Forum: Modern Military Aircraft

popcorn wrote:

Considering that the F119 actually flew in the flyoff between the YF-22 and YF-23 in 1990. then that would be approximately a 30-year gap if the new Russian engine appears in the 2020 timeframe. I wonder what the F-119 will be like by then?

One do feel good if the gap is 30 years.
Remember, in the case of gap, there are jumps that burn steps and reduce gap very fast. The 30 years gap will not hold long time.

F-16.net Sponsor

cfg wrote:

Remember, in the case of gap, there are jumps that burn steps and reduce gap very fast. The 30 years gap will not hold long time.

Care to name what some of these so far anonymous 'jumps that burn steps very fast" are.

Building a modern fighter jet engine isn't trivial. It has to operate with the precision and tolerances of a swiss chronometer while puttin up with extremes of temperature, pressure and abuse. It just seems the Soviets/Russians have seen the gap with the Yanks grow larger since they started at parity at the time of the Korean conflict.

The only way the Russian engines were close to Western designs at the start of the Korean war (1950) was their capture of German technology at the end of WW II and the incredibly stupid blunder of the British giving them the Rolls Royce Nene engine.

johnwill wrote:

The only way the Russian engines were close to Western designs at the start of the Korean war (1950) was their capture of German technology at the end of WW II and the incredibly stupid blunder of the British giving them the Rolls Royce Nene engine.

Actually, it was less of a blunder than most realize. When the British agreed to share their jet engine technology, the USA also felt sharing radar technology with the Soviet Union would ease their fears about their borders being invaded. The USA shared radar technology with the Soviets!!
Stalin had no intentions of being friendly with the West, regardless of the circumstances.

avon1944 wrote:

Actually, it was less of a blunder than most realize. When the British agreed to share their jet engine technology, the USA also felt sharing radar technology with the Soviet Union would ease their fears about their borders being invaded. The USA shared radar technology with the Soviets!!
Stalin had no intentions of being friendly with the West, regardless of the circumstances.

Sounds to me like both us and the US made a really terrible blunder. Both nations were equally stupid in what they did.

I agree with shep, terrible blunders by both US and UK. But wars (cold and hot) are won by those that make the fewest blunders.

shep1978 wrote:

Sounds to me like both us and the US made a really terrible blunder. Both nations were equally stupid in what they did.

I wouldn't say stupid, naive (to me) would be a better word. Both leaders realized that if Stalin was as bad as some of the negative advice they had received said he was, there would be another world war in a matter of years. Presidents Roosevelt and Truman plus, Prime Minister Churchill felt they had a very limited number of choices. The wrong answer would cause another world or major war in Europe, this time with nuclear weapons while the other choice would allow a form of peace to continue.

johnwill wrote:

I agree with shep, terrible blunders by both US and UK. But wars (cold and hot) are won by those that make the fewest blunders.

Thank gawd, the leaders of the USSR made more blunders than the leaders of the West did.

shep1978 wrote:

Care to name what some of these so far anonymous 'jumps that burn steps very fast" are.

If we think at "in the case of gap, there are jumps that burn steps and reduce gap very fast. The 30 years gap will not hold long time" as a generality, then for some cases it true and for some is not true. In this respect I was wrong in being general, maybe the jet engine gap will continue to be 30 years.

Example that reduce the gap and/or burn steps? Buying license/technologies, getting or buying exemplars, study some exemplars, hire engineers or scientist that have the knowledge, investing a lot in order to reduce the gap.

If one look between point A and B in time for some example, maybe T-34 is one, it came in my mind. Could be example from other industries: electronics in US vs. Japan, North Korea is today larger producer of super tankers (vessel) and was not in the past.
As posted already (popcorn) jet engine are not easy (temperature that require materials, precision, etc.) but so were other thinks till the need was so big ...
At some point who need it will try to have / get / develop it.

For sure US will continue to invest, popcorn is right (where will be US in 2017-2020?). I don't want to be right I want to be understood: having a gap of 30 years can make one feel in a way, and is good to feel that way.
But one must be demanding (not that somebody is not) and ask for more.
I think we can learn from past, not only aviations, that if one doesn't continue to develop, at a moment, that gap will shrink.

From the posts that followed, I like to think that I was partially understood. No need to lower the guard toward someone that look friendly or so far behind. Smile

(I know that development didn't stop ... )

Any more news on the PAK-FA? Such as intake redesign or an update on the avionics, how many flights have been done too? Seems quiett...

Yes, for such an amazing and obviously superior aircraft it has been suprisingly quiet. Oh, I know, it it so stealthy that it has been flying almost everyday, it's just that nobody or nothing can see it!

