Raptor vs. Sukhoi-27 in so-close-combat

what i see from F-22 is such advaned technology used like LO or vectoring nozzles, supercruise,ect. but not so effective in dog fight

in BVR combat mode, it will takes out all thread off, but in close combat?

think about it. the Raptor's way to fire missiles is by open the bay door, then fallout the AMRAAM then wuzzz!

but in strange hi angle-of-attack(AoA), like when it's roll-up to 180 degrees or what, the Raptor just could fire it's canon or only 2 Sidewinder.

how could the F-22 stand of with Sukhoi-27 with its fully loaded armaments? anyway, the Su-27 could see Raptor in close range!

i've read the discusion about F-18 gun down a Raptor, so do the Su-27! i think so!

u should think about it coz does the US mil. made an effective weapon or just look good to public.

thx

I guess the key is to have enough Raptors and enough AMRAAM missiles to take out your enemies BVR and not have to dogfight them.

Local numerical superiority.

Nice trick if you can do it.

Personally I think that the Air-Forces of the world have strayed too far from the basic lessons of aerial combat once again and will soon realise the need to re-learn them.

Originally posted by Eastpolar Commander
what i see from F-22 is such advaned technology used like LO or vectoring nozzles, supercruise,ect. but not so effective in dog fight

Are you kidding? the F-22 is phenomenal in a dogfight it could eat virtually any aircraft flying today or in the near future with its manouverabillity.

in BVR combat mode, it will takes out all thread off, but in close combat?

Well if it can take out all threats BVR then it wont even have to worry about a dogfight. And if it does then what I said above will most likely happen.

but in strange hi angle-of-attack(AoA), like when it's roll-up to 180 degrees or what, the Raptor just could fire it's canon or only 2 Sidewinder.

The bit I have underlined is the answer to this whole thread. IF you were in a close in dogfight you could only use cannon or short range air to air missiles like AIM-9X Sidewinder, or in the Su-27/Su-30 case R-73 (AA-11 Archer). You DONT use AMRAAM for dogfights. In any case the F-22 is cleared to open its weapon bays at quite high "G" loads and angles of attack, especially the outer air intake short range missile bays.

how could the F-22 stand of with Sukhoi-27 with its fully loaded armaments? anyway, the Su-27 could see Raptor in close range!

Very well with a full internal load of missiles thankyou, it was designed to. In any case It would have used those full weapon bays to blast the Su-27 at BVR range with an AMRAAM before the poor Flanker pilot had realised an F-22 was even there.

i've read the discusion about F-18 gun down a Raptor, so do the Su-27! i think so!

Maybe? If the F-22 pilot was stupid, didn't do anything as the Fulcrum got closer, and flew around with his eyes closed.

u should think about it coz does the US mil. made an effective weapon or just look good to public.

Both, it works and it looks good. And are you telling me Russia doesn't do the same, what were they doing at MAKS 2007 do you think? Showing off with flying demonstrations and pretty looking industry displays to get customers, thats what. Its a business afterall.

LEE.

He said close air combat not bvr i dont know you have brought that up here thebozeian.

I dont know about the F22 in wvr combat. It should have a very good thrust to weight ratio and all but im not too sure about those launch bays. These missles just dont fly away right away but have a small delay so to speak. Such a delay can be critical in wvr. The su27 just fires its Archers straight off the pylons.

As far as real manuverabillity goes the F22 has 2d thrust vectoring. The latter SU27 variants have 3d thrust vectoring. That should give at least some advantage.

In simulated WVR combat the Raptor has been taking out a ridiculously high number of US aircraft even when often outnumbered. Mind you these legacy aircraft are equipped with HMCS and AIM-9X while the Raptor is not, yet. Still, it is very maneuverable and can do everything the latest Russian aircraft can (while combat loaded) and even features some capability that they do not.

In real world combat a fully loaded Flanker merging into WVR against the F-22 would already be at a disadvantage due to it's external stores. Anyway, the myth that the F-22 was only good at BVR and not close in was wide spread and persisted for a number of years however it has since been well established that this is simply not the case.

PS. The infamous Super Hornet "kill" has very little merit in terms of a real world scenario.

[edit on 13-9-2007 by WestPoint23]

An F-22 would have a Su-27 Flanker-B for breakfast.


It would also almost certainly have an MKI for lunch.


Not so sure about the latest BM though.




BTW, I've heard that the HMCS is not all its cracked up to be - it doesn't offer the expected advantages, and aircraft maneuverability is still more important.

Originally posted by WestPoint23
In real world combat a fully loaded Flanker merging into WVR against the F-22 would already be at a disadvantage due to it's external stores.

