А наши идиоты-конструкторы, конечно же, просто так пошли по американскому пути, создав самолёт по нормальной аэродинамической схеме с трапециевидным в плане крылом и отвергнув при этом 1.44 и С-37?
It's like the Russian military docs.. They have developed the plasma weapons and hyper-sonic aircrafts and the flying saucers etc.. Yeah!! Just like the USSR!! U.T.O.P.I.A.!!!
This looks practical and retrofittable into older tactical-jet designs, and, properly scaled, could give F-15's, F-16's and F-18's better handling at the ragged edges of their performance envelopes. (The United Technologies/Lockheed Martin two-dimensional nozzles on the F-22 have wider angle limits, but they're airframe-specific.)
the only possible way any of you could know which jet is the best is if you flew them. Every single specification you read in some book or on some web page is inaccurate, the real specifications are classified for a reason. the only people who know what the jets are truly capable of are the pilots who fly them, so why waste time arguing about something you know nothing about
@gwschild There is no single pilot who flew every fighter around. Even if there is one, its still biased; an F-16 pilot flying a MiG will never say its better or vice versa. Only true way to know which jet is the best is to find unbiased and accurate specifications and compare them on paper. Only source of that knowledge is flight manuals, as no AF is silly enough to mislead its own pilots.
American fighter planes won't make it thru Siberian winter storms, just like Hitler's babarossa in ww2 & Napoleon's attack of Russia.
Regardless how these American planes (or other machines) looks like or whatever media wants you to believe, these machinery won't run thru Russian winter because one of the big reason is fuel is turning to ice inside thier pipes.
Russian machineries are rigid and design to make it thru their winter. Don't believe it? Go ask Hitler or Napoleon. lolz.
As many have said you logic is seriously flawed, you see America has this little state called Alaska, don't know if you have ever heard of it. Currently Americas has many modern aircraft stationed there permanently, I'm sure you can do a Google search to find out which ones. While you are searching that you can also search to find just how cold it get there, and trust me those planes don't stop flying for a little bit of cold.
@AwesomeJokes Su 37 is better than you Peace of Shit F22 what is now Canseled becorse it was Shit!
Why the Peple in the USA Dont understand that a Jet needs Quality and Funktionality not Design.
The Russian have alwas goes on Funktionality, the USA have Wach to mush Star wars and have goes to Design.
In the End the F22 is already Canseled, they tell us, its to expencive...HA Tell the Tru its better Every Pilot how Fly F22 or SUs thell you that the SUs MUSH better that every US Jet JUST A FAKT
@19834883 further production of f-22s has been terminated (but there is still a possibility that the f-22 may be brought back into mass production). the raptor is NOT cancelled. 187 raptors will be in the US inventory whilst there are only a couple su37s. russia's functionality has always been shit, and they fail to implement some features modern fighters should have. the f-22 is a deadly combination of all 5th generation fighter traits and has already been proven to be a successful combatant
@Udarn1k f22 Loses on all parameters ask the American experts of aircraft. F-22 load factor(G) in 2 times is more on the person than in Su. In educational fight F-22 has lost to plane Su 0-10 (fact)
@LiallisVladik Так напиcали бы по-русски. И ваш выпад, кстати, всё равно был не в тему. Я цитировал товарища "AwesomeJokes", который утверждал, что Ф-22 лучше любой сушки по определению. Это не так. Но утверждать, что Ф-22 сливает по всем параметрам ещё в большей степени неверно. Раптор - это всё же 5 поколение, а значит, что, как минимум, аэродинамические характеристики у него лучше, не говоря уже об авионике.
in a fact - Su-35BM has more advanced AESA radar system (could see any "stealth" jet with RCS >0.01 m - F-22 too) and missile РВВ-СД (range 110 kilometers) against AIM120C-5 with range 105 kilometers.
THE NEW ERA IN AVIATION STARTED in ISRAEL with 1st-EVER flight of Stealth, Tailless 3D Vectoring [STV]. (5/18/1987 Av. Week). Facebook video ["Benjamin Gal-Or"] explains STV-based Super-Kill-Ratio, Extra TO/L-safety (Civil & military) gained by STV, thereby ending dominance of common stall/spin dangerous aero-control. F-35 & F-22 exploit only part of STV potential [tailless= better stealth, reduced drag/structure/weight/fuel). X44 MANTA, X47b, X-48b,c, RQ170, T50, NGB, FB22, X-727.
Anyone noticed that the F22's vector thrust has a higher spread of ANGLE plus a fighter cannot take much lateral g's anyway but however, it just looks sexy^^
Hilarious discussion going on in here from "real" war experts.
The acrobatics that 3-d vectoring provide will get you killed in today's aerial combat because 1) you loose too much airspeed pulling spiral turns 2) too much radar/IR radar cross-section and 3) you can shoot MISSLES at your target from 20+ miles away where you can't even SEE the target.
It'd be good in a gun-on-gun dogfight, but that doesn't exist anymore. other technologies are MUCH more effective.
@pppranayy sorry mate but only russia. India just helped us with money but technologys are russian. India will get 140 jets then it must be upgraded and enter in russian military service.
3d thrust vectoring (TV) may be "better" but it's ineffective in today's air to air combat.
the americans were the first to have 3-D TV... the F-18 HARV program (1987-1996, over 300 flights) and the F-16 MATV (circa 1990-1993). russians didn't have it until the MiG-29 OVT in 2000-2001. google it and see for yourself.
f-22 has 2d TV because 3d isn't needed, and simple 2-d nozzles have a much lower IR and radar signature.
the germans came up with the idea, the americans engineered and built it
STFU ALREADY U IDIOT, F22 IS A GLASS SLIPPER, COMPLETE JUNK AND CANCELED. IT'S ONLY STEALTH IN THE AIR BECAUSE IT WILL ALWAYS BE GROUNDED. GET INFORMED.
Very nice to see sensible Americans, and you and we have a vast knowledge. No need to water by shit Russia or the USA, so who does it better be quiet, you butthurt!
F-22's vertical axis is absolutely sufficient becuause it supports all directions in combination with the wing-controll. y-axis is for a fighter useless!
