All fifth-generation fighter F-22 Raptors from the 1st Fighter Wing, Langley Air Force Base, Va., are back with the flight operations suspended a pilot after going through loss of oxygen during the flight.
Air Force Base Elmendorf-Richardson also suspended flights of its F-22 Raptors
Over 20 years of design and how can it still stopping
Eurofighter Typhoon is now the best maneuvering fighter aircraft. Su-35 looks and flys like the big old fat cow. there is no comparision to Typhoon. British pilots of Eurofighters did beat even F-22 during Red Flag couple years ago.
@Gottmituns1610 Typhoon CAN NOT maneuver post-stall. CANNOT change direction at 0 and negative speeds. It cannot rotate in all 3 axis while at 0 velocity. Su-35 flies like a fat old cow? You are blind.
@Spetsnazovets Air show Typhoon's demos are extremely dynamic and fast, without thrust vectoring ! Typhoon is optimalized to fight not to the circus performances. Who uses during real combat 0 speed capabilities? Less complex devices means higher level of reliability. Proper size of fighter plane. Su-35 is too big and his RCS huge as hell. Typhoon RCS is circa 0,5m2. I am not a fan of german tech, but i know what i see.
@Spetsnazovets 400 km for fighter 25m2 RCS aircraft as the Su-27 maybe.
Typhoon has 0,5m2 RCS fighter generation 4+++.Typhoon is pure grerman Messerschmitt-Bölkow-Blohm design. Real name Messerschmitt BF2000.German fuselage, airframe, engines, radar and gun . The name Typhoon,ejection seat is UK origin only. Spanish and Italian are tires for landing gears , CD player and upholstery.
The Tikhomirov NIIP (IRBIS radar designer) has stated that 400km at 2.5SqM RCS NOT 25 while 0.01SqM target is found at 90km. More then enough to track and engage Typhoon at tactical BVR ranges
One last thing, fanboy. If the t-50's sensors are so good, why is the the targeting pod they're doing to put on it contracted to Thales? The US is even sueing Russia because they copied it and are planning to use it. It's kind of pathetic that Russia isn't even confident enough to use it's own domestic sensors on it's aircraft. The only sensor that's indigenous is it's OLS.
@atmodom helmet mounted display, but it's based on where the pilot can point his head, so he can't exactly fire right behind him. The f-35's HMD is the best, even if the pilot can turn his head all the way around, the system categorizes the target and allows him to fire a sidewinder or AMRAAM directly behind him without having to maneuver.
@cursethee Actually its just the opposide. F-35s HMD is good, esspecially b/c it also includes hud, but F-35 does not have rear faced optical locator to queue a missile. Only T-50 has a rear faced EOS, thats the sphere behind the cockpit. AIM-9X is still behind even R-73M2 let alone proposed T-50 armaments, when it comes to off-boresight capability. That gives F-35 only 45deg cone for attack zone. AMRAAM needs datalink or radar lock to be fired. It has mad-dog ability but within 15 deg cone.
@atmodom You have to understand, I have great respect for all aircraft. Including Russian and Chinese made ones. I love the t-50, it's the sexiest most maneuverable bird out there. The f-35 looks like shit. On the other hand the f-35 is the most advanced jet fighter out there. It can pick up the f-22 easily. It can launch a missile 360 degrees and has the best detection capabilities anywhere. The f-22 still has to get it's targets in front of it. It's fucking revolutionary. The t-50 may have a
@atmodom away. That means that the f-35 will be able to see the t-50 from well over 100 miles away. That is EXTREMELY far for an infrared based sensor. I can guarantee you the t-50 will have nothing like that, because I already know and have seen the exact sensors including it's own distributed aperture system that will be in the aircraft. Their quality is crap compared to the f-35's sensors. Even the t-50's innovative l-band wont be able to do much to defend it because AMRAAM's can rely on gps.
@cursethee Why you have to make false claims in your every comment? F-35s EOTS is not even comperable to OLS-27 when it comes to A-A combat. Its designed as a internal, stealthy Sniper XR pod, we are lucky if it can detect at all. DAS is only a IR Missile waring system, nothing more, something Su-35 already has and T-50 certainly have. T-50s L band (not I) radar is for detecting LO objects by using , it has nothing to do with amraam, and amraam doesnt have a GPS.
@AndraxxusNephilem Wrong, wrong and wrong. The EOTS is so much better than the OLS. It may have been based off the design of the Sniper XR, but it was a lot more built in functions. All you do is read info on websites, I know how this shit actually works.
The l-band radars on the t-50 aren't going to be used for detecting low-observable objects. It doesn't have the beam strength or enough TR modules. It's uses are mainly detecting, jamming and degrading NATO link-16 data links like on theAMRAAM
@cursethee You dont know any shit at all. You not only even read websites, but you dont have slightest engineering knowledge about anything. T-50s L band (again not I band) radars are not even in production so how do you know about its strength or TR modules? Why does it even need TR modules for LO detection? You know what I band is used for? Ship navigation radars! LOL! You know what I band is? it is a subset of X band (8 to 10 GHz = I, 8 to 11.2 GHz = X) So every fighter radar is ALSO I band.
@cursethee There is no point in making a claim within an area of science, physics and engineering you know nothing about, as it gets pretty obvious when you lie. If you dont have any factual info -which means techical drawings, flight manuals, CAD models, production process schematics, official performance figures etc etc.- to prove me wrong, dont bother replying. Live with your own lies.
@atmodom Do you know how, besides it's extremely advanced AESA and RWR how a f-35 will shoot a t-50 out of the sky? Consider how far more advanced the United States is in engine design. The f-35 has the most powerful, yet one of the stealthiest in IR signiture engines in the world. At full military power not in afterburner it's detection range on an enemy IRST is half that of a normal engine. The t-50 has 2, and can be seen from way further. The DAS on the f-35 can see a ICBM launch from800miles
@cursethee Latest saturn engines also has ceramic and fuel cooled IR reduction measures, not better nor worse than F-35. F-135 is not the most powerful engine, not even close. detecting an ICBM launch from 800 miles is utter bullshit. No matter what sensor you have you wouldnt see it because of curvature of earth.
@AndraxxusNephilem Yes, the f-135 is the most powerful single fighter jet engine ever made. Look it up, dumbass. I love how you call the f-35's ability to detect an ICBM launch from 800 miles "utter bullshit". I have a video to prove you wrong, asshole.
This just goes to show how little you know. You're talking out of your ass.
@cursethee You are the one talk out of your ass, without even paying attention to claims you make. F-35 is the most powerful single engined jet fighter, but F-135 is not the most powerful jet engine. Not even close. If you want numbers, NK-321 of Tu-160 and NK-25 of Tu-22M produces 245,2 kN of thrust and by far most powerful military jet engine. Go learn a thing or two then come and claim other bullshit. F-35 uses Sniper XR same as F-15Es external one. If you have a video, share, prove me wrong.
@ShadrikLOL I think you should do your own research first. Have Blues RCS algorythims were developed by Bill Schroeder which used algorythims of Scherer (I dont remember the name), and that man derived his mathematical formulas from Petr Ufimtsev. While Petr Ufitmsev was the first person to accurately derive formulas to pretict RCS of a flying aircraft, he only continued on works of a German physicist, I dont have the name. If you want the names a google search will do the trick.
@ShadrikLOL Did you believe what you just said? They build an unstable faceted airframe and a miniature supercomputer to fly it. Only because they wanted to go easy in their computers to calculate algorythms? That was a top secret multi billion dollar project. If they could have done better, they would. As for russians, considering one was shot down with a S-125, and the fact F-117 was never able to penetrate a compound AD like US or USSR had, maybe they didnt feel the need? Spaculating...