Yes i'd think the extremely heavily criticised F-35 flight testing went quicker then this PAK-FA testing seems to be going, its certainly not going to be IOC by 2013 at Putina promised.
I fully expect one to crash too within the next year or so much like what happened with the Su-35, safety during testing is not something they seem to know or care about very much.

I read recently where there have been 6 flight tests. This is the bird with the full Russian Blue-White-Gray camo scheme. Beautiful bird despite all of the unknowns...

Getting back to the first question, I think apa would be right in it's analysis. Legacy fighters would not be able to compete against the PAK-FA, mainly due to the fact that they are a generation behind, and do not possess many of the more recent advancements.

The F-35 wouldn't perform favorably against the PAK-FA. They both are predicted to have the same frontal RCS, although this remains to be seen. The F-35's Stealth is optimized towards X-Band radars, leaving it exposed to radars operating in the L-band. It is thought that the L-band radars will be located along the LERX's on the wing. It also does not matter if they have a small antenna because L-band travel much further than X-band rays do, that's why they are used for satellites, etc. Also between now and 2015 there will probably be more developments in QWIP and other IRST technologies, maybe even getting a range of something like 70km, presenting itself as another blow against the F-35 stealth abilities. The F-35 also extremely unmaneuverable compared to most air superiority aircraft today, so it will not stand a chance in dogfights or WVR combat. Their price tags will also be close, with the PAK FA costing under 100 million, and the F-35 costing around 90 million.

The F-22 has a good chance against the PAK FA. However, the end to production in the US and a ban on exports means it will be pointless. If Russia acquires 250 PAK FAs and India acquires 250, then the 187 F-22s will not be able to achieve air superiority in these two countries, or any other country with a sizable PAK FA air force. Their lack of IRST and the APG-77 which performs worse than the IRBIS-E will be definite weakness in the F-22.

mustafa123 wrote:

The F-35 wouldn't perform favorably against the PAK-FA. They both are predicted to have the same frontal RCS,

By whom?

Quote:

although this remains to be seen. The F-35's Stealth is optimized towards X-Band radars, leaving it exposed to radars operating in the L-band.

You do understand that optimised doesn't = no attention to other bands. There's an awful lot about the signature reductions on the F-35 that aren't public knowledge, so it's pure speculation to make claims about unknowns.

Quote:

It is thought that the L-band radars will be located along the LERX's on the wing. It also does not matter if they have a small antenna because L-band travel much further than X-band rays do, that's why they are used for satellites, etc.

And these antennas have very little search volume with regards to elevation, and it's still not even known whether they're designed to be search radars, or whether they'll be used to look for/jam datalinks. As for their detection ranges, I think that you're being very generous.

Quote:

Also between now and 2015 there will probably be more developments in QWIP and other IRST technologies, maybe even getting a range of something like 70km, presenting itself as another blow against the F-35 stealth abilities.

Yet another speculation, which has yet to be demonstrated.

Quote:

The F-35 also extremely unmaneuverable compared to most air superiority aircraft today, so it will not stand a chance in dogfights or WVR combat. Their price tags will also be close, with the PAK FA costing under 100 million, and the F-35 costing around 90 million.

I'd love to see the source for this.

http://www.airforce-magazine.com/Magazi ... ghter.aspx

Quote:

With a full internal load of fuel and weapons, the F-35 is as agile as a “clean” F-16 carrying no weapons.

When you combine this with the EODAS and HOBS weapons, along with DIRCM, I just don't see your position being tenable.

Quote:

The F-22 has a good chance against the PAK FA. However, the end to production in the US and a ban on exports means it will be pointless. If Russia acquires 250 PAK FAs and India acquires 250, then the 187 F-22s will not be able to achieve air superiority in these two countries, or any other country with a sizable PAK FA air force.

What scenario do you envision the USAF fighting the RuAF or the IAF? You can't use a platform vs. platform to arrive at any sort of empirical measure of effectiveness. You have to evaluate at the systems level, and the tactics used. Furthermore the above scenarios are unrealistic due to the fact that that the F-22s would also have F-35s, and Golden Eagle F-15s augmenting them(and providing EW support).

Quote:

Their lack of IRST and the APG-77 which performs worse than the IRBIS-E will be definite weakness in the F-22.

Where did you get the notion that the APG-77 performs worse than the IRBIS-E, which isn't even operational? It's true that the F-22 doesn't currently have an IRST. By the time the RuAF has 250 PAK FAs, that's not necessarily going to be the case. The F-22's are going to be receiving upgrades over their careers, so it's disengenuous to compare a 2010 F-22 vs. a 2020 PAK FA.

Forum: Modern Military Aircraft

Overstatement of PAK-FA capabilities?