Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

Something else to consider:

The MiG-29 is a very good and respectable aircraft that originally achieved parity with western aircraft in many respects; especially when western aircraft were armed with AIM-7s vs the MiG’s AA-10a. The reason it has suffered an abysmal combat record, as most of us know, is because of the man in the cockpit. Western tactics have always been about loose control and the flight-leads making decisions based on a game-plan that is executable in dynamic environments. On the other hand, the Russians have spent their years developing tactics based on very close control from GCI. Every time they change heading, altitude, airspeed, flip a switch in their cockpit, or fire a missile it is because GCI has told them to.

We all know it’s better to have the pilots making the decisions, especially in dynamic environments, because it takes the man-in-the-middle out of the equation and speeds up the decision making process and the execution of that decision…things that are very important in air combat. Western aircraft manufactures have for years known this and built avionics based on providing the pilots with as much information as possible, while simultaneously making it very easy to interpret that information.

Sensor fusion and advanced avionics are designed for western-style combat where the pilot needs the information to make his decisions. However, in many ways they are useless for countries that operate under close control (read countries that fly Russian aircraft). All the information is fairly worthless if you are not allowed to make decisions based on it.

If the PAK-FA does achieve the sensor fusion it is claiming, that in-and-of itself would be a remarkable feat considering they are newcomers to this field. However, if they actually find a way to present it to the pilot in ways that don’t overload the pilot and make things easier in a fluid tactical environment, instead of overwhelming him, that would be even more remarkable.

Now, if we give the PAK-FA the benefit of the doubt and say that it actually does accomplish these things in a manner that is on par with western standards, that is still only about 10% of the battle. The Russians would need to completely change their strategy and tactics from the ground up in order to allow the pilot to take advantage of these advances in the same way western pilots do. This will literally be about 10 times more difficult than developing the technologies. To develop the tactics to the level western air forces operate at would take decades (this is not an exageration). However, even if they had the tactics already developed, it would take a generation of pilots operating from the ground up under these new tactics before they would be fully implemented. My main point being: western air forces will still hold a huge advantage with regard to the man in the cockpit.

My guess is that the Russians will develop some good avionics, especially the radar, which may be able to compete with western aircraft within about a decade. However, they will not fuse them together in a way that will take full advantage of them and thus will not receive the synergistic benefits that make the advances so important. Furthermore, I don’t foresee the Russians moving away from close control any time soon. It is their bread-and-butter. They developed it and are incredibly prideful about it. Thus, all their hard technological work will be mostly wasted, except for the few air forces that buy Russian aircraft and follow a more western style of combat (read India).

Hey, if we can work the PAK-FA into the new Mig-25 in order to justify more F-22s I am all for it.

Hey now, don't discredit a good GCI controller...I'm being biased here (mainly cause I am one lol) but yes, I agree with your main point that the flight lead having the hammer is better than 100% close control, however there are times when myself (having the God's Eye view) can be more directive in my calls because the pilot may have lost SA or become overwhelmed and needs that lextra directional cue to gain Mission Success or sanitize the airspace.
I'm not saying I'm the sh** or anything but a good GCI controller can be one of the pilots greatest assets in the air...which is why we have to know the fighters timeline, tactics, game plan and also why we brief and debrief with them...helps us become better controllers and a better asset to the fight.
Yes, the crutch of Russia has been the use of close control GCI but from the looks of it, with the gradual improvement of avionics, radar and tactics, they are slowly beginning to adopt a more western style of tactical control rather than exclusively close...however from the data I've read, they are still very behind the proverbial power curve compared to how we control and all the techniques we have developed...it has just become a modified close control.

The F-22A lacks SAIRST and a helmet mounted sight, so CAN NOT make high off-boresight missile shots.

An F-22 pilot who somehow manages to dogfight the completed PAK-FA (ignoring for the moment that by the time the PAK-FA is fully developed the F-22A will have been retired due to airframe age issues), is making a grave mistake.

The F-22A lacks SAIRST and a helmet mounted sight, so CAN NOT make high off-boresight missile shots.

The F-22A will of course spot the PAK-FA well before the F-22A is spotted and so will always fire BVR (if allowed) and win every time.

The F-35 does have SAIRST and the helmet mounted sight and its superior sensors and stealth will allow it to beat the PAK-FA in a dogfight most of the time.

It's a pity that American F-35s will only outnumber the PAK-FAs of any one country by more than ten to one so very few American F-35 pilots will ever get to shoot down a PAK-FA.

Just for the record, the F-22 WILL get the AIM-9X in about 5yrs (and testing before that). At around that time, the AIM-120D should also be operational.

For those that fought the F-22 before (both BFM and BVR) and thought it was bad before, wait until around 2015...

Just for the record, the F-22 WILL get the AIM-9X in about 5yrs (and testing before that). At around that time, the AIM-120D should also be operational.