@fludblud I see, the way they named it is odd, would have called f22 1d and this one 2d since it covers the entire rear plane, would save 3d for a nozzle design that would be able of greater than 90 degrees of inclination
Pretty fucking cool BUT they only have some weird V axis TVC for the flankers. If they make true 2d or 3d TVC and implement them on the flanker then we'll talk.
How many planes move x, y and z very much? Most planes only make lateral adjustments for minor heading correction...you don't dog fight in that fashion, why would you really need thrust vectoring in 360 degrees? Not to mention too much lateral movement and you could end up in an unrecoverable spin. Pilots don't stomp on the rudder to avoid missiles...they quickly roll to one side and pull on the stick to quickly change direction...
@rpenri With a 3-D thrust vectoring system, unrecoverable spins has been eliminated with the Mig29 OTV. That's why you want X, Y, Z tighter turns, faster rolls, better everything.. have you seen the super cobra maneuver? Is that the lateral movement your talking about? It Goes into a spin, but the mig always recovers.
Do you know what lateral movement is??? It means side to side...along the horizontal axis of an object. Planes have vertical stabilizers to prevent side slip during flight...but too much yaw can destabilize a plane as air no longer flows over/under its leading edges to provide lift. The plane usually will go into an almost unrecoverable lateral spin. A super cobra is not even close to being a proper example of lateral movement....
On top of that, a super cobra maneuver requires the plane be relatively slow moving in order for it to work correctly...how many fighter pilots fly their planes as such slow speeds during an actual engagement??? NONE. Speed is life. You lose speed, you lose kinetic energy and you lose your ability to maneuver, even with 3D thrust. Because, believe it or not, when you pull Gs, you bleed speed. That's the reality of flying in an atmosphere...we're not in space with tie fighters and x-wings.
If you are in position to do a cobra, that means that the enemy is behind you. Well, guess what, your cobra maneuver may get the guy right behind you, but what about his wingman??? US pilots fly in tandem, one to cover the "shooter" in case someone wants to take a shot at him and to relay critical information about the dynamics of the engagement.
If you pull a cobra on the guy behind you, his wingman will have a shot and you won't be able to avoid his missile because you're now a sitting duck
A good pilot can easily counter the cobra by performing a split S. A split S is when you invert so that the plane is upside down and you pull hard on the stick until you are now going the opposite direction. A plane that has just performed the cobra will not have enough air speed to effectively turn their nose onto that aircraft before he moves too far in the opposite direction. Jet planes maneuver better at fast speeds, not slow.
If altitude is a factor, you can inversely use a chandelle, which is a turn combined with a climb to counter a cobra maneuver. The plane that just performed the cobra cannot turn fast enough because of the slow-down/almost stop of the cobra maneuver. He cannot turn fast enough nor can he point his nose up in the air because it will cause a stall due to the low speed.
@rpenri depends on the plane. They maneuver best according to their design. An A-10 maneuvers excellent at very low speeds, a su-27 maneuvers excellent at low-mid speeds and Eurofighter maneuvers a bit better at supersonic speeds, allthough jets like the F-22 and Su-35S that have TVC can reach the same level of maneuvering at supersonic speeds.
this is called 3D Thrust vectoring. and the Raptor has 2D which is all a plane should need because all the fancy moves 3D helps russian planes do is useless in a dogfight.
@iceman27406@xnemu no i dont, go to wikipedia and search for "Dimension" in english, click the second image from the top on the right side, can believe you 2 dont know this, you learn it in the first math class in school, seriously
well i am not sure if the Z vector does really help (imagine how a plane flies) you would influence the Yaw and that is not really necessary to support with thrust (just my imagination and opinion) :-) - its just a result of how the nozzle is built..
@xnemu basically the f-22 dosnt need that much lateral thrust control given its massive vertical stabilizers. still the mig-29/35 has got to be one of the top 10 sexiest fighters in existence.
@blitz7341 also, the 2d thrust vectoring in F22 already makes it maneuverable and it allows better stealth capacities because of the shape and some reduction of heat signature.
@xnemu thats why american pilots are not allowed to test fight with russian pilots since ~1995. even old mod of mig29 /su27 can beat f16/18 easily. american pilots can fight only with AIM120.
@xnemu This thrust vector tech was invented in America during the F22 development. It was tested on f16's and 18's. It was also deemed useless because of its high thermal visibility and lack of tangible performance value. It is gen four tech. The f22 uses paddles because its a stealth fighter aircraft, which needs low visibility, not an air show display piece.
@xnemu The F-22 can stand on its engines just fine, besides, i don't see what the advantage is... modern air combat maneuvering is dominated by decisive, high speed maneuvers coupled with advantages in radar and missile technology. The F-22 is the best in the world at all of those things, that's why Sukhoi was driven to produce the PAK FA. If the current Sukhois were good enough, trust me, Sukhoi wouldn't be making a new plane.
@xnemu Russia doesn't have the money to spend trying to leap ahead of the US in military power, they just don't. The F-22 was built to be the best fighter in the world, and it CLEARLY is. Best avionics, best radar, best weapons, extremely fast, extremely maneuverable, and to top it all off it's practically invisible to radar... it was specifically built to shoot down Sukhois and MiG-29's. Not that they would ever need to anyway, at least 70% of the MiG-29 fleet is too old to fly.
@JohnMaxGriffin The thrust vectoring was invented by the russians, not the US. Please stop thinking that the US military is all this and that. The stealth planes were built with the guidance of BAE Systems (Swedish / Brittish owned company), so much for thinking one man can come up with all that. The engines used in the F/A 18, F117 and the JAS 39 Griffin are even the same - made by Volvo and General Electric (F404).. Guess you should read more than brag..
@ArtemisFour The Soviet aerospace industry has had some practical inventions, and thrust vectoring is one of them. We let BAE systems into the stealth project as a courtesy because Great Britain is a NATO country; we already had most of the design plans and technology. Volvo did not help design the F404, they simply invested in it heavily in return for manufacturing rights, hence the RM-12. Engine companies like GE do this a lot to make foreign customers happy, it's just politics :)
@BitnikGr It's capable of post-stall maneuvering, which is the definition of supermaneuverability. If you're getting your information from anyone else other than the F-22's Operating Handbook (which nobody outside of the DoD has access to), it's not 100% accurate. And just so you know, the YF-22 and the production F-22 are very different planes.
