Can the F-35 match the PAK-FA

The F-35 compared with other modern jets.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

zero-one

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1585
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2013, 16:19
  • Location: New Jersey

Unread post10 Jul 2018, 13:30

botsing wrote:The general location is not the same as knowing the exact location and the ability to get a firing solution. The F-35's would detect you long before you would know their specific location and they would make sure to keep the sweetspot of this engagement.


Against a 4th gen no doubt. The problem is we're treating the Su-57 as just another 4th gen. It's not, They claim it is VLO, I doubt that, but at worst I think it is LO. So killing it "LONG BEFORE" it knows you're there may not apply.

botsing wrote:In Red Flag they were killed by aircraft that were respawned, the F-35 just killed those aircraft and they were reactivated, not something that will happen in the real world. The area for Red Flag is also much smaller and confined than real world scenario's.

I've heard that before, but so far there has been no official statements to support that. And who ever said that every single WVR encounter resulted from re-spawned aggressors, maybe some,

In fact if you listen to the actual testimony in youtube, the General said, some of the F-35's were simply caught passing by and shot.

Also, if you re-spawned and killed the aircraft that killed you, doesn't that mean the F-35 killed you in WVR also?

botsing wrote:And why are these F-35's out there without any support?

Zero-one wrote:The whole point of 5th gens is to be able to operate deep inside enemy IADS zones without support.


Where did you get that idea? You are putting out a straw man argument here.


https://breakingdefense.com/2014/06/gen ... -starts/2/
Gen. Mike Hostage wrote:“But in the first moments of a conflict I’m not sending Growlers or F-16s or F-15Es anywhere close to that environment, so now I’m going to have to put my fifth gen in there and that’s where that radar cross-section and the exchange of the kill chain is so critical. You’re not going to get a Growler close up to help in the first hours and days of the conflict, so I’m going to be relying on that stealth to open the door,” Hostage says.


The General was quite clear, in the first week of the war, he's putting 5th gens in there, no support

botsing wrote:
Building your strategy around winning the lottery is not a viable solution. Your proposed scenario still makes no sense at all.


I'm not saying this strategy will work. All I'm saying is this SEEMS to be what they are gunning for? If you are Russia what will you do. Shoot F-22's BVR? Good luck with that.

Your only hope is to make it to the merge. The Su-57, among all Russian fighters give them the best chance to do that.
Offline
User avatar

blindpilot

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1121
  • Joined: 01 Mar 2013, 18:21
  • Location: Colorado

Unread post10 Jul 2018, 17:01

zero-one wrote: ..

Your only hope is to make it to the merge. The Su-57, among all Russian fighters give them the best chance to do that.


Again just to keep things in context .. I kind of agree that the SU-57 "might" find an F-22 at the merge ... but not for the reason stated.

Keep in mind if Russia marshals its entire fleet and the US and allies send theirs.

A flight of 4 SU-57's (all three of them) will be merging with 160 F-22's and F-35s. Hard to miss that when the sky is blackened ..

We're talking 40-1 here folks... I don't care if it's an X-Wing fighter ... good luck making it to the merge.

PS If you escort with SU-35s ... its only 6-1. so that flight of 4 will only have to handle 24 F-22s and 35s.

Let's wait and see what is happening in a decade or two. Right now it's blowing smoke. End of discussion.

MHO, Just for context
BP
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2830
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post10 Jul 2018, 18:06

zero-one wrote:

Against a 4th gen no doubt. The problem is we're treating the Su-57 as just another 4th gen. It's not, They claim it is VLO, I doubt that, but at worst I think it is LO. So killing it "LONG BEFORE" it knows you're there may not apply.


No they don't. APA, BFA, RT, youtube fans, claim that. The Russians have never made such a claim, and the Indians have been critical of the RCS.
botsing wrote:In Red Flag they were killed by aircraft that were respawned, the F-35 just killed those aircraft and they were reactivated, not something that will happen in the real world. The area for Red Flag is also much smaller and confined than real world scenario's.

I've heard that before, but so far there has been no official statements to support that. And who ever said that every single WVR encounter resulted from re-spawned aggressors, maybe some,



I've listened to and read a lot about the losses. The 7 losses were from respawns, and the confusion over who was alive/dead, when multiple aircraft were in close proximity. Sensor fusion doesn't tell you who's back in play.
Offline

zero-one

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1585
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2013, 16:19
  • Location: New Jersey

Unread post11 Jul 2018, 12:01

wrightwing wrote:I've listened to and read a lot about the losses. The 7 losses were from respawns, and the confusion over who was alive/dead, when multiple aircraft were in close proximity. Sensor fusion doesn't tell you who's back in play.




In the 3:10 mark, the guy says they were seen visually passing by.
No mentioned of respawned airfraft what so ever.

Now hold on, im not saying that was a lie. What im saying is that, we don't have evidence that every single F-35 killed was from a respawned aircraft.

Furthermore, we don't have evidence that every single WVR encounter was from a respawned airplane
Offline

beepa

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 237
  • Joined: 05 Jan 2007, 22:36
  • Location: Aust.

Unread post13 Jul 2018, 04:34

Looks like someone is off to the salt mines....

https://amp.businessinsider.com/russia- ... m=referral
Offline

juretrn

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 338
  • Joined: 31 Jul 2016, 01:09
  • Location: Slovenia

Unread post13 Jul 2018, 06:35

beepa wrote:Looks like someone is off to the salt mines....

https://amp.businessinsider.com/russia- ... m=referral

I've seen some fanboys triggered HARD by that article.
It's fine to do hack pieces on the F-35, but don't you dare to do one on the Su-57!
Russia stronk
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 7381
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post13 Jul 2018, 12:33

LOL
Attachments
Custom Image 13072018192858.jpg
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2338
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post13 Jul 2018, 14:02

beepa wrote:Looks like someone is off to the salt mines....

https://amp.businessinsider.com/russia- ... m=referral


"The Su-57 is considered to be one of the best aircrafts produced in the world. Consequently, it does not make sense to speed up work on mass-producing the fifth-generation aircraft."

Um, so they built something so good... they're not going to field it? That happens all the time I guess, LOL.

I have to hand it to F-16 net members here - they saw through the SU-57 hype and painted a realistic picture of what was really going on. It never was going to have the stealth. By the time the new engines are ready, we'll be fielding ADVENT and other much more advanced versions of the F-119 and F-135, and PCA will be right around the corner. In many ways the failure of PAK FA signals the death spiral of Russian military aviation, at least fighter - wise. They never really did recover from the collapse of the USSR, and on some levels I think that's sad.

I will hand it to their engineers for all of their groundbreaking aircraft over the years. I think the Mig-25, 31, SU-27 and newer Flanker derivatives inspired greatness. Even the PAK FA is interesting, albeit too many key systems (engines, avionics, weapons, stealth) just never came together. I don't know where I'd put the Mig 29 on that list. Great airframe and performance but lousy pilot interface, range and at the end of the day.... combat record.

It's doubtful foreign orders can carry them now. Why buy a Mig-35 or even advanced Flanker, now that they're nothing more than flying bulls eye's...
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2830
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post13 Jul 2018, 20:50

zero-one wrote:
wrightwing wrote:I've listened to and read a lot about the losses. The 7 losses were from respawns, and the confusion over who was alive/dead, when multiple aircraft were in close proximity. Sensor fusion doesn't tell you who's back in play.




In the 3:10 mark, the guy says they were seen visually passing by.
No mentioned of respawned airfraft what so ever.

Now hold on, im not saying that was a lie. What im saying is that, we don't have evidence that every single F-35 killed was from a respawned aircraft.

Furthermore, we don't have evidence that every single WVR encounter was from a respawned airplane

That's one source. I've read/watched/listened to multiple sources.
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 5601
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post13 Jul 2018, 22:11

beepa wrote:Looks like someone is off to the salt mines....

https://amp.businessinsider.com/russia- ... m=referral



CALLED IT.

Only 8 years ago all the komrade fanbois were telling us that Russia was going to show us how 5th gen was done...

HAHA
Choose Crews
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 7381
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post13 Jul 2018, 23:41

Gotta credit the Indian AF and their long laundry list of complaints about the jet that Russia tried and failed to BS their way out of.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2338
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post14 Jul 2018, 20:52

Interestingly enough, I just queried an F-35 pilot about the PAK FA at the Great New England Airshow today...

His reaction was (borderline laughing), "I heard they canned it. Doesn't surprise me. Developing 5th gen stealth planes isn't easy...". Now I added that the plan was for a dozen pre-production models, but he basically waved it off as a non issue. Said China concerns him much more given they have a lot of intel on Russia and what they're capable of. China, not so much. I asked for his opinion as to the rumor Indian SU-30MKI's detected the J-20 and he said it wouldn't surprise him. Said a lot of what China is doing is trying to copy us, and the jury was still out.

In other news, I spoke to F-15 and 16 pilots who apparently aren't really gearing up for Russian Flankers and Mig-29's as much as they are Chinese J-10's, and J-11's. Both pilots were throwing a lot of praise on the AIM-120D and said it gave them the necessary punch to deal with some of the longer ranged Chinese air to air weapons now being fielded.

Anyway, I thought his perspective on the PAK FA was interesting. It seems only the Russians are looking at this as a viable, long term solution that (some day) will be fielded...
Offline

lrrpf52

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 258
  • Joined: 29 Mar 2018, 01:52

Unread post15 Jul 2018, 01:18

collimatrix wrote:
mixelflick wrote:Is the pilot/aircraft/cockpit interface not better though in SU-35? Have to presume that... The real question is, how far removed is it from the late model F-15's, 16's, 22's and 35's??


The SU-35 has a proper glass cockpit:

Image

At a glance, it looks comparable to the Gripen's cockpit:

Image

Not a match for the F-35's cockpit, but then, nothing is. Still, respectable.

lrrpf52 wrote:They're still working on the Su-57's AL-41 engine. They made these prototype airframes before having an engine profile nailed down.

This is cart before the horse clown shoes hour. Who decided to do that?

What happens when they realize they need more mass flow through the ducts, longitudinal stresses create second and third order effects, and that supersonic behavior on the inlets doesn't work as well with the new engines, if they ever get them working and produced?


Is that any sillier than producing the first F-14s with TF-30 engines instead of the intended F100 variant, and then switching to F110s later on?

It's pretty clear that they're going to do something with the air intakes on the SU-57. The current design leaves the compressor blades exposed, and it's absurd to think they'll just leave it like that. All the panel access lines are sawtoothed and aligned, the refueling probe retracts, the horizontal tails are in line with the main wings, and they went to the considerable bother and expense of adding four internal weapons bays.

And you're telling me that they're just going to leave the air intakes the way they are? That's ridiculous. The signal return strength from the compressor blades would be far higher than from the panel lines, and they bothered aligning those. Sukhoi also has experience with S-curved ducts, the SU-47 had them. The current intake design is clearly a placeholder, just like the air intake design of the YF-23 was completely unrepresentative of what a production F-23A's air intakes would have looked like.

The semi-podded configuration does give them considerable structural freedom in re-designing the intakes to accommodate whatever the new engines need, airflow-wise.

The GE F101 was what the B-1A was engineered around.

The F-14 prototypes and program were engineered around the Pratt & Whitney TF30. As bad as the TF30 was, it was the first AB turbofan fighter engine available at the time. The Navy wanted to upgrade to the GEF101 Derivative Engine in later serial production of the planned F-14B.

It was never in the cards for the F-14A, never planned to be when the program was conceptualized and funded in the late 1960s.

In contrast, the Russians planned for the PAK-FA to have a new engine from the start, only they went to work on the airframe before having an engine.

Again, in contrast with the US, we not only had the 5th Generation engines ready in the late 1980s before the airframes, we had the basis for the 6th Gen engines already available for the ATF prototypes with the GE YF-120 Variable Cycle Engine. Pratt & GE are currently feverishly working on more advanced evolutions of that technology.

This isn't meant to be a critique of their engineering and military aerospace academic or scientific capabilities, but an illustration of their systemic politico-economic degradation of infrastructure available for advanced military aerospace RDT&E programs that their air defense posture and foreign military sales will hinge upon.

This is true whether they ever actually engage in combat or not.

The Su-57 is a beautiful aerodynamic specimen that any engineer or project manager would smile upon from that perspective. However, the overall program seems to be a continuing debacle hamstrung by forces outside of their control, symptomatic of economic and geopolitical issues Russia simply can't tackle anymore.
Offline

lrrpf52

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 258
  • Joined: 29 Mar 2018, 01:52

Unread post15 Jul 2018, 02:12

zero-one wrote:
wrightwing wrote:I've listened to and read a lot about the losses. The 7 losses were from respawns, and the confusion over who was alive/dead, when multiple aircraft were in close proximity. Sensor fusion doesn't tell you who's back in play.