@atmodom data and is fairly accurate at getting a picture of what a designs radar-reducing properties are by it's shaping and materials. It covers the whole spectrum of detectability throughout the threat range from manpads to SAM's to AESA and PESA radars to long-range early warning. All this hoo-hah about the SU's, t-50's and j-20's being a significant threat to our f-22's and f-35 is utter bullshit. We've been in this game for 30+ years and Russia and China have just started.
@cursethee "We've been in this game for 30+ years" F-117 was made by using stolen works of Petr Ufimtsev. Although his works included calculation of full 3d objects, stolen part only included 2d objects and thats why F-117 got its ridicolously faceted body. USAF were saying "it had to be faceted and claiming curved planes can never made stealthy". They discovered their mistake 8 years later in B-2 when russians were already laughing at F-117. So dont count on your 30+ years of experience.
@atmodom of what possible radar reducing materials that would be used. Let me tell you, the j-20 is actually much stealthier than the t-50. The Russian's have much better engines, avionics, weapons systems, radars and overall design but they compromised their RCS for maneuverability. The j-20 wasn't made for maneuvering, it was made to sneak up, drop bombs or intercept attacking aircraft, launch their missiles and run. By the way, this RCS data isn't 100% accurate but it's still based on known
@cursethee How a compromise was made, say, when compared to F-35A? The currently flying one. One with mutated tumor like extrusions all around the body.
@AndraxxusNephilem The United States is at least 15 years ahead of Russia when it comes to radar absorbing materials. Those protrusions like the gun on the f-35 do not matter. The f-35 has far more advanced radar absorbing skin and materials than anything Rusia can chalk up. Take the t-50's LERX's for example. When they're in a downward facing position to give it lift, they reflect way more and the range at which the f-35 will be able to detect it goes up substantially.
@cursethee What Russia can do or cant is pure speculation. They have the scientific knowledge to do how, and while they are certainly behind US, thats not 15 years only because US made stealth fighters first. Same logic dictates US is behind civilian nuclear reactors b/c russians did it first, which is of course not true. As for T-50s LEVCONs, they only move when lift at high alpha is required and thats less often than Eurofighters canards or F-35 LE flaps and yet no one has problem with them?
@atmodom ...Maybe in 20 years from now when they're actually developed and not just flying prototypes, but I've read plenty of analysis and talked to actual USAF pilots who know their shit, and they do not take one or two-off prototypes very seriously. I've seen computer-based RCS models of the t-50 and j-20 based on different radar frequencies of the different types of radars (air to ground, air to air, missile seekers, you name it), then plug in the data and get estimates based off known data
@cursethee "talked to actual USAF pilots." Our own F-4 pilots claim they can own a Greek Mirage-2k. Rule#1 for the driver, his own car is the best. Dont make him talk about it. "I've seen computer-based RCS models of the t-50 and j-20" now you seriously blew it up. How can you seen a RCS model of T-50 when not even Sukhoi, not even GOD knows how much the "in development" "work in progress" materials be radar absorbing, dense, stong, tough, hard, temperature resistant etc...
@AndraxxusNephilem Because I have data from actual aerospace engineers who did their own research and have plenty of knowledge on radar absorbing materials, radar frequencies, radar cross sections and detections methods. They used their own computer programs to plug in known data to mathematically estimate the RCS's in 3d of current stealth aircraft based on known designs.
@cursethee LOL you cant just draw it in studio max and run signal analysis on it. You have to know reflection and refraction properties of materials, and even forging or quenching the exact same aluminium would change it. If someone can make a flying Tu-95 out of radar transparent plastics it would be more stealthy than an F-22. As such, those aerospace engineers are either talking about something else or bullshitting. As an another engineer, I dare call them liars if they can make such a claim.
@atmodom Thank you. This moron AFosterBoy would have you believe that an f-22 can somehow be defeated by thrust vectoring alone. He has absolutely no knowledge on radars, their different types and modes of operation. I bet you everything he knows about this shit is based on wikipedia info which isn't accurate at all. The f-22 was purposely designed to defeat any and all 4+ and 5th generation fighters for the next 20 or so years.No t-50, j-20 or later model SU can beat it. Period.
@cursethee Purposely designed to defeat blah blah blah. The fact is when F-22 was designed there was no T-50 or J-20 so thats not a design goal. If you have the will, experience and resources, you can design an aircraft to defeat a squadron of T-50s alone. But not without knowing your enemy. Thats why Russians build their "counter" fighters later, to asses the threat first. Side Note: Im not saying they will succeed in that 100%. Im just saying its their idea.
Even the j-20 has better stealth than the t-50. The Russian's sacrificed stealth for maneuverability which wont do very much for you when you have a mach 4 missile heading at you.
@cursethee Again your comment is idiotic and without knowledge. Given the latest developments in seeker technology, maneuverability is the only weapon againist missiles. Baseline Su-27 has 22.36 deg/s sustained turn rate. To achieve same turn rate with your beloved mach-4 missile you have to pull 55.2 lateral Gs. Considering the missile approaching from sides, it would need twice of that catch its target. There is no A-A missile that can pull than 40 Gs.
@BitnikGr Ok, I meant BVR missiles, sorry if my statement wasn't clear enough. My response was againist "stealth is more important than maneuverability" idea and it stands. I didn't count IR guided CAC missiles as it has nothing to do with stealth technology, as every sane person knows the importance of maneuverability in CAC.
@AndraxxusNephilem Well... the latest close range all aspect missiles obtained range, which actually made them a BVR missiles (like Python 5 for example). But in general, yes, I understand what you are talking about. It is just a subject of compromises.
Perception of BVR battles being the main way of aerial warfare was wrong in 60-70s, because radar and missile technologies were unreliable. Since 90s till today most of aerial battles were resolved in BVR engagements.
@BitnikGr The actual definition of BVR and CAC is not dependent on range but purpose and design. Many recent CAC missiles are claimed to have 20+ km range. But under what circumstances? CAC missiles are needed to be fast accelerating, short burn maneuverable missiles and designed in such way. A BVR missile however required to be long burn or even dual stage + energy efficient. Even if a CAC missile has the same range as a BVR missile, it doesnt mean it would be as effective at its range limits.
@AndraxxusNephilem I mean that subject shouldn't be "stealth vs super maneuverability". If SU-35 can be same effective with other 4+ fighters in BVR, then super maneuverability comes as a significant bonus. If a super maneuverability comes as a price of BVR capabilities, then it is probably not a good idea... But I don't think that SU-35 is inferior in BVR for favor of close range dogfights.
@BitnikGr I agree Su-35 is as good as other 4+ gen fighters. Cursathee compared T-50 with other 5th gen. Still I dont think BVR would be decisive when two sides are equally matched. For example a Su-27 can evade any AIM-120s from distance, and same goes for F-15 vs R-27AE missiles. If both sides persist, they need to move in for CAC. However if one is facing an older fighter like an MiG-23 or an F-4 which couldnt evade an AIM-120 or a R-27AE and the battle would besolved at BVR.
If Su-35 compares to what F-22 can do now, the Q is T-50 when in final avtar will blow anything like F-22 out of sky. The real comptetion lie there :)
Also the f-22's entire body design is far more advanced than any Su-27, 30 or 35. It has way more lift and the design is far more balanced. When the Indian Air Force were practicing with the USAF we recognized that although the Indian SU-30MKI has great thrust vectoring abilities, it's ass-heavy. This allows it to pivot it's nose sharply but slows it down momentum wise far more than if an f-22 performed the same maneuver. So all you Sukhoi fan boys can shut the hell up, you don't know shit.