This is a key point in the scenario as described IMHO. One thing people forget is that external stores increase RCS, reduce the max G's the aircraft can pull, and reduce combat radius. You will notice almost all of the fancy manuvers (cobra et al.) are done clean with no stores. It would be alot harder with a full load.

While the Su-XX's has super manuverability, as we have debated how big of an advantage will it be in a dogfight? Bleeding off all your airspeed is a sure way to die IMHO. even if you get the opfor to overshoot, you will be easy meat for his wingman.

Originally posted by kilcoo316
BTW, I've heard that the HMCS is not all its cracked up to be - it doesn't offer the expected advantages...

Interesting, is there a source for this information? Maneuverability is of course important and just like the HCMS if not used properly the results will be disappointing. However expanding your "shoot" envelope with a HCMS/HOBS combination can't hurt, no matter how maneuverable you may or may not be.

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Interesting, is there a source for this information? Maneuverability is of course important and just like the HCMS if not used properly the results will be disappointing. However expanding your "shoot" envelope with a HCMS/HOBS combination can't hurt, no matter how maneuverable you may or may not be.

What is the kill ratio of the F-22 WVR again?


What has got HOBS and HMCS again? [clue: not the F-22]


I'll see if I can dig you up a net reference, but no promises [I think I may have read it in print - but my memory is like crap at the moment... I've no idea where, hopefully it'll come back over time]

reply to post by Eastpolar Commander


You have to do a little more research before making such a funny post. The F-22 has made every western plane look stupid in a dogfight. The SU-27's equivalent is the F-15 without the electronics. Now the F-22 with it's thrust vectoring will always get it's nose on the su-27 first. It would be over in a heart beat.

First of all, before I even go anywhere: The Su-27 Flanker (note the "27") legacy would be completely squished against an F-22. No exceptions. It is not feasible to compare with such a large gap. As is my habit for these sorts of things, I'll be comparing the Su-35 (BM) as my "Flanker of the Week" to any and all other aircraft. It's the most on-par with the rest of the world. I'd say it's poor choice to compare technology that has come out just recently with stuff that came out in the Cold War. Da?

Originally posted by WestPoint23
In simulated WVR combat the Raptor has been taking out a ridiculously high number of US aircraft even when often outnumbered. Mind you these legacy aircraft are equipped with HMCS and AIM-9X while the Raptor is not, yet. Still, it is very maneuverable and can do everything the latest Russian aircraft can (while combat loaded) and even features some capability that they do not.

I find it difficult to say "This works pretty much perfectly against our aircraft. Therefore, it will be equally as good against enemy aircraft!", particularly when comparing legacy aircraft against new Russian stuff. Granted, the F-22 is a heck of a fighter, and is well-made to plow down enemy aircraft, but my point is that it likely won't be cut and dried quite like that.

In real world combat a fully loaded Flanker merging into WVR against the F-22 would already be at a disadvantage due to it's external stores.

How often would it be that a fully loaded Flanker goes to WVR with a Raptor? I know we've argued even the chance of it getting into WVR, but WVR with all stores intact and unused? Unlikely. I'd say it's more likely that WVR happens because the BVR stores are all exhausted (which is a lot of missiles, and therefore a lot of weight).

Just for comparison, a loaded Su-35 BM weighs about 25 tons. Its engines put out 148 kN with the Al-41 F1A (2D TVC), and is slated to get an upgrade with the 117S engine at 160 kN (2D TVC with possibility for 3D as well). F-22 Also weighs about 25 tons loaded, and has the F119-PW-100 at 156 kN. Pretty close. Rather important if you need to be doing high-G turns to get that shot off.

This is an indirect idea that the Su-35 can go for a bit longer than the F-22. The range on the Su-35 is 4000 km, the range on the F-22 is about 3200 km. What this does is tell us indirectly (and therefore imperfectly) how long they can both stay up in the air for before having to turn around and bug out. This probably won't be an issue unless it's a straight up gun fight. Unlikely, I know.

On that note, in the very, very, very, (give or take a few hundred "very"s) unlikely note, the F-22 has 480 rounds of 20 mm, the Su-35 has 150 rounds of 30 mm. Not sure exactly how they'd stack up, considering Flanker has less rounds that do more damage, F-22 has more rounds that do less damage. It could be an issue if you really do mean so-close combat.

Anyway, the myth that the F-22 was only good at BVR and not close in was wide spread and persisted for a number of years however it has since been well established that this is simply not the case.

Not only is it a myth, I think it's also pretty cool that considering the above stats, they could be pretty well evenly matched. Which is really cool.

PS. The infamous Super Hornet "kill" has very little merit in terms of a real world scenario.

Who wants to bet that someone will bring this up anyway?

Unfortunately...

We don't do "versus" threads.

Mod Note: Aircraft Projects Forum Posting Guidelines – Please Review This Link.

Thread closed.