over before the 37 pilot knew what hit him.

Keep in mind also, the 37 is not in production and probably never will be.

How can you answer a question to something that has never been? All answers would be pure speculation and moot. And has been stated, there is no point to WVR combat if you have the advantage in BVR.

Then again, it depends on the rules of engagement. In past engagements(Gulf of Sidra, for example) visual Id and determination of intent must be resolved first. Unless hostilities have already begun, BVR attacks would not be made under most circumstances. Hasn't our policy for intercepts normally been this way even during the Cold War?

Hassling is probably going to happen first at closer ranges.

The same thing happened in the "Vietnam air war"; our pilots couldnt use the F-4 BVR advantage because the President demanded visual ID first, so the WVR combat developed more times than the Pentagon could have foreseen... and many of our pilots died!
No one can affirmed that in a future air combat our pilots wont face similar restricted rules of engagement. I think that our F-22 with its TV and with a better situational awarness technology than any russian jet will have the advantage in a WVR arena. I will go farther; if manouvering isnt so relevant for the future of air combat because of systems like EODAS our F-35 will beat any SUPER MANOUVERING Sukhoi the russians could develop.

We didn't have the same kind of AWACS and IFF equipment in the Vietnam/Cold War... so firing BVR wouldn't be impossible so long as rules of engagement and AWACS allows for it.

I vote F-22 for everything besides low speed guns only fight, which will probably never happen. In an unrestricted fight, the F-22 would just AMRAAM the Flanker. Sure the Flanker might dodge, but it's not going to avoid 6 AIM-120's [and then continue fighting]. I'd assume that the F-22's stealth pretty much limits the R-77's range to nothing, so the Su-37 might as well go for R-73. However it will never get in range because it would be dead, and if it wasn't dead, the F-22 would be supercruising and the Flanker would never catch it.

I don't claim to be an expert or anything, but from my own research, it should go down something like that.

I'm wondering if perhaps you meant S-37 (Su-47) instead of Su-37? Both are agile, thrust-vectoring test aircraft.

Things would certainly be on more even terms WVR than BVR.

The Su-37 could actually win in a guns-only fight. However, I believe that the F-22 would still have a better than 50% chance against the Flanker even then. The F-22 weighs just a shade more than the Su-37 when empty, but the F-22's engines are notably more powerful than the Flanker's. That gives it a higher thrust-to-weight ratio, which will beneficially affect its acceleration, energy retention and energy recovery. The F-22's rate of climb is also likely higher. Wasn't a story posted once on here that there was a pilot who would have broken "all time-to-climb" records in the Raptor he was flying? If the F-22 pilot wants to win, he can just go vertical.

Missiles might make the situation trickier. Does the Su-37 have HOBS capability? I think I've read that the F-22 doesn't. I could be mistaken, however.

Also, there have probably been many aircraft that can out-turn a Raptor if one's measuring stick is turn radius. Old WWII fighters probably had a tighter turning ability than our modern jets do, albiet they are much slower with a far inferior rate of climb.

Kryptid wrote:

I'm wondering if perhaps you meant S-37 (Su-47) instead of Su-37? Both are agile, thrust-vectoring test aircraft.

I believe the S-37(Su-47) Berkut was never tested with the intended thrust vectoring exhaust nozzles. If it ever continues to be worked on for eventual prodiuction it most likely will have standard swept wings. Like Grumman so very long ago, Sukhoi realized the forward swept configuration wasn't a worthwhile improvement.

StolichnayaStrafer wrote:

I believe the S-37(Su-47) Berkut was never tested with the intended thrust vectoring exhaust nozzles.

True. It was powered by the D-30s that also power the MiG-31. That had slipped my mind.

cywolf32 wrote:

How can you answer a question to something that has never been? All answers would be pure speculation and moot. And has been stated, there is no point to WVR combat if you have the advantage in BVR.

You are correct, but the OP is asking for a speculative answer. It's one of those "what if" scenarios. Never mind how likely the scenario, it's still interesting to think about.

I don't have faith in a Russian jet that was a test bed and will never make it to production. Try an SU-30K/MKI/etc...still no match for the Raptor in a hypothetical combat scenario. IMHO of course.

Does the AMRAAM 120D even stand up to the MDBA or the R-77M1 because it does not have a cruise function and loses speed during turns since it does not have a ram jet.

Well the Raptor would use its superior maneuverability at high speed's to win. The Su-47 will never be, because its a HUGE aircraft, is not stealthy, and at high speeds, its swept forward wing design is crap, look at are X-29 Nasa has. The F-22 will own anything to date, so please stop with the bs. Its production, and the 47 isnt, now you could run one about the Su-33, but again the 22 owns all.

mustang65 wrote:

Does the AMRAAM 120D even stand up to the MDBA or the R-77M1 because it does not have a cruise function and loses speed during turns since it does not have a ram jet.

Meteor and R-77M1 are not in production yet.

I think that AIM-120D (and C-7) will be superior to Meteor and R-77M1 when launched from high altitude. Why? Becouse of ballistic trajectory and low-drag at high altitude. Metor and R-77M1 may have greater range in low-med altitudes becouse of their ramjet engines.

If you want to see how much high altitude and high loft angle can halp download minizap - missile launch zone calculator. http://www.ecf.utoronto.ca/~pavacic/mis ... inizap.zip

Now select AIM-120B. Target apsect 180 (head on) and launch. Range = 57km. Now increase programmed loft to 45. Range is now 82km. To simulate AIM-120C7 change fuel weight to ~55kg and specific impulse to ~240 (this is just guesswork) and you have range of over 100km (often quoted as AIM-120C-7 range). To simulate AIM-120D increase fuel weight to 60kg and specific impulse to 245 (again guesswork) and select lof glide logic. Now you have almost 120km range. Now lets launch it from F-35 - change launch alt to 12000 and speed to 1100, and change launch loft angle to 30 (we want to help our missile as much as we can, don't we?). You also have to change controlled flight time to lets say - 300sec. Now we have 177 km range (almost 100 nm!). Now lets use F-22. Alt 1800 speed 1600. Range is now.... 300 km! (160 nm!).

Do you think it's impossible? Well, at 80 000 feet atmospheric pressure is only 2,8 kPa. See level - 101 kPa. Missile launched at high loft angle will cruise even higher, where atmospheric pressure is less than 1 kPa. High pressure=high drag low pressure = low drag.

Forum: F-22A Raptor

F-22 Vs Su37