Forum: Technology

skyhigh wrote:

Take into account the thrust-to-weight ratio.

The Saturn AL-41F turbofans are in the 40000 lb class, more powerful than the Raptor's PW F119-PW-100 and they come with 3D TVC nozzles.

The AL-41F engines are about as real as the entire aircraft....which is to say, not very. They won't be available for a long time if ever. The F119 is here now, and like all fighters engines on US aircraft, surely has a clear upgrade path.

F-16.net Sponsor

An Indian variant of the PAK FA is also on the drawing board, and it is designated the FGFA, standing for Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft, aka Su-50MKI, jointly manufactured by Sukhoi OKB and HAL.

The FGFA will be a twin-seater (as opposed to the single-seater PAK FA) and be heavily customized to Indian specifications, just like the Su-30MKI Flanker-H and minimum common technology would be shared.

Quote:

An Indian variant of the PAK FA is also on the drawing board, and it is designated the FGFA, standing for Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft, aka Su-50MKI, jointly manufactured by Sukhoi OKB and HAL.

The FGFA will be a twin-seater (as opposed to the single-seater PAK FA) and be heavily customized to Indian specifications, just like the Su-30MKI Flanker-H and minimum common technology would be shared.

The problem is it's still in the developmental stage, the US will be fielding significant numbers of F-35s before the PAK FA enters service. IF there was one thing the Soviets did right it was that when they gave a date, they stuck to it, even if the plane had to be duct-taped together--at least they might as well have done that to some of the MiG-21s they sent to the Middle East, would've been easier disassembly for the Israelis.... Very Happy

I stumbled upon rumors that the Su-50 Firefox, aka the PAK FA, if it were to launched into FRIP and IOC with the Russian VVS, it would present itself as the ultimate poison to the F-22 Raptor.

Is this true?

Quote:

I stumbled upon rumors that the Su-50 Firefox, aka the PAK FA, if it were to launched into FRIP and IOC with the Russian VVS, it would present itself as the ultimate poison to the F-22 Raptor.

Is this true?

Probably not, there's always a trend of the Soviets and now Russians in being behind the US. But there is no telling that for sure until the Raptor goes up against a competent pilot flying a PAK FA. I also think the new jet will have an odd-numbered designation, in keeping with the practice that's been followed since Stalin said so, and until I see substantial evidence of what the NATO codename is, it's still the PAK FA. They are just that, rumors.

Here's a primer of how Soviet vs. US fighters of their day have matched up, the pros should be able to go further in-depth.

MiG-15 vs. F-86: While the MiG had it's day in the opening part of the Korean War, the F-86 had not yet been deployed. Once the Sabre was deployed, the US machine had the upper hand, leading to a 10+:1 kill ratio.

MiG-17 vs. F-4: The Fresco was superior in close engagements until the advent of the USAF Echo-model DUFFs, which was the first Phantom to carry an internal gun. Vietnam ROEs and weapon malfunctions worked against the F-4, limiting BVR engagements, and if they could go BVR, the missiles would sometimes malfunction.

MiG-21 vs. F-4: Another similar situation to above, but with the added downside for the US pilots that the enemy could bust Mach and close faster than a subsonic Fresco.

The USN had somewhat better success in the latter years of the war--their establishment of NFWS in 1969 was a success, and had the effect of leading to some spectacular kills, as mentioned on other threads.

I'm not going to put the F-15 vs. MiG-25 in this category, because the MiGs the USAF went against were piloted by largely inept Iraqi pilots, not highly trained Russians, they buried their planes or sent them to Iran instead of fighting, and thus there is a lack of good data for analysis.

Gums, OL, and TC can give more on this subject, they're pros, I'm just a semi-skilled amateur.

ptplauthor, probalby the most significant things in air combat are training, training, training, and Jeremiah Weed.

In Korea, the F-85 and MiG-15 were a pretty good match for each other the difference was that the US pilots were better trained. Some of the really sh** hot Russian pilots pulled some amazing stuff in their aircraft, but most of the NK pilots weren't trained as well and were often fodder for the .50s.

Vietnam was rather different. You have fighters built for different purposes, the F-4 was built to intercept Russian nuclear bombers with less focus on the dogfighting aspect (a la no gun). The MiG-17 was meant solely to dogfight along with having the Mig-21's to shoot from outside, at the already tied up F-4s. As you said, once Top Gun was established the kill ratios started to change much more in our favor since people started to know how to dogfight and better employ their weapons. The MiG-21 was a damn good aircraft for it's day though.

The MiG-25 is a joke. We freaked out about when we first found out about it, but when one defected and we disassembled it... well we found out it was meant solely to intercept the XB-70 and the SR-71. The thing could not survive a turning fight (I think it could pull a maximum of 4 g's). There's another thread on it around here somewhere. Now the MiG-29, that's a relatively good point defense fighter (though mostly for dogfighting). I don't think Russia has been able to keep up with the US fighter tech simply because they haven't had the money until they really started pumping oil into Europe.

With regards to the PAK-FA, I can only say never underestimate your enemy. That leads to dead soldiers and no one wants that (well except the enemy). Remember, even a kid with a BB gun can put out a few eyes.

Quote:

ptplauthor, probalby the most significant things in air combat are training, training, training, and Jeremiah Weed.

I did misrepresent the F-4 as a dogfighter, which it never was, is, or ever will be.

Quote:

And a nine figure sum jet bites the dust

If the Russians manage to screw the procurement up that bad, their economy is going to take a nosedive. Didn't the Blackjack have a part in taking down the Soviet economy?

The Russians have a good start with the Su-37--modifying the aircraft similar to the way the Silent Eagle proposal is fleshing out would save some serious rubles.

[quote="ptplauthor"]

Quote:

I did misrepresent the F-4 as a dogfighter, which it never was, is, or ever will be.

"Woof"

OL

(I can buy the "is" or "will be")

Quote:

"Woof"

OL

(I can buy the "is" or "will be")

grrrr....lol

okay, okay, once McAir came to their senses and started putting guns in the DUFF, it was a passable dogfighter. But until that point, wasn't the furball a little hairier?

It was, shall we say, MORE interesting at that stage. Wink

However, the F-8 Crusader was appreciated while it was still around. Small wonder that Navy fighter pilots referred to it as the Tits machine of all time. Cool

Quote:

However, the F-8 Crusader was appreciated while it was still around. Small wonder that Navy fighter pilots referred to it as the Tits machine of all time. Cool

I know that bird had the nickname of the Last of the Gunfighters, and that it could take off with its wings still folded.

I'm sorry for getting the thread so far off topic again mods.

Single-engined PAK FA iteration (T-50-49) was intended for never realized Chernyshev MMP engine

flateric wrote:

Single-engined PAK FA iteration (T-50-49) was intended for never realized Chernyshev MMP engine

JSFski?

It looks like the bastard child of the F-16 and the JSF maybe with a little X-32 thrown in to up the weird factor.

"Three measures of F-35s, one of X-32, half a measure of MiG-29. Shaken, not stirred"

Forum: Technology

Sukhoi T-50 PAK-FA