Forum: F-35 versus XYZ

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htairfo/20100914.aspx

While the T-50 is the stealthiest aircraft the Russians have, it is not nearly as stealthy as the F-22, or even the F-35 or B-2. The Russians are apparently going to emphasize maneuverability instead of stealth. But they are having problems perfecting the engines for the T-50, and the defensive electronics. This puts the T-50 at a big disadvantage against the F-22 or F-35, which try to detect enemy aircraft at long distance, without being spotted, and then fire a radar guided missile (like AMRAAM).

F-16.net Sponsor

Strategypage article Laughing

qwe2008 wrote:

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htairfo/20100914.aspx

While the T-50 is the stealthiest aircraft the Russians have, it is not nearly as stealthy as the F-22, or even the F-35 or B-2. The Russians are apparently going to emphasize maneuverability instead of stealth. But they are having problems perfecting the engines for the T-50, and the defensive electronics. This puts the T-50 at a big disadvantage against the F-22 or F-35, which try to detect enemy aircraft at long distance, without being spotted, and then fire a radar guided missile (like AMRAAM).

I'm in the pro-F-22/F-35 camp, but I'm hesitant to speak about the T-50 in absolute terms, when there is much that isn't known about it. Having said that, it's amusing to see the supposed superiority of the T-50 touted by its fans. Till production variants are produced, it's premature for either side to state anything in unequivocal terms. The more important metric will be how effective the system that the T-50 will operate in, happens to be, as wars are fought at the systems level.

+1 with WW.

And to add to that the article serves the usual prejudices founded or not and is on many cases inaccurate, not to say wrong.

I am pretty much with Wrightwing on this one too. The T-50 pretty much sits at where the F-22 was in the mid 90's and where the JSF was about 8 years ago. A couple of things that really struck me about this aircraft though: rear aspect stealth is virtually non-existant and will need major work before production. Second, for this to be a serious platform it will need a lot of avionics integration work and the Russians have never been able to do that with previous aircraft. I am not saying it won't be a competitive aircraft, but there is a lot of work on a variety of systems that still needs to be completed.

@nam11b,
if it fulfils the purpose and fits the system it's not mandatory to achieve the very same level at everything. The Russians have done so since ever. It's not like the T-50 is going to compete with the F-22 or F-35 for a USAF or RuAF competition.

Scorpion82 wrote:

@nam11b,
if it fulfils the purpose and fits the system it's not mandatory to achieve the very same level at everything. The Russians have done so since ever. It's not like the T-50 is going to compete with the F-22 or F-35 for a USAF or RuAF competition.

I agree with this, as it's a realistic view. Many of the T-50/Russia Strong crowd are of the mind that the aircraft will exceed the capabilities of any competitor, in all categories, and that's just not a defensible point of view(especially at this point in time). I have no doubt that it will have excellent raw performance, and range, and will cost considerably less than an F-22.
Where I have a lot of reservations are in the claims about RCS/avionics/weapons systems.

You can gather some info about the T-50 by observation. It's clear that there is nowhere near the attention paid to LO compared to the US planes. In terms of the system it is designed to fight in, the Russia Strong crowd should shut up because the T-50 will never make it off the ground. It's apparently designed to keep Russia in the fighter game and possibly repel J-11 hordes although nukes would be the main issue in a Russia China smackdown.

Scorpion82 wrote:

@nam11b,
if it fulfils the purpose and fits the system it's not mandatory to achieve the very same level at everything. The Russians have done so since ever. It's not like the T-50 is going to compete with the F-22 or F-35 for a USAF or RuAF competition.

That is the big problem I see with the T-50 though. They have some huge hurdles to overcome to get the aircraft into production. It really seems that the Russians are still focused on raw performance and agility instead of reduced RCS and improved sensors. If western aircraft can see you and kill/evade you at will, you arent even in the same game.

You are right, they won't ever compete for customers (at least the F-22 and T-50), but from all the reports that have come out in the past few months it seems similar to a 15SE instead of a true 5th Gen.
<

Well consider this, what if by agility, they mean while in supercruise instead of supermaneuverability. The PAK-FA might not be stealthy like the F-22, but it could probably beat the F/A-18 E. If it can cruise at Mach 2+ and still turn fairly well, it could put that energy advantage to good use when combined with a decent RCS. Now of course, that assumes that they can get there (M2+ cruise), but I don't think the Russians are that fixed on air show moves.

exorcet wrote:

Well consider this, what if by agility, they mean while in supercruise instead of supermaneuverability. The PAK-FA might not be stealthy like the F-22, but it could probably beat the F/A-18 E. If it can cruise at Mach 2+ and still turn fairly well, it could put that energy advantage to good use when combined with a decent RCS. Now of course, that assumes that they can get there (M2+ cruise), but I don't think the Russians are that fixed on air show moves.

It's not gonna cruise at M2+ with the current engines, and it's doubtful if the 5G engines will provide that capability either.

Quote:

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htairfo/20100914.aspx

While the T-50 is the stealthiest aircraft the Russians have, it is not nearly as stealthy as the F-22, or even the F-35 or B-2. The Russians are apparently going to emphasize maneuverability instead of stealth. But they are having problems perfecting the engines for the T-50, and the defensive electronics. This puts the T-50 at a big disadvantage against the F-22 or F-35, which try to detect enemy aircraft at long distance, without being spotted, and then fire a radar guided missile (like AMRAAM).