@runxxeroxx What does that even mean? I never said the su-30MKI was the su-35S I just used it as an example of a thrust vectoring aircraft. All these airshows stunts don't mean crap, dude. When are people going to learn that? All I was saying is that the f-22's overall aerodynamic design is far more efficient than any 4th generation Sukhoi. The SU's are ass-heavy and when they pitch-up like they do in the Cobra they can't accelerate out of it as fast as a f-22 would. That's very important.
@cursethee First, TVC is not only for airshow stunts. With TVC basically you increase your alpha limit throughout the flight regime. That is, increasing turn rate from 0 km/h until aircraft reaches 9G limit with >0 excess power. Second, Like hell F-22 is more aerodynamically efficient. Draw both and run a CFD. Third Su-35 can outaccelerate F-22 anytime because 1-its lighter (16.3 vs 19.7 tons) 2- has better static T/W (1.14 vs 1.08) 3- Has variable intake ramps to ensure better supersonic T/W.
That su-35 has some pretty impressive yaw control. For all you naysayers who say the f-22 can't do that because it only has 2d thrust vectoring and not 3d are wrong. The vertical stabilizers on the f-22 are huge and designed to match the yaw control on a thrust vectoring engine, even at very slow speeds. I can't find the link but I read this article about a Russian Air Force general who went to see the f-22 at an airshow and he admitted the f-22 is way more maneuverable than any Sukhoi.
@cursethee I am one of the naysayers who say F-22 cant do yaw maneuvers like Su-35. No matter how uber big the vertical tails are, they still need airflow to be useful. 0 airspeed = 0 airflow = 0 yaw control, period. Your bias and fanboy claims are really beyond logic and physics. Now F-22 does have some yaw control but thats with differantial thrust and thats it. Its nowhere close to the yaw ability of Su-35.
@AndraxxusNephilem You're completely wrong. What do you know about aircraft design? Have you ever designed one? The design of the f-22 is a lift-body design. It's entire body gives it lift, not just it's wings. That's why it seems to just float in the air the way it does when it does those pull-up maneuvers. The Flankers design is way older and although it's an awesome aircraft the theories on designing aircraft of that era were nothing compared to the designs used on the f-22.
@cursethee F-22's body is not a lift body, dont just believe wikipedia. It assists lift only at high AOAs just as a Flanker do, not better not worse, but definately better than a flat F-15. The true marvel about F-22 body design is its perfectly stable chined body allows it to pull high AOAs without ventral fins like those on F-16 or Su-27. But the end result is not higher maneuverability, its better for stealth.
@AndraxxusNephilem The f-22's center of gravity is oriented more towards the middle of the aircraft, and the Flanker's is more towards the rear. This gives it the wonderful ability to yaw extremely fast with it's thrust vectoring engines, however because it has shorter vertical stabilizers and relies more on the vectoring, at lower airspeeds the ability to yaw becomes less effective than it would on an f-22 with bigger tails, and with the gravity more oriented towards the center. This allows it
@cursethee GOD! You got it all wrong. Su-27 has smaller vertical tails because it also has fins to stabilize it when maneuvering at high supersonic speeds. In F-22s verticals are bigger because it needs it. Not for slow yaw ability which is not a significant gain for any use. As for CG, Flanker is a stable design when fully loaded with relaxed stability when front fuel tank is empty. I really doubt your CG claim is true.
@AndraxxusNephilem to pitch up, slow it's airspeed, and pull out of a stall much quicker than an ass-heavy Flanker would. I know it's a hard concept to wrap your infantile head around, but it's a fact.
@cursethee Even if it true, that is not a bad thing, further back the CG, less elevator input is needed to turn aircraft at high Gs. Thats a fact and why F-16 has relaxed stability. (you know what relaxed stability is right?) And dont start being uncivilized. And to your question, I didnt design a piloted aircraft no, but I know enough CFD to test an aircrafts aerodynamic properties.
@AndraxxusNephilem By the way, the only 4th or 5th generation fighter that's more maneuverable than the f-22 is the t-50, but it compromised it's stealth for maneuverability so it's no match. The t-50's radar cross section is somewhere in between a Super Hornet and the f-35, but slightly below the j-20. The f-35 could still run rings around a j-20, so that should tell you something.
@cursethee Two good questions for you. 1- How do you know ANYTHING about T-50s stealth, when quite possibly even Sukhoi engineers dont know for sure? Same question valid for F-35 and J-20 also. 2- How do you know ANYTHING about F-22s maneuverability? Really? Which performance graphics do you posses? Do you even have an TFD to climb graph about it?
@cursethee When I make a claim about Su-27 (and some others) I know *exactly* what it can do and it cant do. I also know the scientific reasons behind them, as its also my profession. For example I say F-35's body has neither the F-16s VG ability nor the ability to control pressure above wings. Its not b/c its old new russian american etc, but b/c when you observe how W condensations start to form, its the truth. Same goes for F-22 and Su-27.
look at the pointability of this plane, and imagine combine it with any current generation missiles...It's mindboggling...Glad we have stealthy fighter..
When an F-22 could pull high G's like that then it would be conidered the best plane.As of now it only have manuverability of 80's soviet Su-27.Please note their users Stealth does not mean invisibility.As the f-22 activates its radar it would be seen and BVR missiles of the Su-27 and > and the MiG-29 > series will be able to blow it out of the sky from a long range. Cheers
@AFosterBoy Wrong. The f-22 can easily fire off a AIM-120D from nearly 80-100 miles away. It's radars use a low-probability of intercept mode and can't be picked up by Russian's radar warning recievers. Russian Su-27 derivatives only use older PESA radars which will be detected by the f-22 all the way out to 250 miles the moment they flick them on. The AN/ALR-94 passive reciever system is the most advanced piece of equipment on the f-22 and can track pretty much anything.
@cursethee The sukhoi Ibris E could detec low observerability aircraft and stealth aircraft my firend but at t adistance of 90km....but Im very sure S-400/S-300pM1 or > could efficently deal with the f-2-2.Even a MiG-31 could rape a raptor from afar.the powerputput of its radar is comparable to those of ground units and thus linking this to Su-35 and using R77m or R33 will equal the the end of the raptor.Btw the raptor don't even have range to make it to russia..lol...IRST's have long ranger to
@AFosterBoy What a load of Russian propaganda. Why don't you actually learn something about radars before you go opening your mouth. The Irbis E is a PESA which is a generation behind the f-22's AESA. When a Sukhoi turns on it's radar it can be seen from 250 miles away, allowing the f-22 to move in from any angle it wants for a kill and launch a AIM-120D up it's ass from over 100 miles away. Nobody knows the radar cross section of the f-22 so how would you know how far an Irbis E can detect it?
@AFosterBoy Do you honestly believe that Russia's FIRST AESA radar is going to out perform the f-22's AESA which is far more advanced and has been perfected for years? You are such a fucking fanboy it's pathetic. You idiots go around counting the TR-modules and think that just because the Russian one has more it's somehow better or something. Here's where the Russian's are going to lose. WE have the technology to actually detect LPI AESA radars, Russia doesn't. They're just building their first.
@AFosterBoy I don't even want to get into how badly the f-35 will whoop the t-50's ass. The Barracuda EW system on it is even better than the AN/ALR-94 RWR on the f-22 and was able to detect the f-22's AESA while the APG-81 (f-35 radar) was being tested on the Sabreliner. We are currently the only country that can do that. Russia cannot. It will be at least 5-7 years before Russia even has an AESA in service with ANY of their jets. We have AESA's all over our legacy jets. You are a fanboy.
