F-16.net

Enthusiast Joined: Mar 21, 2008 Posts: 59 Status: Offline

So it could not only cancel out incoming radar but also out bound. Running silent would be the preferred operational usage, plasma would cancel out the radome, but what about the rest of the AC. In silent running the IRST/LRF or AWACS would be used. It seems this is a minor stealth application, not all-aspect. The other plasma application of reducing drag sounds interesting. Was the stealth or the drag reduction the primary application with the other as a plus?

F-16.net Sponsor

Enthusiast Joined: Jan 21, 2008 Posts: 52 Status: Offline

Plasma stealth is like saying you made a really quiet lightbulb. Sure, you can't hear it, but even if you can get that much energy, it'll be rediculously easy to detect. The only thing this type of emission is good for is for drag reduction at a shock front. Even so, probably takes way more power than is practical.

I think Russia has come up with some amazing aircraft, but if they're so much superior to the F-22, why does the Pak-FA concept (if that's at all indicative) look nearly exactly like it?

Enthusiast Joined: Mar 27, 2008 Posts: 43 Status: Offline

Enthusiast Joined: Mar 27, 2008 Posts: 43 Status: Offline

AeroG33k wrote:

Plasma stealth is like saying you made a really quiet lightbulb. Sure, you can't hear it, but even if you can get that much energy, it'll be rediculously easy to detect. The only thing this type of emission is good for is for drag reduction at a shock front. Even so, probably takes way more power than is practical.

I think Russia has come up with some amazing aircraft, but if they're so much superior to the F-22, why does the Pak-FA concept (if that's at all indicative) look nearly exactly like it?

one russian constructor explained like this:if some projects,in this hand an aircraft,come to similar looks,that means we have both found same solution for the problem,it happened in past, American B1 bomber looks similar to Tu160,also MiG19 looks like american fighter(i cant remember name)... Wink

While I love the SU-47 Berkut, it has not shown much of what it can do. The display it has put on in its air show(s) lacked any major maneuverability that MiG-29 and Flanker types have shown since first being shown to the west. It didn't even have its intended thrust vectoring engines installed yet, if I am not mistaken. Sadly, it has only seen hangar time since then- with SU-37 still only demonstrating mostly and limited production of SU-35s for the Russian Federation alone.

The key thing though is this:

You can have the greatest plane in the world, but it all means nothing compared to who is flying it. A lot of countries don't have the resources to give their pilots enough flying time and ACM/strike training- and when it comes time to do it for real, it shows. Very fast.

Reminds me of a line from a Crosby, Stills and Nash song:

"Traveling twice the speed of sound, it's easy to get burned."

Two Cents

Enthusiast Joined: Jul 03, 2007 Posts: 97 Status: Offline

Has this turned into thread on Russian airplane cartoons? I thought their CG animation would be better...

Enthusiast Joined: Mar 24, 2007 Posts: 62 Status: Offline

JetTest wrote:

Has this turned into thread on Russian airplane cartoons? I thought their CG animation would be better...

Cartoon or "Paper" airplanes are about the only thing that Su-27 pilot has to talk about in a forum for 5th gen fighters Laughing

Enthusiast Joined: Mar 21, 2008 Posts: 59 Status: Offline

I have a theory that i have held since the beginning of the stealth debate, remember when the rumors were flying, about black jets flying around Groom Lake, Nevada. It occurred to me that two adversaries with stealth jets would be thrown back to the pre WW2 era of the Mk1 sensor. With the pilots head on a swivel searching the skies for a bogey, who sees who first and which pilot is the most skilled in the merge of the fur-ball.

Remember the Brits comment about having the F-22 in his sights but could not get a lock-on. Don't forget our experience in Vietnam when we took the guns off the F-4, only to find out the missiles were hit or miss at best. Then to wind up in a dogfight with a very nimble Mig-17/19 and we started the top gun school to re-teach those skills.

Not like the F-22 and any adversary will ever get into the merge. But until the day comes when we have two stealth's face-off, the F-22 is far superior to anything out there.

Enthusiast Joined: Mar 27, 2008 Posts: 43 Status: Offline

i just noticed how F18 hornet and Yak130 are similar...only difference is one tail

More like the LERX area and intakes of the SU-47 Berkut- without the canards, of course.

Oh, MiG-19 looks like the F-100 Super Sabre somewhat, MiG-25 and the RA-5 Vigilante, SU-24 and the F-111 Ardvaark, SU-25 and the Northrop A-9(remember that one, guys?). The evolution of aerodynamics nowadays can make anything seem similar and/or copied if you look hard enough.

Maybe that means the F-35 is somewhat a copy of the Yak-141 Freestyle? Or maybe not. Wink

Enthusiast Joined: Mar 27, 2008 Posts: 43 Status: Offline

Yak141 looks similar to MiG31....i mean at least this part where air enters...

biffbutkus wrote:

StolichnayaStrafer wrote:

Archers and Adders certainly are NOT obsolete missiles.

And I sure wouldn't want to underestimate the capabilities of the Russian Federation these days. They seem to have been making a lot of changes lately. Idea

Personally, I would much rather be their allies- then maybe our pilots would get to play with more of the Russian Federation's pilots in training sessions...

talk about a Super Red Flag! Cool

The Archer is good...the Adder is supposedly not that great with unstatisfactory kinematic performance...that is just what I have read in the past so obviously it is a matter of opinion supported (admittedly) by little facts. The Alamo doesn't look too hot either...how many kills versus firings in Africa???? Embarassed

On paper it's weight, range and guidance systems look 2nd class really.

I agree.

And the changes tolichnayaStrafer referrs to are more on the organization and funding side than actual manufacture and service entry of aircraft. With 24 or so SU-27SM's and most of the export costumers complaining they got refurbished old airframes in place of new, I wouldnt write home about it just yet.

Su-27 What nation's flag is that?

The symbol on the front?

And what is wrong with the guy in the middle? What are the other two doing to him???

What's up with the wrist of the guy on the far right apparent to us? Is he hoping to get in the middle????

Kind of get sea sick trying to read Su27 pilots posts...... anyone else feel'in sick Poke

Enthusiast Joined: Oct 27, 2004 Posts: 44

F16guy wrote:

Kind of get sea sick trying to read Su27 pilots posts...... anyone else feel'in sick Poke

I thought I was the only one! I get spasms when trying to read his posts with that sig on the bottom.

Newbie Joined: Jan 23, 2008 Posts: 1 Status: Offline

i only read this forum as i don't know enough about aircraft to really contribute without wasting space but i feel i must also voice my opinion about that awful forum signiture of SU-27 pilot, i'm not bothered about the content of his posts, there kind of amusing in a nice way but please tone down the awful animated smiley sig, thanks.

F-16.net

Forum: F-22A Raptor

F-22A / EF-2000 / Rafale versus Su-35BM