Ignorant article. It's does not operate with any reliable facts, but rely on make-believe specualtions to make absurd allegations. It's full of incorrect data too. Author's statement that remote-controlled UCAVs (concept demonstrators) in term of air superiority will make all manned fighter jets(including T-50) completely obsolete after 2015... What a silly assumption. My full opinion about this puny article is on SP forum.

nam11b

Quote:

That is the big problem I see with the T-50 though. They have some huge hurdles to overcome to get the aircraft into production. It really seems that the Russians are still focused on raw performance and agility instead of reduced RCS and improved sensors.

What make you think that Russian designers and industry ignored improvements on sensors and their integration??? Actually, they are working on new AESA radars, new IRST and their own electro-optical targeting system (EOTS's analog) for PAK-FA program.
Heavily reduced RCS is also clearly inherent in T-50 design. Many people are confused with a "non so stealthy" look of first flying prototype . They just ignore the facts, that serial production PAK-FA will got "full package" of stealth features, such as new "stealthy" engines with flat nozzles, frameless canopy, radar absorbent coatings etc.

As for F-35 versus T-50 (this topic title), there're a lot of questions:

How F-35 will deal with a high power and large apperture T-50's radar(s)?

Will F-35 be able to detect VLO fighter jets (PAK-FA) with its tiny APG-81 radar at long-enough range to get "first look - first shot"?

Will F-35 be able to be agile enough to withstand air combat against highly agile and faster T-50?

etc.

Quote:

If western aircraft can see you and kill/evade you at will, you arent even in the same game.

It' obvious fact, that Russian designers and military understand importance of BVR capaibilities (early detection, target engagement at long range etc.).
At least, there're no signs that they are care only about agility and kinematic performance, and absolutely don't care about beyond-visual-range capabilities.
Thats why engineers and manufacturers who work on PAK-FA program are focused not only on aerodynamics and maneuverability, but also on AESA-radars, IRST/sensors intergration and new generation of air-air missiles.

Quote:

You are right, they won't ever compete for customers (at least the F-22 and T-50), but from all the reports that have come out in the past few months it seems similar to a 15SE instead of a true 5th Gen.

These "reports" are full of bullshit.
T-50 has nothing to do in concept with a 15SE. "Slient Eagle" still based on 40-years old 4th-generation airframe with some minor improvements to make it more "stealthier".
While T-50 has a completely new airframe and does not ressemble 4th generation at all. The T-50's planform, wings shape, control surfaces, materials etc. were developed with a stealth(VLO) as primary requirement in mind.
it so absurdly to put PAK-FA(T-50), which should be truly 5th generation fighter jet(under its program requirements), into the category of "stealthy 4+ generation" (F-15SE, F-18E).

20 years ago, everyone considers that an Mig-29 is better than an F-16.
but in the war, an F-16 alwayas wins.

wrightwing wrote:

It's not gonna cruise at M2+ with the current engines, and it's doubtful if the 5G engines will provide that capability either.

I didn't say that it certainly would, and of course, I meant the final product, not the prototype. I'm just saying that I don't think the PAK-FA will only be good for airshows. Even if the Flanker spends a lot of time doing the Cobra in front of a public audience, it doesn't mean that it can't track and kill something 30 miles away.

primorsky wrote:

Heavily reduced RCS is also clearly inherent in T-50 design. Many people are confused with a "non so stealthy" look of first flying prototype . They just ignore the facts, that serial production PAK-FA will got "full package" of stealth features, such as new "stealthy" engines with flat nozzles, frameless canopy, radar absorbent coatings etc.

Well, I think some people just have a "wait and see" stance. I'm hesitant to guess what the final PAK-FA will be, but I look forward to seeing it.

Quote:

As for F-35 versus T-50 (this topic title), there're a lot of questions:

How F-35 will deal with a high power and large apperture T-50's radar(s)?

Will F-35 be able to detect VLO fighter jets (PAK-FA) with its tiny APG-81 radar at long-enough range to get "first look - first shot"?

Will F-35 be able to be agile enough to withstand air combat against highly agile and faster T-50?

Same applies to the PAK. Can Sukhoi get its RCS as low as the F-35? And is its radar as LPI as the F-35's?

The F-35 will certainly be agile, however it wouldn't surprise me if the PAK-FA could out maneuver it. Against the T-50, the F-35 will have to rely on stealth.

Quote:

These "reports" are full of bullshit.
T-50 has nothing to do in concept with a 15SE. "Slient Eagle" still based on 40-years old 4th-generation airframe with some minor improvements to make it more "stealthier".
While T-50 has a completely new airframe and does not ressemble 4th generation at all. The T-50's planform, wings shape, control surfaces, materials etc. were developed with a stealth(VLO) as primary requirement in mind.
it so absurdly to put PAK-FA(T-50), which should be truly 5th generation fighter jet(under its program requirements), into the category of "stealthy 4+ generation" (F-15SE, F-18E).

I agree on this. Even in prototype form, I think the PAK-FA would give an Eagle a run for its money. Give it the real engines, AESA, and a lower RCS all aspect/multi aspect and it will kill any Eagle.

Forum: F-35 versus XYZ

T-50 and F-35