Can F-22A defeat the russian T-50

Anything goes, as long as it is about the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor

Which is better?

The russian T-50
2
4%
or F-22A
48
96%
 
Total votes : 50

  • Author
  • Message
Offline

delvo

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 546
  • Joined: 15 Aug 2011, 04:06

Unread post27 Oct 2011, 01:05

What was wrong with Sukhoi 47?
Offline

tacf-x

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 446
  • Joined: 17 Sep 2011, 02:25
  • Location: Champaign, Illinois

Unread post27 Oct 2011, 01:17

It used a radical design that apparently was not worth pursuing as the Russkies never tried it again and the fact that I guess they didn't want to have to reenforce the wings so much that the moments on the airfoils didn't twist the wings out of the roots. Ever since the Cold War ended the Russians have been all talk and no bite. They claim to have R-77Ms which can kill from 100 miles away but will THOSE enter production? How many of those do they have operationally? How good are their regular R-77's? I'd be surprised if the T-50 actually does enter service in 2015 without delays and even so it will have been made in quantities that would make our F-22s seem "expendable."
Offline

discofishing

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1373
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2008, 22:15
  • Location: USA

Unread post27 Oct 2011, 01:41

Man, if I'm in a TA-50, I'm going to stay at the highest altitude possible with a "working" oxygen generation system. F-22's will have to stay down lower so their pilots don't pass out. I can vulture them from there. Reality dictates the F-22 OBOGS will be fixed and fully FMC at some point soon.
Offline

shep1978

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1395
  • Joined: 04 Apr 2009, 16:00
  • Location: UK

Unread post27 Oct 2011, 08:11

delvo wrote:What was wrong with Sukhoi 47?


A better question would be what was right with it.

But the point I was making was that when the Su-47 was first shown many of the professional Russian aerospace journalists (and I think air force commanders) were touting it as the F-22 killer the world had been waiting for. Of course it never was. I might go to the Internet Wayback Machine later and see if I can pull up some of the old articles on it. If someone tells you it was only ever meant to be an experimental aircraft they're trying to revise history.
Offline

mixelflick

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 368
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post27 Oct 2011, 15:20

I don't think there's any question the F-22 is capable, of defeating the T-50. While that holds true, I think the T-50's basic airframe has a LOT of potential. The problem with potential though, is that it must be realized. It's been said that stealth is 80% shape and 20% materials. It has the shape, the question becomes are the materials there? If so, can they be mass produced and is a skilled labor force in place to support the production run? I find that to be unlikely. I also find it unlikely that a worldwide support network capable of supporting a T-50 integrated deployment is around the corner. Finally, it's been said that the T-50 will trump the F-22 by making it to the merge. In order to do that, it needs to be a VLO (not a LO) design. I get the sense they're already forgone that. Ultimately, I think what we're looking at here represents more of an AWACS killer/carrier strike platform, vs. an air dominance machine...
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1599
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az

Unread post27 Oct 2011, 16:46

Sukhoi claims an RCS value an order of magnitude worse than F-35, two orders of magnitude worse than F-22. It will not challenge the F-22, it will be detected.
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-Project Engineer
Offline

mixelflick

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 368
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post27 Oct 2011, 19:52

Wow, that's news to me. Nothing like shooting low, and getting there... :)
Offline

velocityvector

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 171
  • Joined: 25 Apr 2009, 04:21
  • Location: Chicago

Unread post27 Oct 2011, 21:08

<i>Can Moscow regain superpower status? This fighter jet is key.</i>

Not. According to the public data and other sources, against an alert F-22 the Russian weapons launched from aircraft will not guide. A Russian system may predict but unless the F-22 target is caught unawares or the Russian operator is plain lucky the F-22 cannot be hit from any current or realistically projected Russian aircraft including by T-50 with its design telemetry. The fusing mechanisms will never get close enough to decide even with volleys. Russia is guessing and desperate placing L-band on the wings. The numbers games, support systems and Russian SAMs are separate but fair matters for consideration. But A2A T-50 vice F-22 is not and will not be a serious contest, somebody will have to produce an F-22 peer before that happens and T-50 ain't it as others here have made clear. 0.02
Offline

shep1978

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1395
  • Joined: 04 Apr 2009, 16:00
  • Location: UK

Unread post27 Oct 2011, 21:54

velocityvector wrote: Russia is guessing and desperate placing L-band on the wings.


