PAK FA vs F-22A

[/quote]
Ah right, throwing your aircraft around drastically is what makes you win the WVR engagement. So simple and elegant.

It makes me wonder though, why the country with the biggest military research budget ever, who knew quite well about this supermaneuverability, gave priority to several other properties, almost as if they know that in the total package it is not an advantage at all, crazy right?[/quote]

Of course not. I'm not saying the F-22 won't win in WVR encounters too. I am saying nobody puts on an air display as aggressive as that SU-35 did at MAKS 2017. It's considerably more impressive than the Paris SU-35 debut, so I'm assuming they're squeezing more from it OR it was a better/more talented pilot.

For the record, I feel the Raptor isn't showing all of its tricks (post stall) at airshows. In fact, I don't even think it's close to some of the stuff it can do. Whereas I do think the Russians are pushing the SU-35 to its limits. In the realm of public demonstrations though, that SU-35 demo stood head and shoulders above the F-22's I've seen in video and in person (3 times).

There is simply no other aircraft that can throw itself around the sky/execute such drastic nose pointing maneuvers as the SU-35. Sure, you can argue about HOBS missiles, possibly better acceleration etc from US 5th gen jets, but I've seen nothing come close to the most recent SU-35 display at MAKS, I think it was. It didn't even lose altitude after performing these loops, cobra's etc. If the F-35 or F-22 can do the same, I'd love to see it.

Either the US jets can't match those maneuvers or they're holding back. I'll concede it certainly could be the latter...

This actually has more to do with aerial demonstration doctrines than actual capability.

As test pilot Jon Beesly once said, the Russian live to perform what they call "ballistic" maneuvers where the plane is affected by external factors like Gravity, wind resistance etc. with most Russian demos you'll often see Flankers get extremely slow while they execute dazzling high alpha and post stall maneuvers. Its elegant and astounding to see but has nearly zero combat relevance.

American demos on the otherhand display lots of power and precission. I have yet to see a Flanker or any aircraft replicate the max performance take off routine of the Raptor. I have yet to see any of them complete a 360 minimum radius turn in just a little over 20 seconds shortly after said takeoff, while still havy with fuel.

The powerloop is unique in that at one point it anchors the nose in one spot and the plane is actually flying tail first.

Can the Raptor tumble around in the sky? Yes it can, they demonstrated that in departure control test and the pilot was able to recover, so if they wanted they could do that in a demo because they know its safe. But why? The Raptor's whole image is that its the most powerful aircraft out there, so the demo is centered around demonstrations of power.

You see American aircraft being used by other forces with different demo doctrines and you see different things as well. I saw a Dutch F-16 doing all kinds of crazy maneuvers I didn't know the F-16 could do. The Swiss F/A-18C has a very impressive demo too. It almost looked like it had TVC at times better than any US legacy hornet demo.

Its all about demo doctrines, Americans like to drive fast and do tight high G turns, being under control at all times. Its probably the most tactically relevant in the real world but not always the best thing to look a.

OK this makes sense. I actually posted above before reading this, responding to the other poster's quote on page 2. Explains it perfectly, thanks..

http://nordic.businessinsider.com/f-22- ... et-2017-12


We asked an F-22 Raptor squadron commander if he's worried about Russia's Su-57 stealth fighter — and he laughed

"I'm not concerned - I'll tell you that," Hinds said with a laugh.

Well I don't think su35's airshow moves are more aggressive. Non of its moves exceed 90 deg/sec. F22 has some moves reach this threshold.

The Raptor is like King Kong on steroids.

The Russians will soldier on with great 4th+ gen designs, their SU-35 for example being the gold standard for WVR combat.

In what way is the Su-35 the gold standard for WVR?

Lol this^ how?

To be honest, if su35 is the gold standard of wvr, then any 4th Gen. with tvc can be the gold standard. F15E(ge129)+tvc could be the platinum standard.

F-15Cs were able to beat Su-30MKIs quite handily at Red Flag in 2008. The Su-35 has some improvements over the MKI but it’s not going to be a game changer. At best it’s an incremental improvement. I highly doubt that the Su-35 is the “gold standard” in maneuverability. Certainly it has advantages in certain parts of the flight envelope but it will also have its relative disadvantages.

F-15Cs were able to beat Su-30MKIs quite handily at Red Flag in 2008. The Su-35 has some improvements over the MKI but it’s not going to be a game changer. At best it’s an incremental improvement. I highly doubt that the Su-35 is the “gold standard” in maneuverability. Certainly it has advantages in certain parts of the flight envelope but it will also have its relative disadvantages.

Short of an F-22 in willing to bet the gold standard In WVR is the viper. Some eagle guys might have their own ideas of course.

I remember when th3 MKI with the canards and thrust vectoring was supposed to be the bees knees... su 35 got rid of the canards lol

F-15Cs were able to beat Su-30MKIs quite handily at Red Flag in 2008. The Su-35 has some improvements over the MKI but it’s not going to be a game changer. At best it’s an incremental improvement. I highly doubt that the Su-35 is the “gold standard” in maneuverability. Certainly it has advantages in certain parts of the flight envelope but it will also have its relative disadvantages.

Short of an F-22 in willing to bet the gold standard In WVR is the viper. Some eagle guys might have their own ideas of course.

I remember when th3 MKI with the canards and thrust vectoring was supposed to be the bees knees... su 35 got rid of the canards lol

Yup. It’s an Su-30 MKI with 1 seat and no canards with some changes to better optimize it for the air to air role. It’s still the same basic airframe with some updated engines and a new radar. If Eagles could more than hold their own against the MKI, the F-22 should be just fine against the 35.