@JohnMaxGriffin What I know is that the term "super-maneuverability", was erased from demands for 5th generation fighter prototype, including YF-22 and YF-23. And it was erased for sake of more stealthiness. F-22 is not a definition of super- or extreme- maneuverability at subsonic speeds. But it is definitely the most stealth aircraft in service today and has high sustained G-turns at super-sonic speeds.
@BitnikGr Listen, I respect that you're trying to come to a compromise and I wish I could too, but the reality is that every 5th generation fighter in the world today is supermaneuverable, regardless of whether they were intended to be or not. A general rule of thumb is that any aircraft with thrust vectoring nozzles AND a power to weight ratio greater than about 1.05 is supermaneuverable. Another is the ability to perform the cobra, and/or the J-turn. The F-22 meets all of these requirements
@JohnMaxGriffin You are right. Before any argue take place, parts should determine conditions and terms. If you determine "supermaneuverability" by conditions you mentioned above, then yes. I have to agree with you. By the way, next version of French Rafale is gonna have thrust vectoring as well.
Then the subject will evolve to which aircraft among supermaneuverable ones is more maneuverable than others :)))
@BitnikGr Ha! Seeing as the Rafale already out maneuvers most fighters, I expect that to be one hell of a plane! Certainly up there with the Sukhois and the '22. I also wish we had put the F-15 ACTIVE into production as a fighter... God that would have kicked ass.
Is it just me who thinks that the MiG is an amazing fighter?
Id've neglected the Flankers to keep the Fulcrums in the air if I had been ruling Russia just after the fall... only I would've put in new radars. Thoughts?.
of course it is u retard.... F-22 was introduced in 2005...... and mig-29 was introduced 1983.... its more than 20 years difference.... and still F-22 is just a bit better than the mig-29....
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
A bit better? The F-22 has almost 100% stealth (invisible on radar), it goes supersonic without afterburner for greater range than the Mig, it does maneuvers the Mig pilot can only dream about. A bit better? The Mig would be toast against an F-22, I know, I'm part of the program.
Actually you don't know. Unless the two planes meet in a real battle there is no way to know. People said the F-4 would be a killer when it first came out and it got toast in nam before they added cannons to it. The thing is, unless these two fighters get into a real dogfight there is no way to know. :)
@Edagny f-16 no. Maybe f-15 can do that but it a different class jet. Mig 29 is a frontline bomber and fighter. F-15 is a airsuperiority jet fighter. U just can't paragonate one and other. paragonate f-15 with Su-27....
it doesnt matter if ou borrow mne.between gentlemens are grements for biger things more importnt asborrow some irtual stupid dollar..!!! anyway..welcome to new world order.
The engines could be equipped with the thrust vectoring nozzles which would increase combat efficiency by 12-15%. This is the worlds only thrust vectoring engine that has the ability to rotate in all directions.
The Russians are known to be masters of vectored thrust technology. In fact they have been way ahead of the West in this technology and its applications. Due to the effectiveness of thrust vectoring in reducting control surface cross section it has now been used on F22 the first American combat aircraft to use this technology.
Only one aircraft of this type exists, so you can't compare it to russian aircrafts using it, which are in massproduction! It's around since 1992 and only experimental. In my personal opinion, thrust vectoring makes a lot more sense with more than one engine, but it's understandable: They wanted to test out options to update their existing F16s, not build a new plane, which is a quite reasonable thing to do.
Your stupid russia's whole fucken military is bankrupt they cant even produce more than 12 su-35's and russia only has 10 mig-35's so if thats what your thinking of mass production you are pretty dumb. I also never said NF-16 Vista was going into production it was cancelled along time ago, it was just a technology demonstrater thats all. We have 14 f-35's already and they first started production in 2003, more than the su-35's which production started in the 80's!!!!
The one *pretty dumb* is you, it seems. I never resorted to calling you "dumb" or attacking you, yet you react quite aggressive.
First: It's not *my* russia, I'm neither russian nor do I live anywhere near them.
Second: 10 isn't massproduction, but it's built industrially and not by customizing or updating a single, already existing airplane.
Calling me dumb is quite harsh: I never talked about a specific example like the Su-35, it's not the only aircraft in production with vectoring capability.
Next thing: It's not mandatory for russia to produce every aircraft in huge amounts. Its airforce consist of many different planes for different purposes and russia's military isn't "bankrupt", it's only that their military has to manage on a much lower budget: Their per capita GDP is about one third of the US's, which is only natural, as they're only 18 years away from communism.
Then: They have no urgent need for a giant fleet of similar aircraft, so the money can be spent elsewhere.
Yea I really dont fucken care about war and shit, All I know is russia kept on buying and making military weapons that they could not afford during the cold war and their economy is shit now. You might get lucky if you make 2 bucks an hour for minimum wage is russia.
I didnt borrow any money it was my government which i hate so fuck you. Russia is still in a economic crisis because they spend money on things they dont need.
i thought blondy was about to be set on fire
CaptainG19 7 hours ago
Why fight over Siberia anyway... You have to land-conquer it, an air fight over it cannot happen due temperature.
Zukhov1945 1 month ago
@Zukhov1945 What? An air battle can't happen due to to temperature? It's on average -50 up there everywhere.
Helge129 1 month ago
this must be your view before you are dead xD
ipadize 2 months ago
thi made my clitoris come out of its clitoral hood
jigglyfidda125 3 months ago
It's looking at me 0.o
MrAmnongoull 3 months ago
put this on the f35
colt455446 3 months ago
@colt455446 The F35 has a far, far more advanced version of this
ThatAdelaideGuy 3 months ago
@ThatAdelaideGuy i thought only the b had an adjustment to make it hover- not be more nimble.
colt455446 3 months ago
@colt455446 It does both
ThatAdelaideGuy 3 months ago
Смотрится, как живой организм, лопатки очень плавно движутся, завораживает. Никто не сможет его скопировать или сделать, что-то похожее.