Has it been cleared up yet as to whether they are indeed L-band radars or are they actually datalinks as some people have hypothesized.

And the amount of missiles if carries seems to be a bit of a grey area. Everything i've been reading lately seems to point to it carrying 4 AMRAAM class in the main bays and one sidewinder class missile in each of the side bay/missile housing things. Is this the case?
Saying that are those two side bays/missile housing even for weapons at all, or are they part of the moveable LERX things?

Anyone?
Offline

Scorpion82

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1057
  • Joined: 07 Oct 2007, 18:52

Unread post28 Oct 2011, 12:08

velocityvector wrote:<i>Can Moscow regain superpower status? This fighter jet is key.</i>

Not. According to the public data and other sources, against an alert F-22 the Russian weapons launched from aircraft will not guide. A Russian system may predict but unless the F-22 target is caught unawares or the Russian operator is plain lucky the F-22 cannot be hit from any current or realistically projected Russian aircraft including by T-50 with its design telemetry. The fusing mechanisms will never get close enough to decide even with volleys. Russia is guessing and desperate placing L-band on the wings. The numbers games, support systems and Russian SAMs are separate but fair matters for consideration. But A2A T-50 vice F-22 is not and will not be a serious contest, somebody will have to produce an F-22 peer before that happens and T-50 ain't it as others here have made clear. 0.02


Really? According which data? And could you elaborate?
Offline

jetnerd

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 139
  • Joined: 24 Apr 2009, 01:22
  • Location: Southern U.S.

Unread post28 Oct 2011, 14:51

Russian TV Video of Saturn 117 engines for the T-50
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-d ... on-pa.html

This English-subtitled video has been up for a couple days, (dont know if it's reposted elsewhere). Here we have the engine performance claims from the horse's mouth:
    - Saturn 117's being tested in the video will allegedly provide the T-50 with a kinematic advantage over F-22
    - Vague mention of onging work to reduce the radar reflectivity of the engine

(I doubt even their best efforts at sig reduction would matter much with the airframe's honking inlets that expose the engine face directly to radar. )

- Jetnerd
Offline

rkap

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 202
  • Joined: 28 Mar 2010, 14:29
  • Location: Australia

Unread post28 Oct 2011, 15:38

"geogen"]Vpr, Sir, with seriously highest respects to you and your perspectives.


A good reasoned response "geogen". I must get back to you about Taiwan and PRC etc. - Which Forum?
The T50 - All one can do is rely on what Official Russian sources say.

[1] Engine - the Prototype is flying with a new 5th Gen engine fully bench tested and also tested on SU27's for a number of years. It is about 350kg lighter than the F119 with about the same thrust. It is a New 5th Gen engine and has better specific thrust [10.5 - 1] than the F119 published figures.
Life has not been stated. There 117S and C etc. now claim 4000hours.
One would assume it will be about the same or better.
They also say they have tested there ultimate Engine [Type31] in the Prototypes so it must be well advanced - conceivably ready in about 2017 as they said last year. Same dimensions as the present 117 engine but with up to 175kn -39,000lbs thrust. That will put it well ahead of the F119 close to the F135.
They started in the 1980's on a 5th gen engine. Originally it was designed for a larger Aircraft such as the Su-47 Berkut or the Mig1.42 MFI. Two things delayed this ultimate engine - money and the T50 is smaller than those demonstrators were. They had to reduce the size to fit the T50.
According the the President of there United Engine Corporation and others that is the position they are at now.

[2] Thrust vectoring - the Russians claim a lead here because they have a 3D version that is light weight and is durable. Anybody can build Vectoring but keeping it light weight and durable is the big problem. The next problem is control - integrating it with the engine and aircraft from a control point of view. Computer controls. They obviously have achieved that with there 3D vectoring on the SU35 etc.

[3] They claim very short takeoff - about 500m. Fine for a Naval Verson when it is developed.

[4] They claim more agile than the SU35 - more range - more payload. Western Experts say it is obviously designed to be very agile, Super-cruise etc.
They claim there ASEA radar is virtually ready and will equal any Western one. Possible? They have in the past had good radars. They have used IRST longer than the West so that could be better. They claim new missiles are ready and being tested or well into development. Some Russians claim its stealth should be as good as the F22. They drop hints they are going to achieve this in a slightly different way especially in the rear Engine section.
Time will tell.

[5] The L-Band radars? - nothing much said. Western experts don't see it being very effective - it could possibly pick up LO aircraft but not guide a missile accurately they say. Maybe they have a secret there? Who knows?
One thing for sure - it will not be on it as an ornament.
One Expert? on an Indian forum with [claimed] Russian contacts said the L-band Radar will be used with a new missile. One that can be guided roughly to the vicinity of the target by the L-band radar - once in the vicinity its own homing system would lock on and a second stage boost it to take out the target. I am no expert - sounds feasible. The target will have lots of warning if it is not a Mark3 or better missile and it certainly would need a boost for its final phase. [Probably not beyond Russian missile technology - they have a lot of experience with long range missiles for anti ship and aircraft.
This would solve the problem of L-band Radar not being good enough to guide a missile accurately to a target especially one with small antennas in the wings. Maybe - just maybe.
We just have to wait and see. About 2018 we will have a better idea with both the F35 and T50. Because of there policy of gradual development the Russians probably did not fall as far behind as we all thought. They just missed almost one generation aircraft.
A lot of research etc. has obviously been going on over the last 20 years. They just did not have the money to fully develop and build anything.
Composites seem to be no problem - they actually hint at having better solutions in this area and also in the area of RAM paint etc. Who knows?
They claim it will be more rugged and will not need all the specialist support an F22 needs. They claim it will be able to operate from remote airfields with minimum support. Probably true - that fits with the Russian philosophy.
It must be practical and easily supported - every thing they do is along those lines. Keep it as simple as possible.
I suspect the Stealth will not be as good as the F22 - maybe as good as the F35. Then again if the F22 saw real action in a real war could it maintain its stealth if it was pushed to fly 2 sorties a day or even 1 a day. Can it do that? - all the things we do not know.
Offline

Scorpion82

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1057
  • Joined: 07 Oct 2007, 18:52

Unread post28 Oct 2011, 16:13

@Rkap
I very much doubt that a new engine for the T-50 is ready yet, they still use the AL-41F1 which is less powerful than the F119 and it remains to be seen when a new engine is really ready and used. Wrt AESA the Russians have yet to field any AESA based system on any platform. It remains to be seen whether this radar will be able to keep up or not. The L-band AESA systems are reportedly used for "identification" (what ever that means in detail) and IFF. I'm yet interested to see when the Russians come up with a decent HMD as well and we'll see how well its other sensors and avionics will work and perform. The Russians may have long worked on IRST systems, but IR technology itself isn't unknown to the west and the Russians wouldn't consider western LDPs for their own aircraft if they would be that advanced.
Offline

rkap

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 202
  • Joined: 28 Mar 2010, 14:29
  • Location: Australia

Unread post28 Oct 2011, 17:36

[quote="strykerxo"]Let's go back in time

[1] In Korea the Mig15 shot hell out of all United Nations forces to start with.
Our own Australian Vampires - the best you could buy from Britain at the time went down like flies. I think in the end they hardly flew them - it was suicidal.
The Super Sabre when it arrived managed to match the Mig15 and get on top of the North Korean flown Migs.
It was about equal to the experienced Russian Pilots in Mig15's.
If it continued the Russians had the Mig17 ready and coming on line before the War ended. It was numbers of about 10-1 that only won that in the end for the United Nations forces.

[2] Vietnam - Again the Noth Vietnamese Mig17's shot hell out of the US Airforce to start with. Until the Phantom arrived in numbers of about 10 to1 they were in real trouble up against a small force of the remaining Mig17's and some newer Mig21's they still did not find it easy. USSR planes 1 -2 generations behind.
The Russians did not sell them any Mig25's - I don't think the Phantoms would have stood a chance against the Mig25 [Active in about 1970/71].
The Russians never sold any Mig23's to Vietnam either that were available before North Vietnam won the War.
Some in the US say "but we were not allowed to operate BVR". Only for one reason - early in the conflict too many US aircraft were shot down by other US aircraft.

[3] The Israeli Phantoms could not touch the Mig25 when it flew reconisance over Israel about 1970. One of there Mirages I understood did get a Missile off at one. Some it was a Phantom - I read it was a Mirage that could only just get enough altitude if it took off early on a set intercept course. The Pilots had to sit there all day in there planes ready to go. The Phantom could not climb as quickly as the Mirage. The Mirage could get just enough altitude to get a missile off if the Mig25 did not vary its course. The Mig25 might have had only 800hour engine life but nothing could touch it for about 6-7 years. Sure the Russian Pilot cooked the motor that time escaping but he was unarmed and at least got home. I would call that a win - they did not do it just once but many times. He probably did not need to do Mark 3.3 as Israeli radar tracked him to escape. If he had stayed within Mark2.8 he still probably would have survived and saved the motors.

[4] Syria and Israel
Syria had old Mig21's and downgraded export Mig23's if I remember correctly. The USSR never sold there best to the Middle East.
The F15 responsible for most of the Air Victories again 1-2 generations more advanced and they also had F16's.
Also it would be hard to call Israeli F4's standard. They had something like 600 Israeli upgrades. Probably the best F4's in the world. The Syrians had downgraded Mig23's - [the F4 equivalent]. Like a heavyweight up against a lightweight.

[5] Yugoslavia - Old Mig29's - without radars working etc. - no upgrades etc. - and outnumbered about 10 to 1 again with NATO having AWACS etc in support. Big deal.
They were never meant to work that way anyway. That was not the USSR or Russian concept - single or 2 Plane sorties.
The Russian concept at that stage was Mig31's lead the intercept with there superb radar and ground radar support and the SU27's and Mig29's coming up behind. They never tried to put superb radars and avionics in the first Mig29's and SU27's. The Mig31 was supposed to lead the Intercept flying up to 100km wide supported by the SU27's and Mig29's behind them.
The ones the Mig31's missed with there long range missiles and there powerful radar were then to be cleaned up by the SU27's and Mig29's and there missiles directed by the Mig31's radar. The Mig31's go home and the SU27 and Mig 29's do the rest close in.
Fair chance they would have won the close in argument.

Thats the situation if you want to go back in time. It says nothing about Western Aircraft being superior overall. It says a good airforce with up to date equipment and numbers wins.
When it comes down to aircraft the USSR aircraft come up fine.

No one in the World doubt's the USA has the most powerful Airforce in the World and that the USA can produce some good aircraft but the facts say they have produced some real lemons also. Usually when they try to get too advanced and forget the practical lessons of the past.

The generation of US designers that produced the F15 and F16 were one of the best you have had. Why?- probably they could remember how they got caught out in Korea and Vietnam. Thye had seen how tough manouverable Planes always in a major conflict seem to win out. After all thats why most countries keep an Airforce - the chance of a major conflict.

In World War2 if you want go back that far USA designs left a lot to be desired also to start with. Nothing near as good as the Spitfire . The Mustang was the first really superb Fighter the USA produced. But the Mosquito as a long range Fighter light Bomber was probably as good or better.
Nothing wrong with the USSR Yak9 either.

Take off your blinkers and look at the past honestly. It is not USA planes that have won the battle in the past most of the time but the number of them deployed and good crews and support.
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2107
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post28 Oct 2011, 18:53

rkap wrote: Take off your blinkers and look at the past honestly. It is not USA planes that have won the battle in the past most of the time but the number of them deployed and good crews and support.


The F-15 and F-16 have some pretty impressive A2A records, so I'd say the earlier examples that you mentioned are less pertinent, in the grand scheme of things.
PreviousNext

Return to General F-22A Raptor forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests