Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

Scorpion1alpha wrote:

mixelflick wrote:

You knew this was coming. Man, how'd you like to be Putin right now? What was his quote on IOC, 2013? LOL..

He's a pilot, you know. If you didn't know, he'll gladly remind you... Smile

Putin: "I, Putin, have flown the future! It is the F-22ski...er, I mean the T-50 PAK FA!"

Reporter: "But since 1st flight in 2010, how many do we have flying now great leader?"

Putin: "Three, but that's besides the point. We have built a technological marvel! The world's air forces will shake at the knees in fear of this fighter! DA! They will! Ha ha ha!"

You really have to admire this guy. He doesn't take any sh!t, speaks his mind and can pull 9+g's in a business suit!

Bawhaha!

I'm surprised Carlos Kopp hasn't picked up on this fact. He's a man's man, and the 3 Sukhoi T-50/Pak-FA prototypes that exist today could wipe out every Super Hornet on the planet if they wanted to - without even leaving the ground!

Smile

F-16.net Sponsor

T-50 = 3 m2
Flanker = 0.5 m2

Sorry, those were RCS measurments

and i think they are switched

Apparently 2 of the 3 test aircraft are out of action (1 due to severe cracking). The 4th aircraft which has yet to fly is undergoing a major structural redesign.

If we're going to mockingly rename Russian thing as copies of Western things, like Raptorski, Amraamski, Concordski, and shuttlski, we should do it right: "-ski" is for names that describe what place a family came from. A better suffix would be "-ov", meaning "son of": Raptorov, Amraamov, Concordov, shuttlov.

delvo wrote:

If we're going to mockingly rename Russian thing as copies of Western things, like Raptorski, Amraamski, Concordski, and shuttlski, we should do it right: "-ski" is for names that describe what place a family came from. A better suffix would be "-ov", meaning "son of": Raptorov, Amraamov, Concordov, shuttlov.

Finally someone gets it right.

The semantics of a nickname are honestly something I could care less about. If your from New York and your friends nickname you Bubba than your nickname is Bubba.

How could the Russians make such a mistake? A prototype with design and structural issues I think they should cancel it and keep flying the venerable Su-27 family. What do you think the Russian AF would think about that?

Contrast this picture with the great & glorious US leader not wanting to be seen with the Raptor in the background and cancelling the arguably the greatest fighter ever build.

Am I missing something? Two Cents

No really has anybody seen my Two Cents

strykerxo wrote:

Contrast this picture with the great & glorious US leader not wanting to be seen with the Raptor in the background and cancelling the arguably the greatest fighter ever build.

Am I missing something? Two Cents

No really has anybody seen my Two Cents

At least someone agrees with most of us...Raptor was cancelled far too early.

:: Edited by moderator. No politics please! ::

Almost every aircraft has had trouble. I'll quote some of the more famous examples: B-17, P-51, P-38, F-14, Su-27, F-105, the F.2B Bristol, Sopwith Camel, Typhoon, Gripen, Rafale, P-40, etc.

The Russkies aren't new to this, and to be frank, they're doing a way better job than we are.

papakaz wrote:

to this, and to be frank, they're doing a way better job than we are.

Um... No they aren't... We've fielded one stealth fighter (the best in the world) since half a decade ago, and are testing three more as we speak (the three variants of the F-35). The Russians are having FAR more trouble with the PAK-FA than we EVER did with any variant of the 35'. Frame cracks in two of the first prototypes?! That's cause for massive redesign, and years of setback. They've already failed twice in attempts to make fifth generation fighters, and this is teetering on being the third strike. Plus, if it wasn't for the Indians, this little project would've never even gotten to this point.

The Russians have always done, are doing and will continue to do a better job than we do. The stuff looks good and the ads play it up. The brochures claim the stuff is the best and then a particular idiot uses the brochures to make the stuff look better than Western stuff.

Seriously, the T-50 doesn't try to do as much as the F-22 or F-35. It's an F-15 killer, maybe Typhoon killer at best. They couldn't mod the T-10 frame to conclusively beat either until maybe the Su-35.

Frame cracks? Who thinks the innards of the T-10 series and T-50 are really similar/the same and it won't work on the T-50?

If the Russians manage to make an aircraft anywhere near as good as the Raptor, that would be one of the most impressive feats of engineering ever accomplished. The PAK-FA is being developed on a fraction of the budget used to develop the Raptor. Designing any kind of aircraft, let alone a 5th generation stealth fighter, costs a tremendous amount of money. Russia has twice the population of the UK and half its GDP. Russia's defense budget is roughly 1/10th of the USA's.

Let's also not forget that the USA has been operating stealth aircraft since the 70s. Do you think American engineers might have learned a thing or two or three over the decades? The Russians have built a few stealthy prototypes but that's the extent of their experience. So they're going to design and build a comparable aircraft with next to zero experience and a fraction of the budget?

That would be very impressive indeed.

Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

F-22ski Just Got Later And More Expensive