Kostet91 3 months ago
vector anus
PartyBoyz83100 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
now power it up!
pilotos123 3 months ago
Comment removed
pilotos123 3 months ago
А наши идиоты-конструкторы, конечно же, просто так пошли по американскому пути, создав самолёт по нормальной аэродинамической схеме с трапециевидным в плане крылом и отвергнув при этом 1.44 и С-37?
Смотрите, не разваливается: watch?v=k0CPPlFk4Yo
Udarn1k 4 months ago
Mig 35 better than any american plane.
dzundzaviktr 6 months ago
It's like the Russian military docs.. They have developed the plasma weapons and hyper-sonic aircrafts and the flying saucers etc.. Yeah!! Just like the USSR!! U.T.O.P.I.A.!!!
nadoeloiskat 6 months ago
Why is always US Vs Russia??, come on!!!, stop that shit and enjoy technology!!!!!!!!!
LUISFERNANDO1970 6 months ago
This looks practical and retrofittable into older tactical-jet designs, and, properly scaled, could give F-15's, F-16's and F-18's better handling at the ragged edges of their performance envelopes. (The United Technologies/Lockheed Martin two-dimensional nozzles on the F-22 have wider angle limits, but they're airframe-specific.)
bcschmerker 7 months ago
Hmmm. interesting design. Kind of looks fragile though.
danthemansg09 7 months ago
"Yes children. . . Look Into The EyE of the MatriX" (in a traditional slow & spooky voice)
LyfeIzLike 8 months ago
Su's are more maneuverable than F-series jets at low speeds... but, these days, kills are made BVR, so, maneuverability takes a bit of a back seat
operationcwaI789789 8 months ago
usa has a lot of f 22 and f 35_and wtf has russia_almost destroyed military industry and old as my socks planes
MsFastfive 9 months ago
@MsFastfive usa also has a whole fucking lot of debt, and an army that's only capable of fighting collapsed countries.
Adragil 8 months ago 3
the f22 has a 2D thrust vector while this is a 3D thrust vector it is better
hmodywakid 9 months ago
My cock can do that...well except the part where little kids are looking at it.
hollows3 10 months ago 4
WOOOSH! Billy! I told you not so close! Now you've melted your face off....
kriegsammler 10 months ago
Its ALIVE!!!!
123backinyerface 10 months ago 4
the only possible way any of you could know which jet is the best is if you flew them. Every single specification you read in some book or on some web page is inaccurate, the real specifications are classified for a reason. the only people who know what the jets are truly capable of are the pilots who fly them, so why waste time arguing about something you know nothing about
gwschild 11 months ago 18
@gwschild There is no single pilot who flew every fighter around. Even if there is one, its still biased; an F-16 pilot flying a MiG will never say its better or vice versa. Only true way to know which jet is the best is to find unbiased and accurate specifications and compare them on paper. Only source of that knowledge is flight manuals, as no AF is silly enough to mislead its own pilots.
AndraxxusNephilem 1 month ago
American fighter planes won't make it thru Siberian winter storms, just like Hitler's babarossa in ww2 & Napoleon's attack of Russia.
Regardless how these American planes (or other machines) looks like or whatever media wants you to believe, these machinery won't run thru Russian winter because one of the big reason is fuel is turning to ice inside thier pipes.
Russian machineries are rigid and design to make it thru their winter. Don't believe it? Go ask Hitler or Napoleon. lolz.
KatrinaX17 11 months ago 9
@KatrinaX17 Actually, what kinds of machine using fuel did Napolean use???? Too much computer games...
alexcubata 3 months ago
@KatrinaX17 your logic is flawed, as german bombers managed to get to russian cities in winter...
matzklim 2 months ago
@KatrinaX17
As many have said you logic is seriously flawed, you see America has this little state called Alaska, don't know if you have ever heard of it. Currently Americas has many modern aircraft stationed there permanently, I'm sure you can do a Google search to find out which ones. While you are searching that you can also search to find just how cold it get there, and trust me those planes don't stop flying for a little bit of cold.
greenidmonster1 2 months ago
@KatrinaX17 Then we fight in the summer dumbass.
taystew 1 month ago
the f-22 is the best
AwesomeJokes 1 year ago
@AwesomeJokes Su 37 is better than you Peace of Shit F22 what is now Canseled becorse it was Shit!
Why the Peple in the USA Dont understand that a Jet needs Quality and Funktionality not Design.
The Russian have alwas goes on Funktionality, the USA have Wach to mush Star wars and have goes to Design.
In the End the F22 is already Canseled, they tell us, its to expencive...HA Tell the Tru its better Every Pilot how Fly F22 or SUs thell you that the SUs MUSH better that every US Jet JUST A FAKT
19834883 1 year ago 4
@19834883 further production of f-22s has been terminated (but there is still a possibility that the f-22 may be brought back into mass production). the raptor is NOT cancelled. 187 raptors will be in the US inventory whilst there are only a couple su37s. russia's functionality has always been shit, and they fail to implement some features modern fighters should have. the f-22 is a deadly combination of all 5th generation fighter traits and has already been proven to be a successful combatant
AwesomeJokes 1 year ago
@19834883 and the f-22 is better than any SU. just a fact.
AwesomeJokes 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AwesomeJokes "f-22 is better than any SU. just a fact." Awesome joke!
Udarn1k 1 year ago 29
@Udarn1k f22 Loses on all parameters ask the American experts of aircraft. F-22 load factor(G) in 2 times is more on the person than in Su. In educational fight F-22 has lost to plane Su 0-10 (fact)
LiallisVladik 4 months ago
@LiallisVladik Это типа "моя знать английская языка"?
Udarn1k 4 months ago
@Udarn1k я пишу приблизительный перевод думаю тут всё понятно
LiallisVladik 4 months ago
@LiallisVladik Так напиcали бы по-русски. И ваш выпад, кстати, всё равно был не в тему. Я цитировал товарища "AwesomeJokes", который утверждал, что Ф-22 лучше любой сушки по определению. Это не так. Но утверждать, что Ф-22 сливает по всем параметрам ещё в большей степени неверно. Раптор - это всё же 5 поколение, а значит, что, как минимум, аэродинамические характеристики у него лучше, не говоря уже об авионике.
