Is The S-37 Fighter Up There With The F-22 ?!?!

Oh and you forget, the U.S. Marine Corps Harrier aircraft can take off from almost anywhere; the U.S. Air Force is supposed to purchase VTOL versions of the new F-35 as well.

One thing I do like about the Russian planes is they look cooler than the newer U.S. ones (in my opinion).

Though the Super Hornet is a badass aircraft. Oh, and I don't know if the Super Hornet has seen action against foreign military's aircraft; the F-18 C/D Hornet has seen that, but the E/F is a totally new aircraft; it is larger than the C/D, has 40% fewer parts, has longer range, higher payload, a small amount of stealth ability where they could put it, and slightly upgraded avionics; but it is a brand new aircraft that just looks similar to the original C/D. I don't think it has really seen air-to-air combat yet. It can maneuver just as well as the C/D however, and there is lots of room for upgrades to it, whereas the C/D has come as far as it can go upgrades-wise.

Originally posted by Angrykirill
Oh yeah?

YEAH!

Now, The MiG-29 is far behind the F-16? It is common knowledge, that in East Germany in 1991, the F-16 lost 49:1 to a MiG-29. As long it was close combat, the F-16 lost MAJORLY. Now, it was more fair in Air-to-Air, but you must remember that it was a pretty old MiG-29 without latest upgrades (Radar, Missiles)

IF it is common knowledge why don't you post some links with that outrageous ratio!-. I think this thread requires more detail than "MAJORLY". But I know you can't present any facts on that 49:1 ratio because thats just crap!
The F-16C "viper" and the Mig-29 both no doubt formidable have had many run-ins� in the past. For one, the Post 9/11 shoot down of two Syrian MiG-29s by IDF F-15s was especially humiliating especially when that was inside the helmet mounted scope's range. Its time for the MiG-29's to retire. It just gets its face trampled down in the mud every time it shows up for a real shooting fight Vs an F-15 or F-16. Here's the link:[Scroll down to the bottom of the page!]
www.acig.org...
The mig-29 has some pretty unique characteristics that give it an edge in WVR combat to the inexperienced pilot but nothing insurmountable. Like:
1) The mig-29 has the helmet mounted scope that gives the pilot a 45 degree cone infront of them which gives the significant advantage over other fighters in BFM combat. Combine the helmet sight with an AA-11 "archer" and you have what is known as a Schlemm short [which means grandslam in german!] With a turn of the head, they can target opposing aircraft up to forty-five degrees off the nose of the MiG-thats pretty amazing when we compare it with the "Archer". Some positions-particularly in an across-the-circle shot or a high-low shot and in a slow-speed fight-where a Fulcrum pilot can look up forty-five degrees and take a shot while his nose is still off. That capability has changed some of the pilots' ideas on how they should approach a MiG-29 in a neutral fight.
BUT the helmet mounted sight is virtually useless in BVR combat and also the Ru-27/ Ru-77 are no competition for the new and improved AIM-120's. Check this out:
www.f-16.net...

2) The Mig-29 has better maneuverability than the F-16 in the below 200 knots speed but at higher speeds the F-16 outpowers and out turns the Mig-29 and an f-16 can bring it to its nose-then Kaboom! I agree that the Mig-29 is superior to the F-16 at lower speeds and at BFM combat but the age of WVR combat is long over and today almost all engagements are done in the BVR , thus the BFM combat superiority is inconsequential to a large degree. This coupled with the fact that the AIM-120C & D coming out give the American/ Western pilots better equipment and a higher factor of success in any AA engagement. Moreover the Avionics on the Mig-29 are "ancient" and it takes about 6 switches to get a lock!
Also another bizarre fact about the Fulcrum is that the Pilot actually has to calculate the type of missile & time required for missile to hit the target after it is launched so that the radar can illuminate it for that period! Weird! Why can't they get a computer to do that for them?

Here's a great video that shows the F-16's spanking some Mig-29's in AACPictures do speak a 1000 words!-Welcome to the jungle!

The F-16's and the Mig-29 put up a close fight in WVR combat but nothing an experienced pilot cannot contend with. When it comes to BVR the mig-29 falls way behind due to its limited operability and range also its ability to stay air borne is very limited due to very low fuel efficiency, plus the Mig-29 need a pilot part octopus because its avionics are very cumbersome and complicated!
Here is an article about the German Mig-29 air exercises that show the German pilots admitting that the F-26 is infact better than the Mig-29 from the
CodeOne Magazine!

AS for the F-15 Vs Su-27 their have been no actuall conficts that involve the two so by taking into their past records the F-15 clearly has the Edge over Su-27's any day- with 100% kill ratios in almost all major engagements!
Check this video out about the F-15's capabilities: F-15 Vs Su-27 Dogfight!

