Russia's New fighter on airfield near Moscow for tests

Very interesting aircraft.

Comparing it directly to the F22 is missing the point maybe. It doesn't need to be as good. Half as good would do fine if the numbers are right.

The US wont sell the F-22 to anyone and the F-35 isn't really intended for air dominance.

That leaves old US tech and the Euro-canards. With this on the horizon why would anybody invest in Eurofighter, Rafale, F-18, Gripen, F-15?

reply to post by Foppezao


Both the Berkut and MiG 1.44 concepts are being considered for export sales by Sukhoi and Mikoyan corporations, apparently. I think the current T-50 design is pretty good all on its own, to me it moves like razor-sharp steel cutting through water.

Originally posted by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
reply to post by Foppezao

 

Both the Berkut and MiG 1.44 concepts are being considered for export sales by Sukhoi and Mikoyan corporations, apparently.

Is there any corroborative source for that? Because I strongly suspect it to be total cobblers.

Why offer an inferior product in competition with your own aircraft?

Originally posted by DrJay1975
I'm fairly certain the simulation for A2A combat between the F22 and SUV-33 said that for every F22 taken down aproximately 20-27 of the Russian fighters would be taken down. Even when the Russiand came out with more advanced aircraft our avionics and electronics superiority were able to keep 25 year old aircraft designs on par with brand spanking new models.

Well, this is purely speculation.

For instance - if I know I'm in a seriously out-performed airframe, I'm going to not engage the F-22 in the air.

With the drastically few F-22 airframes available, there will be gaps and holes in coverage in any campaign. While this airframe will certainly not possess the raw avionics and weapons systems to compete with the F-22 toe-to-toe, they will be produced in larger numbers, and capable of handling the more practical threats of the F-15 and F-18.

Were I to face off against the F-22, i would let them fly their airframes into disrepair (something plaguing the F-22) and then utilize their drop in coverage to strike the airfields (if this had to be done by air and artillery could not be snuck into position). Until then - I would focus my efforts on merely denying air superiority to whomever had the F-22 - which would not be all that impossible.

This fighter has more than enough performance to 'toy' with anything in the U.S. arsenal. While it doesn't have all of the bells and whistles that the F-22 has, it can certainly get out of an AMRAAM's lethal envelope in plenty of time - effectively taking the majority of the F-22's (and F-15's/18's) teeth away. The slight reduction in RCS this airframe boasts would likely influence terminal guidance reliability on the Aim-120s.

It turns into a scenario where there could be plenty of shooting, but it is unlikely anyone would be hitting anything.

It could be an interesting return to the days of strategic bombing and fighter escorts - which would really be a twist on the governing theories of air superiority.

The movable tails remind me of the YF-23.

This, they do. The whole design seems to be quite inspired by the F-23. Which makes sense, as the Russians have always admired aerodynamic performance - that would gravitate them towards an F-23-esque airframe.

I am also of the opinion that if an aircraft is too good at what it does then it's not available for sale. We still aren't selling em. AAnd Russia is coproducing theirs with India, 200 each and 600 for sale...

I wouldn't really say that. It's mostly a matter of how 'special' the aircraft is. The F-5E is a remarkable little aircraft and damned good at what it does. The aircraft is nothing all that special - it's just a well-designed airframe that gets the job done.

The F-22 is not all that extraordinary of an aircraft - the biggest changes come simply in the form of information that is displayed to the pilot - nothing that isn't being done in the F-15E and the F-18E/F/G. Its design materials are classified because of their properties regarding radar and IR - but so are the chaff/flares used in every aircraft. Performance wise - it's an optimized F-15, and it's only real improvement over F-15 weapons systems is the so-called mini-AWACS it can function as.

It's just got all of these new goodies rolled up into one package that is proving more troublesome than anticipated by the Brass - hence why we're not selling it.

Originally posted by James R. Hawkwood

Originally posted by sherpa

They say that stealth is one of this new planes strong suits and yet it does not have the same degree of facets and chines as say the F117 maybe there is a trade off with aerodynamics and the need for speed at least that seems logical to me.

Sherpa, the F-117 used older styled stealh techniques that were cumbersome in practical usuage in planes.

With improvements in RCS reduction, planes could be made stealthy just as much as the F-117 but with the outer skin of the aircraft more smoother for better aerodynamic performance.

So it is entirely possible for this aircraft to be extreemly stealthy whilest being just as aerodynamicaly smooth as a Flanker.

Yes clearly I am not up to date with current stealth technology this would explain why I was wondering about a new Royal Navy frigate, the type 45 I think, that also lacked obvious chines and facets I must get round sometime to doing a little research.





[edit on 3-6-2010 by sherpa]