Udarn1k 4 months ago
@Udarn1k ничиво подобного в f22 нет при первом же кульбите расыпеться на части. 5 поеоление ? по моему только максимум 3 дотянул
LiallisVladik 4 months ago
@LiallisVladik Пост ниже.
Udarn1k 4 months ago
@AwesomeJokes
in a fact - Su-35BM has more advanced AESA radar system (could see any "stealth" jet with RCS >0.01 m - F-22 too) and missile РВВ-СД (range 110 kilometers) against AIM120C-5 with range 105 kilometers.
You assured, what F-22 it is better?
VadimDee 11 months ago
thatd be awesome if it ignited and afterburned that family up
xmasterfunk 1 year ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
THE NEW ERA IN AVIATION STARTED in ISRAEL with 1st-EVER flight of Stealth, Tailless 3D Vectoring [STV]. (5/18/1987 Av. Week). Facebook video ["Benjamin Gal-Or"] explains STV-based Super-Kill-Ratio, Extra TO/L-safety (Civil & military) gained by STV, thereby ending dominance of common stall/spin dangerous aero-control. F-35 & F-22 exploit only part of STV potential [tailless= better stealth, reduced drag/structure/weight/fuel). X44 MANTA, X47b, X-48b,c, RQ170, T50, NGB, FB22, X-727.
1Bengalor 1 year ago
Anyone noticed that the F22's vector thrust has a higher spread of ANGLE plus a fighter cannot take much lateral g's anyway but however, it just looks sexy^^
TheHunter222 1 year ago
i wish my butt hole could do that..
williamhad 1 year ago
блин сам окуел ... вот машина гуд))
vfeonov 1 year ago
Power on! Burn the nerds:)
Arkanii1 1 year ago
feast ur eyes on a russian je....oh who am i kidding this things a low quality motor
nunchuck19 1 year ago
红菊花
chenqizhenv1 1 year ago
f16matv copy
Inklebonker1 1 year ago
original MIG29 engines is not have OVT. it`s older engine for this plane, and something like upgrade component
ff5x2 1 year ago
Behold, the Eye of Sauron! :D
RoboTekno 1 year ago
Hilarious discussion going on in here from "real" war experts.
The acrobatics that 3-d vectoring provide will get you killed in today's aerial combat because 1) you loose too much airspeed pulling spiral turns 2) too much radar/IR radar cross-section and 3) you can shoot MISSLES at your target from 20+ miles away where you can't even SEE the target.
It'd be good in a gun-on-gun dogfight, but that doesn't exist anymore. other technologies are MUCH more effective.
ibetithasnot 1 year ago
The F22 vectoring '' plates'' do achieve more X Y angle than these appear to .
MidShipCivic 1 year ago
suddenly it activates afterburner lol pity at those poor kids.
itom95 1 year ago
It almost looks alive or natural awesome
slapyousilly3 1 year ago
well, its true with such a large time gap raptor and mig 29 are closer..
and new stealth fighter pak fa 40 is ready [russia and india]
its better than f-22 raptor [usa (2005)]
pppranayy 1 year ago
@pppranayy sorry mate but only russia. India just helped us with money but technologys are russian. India will get 140 jets then it must be upgraded and enter in russian military service.
LimpBizkitRus 1 year ago
3d thrust vectoring (TV) may be "better" but it's ineffective in today's air to air combat.
the americans were the first to have 3-D TV... the F-18 HARV program (1987-1996, over 300 flights) and the F-16 MATV (circa 1990-1993). russians didn't have it until the MiG-29 OVT in 2000-2001. google it and see for yourself.
f-22 has 2d TV because 3d isn't needed, and simple 2-d nozzles have a much lower IR and radar signature.
the germans came up with the idea, the americans engineered and built it
ibetithasnot 1 year ago
That would Fry that kids head if it worked lol!!
u2ube4mi 1 year ago
ARMCHAIR ENGINEERS.......
copehaha 1 year ago
Post the proof, please. I want to read it, you see.
wtfnamecanihave 1 year ago
@farhansukor
STFU ALREADY U IDIOT, F22 IS A GLASS SLIPPER, COMPLETE JUNK AND CANCELED. IT'S ONLY STEALTH IN THE AIR BECAUSE IT WILL ALWAYS BE GROUNDED. GET INFORMED.
Ironoff 1 year ago
Very nice to see sensible Americans, and you and we have a vast knowledge. No need to water by shit Russia or the USA, so who does it better be quiet, you butthurt!
Moossccooww 1 year ago
this angle really shows how it works
darkshadowscene 2 years ago 6
This has been flagged as spam show
F-22's vertical axis is absolutely sufficient becuause it supports all directions in combination with the wing-controll. y-axis is for a fighter useless!
TheHunter222 2 years ago
start the engine.. afterburn's LOL
pacodinko 2 years ago 6
what is 3d thrust vectoring?
Takeital 2 years ago
3d thrust vectoring means the thrust can be directed in all directions like in the video.
2D thrust vectoring like the F22 can only be directed on one axis like up and down
fludblud 2 years ago 2
@fludblud I see, the way they named it is odd, would have called f22 1d and this one 2d since it covers the entire rear plane, would save 3d for a nozzle design that would be able of greater than 90 degrees of inclination
Takeital 1 year ago
Pretty fucking cool BUT they only have some weird V axis TVC for the flankers. If they make true 2d or 3d TVC and implement them on the flanker then we'll talk.
gosciu555 2 years ago
This thrust is better than the F22
it moves to X, Y, Z
and F22 thrust only X to Y
WTF
xnemu 2 years ago 82
not totally... the F-22'2 2d vectoring can go farther in the 2d.
markbart7 2 years ago
@xnemu
How many planes move x, y and z very much? Most planes only make lateral adjustments for minor heading correction...you don't dog fight in that fashion, why would you really need thrust vectoring in 360 degrees? Not to mention too much lateral movement and you could end up in an unrecoverable spin. Pilots don't stomp on the rudder to avoid missiles...they quickly roll to one side and pull on the stick to quickly change direction...
rpenri 1 year ago 2
@rpenri With a 3-D thrust vectoring system, unrecoverable spins has been eliminated with the Mig29 OTV. That's why you want X, Y, Z tighter turns, faster rolls, better everything.. have you seen the super cobra maneuver? Is that the lateral movement your talking about? It Goes into a spin, but the mig always recovers.
borbor122 1 year ago
@borbor122
Do you know what lateral movement is??? It means side to side...along the horizontal axis of an object. Planes have vertical stabilizers to prevent side slip during flight...but too much yaw can destabilize a plane as air no longer flows over/under its leading edges to provide lift. The plane usually will go into an almost unrecoverable lateral spin. A super cobra is not even close to being a proper example of lateral movement....
rpenri 1 year ago 5
On top of that, a super cobra maneuver requires the plane be relatively slow moving in order for it to work correctly...how many fighter pilots fly their planes as such slow speeds during an actual engagement??? NONE. Speed is life. You lose speed, you lose kinetic energy and you lose your ability to maneuver, even with 3D thrust. Because, believe it or not, when you pull Gs, you bleed speed. That's the reality of flying in an atmosphere...we're not in space with tie fighters and x-wings.
rpenri 1 year ago 5
If you are in position to do a cobra, that means that the enemy is behind you. Well, guess what, your cobra maneuver may get the guy right behind you, but what about his wingman??? US pilots fly in tandem, one to cover the "shooter" in case someone wants to take a shot at him and to relay critical information about the dynamics of the engagement.
If you pull a cobra on the guy behind you, his wingman will have a shot and you won't be able to avoid his missile because you're now a sitting duck
rpenri 1 year ago 5
A good pilot can easily counter the cobra by performing a split S. A split S is when you invert so that the plane is upside down and you pull hard on the stick until you are now going the opposite direction. A plane that has just performed the cobra will not have enough air speed to effectively turn their nose onto that aircraft before he moves too far in the opposite direction. Jet planes maneuver better at fast speeds, not slow.
rpenri 1 year ago 7
If altitude is a factor, you can inversely use a chandelle, which is a turn combined with a climb to counter a cobra maneuver. The plane that just performed the cobra cannot turn fast enough because of the slow-down/almost stop of the cobra maneuver. He cannot turn fast enough nor can he point his nose up in the air because it will cause a stall due to the low speed.
You DO know what a stall is, don't you?
rpenri 1 year ago 4
@rpenri Said a guy who has never even flown a fighter.
ArtemisFour 7 months ago
@rpenri The cobra is not a combat manuvuer. You'd be dead ten times over before you completed whatever is you think you can do with the cobra.
0HippyHunter0 7 months ago
@rpenri It doesn't need to turn. Instead of Cobra it will backflip and be again on your tail.
BitnikGr 6 months ago
@rpenri depends on the plane. They maneuver best according to their design. An A-10 maneuvers excellent at very low speeds, a su-27 maneuvers excellent at low-mid speeds and Eurofighter maneuvers a bit better at supersonic speeds, allthough jets like the F-22 and Su-35S that have TVC can reach the same level of maneuvering at supersonic speeds.
ANimouz 6 months ago
@rpenri
You missed a small detail ... what's about the wingman of the Russian guy? They don't fly solo either, you know.
DunnoWhoIam2 1 year ago
@xnemu
this is called 3D Thrust vectoring. and the Raptor has 2D which is all a plane should need because all the fancy moves 3D helps russian planes do is useless in a dogfight.
BRIANROX1 1 year ago
@xnemu Dude, you should really learn X, Y Z values, this OVT moves in X and Y direction, the F22 only moves in the Y direction!
JesperA86 1 year ago
u should think again
xnemu 1 year ago
@xnemu No i shouldnt, you should, X = left/right, Y = Up/Down, Z = forward/back, so the OVT is only X and Y and the Raptor is only Y!
JesperA86 1 year ago
@JesperA86 please try again man....
xnemu 1 year ago
@JesperA86 you got y and z backwards
iceman27406 1 year ago
@iceman27406 @xnemu no i dont, go to wikipedia and search for "Dimension" in english, click the second image from the top on the right side, can believe you 2 dont know this, you learn it in the first math class in school, seriously
JesperA86 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@JesperA86 wiki pedia. org /wiki/Three- dimensional_space shows me correct you wrong the z is up down
iceman27406 1 year ago
@xnemu
Thrust vectoring, not the thrust..
SkuliSheepman 1 year ago
@xnemu that doesnt make sence..
lask72 1 year ago
@lask72 lol newfag
KRewind 1 year ago
@xnemu yes
IgorBigDick1 1 year ago
@xnemu why would you need the Z. the point of a fighter aircraft is weapons right. plu it has stealth
nunchuck19 1 year ago
Comment removed
tronicson 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xnemu
well i am not sure if the Z vector does really help (imagine how a plane flies) you would influence the Yaw and that is not really necessary to support with thrust (just my imagination and opinion) :-) - its just a result of how the nozzle is built..
tronicson 1 year ago
@xnemu basically the f-22 dosnt need that much lateral thrust control given its massive vertical stabilizers. still the mig-29/35 has got to be one of the top 10 sexiest fighters in existence.
blitz7341 1 year ago
@blitz7341 also, the 2d thrust vectoring in F22 already makes it maneuverable and it allows better stealth capacities because of the shape and some reduction of heat signature.
Still, 3d thrust vectoring is sexy
bf2lover42 1 year ago
@xnemu I may be mistaken, but doesn't the F22 deflect thrust up and down only... i.e. Z direction only?
jdkaorned1 1 year ago
@jdkaorned1 well i heard the same, only Z axes
Harky88 1 year ago
@xnemu thats why american pilots are not allowed to test fight with russian pilots since ~1995. even old mod of mig29 /su27 can beat f16/18 easily. american pilots can fight only with AIM120.
U378U 1 year ago
@U378U well, i heard that rusian pilots were being trained to handle 12G without "asistance suit" in 1998
and they were very young so being agile is what matters here.
xnemu 1 year ago
@xnemu )) agile... Maybe. But about "12g training" - its pretty funny. coz in 98 all the money was spent to ensure that planes were just able to fly)
U378U 1 year ago
@xnemu But the F-22's thrust vectoring can confuse and deter heat-seeking missiles, and the MiG 29's doesn't. "WTF."
pilot495 10 months ago
@xnemu i think you meant Mig 29 thrust vectoring can point X n Y. while F22 can only do Y.
cerrutiboy1 9 months ago
@xnemu This thrust vector tech was invented in America during the F22 development. It was tested on f16's and 18's. It was also deemed useless because of its high thermal visibility and lack of tangible performance value. It is gen four tech. The f22 uses paddles because its a stealth fighter aircraft, which needs low visibility, not an air show display piece.
brentsrx7 8 months ago
@xnemu
It moves on the x and y axis, while the F-22 only moves on the y axis.
aidler2 8 months ago
@xnemu Let me ask you this, when are you going to need to vector thrust along the Z axis?
JohnMaxGriffin 8 months ago
@JohnMaxGriffin when it goes from x to y & y to x
now with this thrust every jet can hover walk :)
xnemu 8 months ago
@xnemu The F-22 can stand on its engines just fine, besides, i don't see what the advantage is... modern air combat maneuvering is dominated by decisive, high speed maneuvers coupled with advantages in radar and missile technology. The F-22 is the best in the world at all of those things, that's why Sukhoi was driven to produce the PAK FA. If the current Sukhois were good enough, trust me, Sukhoi wouldn't be making a new plane.
JohnMaxGriffin 8 months ago
@xnemu Russia doesn't have the money to spend trying to leap ahead of the US in military power, they just don't. The F-22 was built to be the best fighter in the world, and it CLEARLY is. Best avionics, best radar, best weapons, extremely fast, extremely maneuverable, and to top it all off it's practically invisible to radar... it was specifically built to shoot down Sukhois and MiG-29's. Not that they would ever need to anyway, at least 70% of the MiG-29 fleet is too old to fly.
JohnMaxGriffin 8 months ago
@JohnMaxGriffin The thrust vectoring was invented by the russians, not the US. Please stop thinking that the US military is all this and that. The stealth planes were built with the guidance of BAE Systems (Swedish / Brittish owned company), so much for thinking one man can come up with all that. The engines used in the F/A 18, F117 and the JAS 39 Griffin are even the same - made by Volvo and General Electric (F404).. Guess you should read more than brag..
ArtemisFour 7 months ago
@ArtemisFour The Soviet aerospace industry has had some practical inventions, and thrust vectoring is one of them. We let BAE systems into the stealth project as a courtesy because Great Britain is a NATO country; we already had most of the design plans and technology. Volvo did not help design the F404, they simply invested in it heavily in return for manufacturing rights, hence the RM-12. Engine companies like GE do this a lot to make foreign customers happy, it's just politics :)
JohnMaxGriffin 7 months ago
@ArtemisFour One note on the JAS 39... it's made by SAAB, not Volvo ;)
walzca 7 months ago
@JohnMaxGriffin How is it "extremely maneuverable" if term "super maneuverability" was erased from YF-22 specifications?
BitnikGr 6 months ago
@BitnikGr It's capable of post-stall maneuvering, which is the definition of supermaneuverability. If you're getting your information from anyone else other than the F-22's Operating Handbook (which nobody outside of the DoD has access to), it's not 100% accurate. And just so you know, the YF-22 and the production F-22 are very different planes.
JohnMaxGriffin 6 months ago
@JohnMaxGriffin What I know is that the term "super-maneuverability", was erased from demands for 5th generation fighter prototype, including YF-22 and YF-23. And it was erased for sake of more stealthiness. F-22 is not a definition of super- or extreme- maneuverability at subsonic speeds. But it is definitely the most stealth aircraft in service today and has high sustained G-turns at super-sonic speeds.
BitnikGr 6 months ago
@BitnikGr Listen, I respect that you're trying to come to a compromise and I wish I could too, but the reality is that every 5th generation fighter in the world today is supermaneuverable, regardless of whether they were intended to be or not. A general rule of thumb is that any aircraft with thrust vectoring nozzles AND a power to weight ratio greater than about 1.05 is supermaneuverable. Another is the ability to perform the cobra, and/or the J-turn. The F-22 meets all of these requirements
JohnMaxGriffin 6 months ago
@JohnMaxGriffin You are right. Before any argue take place, parts should determine conditions and terms. If you determine "supermaneuverability" by conditions you mentioned above, then yes. I have to agree with you. By the way, next version of French Rafale is gonna have thrust vectoring as well.
Then the subject will evolve to which aircraft among supermaneuverable ones is more maneuverable than others :)))
BitnikGr 6 months ago
@BitnikGr Ha! Seeing as the Rafale already out maneuvers most fighters, I expect that to be one hell of a plane! Certainly up there with the Sukhois and the '22. I also wish we had put the F-15 ACTIVE into production as a fighter... God that would have kicked ass.
JohnMaxGriffin 6 months ago
Gos afterburn and owns that kid LOL...
tanksponge 2 years ago
Gentlemen, order please - less fighting.
Is it just me who thinks that the MiG is an amazing fighter?
Id've neglected the Flankers to keep the Fulcrums in the air if I had been ruling Russia just after the fall... only I would've put in new radars. Thoughts?.
radzai - hush child.
vodkasvictim 2 years ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
f-22 is better ;)
sdfsdf666 2 years ago
of course it is u retard.... F-22 was introduced in 2005...... and mig-29 was introduced 1983.... its more than 20 years difference.... and still F-22 is just a bit better than the mig-29....
peivz 2 years ago 49
Comment removed
radzai 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
A bit better? The F-22 has almost 100% stealth (invisible on radar), it goes supersonic without afterburner for greater range than the Mig, it does maneuvers the Mig pilot can only dream about. A bit better? The Mig would be toast against an F-22, I know, I'm part of the program.
Greencom
radzai 2 years ago
Lol you dont know shit about planes :)
Bibazavr 2 years ago 2
hahaha part of program !!!!!!LOLZ man you a retard!!!!!!!
plavins1 2 years ago
dumbass... SU - 37 is better then ur F-22
kkandreykk 2 years ago 6
what the fuck makes you think the su-37 is better than the f-22..how many su-37s are out there huh..
gunnemdown357 2 years ago
Fool!
camelapodo 2 years ago
@gunnemdown357 something like 800 on russian airforce...
LimpBizkitRus 1 year ago
Actually you don't know. Unless the two planes meet in a real battle there is no way to know. People said the F-4 would be a killer when it first came out and it got toast in nam before they added cannons to it. The thing is, unless these two fighters get into a real dogfight there is no way to know. :)
KDALove 2 years ago 4
@peivz as a matter of fact, aerodynamically mig-29 is still better than any American fighter out there, including F-22.
randominitializer 1 year ago
@peivz
yeah the introduction times were different but the Raptor has been in development since around the mig 29s service introducttion
BRIANROX1 1 year ago
@peivz I bet that's the Reason why Obama cancelled the F-22 Production. Totaly useless against Mig-35 and SU-35.
SovjetPhoenix 1 year ago 2
@peivz Lol not even just a bit, more like light years ahead. We don't need the F-22 to take out a MiG-29, just a simple F-15 or even F-16
Edagny 1 year ago
@Edagny f-16 no. Maybe f-15 can do that but it a different class jet. Mig 29 is a frontline bomber and fighter. F-15 is a airsuperiority jet fighter. U just can't paragonate one and other. paragonate f-15 with Su-27....
LimpBizkitRus 1 year ago
@peivz Better by none you meant? F22 can't do shit.
TonyFirelli 1 year ago
@TonyFirelli
F-22 is for pilots that cant fly good or are scared stiff of fighting other planes, thats why they are stealth
warriorxp111 1 year ago
@warriorxp111 Russian detection systems are invisible, (РГУ) F22 have little chance
Biogem369 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
your just jelous =D
f-22 still is awesome
mrkilltron 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Being replaced by F-35, therefore, F-35 is better ;)
IronManu77 2 years ago
it doesnt matter if ou borrow mne.between gentlemens are grements for biger things more importnt asborrow some irtual stupid dollar..!!! anyway..welcome to new world order.
eristderbeste 2 years ago
"Morskaya Osa" only one existing engine 5 generation on planet Earth. F-22 trust 2D russuian planes 3D.
Zbyszkoz 2 years ago
The engines could be equipped with the thrust vectoring nozzles which would increase combat efficiency by 12-15%. This is the worlds only thrust vectoring engine that has the ability to rotate in all directions.
Zbyszkoz 2 years ago
Comment removed
aval1998 2 years ago
i know stupid fatty!!!
ivanlunaelizarraras 2 years ago
my dad can beat up your dad...
skiunow 2 years ago
thanks to the new LOAL missiles, manoevrability has become out phased :(
blingyruss 2 years ago
Yeah . So why did they go with 2d thrust vectoring for f22 raptor ?
LOAL missles already existed when they made them .
STFU if you dont know what are you talking about .
gizzmozzium 2 years ago
they are americans... duh
blingyruss 2 years ago
What is the smellting point of that nozzle ? and why is it capable to move up and down and left and rigt :P:..
Asim2846 2 years ago
It increases the planes manouverabilyty.
mohrds 2 years ago 3
Maneuverability*
TheBlitz1 2 years ago
The Russians are known to be masters of vectored thrust technology. In fact they have been way ahead of the West in this technology and its applications. Due to the effectiveness of thrust vectoring in reducting control surface cross section it has now been used on F22 the first American combat aircraft to use this technology.
presar02 2 years ago 5
well the Russians did perfect Thrust vectoring
aaronh257 2 years ago
Americans perfected it bud, they made the first fighter with thrust vectoring nozzles with vector control. Nf-16 vista.
tonygogap 2 years ago
Only one aircraft of this type exists, so you can't compare it to russian aircrafts using it, which are in massproduction! It's around since 1992 and only experimental. In my personal opinion, thrust vectoring makes a lot more sense with more than one engine, but it's understandable: They wanted to test out options to update their existing F16s, not build a new plane, which is a quite reasonable thing to do.
346L3 2 years ago
Your stupid russia's whole fucken military is bankrupt they cant even produce more than 12 su-35's and russia only has 10 mig-35's so if thats what your thinking of mass production you are pretty dumb. I also never said NF-16 Vista was going into production it was cancelled along time ago, it was just a technology demonstrater thats all. We have 14 f-35's already and they first started production in 2003, more than the su-35's which production started in the 80's!!!!
tonygogap 2 years ago
The one *pretty dumb* is you, it seems. I never resorted to calling you "dumb" or attacking you, yet you react quite aggressive.
First: It's not *my* russia, I'm neither russian nor do I live anywhere near them.
Second: 10 isn't massproduction, but it's built industrially and not by customizing or updating a single, already existing airplane.
Calling me dumb is quite harsh: I never talked about a specific example like the Su-35, it's not the only aircraft in production with vectoring capability.
346L3 2 years ago
Next thing: It's not mandatory for russia to produce every aircraft in huge amounts. Its airforce consist of many different planes for different purposes and russia's military isn't "bankrupt", it's only that their military has to manage on a much lower budget: Their per capita GDP is about one third of the US's, which is only natural, as they're only 18 years away from communism.
Then: They have no urgent need for a giant fleet of similar aircraft, so the money can be spent elsewhere.
346L3 2 years ago 3
Yea I really dont fucken care about war and shit, All I know is russia kept on buying and making military weapons that they could not afford during the cold war and their economy is shit now. You might get lucky if you make 2 bucks an hour for minimum wage is russia.
tonygogap 2 years ago 2
stupid fuck, is russia in recession now?
NO because they haven borrowed any money like you sheep
did
infantserbian 2 years ago
I didnt borrow any money it was my government which i hate so fuck you. Russia is still in a economic crisis because they spend money on things they dont need.
tonygogap 2 years ago