F-15 vs MiG-29

Military aircraft - Post cold war aircraft, including for example B-2, Gripen, F-18E/F Super Hornet, Rafale, and Typhoon.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 7665
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post18 Jun 2018, 02:44

Thanks for the video. Glad to know Dozer left the AF on his own terms and is enjoying civilian life. I understand state senators also get well compensated so good for him and his family.
Last edited by popcorn on 18 Jun 2018, 11:16, edited 1 time in total.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline

h-bomb

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 299
  • Joined: 26 Apr 2009, 20:07
  • Location: South Central USA

Unread post18 Jun 2018, 09:31

I liked the part about Paul "Max" Moga getting mad at him claiming for being the first Raptor Demo Pilot.
Online

marsavian

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1121
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2018, 21:55

Unread post18 Jun 2018, 10:40

Awesome first hand report of the F-22 prowess particularly the ease with which it can reach Mach 2+ at altitude and use that effectively in a combat setting.
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 7665
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post18 Jun 2018, 11:22

Network-enabled sensor fusion in 5gens should be like NCTR magic compared to what Dozer had on his Eagle but safe to say that the fog of war will always be a factor to contend with.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline

zero-one

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2010
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2013, 16:19
  • Location: New Jersey

Unread post18 Jun 2018, 15:39

notice that he mentions that the F-22's combination of Stealth, SA and Kinematics gives them the ability to have offensive Stealth. he said The F-117 was defensive stealth because it can't climb, can't turn, can't run.

to me this is a big problem for proposals of 6th gen platforms that are big sluggish planes with lots of fuel, lots of missiles, big sensors, big networks and data sharing capabilities but can't do the traditional fighter plane stuff.
Offline
User avatar

geforcerfx

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 836
  • Joined: 10 Feb 2014, 02:46

Unread post19 Jun 2018, 00:35

zero-one wrote:notice that he mentions that the F-22's combination of Stealth, SA and Kinematics gives them the ability to have offensive Stealth. he said The F-117 was defensive stealth because it can't climb, can't turn, can't run.

to me this is a big problem for proposals of 6th gen platforms that are big sluggish planes with lots of fuel, lots of missiles, big sensors, big networks and data sharing capabilities but can't do the traditional fighter plane stuff.

The biggest disadvantage the F-117 had was no SA, that's the F-35's and F-22(and the B-2)'s Ace card, they know 90% of what's going on around them and pilot is being told where he can and can't go as far as being spotted. No one has said a 6th gen won't be supersonic, have a good climb time, all they have said is they want a large fuel load capability and more weapons which means bigger plane. The US has already shown in the F119 and F135 engines we have the engine tech to build larger fighters. It may not be a F-22 with no gas, but if it's still fast and high with even better SA and stealth good luck getting it.
Offline

zero-one

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2010
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2013, 16:19
  • Location: New Jersey

Unread post19 Jun 2018, 09:00

geforcerfx wrote:The biggest disadvantage the F-117 had was no SA, that's the F-35's and F-22(and the B-2)'s Ace card, they know 90% of what's going on around them and pilot is being told where he can and can't go as far as being spotted. No one has said a 6th gen won't be supersonic, have a good climb time, all they have said is they want a large fuel load capability and more weapons which means bigger plane. The US has already shown in the F119 and F135 engines we have the engine tech to build larger fighters. It may not be a F-22 with no gas, but if it's still fast and high with even better SA and stealth good luck getting it.


See I agree with all of that, but Dozer wasn't the only one, Paul Metz said the same thing with the effect of what sets the F-22 apart from previous generation is that it combined Stealth with traditional fighter characteristics.

I'm not saying Kinematics is more important than S.A. or even Stealth. All I'm saying is, these guys pointed out that having all 3 on the F-22 made the difference.

Now what I'm worried about is the recent studies that are going around that are suggesting we forgo Kinematics because we need more range.

I'm sure they can point out how recent air-air engagements against 3rd world adversaries have proven that kinematics have become less and less relevant in today's network centric environment
Offline

garrya

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 707
  • Joined: 25 Dec 2015, 12:43

Unread post19 Jun 2018, 09:40

zero-one wrote:to me this is a big problem for proposals of 6th gen platforms that are big sluggish planes with lots of fuel, lots of missiles, big sensors, big networks and data sharing capabilities but can't do the traditional fighter plane stuff.

But why should they?
SAM become more and more potent, nowadays many medium range SAM can shot down ballistic missiles, so making fighter fly faster could certainly be counterproductive ( bigger signature, less reaction time, more expensive, shorter range).
For agility, laser weapons will probably come online in 10-15 years, so even less motivation to make your fighter super maneuver
Offline

zero-one

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2010
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2013, 16:19
  • Location: New Jersey

Unread post19 Jun 2018, 11:42

garrya wrote:But why should they?
SAM become more and more potent, nowadays many medium range SAM can shot down ballistic missiles, so making fighter fly faster could certainly be counterproductive ( bigger signature, less reaction time, more expensive, shorter range).
For agility, laser weapons will probably come online in 10-15 years, so even less motivation to make your fighter super maneuver


Well heres my take.
I saw a video of a naval weapons expert say that today there is a new sonar technology that allows them to detect any submarine no matter how silent. But does this mean we can go back to making loud submarines? of course not.

