- Posts: 37
- Joined: 13 Jan 2006, 11:55
armedupdate wrote:How outgunned are 4th Generation Fighters facing the Russian PAK FA and Chinese J-20 and J-31? India for example may have a huge gap against future Chinese Stealth fighters. France also has no stealth fighters in their arsenal.
PAK FA I believe has a RCS only 0.1m2 decrease I believe which is not a lot compared to the F-22. Rafale and Eurofighter and Super Hornet I believe have a RCS around that, however they are greatly effected by their internal carry increasing that RCS.
The J-20 will use the dual pulse PL-15 and the Russians have a duel pulse R-77M. Both France and India will get he Meteor so they will have a missile able to stick up just as well.
How do avionics compare? I believe the Eurofighter, Rafale, and Super Hornet all use PowerPC processors, with the SH using a PowerPC G4 chip(same gen as F-35). PAK FA and J-20 are larger and have bigger radar arrays however, not sure if they are more powerful in terms of general technology and computing power. PAK FA can use it's own radar to jam and has a broadband datalink. J-20 I am not too sure. Most 4th gen NATO aircraft lack instantaneous datalinks now, however the Gripen I believe will getting the TIDLS, the Rafale with TRAGEDAC, and the SH with some sort of multi-ship sensor fusion. The Russian still lack IIR missiles making them vulrable to a WVR fight.
In the end, the other 4th Gens may stand a chance. However IMO the stealth fighters have a advantage for they are simply faster and not carrying anything externally.
Assuming both sides are able to detect eachother at lets say 30 km, the PAK FA and J-20 can launch their missiles first, and more time guiding it for enemy active radar homing missiles will need more time finding it. The 4th Gens have to launch, disengage quicker to break lock.
You are dreaming: pak-fa rcs could reach 0,5 if properly assembled, using composites were planned (while current prototypes use titanium), flat head rivets instead of current round ones, and new air intakes blockers, as Indian military claims: at the moment russian themselves say that pak fa rcs i s very high as yuo can read here "“The engine for the T-50 was significantly upgraded from the original models, incorporating the latest control system, compressors, etc. Nevertheless, it still falls short of the 5th generation model, and is very noticeable on radar screens,” said the expert." https://rbth.com/defence/2016/11/25/new ... aft_651123 in Eurocanrads rcs in air to air rcs is around 0,3; considering new repositioning antenna for typhoon AESA and meteor, I would say pak fa vs typhoon tranche 3 does not stand a chance. Full stop. Pak fa project would only drain resource to keep su-27 and su-30 operative.Full stop. Consider also that pak fa thermal signatur eis gigantic, not using any visible maskig tecnicque. For example old al31f fuel consumption is 0,54 km per litre, while more recent al41f (used on su35 and current pak fa) is 0,19km per litre: russian get more thrust with thiier more recent engine, still not enpugh to grant supercruise, but fuel consuption get horrible, that indicates also an inherent high thermal signature.They mus t do miracles with new engine. Furthermore consider that EJ200 (typhoon engine)has born with 30% grow potential and even current batch is so reliable that pilots has and electronic key on two steps: step 1 10% more dry and post combustion power, step 2 25% more thurst. Pilots are alllowed to enable this military power just in real war scenario: as you can imagine already very good supercruise capabilities of typhoon would be significantly augmented. No other military plane has this electronic key flexibility, granted by legendary EJ200 efficiency. Both rafale and eurofighters are not stealth but use S-ducts ,while pak-fa use air intakes blocker like on f18, a much more primitive reducing rcs tecnique (f22 and f35 use S-ducts); furthermore pak fa air intake s are gigantic and very distant from each other; so it could reach an 0,5 rcs, if engineered from scratch, as Indian autorites say and russian themselves admit rcs is very high. So you are dreaming about an 0,1 rcs. Not consodering all other problems...Furthermore consider thatonce you get locked by a meteor chance to survive are very low, 5 times lower then with amraam. Russian R77, altough scarce in numbers, is compared to old sparrow for efficiency: russian should invest in a decent bvr missile, if they dont want their su-35 get shot down by f16 block 40 with amraam.