The F/A-18E has seen combat, but probably nothing more than dropping JDAD's on Iraq and Afghanistan...

I don't have enough time to respond to your other comments since I have to go now

YOU Americans are the gulablest people in town, you realy believe these "symilations" don't you?

JDADs? what are JDADs? I meant JDAM's really...oops!!

Americans are a tad too arrogant, sadly it will be their downfall, they should just admit that they need new technology to defeat the Russian tech...

What?! i can clearly tell you the MiG-29 was coming close to the F-15 in terms of performance in the cold war,let alone the F-16,and the Su-27 would happily kill both the F-15 and the F-16 in BVR combat during the cold war. Even now i would say a Su-30 with BARS will win a F-15 with an AESA radar.

IAF, the fulcrums performed better that the falcons in aerial combats the kill ratio wont 40-50/1, maybe 11/1, or higher, i dont remember well, the mig29 is better at almost all dogfight speeds, but at M0.9 the f16 have an slightly advantage, patheticaly the falcons pilots said that if they turn on the AB constanty they had better probabilities of kill , thats an "i cant do anymore" tactic (like f4s in vietnam war), but the f16 perform better rolls and vertical turns.

the syrian migs 29 its a myth (anyway if that happened, whe know how the syrians are equiped and piloted), about ACIG , i had read that, and suck!!...

yeah sure from a web site called www.f16

Code One its the american air force magazine!!!

the su27 is cleary better than the f15

[edit on 26-12-2004 by IAF101]

Originally posted by grunt2
IAF, the fulcrums performed better that the falcons in aerial combats the kill ratio wont 40-50/1, maybe 11/1, or higher, i dont remember well, the mig29 is better at almost all dogfight speeds, but at M0.9 the f16 have an slightly advantage, patheticaly the falcons pilots said that if they turn on the AB constanty they had better probabilities of kill , thats an "i cant do anymore" tactic (like f4s in vietnam war), but the f16 perform better rolls and vertical turns.

You know thats BS! Its not just the turning thing its a complement of all the factors! Moreover they went up against the Luftwaffe- they are better with the Mig-29 than the Russians are!

the Syrian migs 29 its a myth (anyway if that happened, whe know how the syrians are equiped and piloted), about ACIG , i had read that, and suck!!...

You think the RUAF is any better? They are almost the same as the SAF in some respects[maybe better planes], just look at the Chechen conflict for example!

yeah sure from a web site called www.f16

Code One its the american air force magazine!!!

the su27 is clearly better than the f15

Come on! Didn't you watch the video? How can that be doctored?

You�re implying that American airforce magazines is biased! That they don't want to inform their pilots about how to stay alive in a dogfight with a mig-29!
Haven't you read the article they say that the mig-29 is pretty good!

Come on people! Get rid of the "open eyes closed mind" attitude, the commies have brainwashed you into thinking that it is better by all that air-circus tricks - look I can do a head stand!
As I say-
To know the truth you have to be brave enough to accept the truth

IAF


[edit on 26-12-2004 by IAF101]

IAF, you didnt posted any good argument!!!!

veniks will say that the mig29 is better, codeone will say that the f16 is the best.....pssss,

if the russian are better pilots , hell yes!!!, in korean war (i know again) they had the greater cuantify of aces (even better than the americans), and the sabres kill ratio wasnt 10-1!!!, only patriotic idiots could believe in that!!!

they are better with the Mig-29 than the Russians are!

man, im not prorussian, but the cold war made some myths that we can dispell right now.

just look at the Chechen conflict for example!

just look irak-afganistan conflict!!!!!

Your not prorussian alright! Your just anti-american!
MY argument is based on facts - not hearsay and opinion. CodeOne is credible to a very large degree-especially about aircraft!
RUAF guys belong in the circus not in combat duty!- the Germans have more hours on the Mig-29 than the RUAF do!By doing a super cobra doesn't show that your aircraft is better it just shows that you aircraft can do a supercobra! Which is pointless!
Moreover your speculation about F-16 is biased tosay the least as you cannot support your argument with facts! Face it!- RUAF are an imitation of the Soviet AF while the USAF is the real thing!
[Mental note:will not respond to speculation]

Anyway, back on topic the F-22 can NAIL the su-37 anywhere anytime anyhow!
Like Bush says " Make no mistake about it!"

Your not prorussian alright! Your just anti-american!

No man, im just anti-myth

can you tell me where im speculating????? all that i had posted is based on pilots reports and respected sources, that mig29s shootdowned by f16 is an rumor,and that russian lack of training is an cold war insult, the migs29 horizontal turn advantage is well known, also the f16 poor performance at heigh.

i think that the fulcrum is an interesting example of engeniering, what they had done without FBW or unstable design.

[edit on 26-12-2004 by grunt2]

[edit on 26-12-2004 by grunt2]

Well, the video is not reliable...

It's obviously cut up, and possibly the MiG-29 came behind the F-16 many other times...

The F-16 stalled a fair number of times and what was with the Fuel warning?

Why did the MiG-29 crash in the end?!

I'd be more convinced if I saw the whole video...

The F-16 is impressive, but so is the MiG-29.

Soruce: www.globalsecurity.org...

Read the above link the MiG-29M/33 is much better than F-16 !

~ Kenshin

Forward Swept wing technoloygy was proven to be inferior around 1984 by the Grumman x-29. The US has not pursued the technology thus. The Russians are 15 to 20 years behind this fact and the s-37 is also a FSW demonstrator.

Originally posted by Kenshin
Soruce: www.globalsecurity.org...

Read the above link the MiG-29M/33 is much better than F-16 !

~ Kenshin

Who is in production? The F-16E/F with AESA... Those specs are comparative to the common blk~40+ F-16C... The newest F-16s are a fighter that none would engage unless they knew they had an upper hand in numbers.

Though the Super Hornet is a badass aircraft. Oh, and I don't know if the Super Hornet has seen action against foreign military's aircraft; the F-18 C/D Hornet has seen that, but the E/F is a totally new aircraft; it is larger than the C/D, has 40% fewer parts, has longer range, higher payload, a small amount of stealth ability where they could put it, and slightly upgraded avionics; but it is a brand new aircraft that just looks similar to the original C/D. I don't think it has really seen air-to-air combat yet. It can maneuver just as well as the C/D however, and there is lots of room for upgrades to it, whereas the C/D has come as far as it can go upgrades-wise.

Also, due to it's larger control surfaces, overall larger wing area and more emphasis on a lifting body design it handles better at very high alpha.

One should also note the AESA, HMS, Aim-9X and 27,500lbs class engines coming into the picture in the 2008 timeframe. The easy maintainability of the jet, it's more advanced electronic and physical counter measures, its reduced RCS and its ability to come out of almost any knife fight could take the crown from the F-15C AESA as king of the conventional US fighters.

What?! i can clearly tell you the MiG-29 was coming close to the F-15 in terms of performance in the cold war,let alone the F-16,and the Su-27 would happily kill both the F-15 and the F-16 in BVR combat during the cold war. Even now i would say a Su-30 with BARS will win a F-15 with an AESA radar.

The Mig-29 hasn�t the range, sustainable speed, and electronics the F-15 packs. Sure, the Mig-29 could mingle with the F-15 at low-speed high-alpha play but the F-15 pilots know better and train for their fighters strength witch is its beefy radar and high energy gunfights.


The F-15 and F-16 would also happily kill the Su-27.
A Flanker with BARS has more powerful radar and can pick the F-15 up at further ranges then a regular Flanker could. He still has to wait to calculate a firing solution. Heck, the only advantage really is the fact that he knows the F-15 is storming towards him.
The N011M has a supposed maximum track range of 150km while the APG-63(V)2 clocks in at ~220km. Seems like the Eagle has the better SA to me, no?
So, 2 equally matched heavy fighters and both will soon be equipped with HMS� The better fighter pilot wins�

Anyway, back on topic the F-22 can NAIL the su-37 anywhere anytime anyhow!
Like Bush says " Make no mistake about it!"

Oh, only a fool would dissagree...

::::sigh::::: I wish the Marine Corps was purchasing the Super Hornet :* (

[edit on 26-12-2004 by Broadsword20068]

Originally posted by Broadsword20068
::::sigh::::: I wish the Marine Corps was purchasing the Super Hornet :* (

[edit on 26-12-2004 by Broadsword20068]

The Super Bug has enormous potential. I feel that a smaller, stealthy F-35 with wing mounted pylons would serve better though. Too bad they can�t throw a few billion into a more efficient hovering system. These things hit bingo before they hit the front lines...
I personally think a beefy A-10 type CAS jet with reduced RCS and infra red signatures would work best for the Marines.

Well I am hopefully going to become a jet pilot in the Marines, meaning I will either fly the F/A-18 C/D Hornet, or the AV-8B Harrier, and then probably eventually the F-35 when they get that.

But I think the Super Hornet looks far more bad-ass, so I'd wanna fly that instead

The F-35 I think will have a fine hover system. The hover system on the Harrier was weak in its early days too. The F-35 has until 2008-2010 until it is supposed to officially come out; the company is still working on the engine strength and such.

The F-18 had loads of challenges they had to overcome when it first was coming out as well.

Awesome...

Don�t count on the AV-8B as it is just about out the door like the F-14.

I'm not calling the F-35 weak by any means. Its engine is a supped up F/A-22 F-119 in the 40k lbs thrust class.
I'm just saying that it consumes fuel in hovermode like nothing else.

And yes, I love the sleek, vicious look of the F/A-18E-G also.