@cursethee Your'e the fan boy idiot "Russia don't even have an AESA radar", stop talking shit....the t-50 would be the same thing like when the Su-27 was made to counter the F-15 and of course the Su-27 outperformed it by a very large extent.the joint strike fighter is shit my firend, its not a raptor.You guys love to put targets in the sky?F-35 is in the same class as the euro, rafa,Su-30mk, there is nothing special about it except spending tax payers money:) ...go same your failed economy arse
@AFosterBoy there were no actual proof that the Su-27 outfperformed the F-15 though...
unless you thought the flight in summer 1992 as one, in which case it was not a DACT flight between F-15 and Su-27 as both aircraft were in fact only meant to fly in formation with all of their fire control system turned off (as neither the russian or the US were willing to let each other get a glimpse of them).
and the F-35 is meant to have very small RCS, much smaller than any 4.5th gen fighters.
@AFosterBoy whether it's new avionics, radar, and sensor suite plus stealth aspect (very low RCS) is worth the extreme price tag of the F-35 is a different story and one that may indeed be put to question.
but one on one, there is no doubt that the plane should come on top of any 4.5th gen fighters unless the battlefield have been setup to nullify the F-35 advantage in stealth and sensor suite.
@cursethee You fire a AIM-120 from 80 miles againist a maneuverable target such as Su-27 and you waste your ammuninition 100% guaranteed. LPI is nice when scanning the area, but does not work when you need speed, direction etc values to fire a missile. Radar then has to focus a narrow beam on target and be visible to RWR. That gives Russian a chance to turn tail and run. If thats enough for the mission, fine. If not Su-27s or MiG-31s can establish a datalink with other radars and hunt F-22 down.
@AFosterBoy Not exactly true. F-22s AESA has decent LPI capabilities. It is very unlikely a Su-27 can detect F-22 before it switches STT mode to engage. That would be perhaps 3-5 seconds beep in RWR before missile launch and additional 2 seconds visible to radar when bay doors open. I really doubt a Su-27 doing volume scan can lock on an F-22 in 7 secs. MiG-31s zalson radar can do it, but cannot engage as the signal would be lost after missile is fired. But they can turn and outrun the missile.
@AndraxxusNephilem you make sense unit i hear out run the missile...R37 would do the trick especially with a MiG-31 at 2.5e02 mph.....During the 90s did the dogfight between MiG and F-15's take place at BVR ?
@AFosterBoy In 90s MiG-31 had a huge advantage in BVR b/c of its radar. Zalson could conduct full range, full coverage scans almost instantly when F-15's APG-63 needed 15+ seconds. In TWS, it could track sec. targets no matter how seperated they are, whereas others had do focus antenna and do TWS in a 5-15 deg cone. Zalson had countless other features. Combined with Mn2.83 speed and R-33, it WAS the best BVR fighter. Now the upgraded F-15s have AESA radars, that huge advantage is no more.
@AFosterBoy Apart from speed advantage, todays MiG-31 is just like Su-27 was in 90s and Su-35 is now. Compared to western counterparts, radar has better range, power output and ECCM capability, and more missiles with longer ranges + better maneuverability are carried. However, radars still lacking behind in signal processing, raid assesment, multi target engagement, while missiles still lacking in HOJ capability, NOZ and energy efficiency. Stealth is completely different story of course.
@AndraxxusNephilem cool :)...russia needs to invest more the the electromagnetic spectrum processing field becuase the west are ahead in what you mention.Maby when they do make some more advanced sigint com devices etc they may install them on the pak-fa and the later lines of su-35s and su-34
@AFosterBoy I think it doesnt depend on russians ability or disability but what they want. Russian doctrine still has these two factors: 1- quantity has a quality of its own: If a Su-27 bests F-15 when on equal numbers and equal situational awareness -which it does-, it doesnt need to be more expensive to perform equally well outnumbered or when lacking situational awareness. 2- GCI. Russians believe in it. Maybe PAKFA will change it but Su-27s or MiG-29s design phylosophy reflects this.
I had a chance to see this performance last Wednesday afternoon. Su-35 and its pilot do impossible things. Never seen anything like this. Hats off to all who create this amazing fighter!
fenomenale non esiste mai esistera un mostro simile nessun altro stato al mondo tranne la russia si deve permttere mai di parlare di superiorita aerea
Sdelanounas.ru
YaHuyeyuNna 3 weeks ago
que bestia exelente aeronave
sukoy999 1 month ago
Әдемі ұшақ!
galymzhanization 2 months ago
gawddaaaaaaaaaaanmmm!!!!!! f-15 you better watch out,
cardude1992 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Please do not copy my videos. （PAK-FA , Su-35 MAKS）
Tonkatsu298 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
F-22 flights are suspended again - Part 4
All fifth-generation fighter F-22 Raptors from the 1st Fighter Wing, Langley Air Force Base, Va., are back with the flight operations suspended a pilot after going through loss of oxygen during the flight.
Air Force Base Elmendorf-Richardson also suspended flights of its F-22 Raptors
Over 20 years of design and how can it still stopping
ricjan33 4 months ago
Eurofighter Typhoon is now the best maneuvering fighter aircraft. Su-35 looks and flys like the big old fat cow. there is no comparision to Typhoon. British pilots of Eurofighters did beat even F-22 during Red Flag couple years ago.
Gottmituns1610 4 months ago
@Gottmituns1610 Typhoon CAN NOT maneuver post-stall. CANNOT change direction at 0 and negative speeds. It cannot rotate in all 3 axis while at 0 velocity. Su-35 flies like a fat old cow? You are blind.
Spetsnazovets 4 months ago
@Spetsnazovets Air show Typhoon's demos are extremely dynamic and fast, without thrust vectoring ! Typhoon is optimalized to fight not to the circus performances. Who uses during real combat 0 speed capabilities? Less complex devices means higher level of reliability. Proper size of fighter plane. Su-35 is too big and his RCS huge as hell. Typhoon RCS is circa 0,5m2. I am not a fan of german tech, but i know what i see.
Gottmituns1610 4 months ago
@Gottmituns1610 RCS of ANY gen-4 fighter is large enough for 400km detection by IRBIS radar which makes THAT point totally IRRELEVANT.
Su-35S IS less complex then Typhoon since its based on slightly older tech.
Su-35S has supersonic cruise capability just like Typhoon with slightly higher speed.
Su-35S is optimized for close-in maneuverability hence the TVC.
Typhoon is German/British/Italian/Spanish
Sudden slow-down affects doppler shift and breaks radar lock and THAT is what post-stall is for.
Spetsnazovets 4 months ago
@Spetsnazovets 400 km for fighter 25m2 RCS aircraft as the Su-27 maybe.
Typhoon has 0,5m2 RCS fighter generation 4+++.Typhoon is pure grerman Messerschmitt-Bölkow-Blohm design. Real name Messerschmitt BF2000.German fuselage, airframe, engines, radar and gun . The name Typhoon,ejection seat is UK origin only. Spanish and Italian are tires for landing gears , CD player and upholstery.
Gottmituns1610 4 months ago
@Gottmituns1610
The Tikhomirov NIIP (IRBIS radar designer) has stated that 400km at 2.5SqM RCS NOT 25 while 0.01SqM target is found at 90km. More then enough to track and engage Typhoon at tactical BVR ranges
Where do you get your info dude? Future Weapons?
Spetsnazovets 4 months ago
@Gottmituns1610 su 35 have 0.5m2 rcs. without rockets and 2m2 with. and please, watch tuphoon videos, and comment them.
coll565 3 months ago
and this jet have the technology to find the stealth jets
LolmanMr 4 months ago
We need more F-22s.
fadedflage 4 months ago
wooooooooooow increible viva russia !!!!!!!
TIERNITOBB 5 months ago
Speechless!!! A very impressive display indeed!!!
migstrike 5 months ago in playlist aviones
Look up "Thales Domacles". The Russian's copied it so they can use it to designate targets.
cursethee 5 months ago
One last thing, fanboy. If the t-50's sensors are so good, why is the the targeting pod they're doing to put on it contracted to Thales? The US is even sueing Russia because they copied it and are planning to use it. It's kind of pathetic that Russia isn't even confident enough to use it's own domestic sensors on it's aircraft. The only sensor that's indigenous is it's OLS.
cursethee 5 months ago
It wont let me post the link so I sent it to you in a private message.
cursethee 5 months ago
Muito foda, muito foda mesmo, poderíamos ter essa aeronave na força aérea Brasileira, mais sabe como é, aqui quem manda mesmo é os estados Unidos
ricjan33 5 months ago
@atmodom helmet mounted display, but it's based on where the pilot can point his head, so he can't exactly fire right behind him. The f-35's HMD is the best, even if the pilot can turn his head all the way around, the system categorizes the target and allows him to fire a sidewinder or AMRAAM directly behind him without having to maneuver.
cursethee 5 months ago in playlist cursethee's Favorited Videos
@cursethee Actually its just the opposide. F-35s HMD is good, esspecially b/c it also includes hud, but F-35 does not have rear faced optical locator to queue a missile. Only T-50 has a rear faced EOS, thats the sphere behind the cockpit. AIM-9X is still behind even R-73M2 let alone proposed T-50 armaments, when it comes to off-boresight capability. That gives F-35 only 45deg cone for attack zone. AMRAAM needs datalink or radar lock to be fired. It has mad-dog ability but within 15 deg cone.
AndraxxusNephilem 5 months ago
@atmodom You have to understand, I have great respect for all aircraft. Including Russian and Chinese made ones. I love the t-50, it's the sexiest most maneuverable bird out there. The f-35 looks like shit. On the other hand the f-35 is the most advanced jet fighter out there. It can pick up the f-22 easily. It can launch a missile 360 degrees and has the best detection capabilities anywhere. The f-22 still has to get it's targets in front of it. It's fucking revolutionary. The t-50 may have a
cursethee 5 months ago in playlist cursethee's Favorited Videos
@atmodom away. That means that the f-35 will be able to see the t-50 from well over 100 miles away. That is EXTREMELY far for an infrared based sensor. I can guarantee you the t-50 will have nothing like that, because I already know and have seen the exact sensors including it's own distributed aperture system that will be in the aircraft. Their quality is crap compared to the f-35's sensors. Even the t-50's innovative l-band wont be able to do much to defend it because AMRAAM's can rely on gps.
cursethee 5 months ago in playlist cursethee's Favorited Videos
@cursethee Why you have to make false claims in your every comment? F-35s EOTS is not even comperable to OLS-27 when it comes to A-A combat. Its designed as a internal, stealthy Sniper XR pod, we are lucky if it can detect at all. DAS is only a IR Missile waring system, nothing more, something Su-35 already has and T-50 certainly have. T-50s L band (not I) radar is for detecting LO objects by using , it has nothing to do with amraam, and amraam doesnt have a GPS.
AndraxxusNephilem 5 months ago
@AndraxxusNephilem Wrong, wrong and wrong. The EOTS is so much better than the OLS. It may have been based off the design of the Sniper XR, but it was a lot more built in functions. All you do is read info on websites, I know how this shit actually works.
The l-band radars on the t-50 aren't going to be used for detecting low-observable objects. It doesn't have the beam strength or enough TR modules. It's uses are mainly detecting, jamming and degrading NATO link-16 data links like on theAMRAAM
cursethee 5 months ago
@cursethee You dont know any shit at all. You not only even read websites, but you dont have slightest engineering knowledge about anything. T-50s L band (again not I band) radars are not even in production so how do you know about its strength or TR modules? Why does it even need TR modules for LO detection? You know what I band is used for? Ship navigation radars! LOL! You know what I band is? it is a subset of X band (8 to 10 GHz = I, 8 to 11.2 GHz = X) So every fighter radar is ALSO I band.
AndraxxusNephilem 5 months ago
@cursethee There is no point in making a claim within an area of science, physics and engineering you know nothing about, as it gets pretty obvious when you lie. If you dont have any factual info -which means techical drawings, flight manuals, CAD models, production process schematics, official performance figures etc etc.- to prove me wrong, dont bother replying. Live with your own lies.
AndraxxusNephilem 5 months ago
@atmodom Do you know how, besides it's extremely advanced AESA and RWR how a f-35 will shoot a t-50 out of the sky? Consider how far more advanced the United States is in engine design. The f-35 has the most powerful, yet one of the stealthiest in IR signiture engines in the world. At full military power not in afterburner it's detection range on an enemy IRST is half that of a normal engine. The t-50 has 2, and can be seen from way further. The DAS on the f-35 can see a ICBM launch from800miles
cursethee 5 months ago in playlist cursethee's Favorited Videos
@cursethee Latest saturn engines also has ceramic and fuel cooled IR reduction measures, not better nor worse than F-35. F-135 is not the most powerful engine, not even close. detecting an ICBM launch from 800 miles is utter bullshit. No matter what sensor you have you wouldnt see it because of curvature of earth.
AndraxxusNephilem 5 months ago
@AndraxxusNephilem Yes, the f-135 is the most powerful single fighter jet engine ever made. Look it up, dumbass. I love how you call the f-35's ability to detect an ICBM launch from 800 miles "utter bullshit". I have a video to prove you wrong, asshole.
This just goes to show how little you know. You're talking out of your ass.
cursethee 5 months ago
@cursethee You are the one talk out of your ass, without even paying attention to claims you make. F-35 is the most powerful single engined jet fighter, but F-135 is not the most powerful jet engine. Not even close. If you want numbers, NK-321 of Tu-160 and NK-25 of Tu-22M produces 245,2 kN of thrust and by far most powerful military jet engine. Go learn a thing or two then come and claim other bullshit. F-35 uses Sniper XR same as F-15Es external one. If you have a video, share, prove me wrong.
AndraxxusNephilem 5 months ago
@ShadrikLOL I think you should do your own research first. Have Blues RCS algorythims were developed by Bill Schroeder which used algorythims of Scherer (I dont remember the name), and that man derived his mathematical formulas from Petr Ufimtsev. While Petr Ufitmsev was the first person to accurately derive formulas to pretict RCS of a flying aircraft, he only continued on works of a German physicist, I dont have the name. If you want the names a google search will do the trick.
AndraxxusNephilem 6 months ago
@ShadrikLOL Did you believe what you just said? They build an unstable faceted airframe and a miniature supercomputer to fly it. Only because they wanted to go easy in their computers to calculate algorythms? That was a top secret multi billion dollar project. If they could have done better, they would. As for russians, considering one was shot down with a S-125, and the fact F-117 was never able to penetrate a compound AD like US or USSR had, maybe they didnt feel the need? Spaculating...
AndraxxusNephilem 6 months ago
@atmodom data and is fairly accurate at getting a picture of what a designs radar-reducing properties are by it's shaping and materials. It covers the whole spectrum of detectability throughout the threat range from manpads to SAM's to AESA and PESA radars to long-range early warning. All this hoo-hah about the SU's, t-50's and j-20's being a significant threat to our f-22's and f-35 is utter bullshit. We've been in this game for 30+ years and Russia and China have just started.
cursethee 6 months ago
@cursethee "We've been in this game for 30+ years" F-117 was made by using stolen works of Petr Ufimtsev. Although his works included calculation of full 3d objects, stolen part only included 2d objects and thats why F-117 got its ridicolously faceted body. USAF were saying "it had to be faceted and claiming curved planes can never made stealthy". They discovered their mistake 8 years later in B-2 when russians were already laughing at F-117. So dont count on your 30+ years of experience.
AndraxxusNephilem 6 months ago
@cursethee Do manpads have radars? Or your "fairly accurate" data also includes 50 years into future...
AndraxxusNephilem 6 months ago
@atmodom of what possible radar reducing materials that would be used. Let me tell you, the j-20 is actually much stealthier than the t-50. The Russian's have much better engines, avionics, weapons systems, radars and overall design but they compromised their RCS for maneuverability. The j-20 wasn't made for maneuvering, it was made to sneak up, drop bombs or intercept attacking aircraft, launch their missiles and run. By the way, this RCS data isn't 100% accurate but it's still based on known
cursethee 6 months ago
@cursethee How a compromise was made, say, when compared to F-35A? The currently flying one. One with mutated tumor like extrusions all around the body.
AndraxxusNephilem 6 months ago
@AndraxxusNephilem The United States is at least 15 years ahead of Russia when it comes to radar absorbing materials. Those protrusions like the gun on the f-35 do not matter. The f-35 has far more advanced radar absorbing skin and materials than anything Rusia can chalk up. Take the t-50's LERX's for example. When they're in a downward facing position to give it lift, they reflect way more and the range at which the f-35 will be able to detect it goes up substantially.
cursethee 5 months ago in playlist cursethee's Favorited Videos
@cursethee What Russia can do or cant is pure speculation. They have the scientific knowledge to do how, and while they are certainly behind US, thats not 15 years only because US made stealth fighters first. Same logic dictates US is behind civilian nuclear reactors b/c russians did it first, which is of course not true. As for T-50s LEVCONs, they only move when lift at high alpha is required and thats less often than Eurofighters canards or F-35 LE flaps and yet no one has problem with them?
AndraxxusNephilem 5 months ago
@atmodom ...Maybe in 20 years from now when they're actually developed and not just flying prototypes, but I've read plenty of analysis and talked to actual USAF pilots who know their shit, and they do not take one or two-off prototypes very seriously. I've seen computer-based RCS models of the t-50 and j-20 based on different radar frequencies of the different types of radars (air to ground, air to air, missile seekers, you name it), then plug in the data and get estimates based off known data
cursethee 6 months ago
@cursethee "talked to actual USAF pilots." Our own F-4 pilots claim they can own a Greek Mirage-2k. Rule#1 for the driver, his own car is the best. Dont make him talk about it. "I've seen computer-based RCS models of the t-50 and j-20" now you seriously blew it up. How can you seen a RCS model of T-50 when not even Sukhoi, not even GOD knows how much the "in development" "work in progress" materials be radar absorbing, dense, stong, tough, hard, temperature resistant etc...
AndraxxusNephilem 6 months ago
@AndraxxusNephilem Because I have data from actual aerospace engineers who did their own research and have plenty of knowledge on radar absorbing materials, radar frequencies, radar cross sections and detections methods. They used their own computer programs to plug in known data to mathematically estimate the RCS's in 3d of current stealth aircraft based on known designs.
cursethee 5 months ago in playlist cursethee's Favorited Videos
@cursethee LOL you cant just draw it in studio max and run signal analysis on it. You have to know reflection and refraction properties of materials, and even forging or quenching the exact same aluminium would change it. If someone can make a flying Tu-95 out of radar transparent plastics it would be more stealthy than an F-22. As such, those aerospace engineers are either talking about something else or bullshitting. As an another engineer, I dare call them liars if they can make such a claim.
AndraxxusNephilem 5 months ago
@atmodom Thank you. This moron AFosterBoy would have you believe that an f-22 can somehow be defeated by thrust vectoring alone. He has absolutely no knowledge on radars, their different types and modes of operation. I bet you everything he knows about this shit is based on wikipedia info which isn't accurate at all. The f-22 was purposely designed to defeat any and all 4+ and 5th generation fighters for the next 20 or so years.No t-50, j-20 or later model SU can beat it. Period.
cursethee 6 months ago
@cursethee Purposely designed to defeat blah blah blah. The fact is when F-22 was designed there was no T-50 or J-20 so thats not a design goal. If you have the will, experience and resources, you can design an aircraft to defeat a squadron of T-50s alone. But not without knowing your enemy. Thats why Russians build their "counter" fighters later, to asses the threat first. Side Note: Im not saying they will succeed in that 100%. Im just saying its their idea.
AndraxxusNephilem 6 months ago
dancing with the laws of physics
thrax777 6 months ago
Even the j-20 has better stealth than the t-50. The Russian's sacrificed stealth for maneuverability which wont do very much for you when you have a mach 4 missile heading at you.
cursethee 6 months ago
@cursethee You mean that bus with wings, with canards and ventral fins sticking out. Being painted black doesn't make it stealthier.
TubeCrafter 6 months ago
@cursethee Of course you being the ultimate youtube stealth expert claiming J-20 is better?
AndraxxusNephilem 6 months ago
@cursethee Again your comment is idiotic and without knowledge. Given the latest developments in seeker technology, maneuverability is the only weapon againist missiles. Baseline Su-27 has 22.36 deg/s sustained turn rate. To achieve same turn rate with your beloved mach-4 missile you have to pull 55.2 lateral Gs. Considering the missile approaching from sides, it would need twice of that catch its target. There is no A-A missile that can pull than 40 Gs.
AndraxxusNephilem 6 months ago 2
@AndraxxusNephilem There are such missiles. Especially new generation of close range missiles can pull up to 60Gs.
BitnikGr 6 months ago
@BitnikGr Ok, I meant BVR missiles, sorry if my statement wasn't clear enough. My response was againist "stealth is more important than maneuverability" idea and it stands. I didn't count IR guided CAC missiles as it has nothing to do with stealth technology, as every sane person knows the importance of maneuverability in CAC.
AndraxxusNephilem 6 months ago
@AndraxxusNephilem Well... the latest close range all aspect missiles obtained range, which actually made them a BVR missiles (like Python 5 for example). But in general, yes, I understand what you are talking about. It is just a subject of compromises.
Perception of BVR battles being the main way of aerial warfare was wrong in 60-70s, because radar and missile technologies were unreliable. Since 90s till today most of aerial battles were resolved in BVR engagements.
BitnikGr 6 months ago
@BitnikGr The actual definition of BVR and CAC is not dependent on range but purpose and design. Many recent CAC missiles are claimed to have 20+ km range. But under what circumstances? CAC missiles are needed to be fast accelerating, short burn maneuverable missiles and designed in such way. A BVR missile however required to be long burn or even dual stage + energy efficient. Even if a CAC missile has the same range as a BVR missile, it doesnt mean it would be as effective at its range limits.
AndraxxusNephilem 6 months ago
@AndraxxusNephilem I mean that subject shouldn't be "stealth vs super maneuverability". If SU-35 can be same effective with other 4+ fighters in BVR, then super maneuverability comes as a significant bonus. If a super maneuverability comes as a price of BVR capabilities, then it is probably not a good idea... But I don't think that SU-35 is inferior in BVR for favor of close range dogfights.
BitnikGr 6 months ago
Comment removed
BoxyTheSpaceDog 6 months ago
@BitnikGr I agree Su-35 is as good as other 4+ gen fighters. Cursathee compared T-50 with other 5th gen. Still I dont think BVR would be decisive when two sides are equally matched. For example a Su-27 can evade any AIM-120s from distance, and same goes for F-15 vs R-27AE missiles. If both sides persist, they need to move in for CAC. However if one is facing an older fighter like an MiG-23 or an F-4 which couldnt evade an AIM-120 or a R-27AE and the battle would besolved at BVR.
AndraxxusNephilem 6 months ago
Awesome
trejo656 6 months ago
If Su-35 compares to what F-22 can do now, the Q is T-50 when in final avtar will blow anything like F-22 out of sky. The real comptetion lie there :)
spartan2k1 6 months ago
Also the f-22's entire body design is far more advanced than any Su-27, 30 or 35. It has way more lift and the design is far more balanced. When the Indian Air Force were practicing with the USAF we recognized that although the Indian SU-30MKI has great thrust vectoring abilities, it's ass-heavy. This allows it to pivot it's nose sharply but slows it down momentum wise far more than if an f-22 performed the same maneuver. So all you Sukhoi fan boys can shut the hell up, you don't know shit.
cursethee 6 months ago
@cursethee Way you don't finish , what yours "Captain America" was said about Indian SuMKI30(which is not SU-35S)on Red Flag 2008
runxxeroxx 6 months ago
@runxxeroxx What does that even mean? I never said the su-30MKI was the su-35S I just used it as an example of a thrust vectoring aircraft. All these airshows stunts don't mean crap, dude. When are people going to learn that? All I was saying is that the f-22's overall aerodynamic design is far more efficient than any 4th generation Sukhoi. The SU's are ass-heavy and when they pitch-up like they do in the Cobra they can't accelerate out of it as fast as a f-22 would. That's very important.
cursethee 6 months ago
@cursethee First, TVC is not only for airshow stunts. With TVC basically you increase your alpha limit throughout the flight regime. That is, increasing turn rate from 0 km/h until aircraft reaches 9G limit with >0 excess power. Second, Like hell F-22 is more aerodynamically efficient. Draw both and run a CFD. Third Su-35 can outaccelerate F-22 anytime because 1-its lighter (16.3 vs 19.7 tons) 2- has better static T/W (1.14 vs 1.08) 3- Has variable intake ramps to ensure better supersonic T/W.
AndraxxusNephilem 6 months ago
That su-35 has some pretty impressive yaw control. For all you naysayers who say the f-22 can't do that because it only has 2d thrust vectoring and not 3d are wrong. The vertical stabilizers on the f-22 are huge and designed to match the yaw control on a thrust vectoring engine, even at very slow speeds. I can't find the link but I read this article about a Russian Air Force general who went to see the f-22 at an airshow and he admitted the f-22 is way more maneuverable than any Sukhoi.
cursethee 6 months ago
@cursethee hahahahaha "One Russian general .." God Joke.
runxxeroxx 6 months ago
@cursethee I am one of the naysayers who say F-22 cant do yaw maneuvers like Su-35. No matter how uber big the vertical tails are, they still need airflow to be useful. 0 airspeed = 0 airflow = 0 yaw control, period. Your bias and fanboy claims are really beyond logic and physics. Now F-22 does have some yaw control but thats with differantial thrust and thats it. Its nowhere close to the yaw ability of Su-35.
AndraxxusNephilem 6 months ago
@AndraxxusNephilem You're completely wrong. What do you know about aircraft design? Have you ever designed one? The design of the f-22 is a lift-body design. It's entire body gives it lift, not just it's wings. That's why it seems to just float in the air the way it does when it does those pull-up maneuvers. The Flankers design is way older and although it's an awesome aircraft the theories on designing aircraft of that era were nothing compared to the designs used on the f-22.
cursethee 6 months ago
@cursethee F-22's body is not a lift body, dont just believe wikipedia. It assists lift only at high AOAs just as a Flanker do, not better not worse, but definately better than a flat F-15. The true marvel about F-22 body design is its perfectly stable chined body allows it to pull high AOAs without ventral fins like those on F-16 or Su-27. But the end result is not higher maneuverability, its better for stealth.
AndraxxusNephilem 6 months ago
@AndraxxusNephilem The f-22's center of gravity is oriented more towards the middle of the aircraft, and the Flanker's is more towards the rear. This gives it the wonderful ability to yaw extremely fast with it's thrust vectoring engines, however because it has shorter vertical stabilizers and relies more on the vectoring, at lower airspeeds the ability to yaw becomes less effective than it would on an f-22 with bigger tails, and with the gravity more oriented towards the center. This allows it
cursethee 6 months ago
@cursethee GOD! You got it all wrong. Su-27 has smaller vertical tails because it also has fins to stabilize it when maneuvering at high supersonic speeds. In F-22s verticals are bigger because it needs it. Not for slow yaw ability which is not a significant gain for any use. As for CG, Flanker is a stable design when fully loaded with relaxed stability when front fuel tank is empty. I really doubt your CG claim is true.
AndraxxusNephilem 6 months ago
@AndraxxusNephilem to pitch up, slow it's airspeed, and pull out of a stall much quicker than an ass-heavy Flanker would. I know it's a hard concept to wrap your infantile head around, but it's a fact.
cursethee 6 months ago
@cursethee Even if it true, that is not a bad thing, further back the CG, less elevator input is needed to turn aircraft at high Gs. Thats a fact and why F-16 has relaxed stability. (you know what relaxed stability is right?) And dont start being uncivilized. And to your question, I didnt design a piloted aircraft no, but I know enough CFD to test an aircrafts aerodynamic properties.
AndraxxusNephilem 6 months ago
@AndraxxusNephilem By the way, the only 4th or 5th generation fighter that's more maneuverable than the f-22 is the t-50, but it compromised it's stealth for maneuverability so it's no match. The t-50's radar cross section is somewhere in between a Super Hornet and the f-35, but slightly below the j-20. The f-35 could still run rings around a j-20, so that should tell you something.
cursethee 6 months ago
@cursethee Two good questions for you. 1- How do you know ANYTHING about T-50s stealth, when quite possibly even Sukhoi engineers dont know for sure? Same question valid for F-35 and J-20 also. 2- How do you know ANYTHING about F-22s maneuverability? Really? Which performance graphics do you posses? Do you even have an TFD to climb graph about it?
AndraxxusNephilem 6 months ago
@cursethee When I make a claim about Su-27 (and some others) I know *exactly* what it can do and it cant do. I also know the scientific reasons behind them, as its also my profession. For example I say F-35's body has neither the F-16s VG ability nor the ability to control pressure above wings. Its not b/c its old new russian american etc, but b/c when you observe how W condensations start to form, its the truth. Same goes for F-22 and Su-27.
AndraxxusNephilem 6 months ago
look at the pointability of this plane, and imagine combine it with any current generation missiles...It's mindboggling...Glad we have stealthy fighter..
doolyii 6 months ago
When an F-22 could pull high G's like that then it would be conidered the best plane.As of now it only have manuverability of 80's soviet Su-27.Please note their users Stealth does not mean invisibility.As the f-22 activates its radar it would be seen and BVR missiles of the Su-27 and > and the MiG-29 > series will be able to blow it out of the sky from a long range. Cheers
AFosterBoy 6 months ago
@AFosterBoy Wrong. The f-22 can easily fire off a AIM-120D from nearly 80-100 miles away. It's radars use a low-probability of intercept mode and can't be picked up by Russian's radar warning recievers. Russian Su-27 derivatives only use older PESA radars which will be detected by the f-22 all the way out to 250 miles the moment they flick them on. The AN/ALR-94 passive reciever system is the most advanced piece of equipment on the f-22 and can track pretty much anything.
cursethee 6 months ago
@cursethee The sukhoi Ibris E could detec low observerability aircraft and stealth aircraft my firend but at t adistance of 90km....but Im very sure S-400/S-300pM1 or > could efficently deal with the f-2-2.Even a MiG-31 could rape a raptor from afar.the powerputput of its radar is comparable to those of ground units and thus linking this to Su-35 and using R77m or R33 will equal the the end of the raptor.Btw the raptor don't even have range to make it to russia..lol...IRST's have long ranger to
AFosterBoy 6 months ago
@AFosterBoy What a load of Russian propaganda. Why don't you actually learn something about radars before you go opening your mouth. The Irbis E is a PESA which is a generation behind the f-22's AESA. When a Sukhoi turns on it's radar it can be seen from 250 miles away, allowing the f-22 to move in from any angle it wants for a kill and launch a AIM-120D up it's ass from over 100 miles away. Nobody knows the radar cross section of the f-22 so how would you know how far an Irbis E can detect it?
cursethee 6 months ago
@cursethee btw the russian Aesa is expected to outperform the radar on the raptor and flanker
AFosterBoy 6 months ago
@AFosterBoy Do you honestly believe that Russia's FIRST AESA radar is going to out perform the f-22's AESA which is far more advanced and has been perfected for years? You are such a fucking fanboy it's pathetic. You idiots go around counting the TR-modules and think that just because the Russian one has more it's somehow better or something. Here's where the Russian's are going to lose. WE have the technology to actually detect LPI AESA radars, Russia doesn't. They're just building their first.
cursethee 6 months ago
@AFosterBoy I don't even want to get into how badly the f-35 will whoop the t-50's ass. The Barracuda EW system on it is even better than the AN/ALR-94 RWR on the f-22 and was able to detect the f-22's AESA while the APG-81 (f-35 radar) was being tested on the Sabreliner. We are currently the only country that can do that. Russia cannot. It will be at least 5-7 years before Russia even has an AESA in service with ANY of their jets. We have AESA's all over our legacy jets. You are a fanboy.
cursethee 6 months ago
@cursethee Your'e the fan boy idiot "Russia don't even have an AESA radar", stop talking shit....the t-50 would be the same thing like when the Su-27 was made to counter the F-15 and of course the Su-27 outperformed it by a very large extent.the joint strike fighter is shit my firend, its not a raptor.You guys love to put targets in the sky?F-35 is in the same class as the euro, rafa,Su-30mk, there is nothing special about it except spending tax payers money:) ...go same your failed economy arse
AFosterBoy 6 months ago
@AFosterBoy there were no actual proof that the Su-27 outfperformed the F-15 though...
unless you thought the flight in summer 1992 as one, in which case it was not a DACT flight between F-15 and Su-27 as both aircraft were in fact only meant to fly in formation with all of their fire control system turned off (as neither the russian or the US were willing to let each other get a glimpse of them).
and the F-35 is meant to have very small RCS, much smaller than any 4.5th gen fighters.
IonoTheFanatics 6 months ago
@AFosterBoy whether it's new avionics, radar, and sensor suite plus stealth aspect (very low RCS) is worth the extreme price tag of the F-35 is a different story and one that may indeed be put to question.
but one on one, there is no doubt that the plane should come on top of any 4.5th gen fighters unless the battlefield have been setup to nullify the F-35 advantage in stealth and sensor suite.
IonoTheFanatics 6 months ago
@AFosterBoy Nothing special about the F-35? Clearly you don't know shit about it......
mailman35419 6 months ago
@cursethee You fire a AIM-120 from 80 miles againist a maneuverable target such as Su-27 and you waste your ammuninition 100% guaranteed. LPI is nice when scanning the area, but does not work when you need speed, direction etc values to fire a missile. Radar then has to focus a narrow beam on target and be visible to RWR. That gives Russian a chance to turn tail and run. If thats enough for the mission, fine. If not Su-27s or MiG-31s can establish a datalink with other radars and hunt F-22 down.
AndraxxusNephilem 6 months ago
@AFosterBoy Not exactly true. F-22s AESA has decent LPI capabilities. It is very unlikely a Su-27 can detect F-22 before it switches STT mode to engage. That would be perhaps 3-5 seconds beep in RWR before missile launch and additional 2 seconds visible to radar when bay doors open. I really doubt a Su-27 doing volume scan can lock on an F-22 in 7 secs. MiG-31s zalson radar can do it, but cannot engage as the signal would be lost after missile is fired. But they can turn and outrun the missile.
AndraxxusNephilem 6 months ago
@AndraxxusNephilem you make sense unit i hear out run the missile...R37 would do the trick especially with a MiG-31 at 2.5e02 mph.....During the 90s did the dogfight between MiG and F-15's take place at BVR ?
AFosterBoy 6 months ago
@AFosterBoy In 90s MiG-31 had a huge advantage in BVR b/c of its radar. Zalson could conduct full range, full coverage scans almost instantly when F-15's APG-63 needed 15+ seconds. In TWS, it could track sec. targets no matter how seperated they are, whereas others had do focus antenna and do TWS in a 5-15 deg cone. Zalson had countless other features. Combined with Mn2.83 speed and R-33, it WAS the best BVR fighter. Now the upgraded F-15s have AESA radars, that huge advantage is no more.
AndraxxusNephilem 6 months ago
@AFosterBoy Apart from speed advantage, todays MiG-31 is just like Su-27 was in 90s and Su-35 is now. Compared to western counterparts, radar has better range, power output and ECCM capability, and more missiles with longer ranges + better maneuverability are carried. However, radars still lacking behind in signal processing, raid assesment, multi target engagement, while missiles still lacking in HOJ capability, NOZ and energy efficiency. Stealth is completely different story of course.
AndraxxusNephilem 6 months ago
@AndraxxusNephilem cool :)...russia needs to invest more the the electromagnetic spectrum processing field becuase the west are ahead in what you mention.Maby when they do make some more advanced sigint com devices etc they may install them on the pak-fa and the later lines of su-35s and su-34
AFosterBoy 6 months ago
@AFosterBoy I think it doesnt depend on russians ability or disability but what they want. Russian doctrine still has these two factors: 1- quantity has a quality of its own: If a Su-27 bests F-15 when on equal numbers and equal situational awareness -which it does-, it doesnt need to be more expensive to perform equally well outnumbered or when lacking situational awareness. 2- GCI. Russians believe in it. Maybe PAKFA will change it but Su-27s or MiG-29s design phylosophy reflects this.
AndraxxusNephilem 6 months ago
1:49 , even F-22 can´t do that
gxlxn 6 months ago
Супер-истребитель !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
vm68dm 6 months ago
Воришка, положи чужое видео обратно, откуда взял.
TShd0 6 months ago
I had a chance to see this performance last Wednesday afternoon. Su-35 and its pilot do impossible things. Never seen anything like this. Hats off to all who create this amazing fighter!
mishaonmac 6 months ago 2
fenomenale non esiste mai esistera un mostro simile nessun altro stato al mondo tranne la russia si deve permttere mai di parlare di superiorita aerea
zoran3119 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
fenomenale non esiste mai esistera un mostro simile
zoran3119 6 months ago
Comment removed
zoran3119 6 months ago
This is a copy!! Why bother!
ImYourRealDad 6 months ago
@ImYourRealDad
a copy of what??
nem1 6 months ago
@nem1 The video I meant to say. This guys copied the video from someone else. Just seems pointless!
ImYourRealDad 6 months ago