Just take a look at the official su35 maneuverability spec. (Climb rate, acceleration,
maximum g...) and compare It against a F15e(ge129 no cft). You know immediately gold standard is a joke. Above that there are platinum, diamond, master and challenger

To be honest, if su35 is the gold standard of wvr, then any 4th Gen. with tvc can be the gold standard. F15E(ge129)+tvc could be the platinum standard.

I'm wondering what would make you think this way? The Su-35 is pretty good, I'll give it that but I wouldn't go this far.

Besides 3D TVC which only really useful in the extreme slow speed or extreme highspeed part of the envelope, what else does it have?

TVC is just dead weight in the vast majority of the subsonic envelope where most dogfights occur. So in that sense, you could say 3D TVC is a disadvantage in a large part of the maneuvering envelope.

And unlike the Raptor, the Flanker doesn't have as much power to compensate for the extra weight. Carrying ordnance outside also doesn't help. The TVC of the Su-35 deflects 15 degrees in the Y axis and 8 degrees in the X axis compared to the F-22's 20 degrees in the Y axis.

So except for extreme slow speed Yawing movements, the Raptor has superior maneuvering performance against the Su-35 across the board.

But to be fair, the Raptor is 5th gen and you did say 4th gen. So maybe yeah, I'd say the Su-35 might be on top in terms of overall kinematic performance. but it doesn't beat the competition hands down.

I'd bet a Typhoon would out climb it.

A Superhornet may have better departure resistance, I noticed that during high Alpha demos the Su-35 always looses a few hundred feet in altitude after a maneuver like that, the Rhino can level off perfectly after high alpha moves.

High altitude maneuverability may still be owned by the Eagle.

The Viper can out turn it. better Energy as well across the board. If I'm not mistaken, only the Raptor can compete with a Viper in its own game and even then it might be pretty close. maybe Tailgate can confirm or debunk this as he flew both. Howbout it Tailgate.

but since the Su-35 can pretty much be at least competitive against all 4th gen types in their own games, then yeah, maybe you can say it is a gold standard in 4th gen metrics.

http://nordic.businessinsider.com/f-22-raptor-vs-russia-su-57-fighter-jet-2017-12


We asked an F-22 Raptor squadron commander if he's worried about Russia's Su-57 stealth fighter — and he laughed

"I'm not concerned - I'll tell you that," Hinds said with a laugh.

Yeah, I got a similar reaction from an F-22 pilot at this year's airshow in MA I attended. However, when that conversation turned to Chinese fighters (the J-20), he wasn't so dismissive. Said something to the effect, "The Chinese take Russian designs and tinker with them a lot. Some of their stuff is pretty impressive...".

I get the sense they're told something in intelligence briefings that leads them to believe the Russian stuff isn't very capable. Maybe I'm wrong, but it was palpable. He mentioned "intelligence briefings" twice when I asked him why he felt that way..

F-15Cs were able to beat Su-30MKIs quite handily at Red Flag in 2008. The Su-35 has some improvements over the MKI but it’s not going to be a game changer. At best it’s an incremental improvement. I highly doubt that the Su-35 is the “gold standard” in maneuverability. Certainly it has advantages in certain parts of the flight envelope but it will also have its relative disadvantages.

I heard this too (Red Flag 2008 results), but of course the Indians said differently. Cope India results I dismiss given the ridiculous ROE's, but getting the real truth is difficult. What is clear is that advanced Flankers are a serious threat, with most pilots I've spoken to (F-15C pilots) saying that it's going to come down to the pilot. And to me, that's concerning. It seemed like during the 1980's our teen series held very obvious advantages over the Mig-21, 23, 25 threat and once the Mig-29/SU-27 emerged, those advantages were now much less.

Because we truncated the F-22 buy, air superiority is no longer guaranteed. Sure, I think it'll ultimately be achieved but at a much higher cost. I just hate seeing our country send to war pilots in machines with no clear cut advantages. Or at least a lot of them. Hopefully, the F-35 will bring us back to a qualitative edge. I do think it's going to revolutionize air warfare. I think this time, it's going to happen...

F-15Cs were able to beat Su-30MKIs quite handily at Red Flag in 2008. The Su-35 has some improvements over the MKI but it’s not going to be a game changer. At best it’s an incremental improvement. I highly doubt that the Su-35 is the “gold standard” in maneuverability. Certainly it has advantages in certain parts of the flight envelope but it will also have its relative disadvantages.

I heard this too (Red Flag 2008 results), but of course the Indians said differently. Cope India results I dismiss given the ridiculous ROE's, but getting the real truth is difficult. What is clear is that advanced Flankers are a serious threat, with most pilots I've spoken to (F-15C pilots) saying that it's going to come down to the pilot. And to me, that's concerning. It seemed like during the 1980's our teen series held very obvious advantages over the Mig-21, 23, 25 threat and once the Mig-29/SU-27 emerged, those advantages were now much less.

Because we truncated the F-22 buy, air superiority is no longer guaranteed. Sure, I think it'll ultimately be achieved but at a much higher cost. I just hate seeing our country send to war pilots in machines with no clear cut advantages. Or at least a lot of them. Hopefully, the F-35 will bring us back to a qualitative edge. I do think it's going to revolutionize air warfare. I think this time, it's going to happen...

I don't think they are nearly the threat people make them out to be.

And before I get the "remember Vietnam" and "better to over estimate an opponent" scolding. I just really don't know how evolutionary changes in the flanker design leads to revolutionary results. The super hornet needed drastic Changes from the original to get some big performance advantages.

AlsonSpeaking very broadly, anytime we are talking WVR I think the smaller lighter fighter has an advantage over the larger. Again broadly. Some viper and an su35 I'll probably pick the viper to win