Same logic, as long as we are using moving objects like missiles to hit moving targets like planes, the nature of their movement will always affect the outcome.

So a sluggish plane with laser defenses will always be easier to hit than a nimble plane with laser defenses.
Offline

vilters

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 992
  • Joined: 28 Sep 2009, 00:16

Unread post19 Jun 2018, 14:00

Don't concentrate too much on the "air" war.
Look at ALL, and I mean ALL recent and current conflicts that are happening right NOW under our noses. ..…
How many of our opponents have an "air force"?

NONE ! ! ! ! Absolutely NONE have ANYTHING flyable that could be a tread.


Trucks, Jeeps, and a mule with a manpad or 2. That's it guys.
That are the enemies we are fighting.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Back to the subject of the treat. F-15 versus Mig-29?
No competition : One is combat proven and the other flies air shows.
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3114
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post19 Jun 2018, 16:42

Where has anyone suggested that the follow on to the F-22, will be sluggish, and lacking in kinematic performance?
Offline

zero-one

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2010
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2013, 16:19
  • Location: New Jersey

Unread post19 Jun 2018, 17:01

wrightwing wrote:Where has anyone suggested that the follow on to the F-22, will be sluggish, and lacking in kinematic performance?


https://breakingdefense.com/2015/04/sho ... sba-study/
America’s next war plane may look much more like a stealthy long-range bomber than a sleek, fast and maneuverable fighter.
“The increased importance of electronic sensors, signature reduction, RF [radio frequency] and IR [infra-red] countermeasures and robust LOS networks in building dominant SA [situational awareness], and the potential reduced tactical utility of high speed and maneuverability could mean that, for the first time, the aerial combat lethality of large combat aircraft may be competitive or even superior to more traditional fighter aircraft designs emphasizing speed and maneuverability,” the study says..


What I find disturbing about this study is that it is firmly anchored on experiences against far inferior opponents that did not have the best technology offered by adversaries.

In RedFlag 17-1, Red air was said to have challenged Blue air with as many advanced threats as possible and as a result the F-35 was subjected to WVR combat multiple times, 7 of which it lost.
Offline

charlielima223

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 963
  • Joined: 12 Jan 2014, 19:26

Unread post19 Jun 2018, 19:13

A more perplexing question is how much more kinematic performance in terms of maneuverability do you really need in a hypothetical 6th gen fighter platform? It would seem that we've already reached the pinnacle of what physics allows us to do unless there is some kind of super secret device in an unnamed unknown facility that can create a bubble of mass free space allowing a vehicle to literally turn on a dime. As retired USMC Lt. Col "Chip" Burke has contended that kinematic performance is secondary to true capability (SA, Networking, stealth, ect)
Offline

vilters

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 992
  • Joined: 28 Sep 2009, 00:16

Unread post19 Jun 2018, 20:55

More and more the question becomes :

How much more kinematic energy can the pilot handle over a 4 -8 hr mission? ? ?

Most A/C can get to and under certain conditions sustain the magic "9G", but the weak spot becomes the driver...…..

We are getting into the pilots limits if we take this any further.
Offline

garrya

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 707
  • Joined: 25 Dec 2015, 12:43

Unread post19 Jun 2018, 21:07

zero-one wrote:Well heres my take.
I saw a video of a naval weapons expert say that today there is a new sonar technology that allows them to detect any submarine no matter how silent. But does this mean we can go back to making loud submarines? of course not.
.

In a fictional world with infinite money, you can make an aircraft that is fastest, most maneuvrable, most stealthy with infinite combat radius, can take off vertically and also extremely cheap. But in reality, all designs are the matter of trade off, you sacrifice an advantage in certain aspect to gain an advantage in another. That how it works. For your example: consider this, will the noisier submarine have an advantage where the silent submarine doesn't? such as longer weapon range, much better speed..?
Anyway, it is a mistaken assumption that new generation of aircraft will be better than the previous one in all aspects. That is wrong. For example: is the F-22 as heavily armored as P-47 ? Can B-2 fly faster than B-58?.

zero-one wrote:Same logic, as long as we are using moving objects like missiles to hit moving targets like planes, the nature of their movement will always affect the outcome.
So a sluggish plane with laser defenses will always be easier to hit than a nimble plane with laser defenses

Big sluggish plane can often carry more powerful laser, and they likely can carry more weapons too.
If super maneuverable isn't a requirement then the aircraft can get rid of many control surfaces and therefore stealthier.


zero-one wrote:What I find disturbing about this study is that it is firmly anchored on experiences against far inferior opponents that did not have the best technology offered by adversaries.In RedFlag 17-1, Red air was said to have challenged Blue air with as many advanced threats as possible and as a result the F-35 was subjected to WVR combat multiple times, 7 of which it lost.

On the contrary, i would say the study assumes adversaries has the best tech available, otherwise, stealth won't be needed
.I highly doubt that better kinematic is really the answer against high-end adversary, moreover, others questions need to be answered.
_ Is it worth having a more maneuver aircraft that is twice as expensive?
_ What would some extra kinematic do if your range is much shorter and you can't reach target location?
Next

Return to Modern Military Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests