SU-35... does it match up with F-22/F-35?

Military aircraft - Post cold war aircraft, including for example B-2, Gripen, F-18E/F Super Hornet, Rafale, and Typhoon.

SU-35 or F-22/F-35

Poll ended at 01 Dec 2008, 19:35

SU-35
1
7%
F-22/F-35
13
93%
 
Total votes : 14

  • Author
  • Message
Offline

haavarla

Banned

  • Posts: 873
  • Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 19:36
  • Warnings: 4

Unread post16 Dec 2011, 15:20

These compairison threads is a 'no brainer'..
Why would anyone compair two jets like Su-35S and F-22 :?:

And for the record, the Su-35S has only two serial going at this time, going through VVS state trials at Lipetsk training senter.
The Word is there will only be two more out in 2012.. It seems the Su-35S is in for a delay for some reason.

Perhaps the new Irbis-E radar systems are too unstable/imature or not up to VVS reqiirements..

Anyway, these two jets will be used very different by its respectivly AF, and will be given different missions as well.
If not any F-22 will be station in Europe or Turkey they will never get a glims of each other.
Cause in the Far East Russia, there are mostly Mig-31BM and will not see any Su-35S deployment..
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2101
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post16 Dec 2011, 17:31

falcon17 wrote:
destroid wrote:The F-22 can barely use any air-ground ordnance, what would be the point of deploying it to Libya? It's not suitable for the mission.

That didn't stop the British deploying the Typhoon, although I imagine that was for marketing reasons rather than it being an actually useful deployment.


Seeing that there was a no fly zone established. That would be the raptors reason for deployment, to patrol the no fly zone. That's what I'm trying to say. And by stole the raptors thunder meant that the eagles vipers and hornets were doing the air superiority Job just fine. Now attempting to get on topic with this comparison. If you want to compare 5th gen aircraft then use the PAK FA not the flanker. Also since I put PAK FA in a sentence let me clarify. The PAK FA is not an aircraft to be dismissed as a piece of flying trash. It's still being tested and has a lot of growth potential.


Why waste airframe hours, with a limited size fleet, against a non-peer threat?
Offline

falcon17

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 72
  • Joined: 01 Sep 2011, 04:00
  • Location: Orlando

Unread post16 Dec 2011, 19:01

wrightwing wrote:
falcon17 wrote:
destroid wrote:The F-22 can barely use any air-ground ordnance, what would be the point of deploying it to Libya? It's not suitable for the mission.

That didn't stop the British deploying the Typhoon, although I imagine that was for marketing reasons rather than it being an actually useful deployment.


Seeing that there was a no fly zone established. That would be the raptors reason for deployment, to patrol the no fly zone. That's what I'm trying to say. And by stole the raptors thunder meant that the eagles vipers and hornets were doing the air superiority Job just fine. Now attempting to get on topic with this comparison. If you want to compare 5th gen aircraft then use the PAK FA not the flanker. Also since I put PAK FA in a sentence let me clarify. The PAK FA is not an aircraft to be dismissed as a piece of flying trash. It's still being tested and has a lot of growth potential.


Why waste airframe hours, with a limited size fleet, against a non-peer threat?



Here's a better question. Why waste money on an aircraft that was designed to face a long gone soviet threat? Also rest assured. WWIII will not happen as I've stated before the soviet union is dead and we have a good relationship with Russia. If we do end up going to war with a country that has an air force then I'm putting my money on north Korea or Iran. And honestly I don't even see that happening. As said before the F-22 will most likely be reduced to bombing a bunch of terrorists in a cave. Which the predator,AC-130,B-52,B-1B,F-16,F-18 and F-15E do perfectly fine in. And finally 187 aircraft is more then enough.
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2101
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post17 Dec 2011, 01:17

falcon17 wrote:

Here's a better question. Why waste money on an aircraft that was designed to face a long gone soviet threat? Also rest assured. WWIII will not happen as I've stated before the soviet union is dead and we have a good relationship with Russia. If we do end up going to war with a country that has an air force then I'm putting my money on north Korea or Iran. And honestly I don't even see that happening. As said before the F-22 will most likely be reduced to bombing a bunch of terrorists in a cave. Which the predator,AC-130,B-52,B-1B,F-16,F-18 and F-15E do perfectly fine in. And finally 187 aircraft is more then enough.


It's hard to say what conflicts might occur in the next 3 to 4 decades, and is unwise to assume that bombing caves will always be the mission. Additionally, you do realize that in the next 3 to 4 decades, we may fight foes armed with Su35/T50/J20/S300/400, etc... Legacy fighters won't fare to well with those types of threats.
Offline

thestealthfighterguy

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 252
  • Joined: 15 Sep 2011, 01:18
  • Location: Your six-O-clock

Unread post20 Dec 2011, 05:03

falcon17 wrote:
wrightwing wrote:
falcon17 wrote:
destroid wrote:The F-22 can barely use any air-ground ordnance, what would be the point of deploying it to Libya? It's not suitable for the mission.

That didn't stop the British deploying the Typhoon, although I imagine that was for marketing reasons rather than it being an actually useful deployment.


Seeing that there was a no fly zone established. That would be the raptors reason for deployment, to patrol the no fly zone. That's what I'm trying to say. And by stole the raptors thunder meant that the eagles vipers and hornets were doing the air superiority Job just fine. Now attempting to get on topic with this comparison. If you want to compare 5th gen aircraft then use the PAK FA not the flanker. Also since I put PAK FA in a sentence let me clarify. The PAK FA is not an aircraft to be dismissed as a piece of flying trash. It's still being tested and has a lot of growth potential.


Why waste airframe hours, with a limited size fleet, against a non-peer threat?



Here's a better question. Why waste money on an aircraft that was designed to face a long gone soviet threat? Also rest assured. WWIII will not happen as I've stated before the soviet union is dead and we have a good relationship with Russia. If we do end up going to war with a country that has an air force then I'm putting my money on north Korea or Iran. And honestly I don't even see that happening. As said before the F-22 will most likely be reduced to bombing a bunch of terrorists in a cave. Which the predator,AC-130,B-52,B-1B,F-16,F-18 and F-15E do perfectly fine in. And finally 187 aircraft is more then enough.

Read your history books. There is always a next great war. People like you have had their head in the sand for to long.
Attachments
image015-thumb.jpg
Stealth, so the bad guys don't know your there till they start blowing up. Have a nice day!
Offline

falcon17

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 72
  • Joined: 01 Sep 2011, 04:00
  • Location: Orlando

Unread post20 Dec 2011, 07:29

destroid wrote:The F-22 can barely use any air-ground ordnance, what would be the point of deploying it to Libya? It's not suitable for the mission.

That didn't stop the British deploying the Typhoon, although I imagine that was for marketing reasons rather than it being an actually useful deployment.


Also destroid. The typhoon did actually drop some precision guided bombs on enemy targets in Libya.

Source:

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... at-355511/
Offline

destroid

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 58
  • Joined: 05 Sep 2011, 11:20

Unread post20 Dec 2011, 10:58

Didn't it need it's targets designated by the Tornado?
Offline

tacf-x

Senior member

Senior member

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

Unread post20 Dec 2011, 20:43

destroid is correct. The Typhoon wasn't rated to carry the appropriate targeting equipment to self-designate. It needed assistance from Tornados.
Offline

southernphantom

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 814
  • Joined: 06 Aug 2011, 17:18
  • Location: Somewhere in Dixie

Unread post21 Dec 2011, 01:49

falcon17 wrote:
wrightwing wrote:
falcon17 wrote:
destroid wrote:The F-22 can barely use any air-ground ordnance, what would be the point of deploying it to Libya? It's not suitable for the mission.

That didn't stop the British deploying the Typhoon, although I imagine that was for marketing reasons rather than it being an actually useful deployment.


Seeing that there was a no fly zone established. That would be the raptors reason for deployment, to patrol the no fly zone. That's what I'm trying to say. And by stole the raptors thunder meant that the eagles vipers and hornets were doing the air superiority Job just fine. Now attempting to get on topic with this comparison. If you want to compare 5th gen aircraft then use the PAK FA not the flanker. Also since I put PAK FA in a sentence let me clarify. The PAK FA is not an aircraft to be dismissed as a piece of flying trash. It's still being tested and has a lot of growth potential.


Why waste airframe hours, with a limited size fleet, against a non-peer threat?



Here's a better question. Why waste money on an aircraft that was designed to face a long gone soviet threat? Also rest assured. WWIII will not happen as I've stated before the soviet union is dead and we have a good relationship with Russia. If we do end up going to war with a country that has an air force then I'm putting my money on north Korea or Iran. And honestly I don't even see that happening. As said before the F-22 will most likely be reduced to bombing a bunch of terrorists in a cave. Which the predator,AC-130,B-52,B-1B,F-16,F-18 and F-15E do perfectly fine in. And finally 187 aircraft is more then enough.


Those preparing to fight the last war always leave themselves unprepared for the next. All the high-speed-low-drag-COIN stuff we're working on?? How's THAT going to fare in an all-out land war with China or Iran, eh??

Just because something doesn't seem necessary now doesn't mean it is forever obsolete. The Euros found that out the hard way when they ran out of BOMBS in Libya. I guess that's what happens when you're only dropping a GBU-12 on a cave or technical every once in a while and forget the equipment and manpower needed to fight a nation-state.

Remember the tactical paradigm shift of Viet Nam, and what the next real war was after that.
Offline

thestealthfighterguy

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 252
  • Joined: 15 Sep 2011, 01:18
  • Location: Your six-O-clock

Unread post24 Dec 2011, 01:23

HOPE FOR THE BEST PREPARE FOR THE WORST! Ancient chinese proverb. Who do want to be? The guy that was prepared for something that never came or the guy that was perpared for something that already happened. TSFG
Stealth, so the bad guys don't know your there till they start blowing up. Have a nice day!
Offline

madrat

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1021
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2010, 03:12

Unread post06 Jan 2012, 03:48

southernphantom wrote:Those preparing to fight the last war always leave themselves unprepared for the next. All the high-speed-low-drag-COIN stuff we're working on?? How's THAT going to fare in an all-out land war with China or Iran, eh??


It's not like 'high-speed-low-drag-COIN stuff' wouldn't work in an all-out war with China or Iran actually. Once you kick in the door and take the gun away from the guy inside you pretty much have free run of the house. That is why after you successfully prosecute the SEAD mission you can reduce your workload to non-frontline aircraft. In Vietnam there was a lot of ordnance dropped by non-frontline fighters because they were in relatively low threat areas. We shouldn't get fixated on strictly using the high tech geewhiz stuff for dropping bombs.
Offline

thestealthfighterguy

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 252
  • Joined: 15 Sep 2011, 01:18
  • Location: Your six-O-clock

Unread post06 Jan 2012, 04:50

madrat wrote:
southernphantom wrote:Those preparing to fight the last war always leave themselves unprepared for the next. All the high-speed-low-drag-COIN stuff we're working on?? How's THAT going to fare in an all-out land war with China or Iran, eh??


It's not like 'high-speed-low-drag-COIN stuff' wouldn't work in an all-out war with China or Iran actually. Once you kick in the door and take the gun away from the guy inside you pretty much have free run of the house. That is why after you successfully prosecute the SEAD mission you can reduce your workload to non-frontline aircraft. In Vietnam there was a lot of ordnance dropped by non-frontline fighters because they were in relatively low threat areas. We shouldn't get fixated on strictly using the high tech geewhiz stuff for dropping bombs.


Agreed... That's what the B.U.F.F. and the old mud hen are for. TSFG
Stealth, so the bad guys don't know your there till they start blowing up. Have a nice day!
Online

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1500
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az

Unread post06 Jan 2012, 14:50

Ah the BUFF, and aircraft that has been is flying for 60 years, production line has been closed for 45 years, and is outlasting all of it's intended replacements. They don't make em like they used to.
"Spurts"

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

southernphantom

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 814
  • Joined: 06 Aug 2011, 17:18
  • Location: Somewhere in Dixie

Unread post06 Jan 2012, 16:12

sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:Ah the BUFF, and aircraft that has been is flying for 60 years, production line has been closed for 45 years, and is outlasting all of it's intended replacements. They don't make em like they used to.


Amen to that.

Anyways, kicking in the door against Iran should be fairly easy, but against China we'd be looking at sustaining overwater attacks from Japan. If you've trashed the super-SAMs or at least have them suppressed, Beagles can go in and bomb the place back to the stone age. I'm just not sure what level of IADS infrastructure we're looking at in the PRC. It could resemble Iraq (Smashed by a relative handful of WW Vs) or Pack VI, where we could never quite get everything before it popped right back up again.
Offline

duplex

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 352
  • Joined: 14 Apr 2005, 16:30

Unread post14 Jan 2012, 17:01

>>Let me guess- you've arrived at these conclusions based upon countless hours studying You Tube videos/comments, Wikipedia, APA, and Russian forums? >>



Even Carlo Kopp would not bet his money on SU-35 when it goes against the Raptor.
One F-22 with its awesome AESA radar could easily take on three SU-35's.
F-35 versus SU-35 ?? I am not so sure.. The SU-35 would outperform the F-35 in most cardinal parameters and capabilities.
PreviousNext

Return to Modern Military Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests