Forum: Modern Military Aircraft

Found this article, it references a new Kopp article. I don't know why, but this guy seems to be a wee bit on the extreme side..

and Peter Goon from Air Power Australia, an independent adviser to the Australian military says that the new Russian fighter, the Sukhoi T-50 or PAK-FA, could hold the “future of tactical air power”.

In terms of its design, the report argues that the T-50 has a design that “has forward fuselage, inlet, upper fuselage, wing and tail surface airframe Very Low Observable (VLO/stealth) shaping, which is highly competitive against the US F-22A Raptor and YF-23 ATF designs. Aft and centre lower fuselage, and aft fuselage and nozzle shaping is inferior to the F-22A Raptor and YF-23 ATF designs, sharing the same deficiencies as the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.”

However, the report says that where the T-50 design potentially excels is in its “combined use of 3D thrust vector control of the engine nozzles, all moving tail surfaces, and refined aerodynamic design with relaxed directional static stability and careful mass distribution to control inertial effects”.

Dr Kopp and Goon also think that Russian radar design will be on a par with Western standards with X-band multi-mode primary Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar. They consider that once in production, the T-50 will match the F-22A Raptor in most aspects and outperform it “aerodynamically and kinematically”.

In summing up, the report says that the T-50 will “render all legacy US fighter aircraft and the F-35 strategically irrelevant” once it enters service in 2015 and the only “viable strategic survival strategy now remaining for the United States is to terminate the Joint Strike Fighter programme immediately” and direct funding to improve the F-22A Raptor

F-16.net Sponsor

Goon, an adviser to the Australian military?

The so is my old grandpa. He still bemoans the loss of the .303 Lee Enfield rifle from the order of battle...

Laughing

npeterman18 wrote:

Dr Kopp and Goon also think that Russian radar design will be on a par with Western standards with X-band multi-mode primary Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar. They consider that once in production, the T-50 will match the F-22A Raptor in most aspects and outperform it “aerodynamically and kinematically”.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for more Raptors and I think they were stupid to shut the program down on such specious reasoning. If a little paranoia can get them to reboot the program I'm all for it. But what you see here is more opinions, they think the radar will be on-par, they think it's stealth will. Think this, think that, blah blah blah. Until all the production quality parts are in the thing, you can't really make an honest comparison.

However I also wouldn't be surprised if there's a Raptor pilot out there somewhere with a simulated kill on the brand new PAK-FA....

npeterman18 wrote:

Found this article, it references a new Kopp article. I don't know why, but this guy seems to be a wee bit on the extreme side.

Kopp has zero credibility. Don't get me wrong: the Russians have made fine aircraft in the past. But it's not time to push the panic button just yet.

Maybe its just me, but looking at the PAK-FA, it sorta looks like an SU-27 put through an upgrade kinda like what was done to the F/A-18 to get the Super Hornet. Its bigger, stealthier, etc, but basically still the same platform. Not that I am saying that the PAK-FA is in any way like a Super Hornet, it just seems to be a development of the Flanker family, just prettied up for RCS mitigation.

ok, so lets expect it will be like Su-27 with STEALTH capability - Su-27,or Su-30MKx is quite capable aircraft... AESA and STEALTH will make it quite a deadly plane. Problem is, nobody can say how good it will be in 2015-2020, so US AirForce and Gov has two options, ignore it and hope it will not be nowhere as good as F-35 but then you could be surprised if it will match or overcome F-22 and you will have no countermeasure (you will be stuck with 80+ Block 35 F-22 vs 200-300 (comparable/superior) T-50 as a worst case scenario, plus of course, Russians will export it to all their friends like Hugo, etc...) Second option would be to make some adjustments which will ensure F-22 will stay superior plus reconsider buying few (50-100) Block 35 F-22 for the same price as you will buy first batches of F-35 btw, (and also maybe start working on naval version of F-22?) - here, if T-50 will be not that good, you will end up with enough of planes to fully replace aging F-15. If T-50 will match the F-22, you will end with 200 vs 200 situation, that is much better than 80 vs 200...

The thing that is going to ensure that the F-22 and F-35 stay superior to the PAK-FA, even if it ends up being all that alarmists crack it up to be, is the support assets that the USAF can bring into play. Yes the Russians have AWACS, and yes they have tankers, however, they lack significant numbers of either of these assets; the number of KC-135s in service alone are many times the size of the russian Midas fleet. Even if PAK-FA is long legged, it is going to be hard pressed to gain the ranges that American fighter, with tanker support will be able to attain. Add to that the capability of American AWACS platforms and datalinks and it is likely that F-35s and F-22s would be engaging PAK-FA in situations where the shooter would not necessarily be actively detecting his prey. Russian deficiency in EW self protection gear became clear over South Ossetia, where Russian aircraft were hit many times by Soviet built SAM systems. Add that to the mix, and it looks like that is another deficiency that PAK-FA will have to overcome. Next, even if the Russian field a very successful AESA radar, that doen't change the fact that the Raptor and Lightning II are stealth platforms, just because the PAK-FA is using an Aesa radar doesn't mean that all American stealth aircraft will be magically visible to them all of a sudden. Ultimately, like any aircraft, PAK-FA is going to need time to develop into a fully capable platform. I think the fact that Russia now has a stealth aircraft is causing a huge "panic" in everyone. If I am not mistaken, western analysts were scared to death of anothert Russian aircraft called the Foxbat, and if I recall correctly, Victor Belenko showed us the truth behind that paper tiger...

Having to coose, i think it's more important upgrade the F-22 than buy more of them (of course the best would be both).

The T50 has no capability. It's a shell that's made a flight around a basic test circuit. It will never come close to matching either of the American 5th generation fighters.

Guys, I wanted to let you know you've all been very very mean about the PAK-FA and have emotionally scarred its youngest and most vulnerable fans
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showth ... amp;page=2

Keep up the good work! Laughing

Haha, I cannot claim that I have ever been quoted on another website beore, theyve gone and made me feel all special. is that some forum for the delusional and depressed Russian fighter fanatic? They seemed a little too attached to the whole PAK-FA is amazing ideal...

Why do people in this forum believe any of this trash from the apa? It's on par with the national inquirer or sun mags. If the national inquirer ran an article that the pak-fa was designed by aliens, I have no doubt some of these suckers would start a thread.

A better question is why does APA exist? I guess I don't see the point of a think tank that that just comments on defense matters, but is not necessarily informed of them by any government agencies.

HaveVoid wrote:

A better question is why does APA exist? I guess I don't see the point of a think tank that that just comments on defense matters, but is not necessarily informed of them by any government agencies.

1. Carlo Kopp writes these articles for a local Defence rag in Australia and for reasons best known to himself, simultaneously puts them up for free use on this website...

2. Peter Goon's company - Australian Flight Test Services went broke after he failed to win a contract from the Australian Government to build the F-111S "uber pig" and now seemingly his only involvement in the defence arena is partnering Kopp in writing these ridiculous articles... That the F-35 was the platform that "beat" his F-111 upgrade idea and therefore sent his company broke, obviously doesn't influence his opinion, one iota... Rolling Eyes

APA has argued it's points for years, to each Australian Defence Minister, the Australian Senate Committees, to the Australian media and are now mostly restricted to Internet articles andhaving been summarily dismissed by anyone of any actual status or relevance within the Australian Defence community, seems now to be attempting to engage in little more than sheer spitefulness...

Conan wrote:

HaveVoid wrote:

A better question is why does APA exist? I guess I don't see the point of a think tank that that just comments on defense matters, but is not necessarily informed of them by any government agencies.

1. Carlo Kopp writes these articles for a local Defence rag in Australia and for reasons best known to himself, simultaneously puts them up for free use on this website...

2. Peter Goon's company - Australian Flight Test Services went broke after he failed to win a contract from the Australian Government to build the F-111S "uber pig" and now seemingly his only involvement in the defence arena is partnering Kopp in writing these ridiculous articles... That the F-35 was the platform that "beat" his F-111 upgrade idea and therefore sent his company broke, obviously doesn't influence his opinion, one iota... Rolling Eyes

This is just bullshit. Australian Flight Test Services is like a ten person company. To claim that their only motivation in this is financial is just wishful thinking on Conan's part. Whilst Kopp and Goon developed the proposal to upgrade the Australian F-111 fleet and purchase F-22A's as a replacement for the Australian F-18A's they were never going to be involved in the actual work. This work was always going to be carried out by the guys who maintain and repair the F-111's now; Boeing Defence Australia at RAAF Base Amberley, the DSTO (Defence Science and Technology Organisation, kind of Australia's DARPA) and the RAAF's Aircraft Research and development Unit.

Conan likes to complain about APA's bias and misleading articles but he's not averse to dropping a couple of lies in himself if the opportunity presents itself. To claim that Kopp and Goon stood to make financial gain from the upgrade of the F-111 and that this is their sole motivation for maintaining the Air Power Australia website is just a shallow attemp to mislead readers and to smear the reputations of authors whose views he disagree with.

Conan wrote:

APA has argued it's points for years, to each Australian Defence Minister, the Australian Senate Committees, to the Australian media and are now mostly restricted to Internet articles and having been summarily dismissed by anyone of any actual status or relevance within the Australian Defence community, seems now to be attempting to engage in little more than sheer spitefulness...

Except for the spite bit this is quite true. The government line is to dismiss any questions regarding the JSF not being suitable for the RAAF with "we can't tell you why because it's classified, but rest assured the JSF IS absolutely the best plane for Australia" sort of answers. It's been reported that speaking out against the JSF is now a severly career limiting move in the department of defence, but many RETIRED air force officers agree that the JSF is, at best, a poor fit for Australia's requirements. Also, Lockheed Martin is now a major advertiser in Australia's main aviation magazine (Australian Aviation) and provides regular articles praising the JSF and its project management through a PR firm called the Williams Foundation who they fund. Funnily, no dissenting opinions ever get printed...

To return to the subject of this thread, Kopp's consulting jobs for DSTO were all about capability projections for the region. He writes most of his articles from this perspective. He does get over enthusiastic but he's talking about the situation we'll face if mature versions of these thing's start popping up all over the world like the various flankers do now.

Forum: Modern Military Aircraft

Overstatement of PAK-FA capabilities?