F-35 vs Su-30/35

But why would the aircraft with (highly likely) world's most advanced onboard EW need to carry another podded self-defense jammer?

I don't know ask them:

download/file.php?id=18810&mode=view

last sentence in on that photo.

Btw mini pod could only be little bigger then pylon on which gun pod is mounted, forward and rearward it could have two DIRCM and in on sides wvr missiles, no space for any bigger jammer though.

^Come on now, that's not an ASPJ pod, it's a multi-mission pod being advertised as able to carry a variety of payloads of which a jammer is just one

Also, it's likely meant as a Growler-ish ability; i.e. stand-off jamming for others, not to protect itself. Apples and oranges, milosh.
BTW, this is a proposal by a supplier, not something the program itself/JPO is actively looking at.

Did I wrote self protection jammer ?!? Nope I wrote mini jammer, I am sure there is reason to pack additional jammer, never too much jammers or jam.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVRjvhnZOXA


Okey just forget I mentioned micro jammer, one simple pod with for two AIM-9 class missiles.

F-35 normally takes 18400 lbs fuel at stage show engine start. In terms of A/B duration, that is more than the full fuel load of Su-27/35.

The Su-27 carries 20,700 lbs, the Su-35 carries 25,400 lbs at full load. There are many claims that the Flanker carries far less than this at an airshow but I have never seen any official statement that this is the case.

At airshows Su-27 has fuselage tanks at half full and wing tanks empty. Fuselage tanks is 56% of total internal fuel, I think.

I really find nonsense comparing F-35A with any other fighter in WVR mode. F-35A in stealth configuration doesn't carry any wvr missiles, and demo flights it fly in stealth configuration without two pylons and two AIM-9X.

The F-35 is still stealthier than other aircraft with its tiny slanted ram-treated IR pylons and missiles (probably around 0.05 sq m RCS) and the Amraam itself can be fired WVR at only just a couple of miles out with a much higher pK. Strawman argument !

Exactly. AMRAAM can be used at 2km.

I really find nonsense comparing F-35A with any other fighter in WVR mode. F-35A in stealth configuration doesn't carry any wvr missiles, and demo flights it fly in stealth configuration without two pylons and two AIM-9X.

The F-35 is still stealthier than other aircraft with its tiny slanted ram-treated IR pylons and missiles (probably around 0.05 sq m RCS) and the Amraam itself can be fired WVR at only just a couple of miles out with a much higher pK. Strawman argument !

Precisely!

Here, from F-16.net itself (the AIM-120 AMRAAM entry/article):
http://www.f-16.net/f-16_armament_article3.html

The AIM-120 AMRAAM (Advanced Medium Range Air to Air Missile) is a high-supersonic, day/night/all weather Beyond Visual Range (BVR), fire-and-forget air-to-air missile. It has a high-explosive warhead and relies on active radar homing for the final stages of flight, being launched on inertial mid-course guidance without the need for the fighter to keep the target illuminated. Its capabilities include look-down, shoot-down, multiple launches against multiple targets, and intercepts at very short range in dogfight situations

In the link below (I don't know if it's reliable enough so I'll let you be the judge of that):
http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-120.html

It says:

minimum range is said to be 2 km (2200 yds)

That's around 1.08 nautical miles. If that's not "dogfight enough" then I wonder what else would be...

Did I wrote self protection jammer ?!? Nope I wrote mini jammer, I am sure there is reason to pack additional jammer, never too much jammers or jam.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVRjvhnZOXA


Okey just forget I mentioned micro jammer, one simple pod with for two AIM-9 class missiles.

I don't think mini-jammer (I still don't understand what that is if not what the F-35 already carries???) makes much sense here; either use your in-built ones or eventually make a EF-35 with an NGJ fitted. The amount of interest by any of the current buyers on these pods is telling so far.
What I can see is maybe a small -9X carrier like you say. Still I see no problem using a -120D in a dogfight as IIRC it can also be datalinked for some sort of HOBS shot.
Case in point:

Firing AIM-120 from F-35 belly during tight dogfights?!?

Did F-35 ever did something like this with AIM-120:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RM5pCgy2jiY

Btw why Americans bother to make sidebays for F-22, why Russians developed bumpy pods, why Chinese design missile rail for J-20 so it can carry wvr missile externally during wvr combat, when all you need is to fire BVR missile from belly door during tight turnings, what stupid people were folks in LM in 1980s, in Sukhoi and Chengdu in 2000s.