In the 3:10 mark, the guy says they were seen visually passing by.
No mentioned of respawned airfraft what so ever.

Now hold on, im not saying that was a lie. What im saying is that, we don't have evidence that every single F-35 killed was from a respawned aircraft.

Furthermore, we don't have evidence that every single WVR encounter was from a respawned airplane


An F-35 pilot from 388th TFW told me that the only kills in Red Flag for the 17-1 exchange ratio (the actual numbers were much larger) were from regenerated and WVR after gaming their vectors and recently killed with close proximity, then allowed to progress from a position that would never work out against F-35 sensor network in reality.
Offline

lrrpf52

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 258
  • Joined: 29 Mar 2018, 01:52

Unread post15 Jul 2018, 03:01

zero-one wrote:
ricnunes wrote:Besides, I think you're being "too generalist" with that comment of yours above.


Sorry if it came out that way. but that wasn't what I was trying to imply. In fact I think i'm the one guilty of that. When I think of best I think of:
A-A fighter: F-22
Multi role: F-35
Bomber: B-2
Destroyer: Burke Class
Subs: Virginia class
Tanks: M1A2 SEP


Basically I just look at what the US uses and automatically assume that its the best. Like I said they have the wold's highest R&D budget, the best defense contractors, the most experience in every facet of tech. So its not surprising when you guys have the best.

And when I see articles of other aircraft, specially Russian aircraft claiming to be on PAR with what America has, I find my self quickly dismissing it and picking it apart.

But what I find dangerous is when I don't have a good counter argument I simply dismiss it as false. One example is the Su-57's empty weight. 39,000+ lbs. its lighter than the Su-30 and Su-35. How did they do that? If it's true then you can really make an argument that it is as good as the Raptor in Kinematic performance, maybe even better with more control surfaces and 3D TVC. Now the Su-57 supposedly has DAS like systems and HMCS/HOBS.

If thats true then it combines some of the best attributes of the F-22 and F-35 in WVR engagements. Therefore the strategy of forcing a merge with American 5th gens doesn't seem all that crazy.

They don't have to beat Raptors and F-35s every time. They just need to reduce kill\loss ratios to 3:1 ala Vietnam and it would be seen as a failure for the USAF.

So I find myself simply dismissing the empty weight claims as inaccurate or dated. That way the Raptor still has the edge in most Kinematic performance metrics and the F-35 isn't too far behind.

In previous generations since the advent of the MiG-15 and MiG-19, they used the faster supersonic fighter for the kill, with the subsonic turner as the decoy/bouncer. This tactic worked extremely well for them in the early days of Vietnam against the unprotected F-105s going up north on bombing runs.

The MiG-21 did even better in combination with the MiG-17. Even with introduction of the F-4D later to provide top cover for the F-105s, the Ground Controllers were able to vector MiG-21s for rear aspect perch intercept of the F-4s and reach an unacceptable exchange ratio for the US. There's a reason both Fighter Weapons Schools used the mix of Aggressor/Adversary aircraft that they did, which focused more on BVR approaches to deal with Soviet supersonic and subsonic fighter mix tactics.

Image

With the introduction of Teaball (early AWACS), F-4s getting jumped from rear aspect went away and they never were able to come close to the early years SEA exchange ratio from then on. Israelis used that same recipe for success in 1982 with Syria, using E-2C/F-15/F-16A combo with other Electronic Support and shot down 70 Syrian MiGs and Sukhois in 2 days.

The Iraqis used the MiG-25PD and MiG-29A with Soviet tactics in 1991, initially baiting with MiG-25s to pull F-15Cs off in that direction, then did chaff and dive to break APG-63's lock, while MiG-29As piloted by experienced Mirage F1 pilots launched from a side aspect airfield and attempted to approach in ambush.

Because of US AWACS and F-15C community tactics, they had already gamed these types of scenarios out repeatedly, used counter tactics and Electronic Support to see first, then orient and kill. We remained several steps ahead of the Soviet MiG-25/MiG-29 tactics.

Those are 3rd and 4th Gen tactics, heavily determined by who has and works with their AWACS the most, as well as has reliable weapons and radars, good communication between wingmen and flights, with proper air planning and CAP sorties covering the airspace around the clock.

The 5th Gen tactics throw a lot of this out of the window, so if the Russian response is to Hi-Lo Su-57/Su-30/Su-35S, it misses the mark for a number of reasons.

1. Radar technology. No matter how they dice it, the US is far ahead of them in the ability to conceptualize, design, test, and produce the latest materials science and integrated electronics for high power output RF transmitter receivers, and their own engineers acknowledge this by stating that their electronics is heavier and harder to develop. If we look at the F-86's Radar Ranging & Gyro Gunsight, it's still an engineering marvel. From there to the F-4's APQ-120, to the F-14's AWG-9, F-15's APG-63, F-22's APG-77, and F-35's APG-81 represents a continual aggressive evolution of fighter radars that leave anything the Soviets have in the rearview mirror on many levels.

2. Electro-optical technology. We had IRSTs on 3rd Gen interceptors like the F-101 Voodoo and F-4D, on the 4th Gen F-14/TCS, and on Targeting Pod equipped 4th Gen teen fighters like the F-15E, F-16C, Hornet, SH, complete with some of the most advanced integrated circuitry for radar-slaving and cueing. We have superior glass, germanium, resolution, processors, gears and motors, with decades of experience using Electro-Optical Targeting systems on operational aircraft in combat, dating back to SEA.

Image

Image

3. Computer processing power and size. We're the epicenter of microcircuitry, thermal management, advanced materials, programming, testing, and evolution of the industry.

4. Integrated Systems. This is as hard, if not harder to do than the scientific revolutions in individual disciplines, and what took so long with both the F-22 and F-35. Getting all of those sensors to fuse into a single picture for the pilot, while being able to share them via high throughput secure data links, is a brutal undertaking.

5. Jet Engines. The Russians haven't even caught up with what was available in the 1980s for the US regarding certain manufacturing techniques of single crystal, high pressure turbine fan blades. There are a lot of reasons why we have such high MTBF for our fighter engines, and we've only gotten better with the legacy of development from J47- J57 - J75- J79 - TF30 - F100 - F101 - F110-F-100/F110 IPE - F119/YF120 - to F135. It's one thing to have power, and another to have reliability/serviceability. You could spend a lifetime studying US fighter engine technology, and still be totally unaware of some of the intellectual property regarding manufacturing methods that simply don't exist anywhere else on earth.

Image

6. Training. Nobody trains like us, with as many tiered exercises leading up to things like Red Flag, then operational deployments. We've had continuous operational deployments throughout most global Theaters since WWII now, with tons of air planning and air campaign wars, which when countered with Soviet or Russian tech, have always resulted in vastly disproportionate exchange ratios in our favor. SAMs and AAA have been far bigger thorns in our sides, and VLO/SA/Sensor/EW Fusion deals with that better than anything else.

7. Technical/Tactical Exploitation. We've been operating wings of Aggressor and Adversary aircraft with senior pilots who are constantly trained and fed the latest assessments of threat systems capabilities and tactics based on a vast integrated collection and dissemination network, which includes actual acquired specimens. This trend dates back to the A6M exploitation program in Australia in the Pacific Theater of WWII, and continues on through the collapse of the Soviet Union, where we literally purchased entire squadrons of MiG-29s from former Warsaw Pact nations, and acquired other modern fighters as well.

Image

For Russia to pull off a production Su-57 will be more of a Potempkin Village to their internal populace and prospective FMS clients, both of which aren't looking so good right now. From a marketing perspective, they've almost failed at every turn, other than wooing the spastic kids at airshows who bounce up and and down squealing about loud jet noise and super-maneuverability.

Any tactics leveraging success off the Su-57 as a sensor-shooter node are going to hinge on their ability to somehow leap over the vast effort of the US and partners to crack the code on systems of systems integration with ATF and JSF, while somehow leaping ahead with quantity as well. This is one of those cases where out comes the crystal ball, and it isn't looking bright for Russia's future as a capable RDT&E with substantive manufacturing capability.
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: gta4 and 4 guests