And to be clear, I was writing about F-35 demos which don't have nothing with dogfight capable F-35. Dogfight capable F-35 is one with AIM-9X. In demo shows I didn't saw it fly with pylons and AIM-9.

Su-35 for while is doing demos with two R-73. F-22 demo configuration is same as F-22 with two AIM-9. Su-57 same deal, J-20 same.

Firing AIM-120 from F-35 belly during tight dogfights?!?

Did F-35 ever did something like this with AIM-120:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RM5pCgy2jiY

And in how many dogfights (specially those that ended up in kills) were missiles fired from an upside-down position during tight dogfights?!?!?

Something tells me that it was probably close to if not outright, ZERO.

Btw why LM bother to make sidebays for F-22, why Russians developed that bumpy pod, why Chinese design missile rail for J-20 so it can carry wvr missile externally during wvr combat, when all you need is to fire BVR missile from belly door during tight turnings, what stupid people were folks in LM in 1980s, in Sukhoi and Chengdu in 2000s.

Well, for instance in the case of the Russians and Chinese perhaps their medium-range missiles aren't nearly as good as an AMRAAM (specially later models) in very close range so they probably need to complement with close-range/WVR range missiles to compensate for this.
Regarding the F-22, remember that this aircraft's origins came in the 1980's from the ATF program so the same limitation as above also applied (the AMRAAM still didn't exist and it was in development stage). Even when the YF-22 prototype (which had the Sidewinder side-bays) first flew (in 1990) the AMRAAM wasn't still introduced in service (which happened in 1991).

And to be clear, I was writing about F-35 demos which don't have nothing with dogfight capable F-35. Dogfight capable F-35 is one with AIM-9X. In demo shows I didn't saw it fly with pylons and AIM-9.

Su-35 for while is doing demos with two R-73. F-22 demo configuration is same as F-22 with two AIM-9. Su-57 same deal, J-20 same.

Jezz get over it and for f*cking Christ sake accept that the AMRAAM is capable of engaging enemy aircraft in dogfights - I already provided you the evidence of this!
You may argue that the AMRAAM may not be as good as one of the most advanced dedicated short-range/WVR missiles such as the AIM-9X for example in certain/some dogfight situations and perhaps rightly so but saying that the F-35 armed with AMRAAM's isn't dogfight capable is plain ridiculous and totally and completely wrong!

Firing AIM-120 from F-35 belly during tight dogfights?!?

Did F-35 ever did something like this with AIM-120:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RM5pCgy2jiY

Btw why Americans bother to make sidebays for F-22, why Russians developed bumpy pods, why Chinese design missile rail for J-20 so it can carry wvr missile externally during wvr combat, when all you need is to fire BVR missile from belly door during tight turnings, what stupid people were folks in LM in 1980s, in Sukhoi and Chengdu in 2000s.

And to be clear, I was writing about F-35 demos which don't have nothing with dogfight capable F-35. Dogfight capable F-35 is one with AIM-9X. In demo shows I didn't saw it fly with pylons and AIM-9.

Su-35 for while is doing demos with two R-73. F-22 demo configuration is same as F-22 with two AIM-9. Su-57 same deal, J-20 same.

F-35s have launched AIM-9 and AIM-120, throughout the entire flight envelope (i.e. high G, high AoA, inverted/rolling, etc...). They don't have to be flying upright and level, to fire.

F-35s have launched AIM-9 and AIM-120, throughout the entire flight envelope (i.e. high G, high AoA, inverted/rolling, etc...). They don't have to be flying upright and level, to fire.

Rebuttal: Post the video or it never happened... just Amerikanski propoganda...

I think you are terrible at maths.

F-35 has 23% less thrust than Su-27 (192 KN vs 250 KN), however, its empty weight is also 23% less than a Su-27 (13 ton vs 17 ton). So they have almost the same T/W ratio if loaded with the same fuel fraction (fuel fraction = fuel weight / flying weight).

PS: AL-41F is not, and will never be fitted to Su-27 variants.

Nope you are terrible informed

https://www.ruaviation.com/news/2011/12/23/699/?h

Su-27SM because of stronger airframe is heavier (17tons) so it got engine upgrade also, there is AL-31F M1 in Su-27SM3. M1 have 135kN thrust, so spec. thust is 15.9N/kg

Btw similar spec. thrust Su-35 have (empty weight ~18tons, 284kN thrust).

Su-27SM3 will get AL-41 becuase oldest Su-27SM3 are 9years old and with AL-31F derivative service life of ~1200h olderst SM3 are will soon need new engine and AL-41 is only logical choice. It cost noticeable more but have much better service life, better thrust and lower fuel consumption. Btw oldest Su-30SM already getting AL-41, RuAF recieve first Su-30SM in 2011 but they clocked more hours two seaters longer mission durations plus training missions.

So when Su-27SM3 get AL-41, spec. thrust will be 16.7N/kg

About F-35A.

I really find nonsense comparing F-35A with any other fighter in WVR mode. F-35A in stealth configuration doesn't carry any wvr missiles, and demo flights it fly in stealth configuration without two pylons and two AIM-9X.

If you look what retired F-18 pilot said in talk show with Sprey, it is noticeable difference between naked plane and plane with just couple of empty pylons. Su-27SM3 or Su-35 naked or with two wvr missiles are same in fact wingtip missiles can even reduce drag.

This is why LM need to be pressure to develop Su-57 like wing pods for F-35. I wouldn't be surprise they in fact have smaller impact on plane performance then this:
https://static.businessinsider.com/imag ... /image.jpg

If there is some problem adding wing pod they could develop small belly pod (something like mini gun pod for B and C) which can carry two wvr missiles and DIRCM plus micro radar jammer.

Without stealth pods for wvr missiles it is really irrelevant what F-35A can show in demos when it fly in stealth configuration.

Go check the Sukhoi website.

Su-27 single seater with with AL-31F already weights more than 17000 kg empty:

And www.ruaviation.com/news is not reliable source for scientific data. Data from office website, technical papers, flight manuals and test reports count.

When you have to fire an AIM-120 at 9G? ? ?

You messed something up extremely bad a few minutes before your pulled the trigger.

F-35s have launched AIM-9 and AIM-120, throughout the entire flight envelope (i.e. high G, high AoA, inverted/rolling, etc...). They don't have to be flying upright and level, to fire.

Rebuttal: Post the video or it never happened... just Amerikanski propoganda...

Unfortunately, the overwhelming majority of SDD testing isn't on youtube, for the scoffers to review.

When you have to fire an AIM-120 at 9G? ? ?

You messed something up extremely bad a few minutes before your pulled the trigger.

Absolutely. One thing some folks here are forgetting, is that the beauty of HOBS missiles, is that it's not necessary.

I know AIM-120 can be used in wvr, but F-35 doesn't fire AIM-120 from rail but from belly in stealth configuration and I am sure any pilot here if he is honest will say that is much less desired then rail AIM-9 or even rail AIM-120.

Also AIM-120 have some not small problems in WVR combat, its G limit is noticeable smaller then AIM-9X and it is lot faster which isn't something you really want in WVR combat. Interesting explantion for guy which say is ex F-15 pilot about AIM-7 and AIM-120 combo:

There are several reasons that a mix of AIM-7s and AMRAAMs was preferable (more so in the F-15C). Some can be discussed here, others cannot. First, the AIM-7 is a much larger weapon with a bigger warhead. If I had to down a larger aircraft, I might choose it over the smaller AIM-120. Also, due to its slow acceleration compared with the AMRAAM, the sparrow was surprising capable in certain types of turning engagements. When stuck in lag with your nose well behind the tail of an adversary but with a radar lock, the AIM-7 was the weapon of choice.

https://www.pprune.org/7014710-post11.html

Forum members which know lot more about what that guy wrote could explain is that true, I don't see why it isn't especially if we know Soviets decide to use grid fins for R-77 to counter problem with turning while missile fly very fast.

@gta4

You can find on many sites info about Su-27SM3 and AL-31F M1 engines. That old Sukhoi data is probable for Su-27SM, which have AL-31F.

And AL-31F M1 is history because Su-30SM (RuAF got them in same year as Su-27SM3) are getting AL-41 upgrade. AL-31F M1 is more powerful AL-31F but still AL-31F, its service life is 15% longer which is lot less then AL-41, and it use more fuel.