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

There is quite a bit more to modern aerodynamics than simply looking at a picture of an aircraft and saying it doesn't look like it is aerodynamic. When the Nighthawks came out some of the best aeronautical engineers in the country didn't think it could fly, with or without the electronic flight controls. They were wrong. In the past 3+ decades advancements in computing power have allowed manufacturers like NG and LM to build aircraft that are both stealthy and aerodynamically clean. You'll be hard pressed to find any faceted surfaces on the B2 and it has one of the lowest RCS's known of. The Raptor is a generation beyond (both in stealth and aerodynamics) the Spirit, so I wouldn't go off assuming that just because stealth is one of its selling points that it isn't able to maneuver well.

Nipples I have to agree with you, in interviews with top brass who have flown the Raptor, or in interviews with former F-15 pilots who now fly the Raptor, the answer is the same. They all say it is more maneuverable than the F-15, now either they are lying, which I find hard to believe, or the Raptor is more maneuverable than we give it credit.

Originally posted by naXaH
still there is the radar network usage which means in air space of any developed country stealth is useless ...

...u know what i mean?

Not a clue.

Civilian radar, such as air-traffic-control, rely on transponders to tell them what jet is where and doing what.

Stealth was designed for a single purpose, to make the jets of the USAF invisible in the single most heavily-air-defended region on earth, the corridor from Berlin to Moscow.

If stealth is useless in the airspace of developed countries why did the US spend so many BILLIONS of dollars pursuing it?

Yugoslavia, and by extension Serbia, was a developed country. Why were they able to shoot down only a single stealth fighter, and then only by ignoring their radars?

Per capita Yugoslavia was one of the biggest exporters of arms in the eastern bloc. That included AA gear. With all that knowledge they should have had F117s falling out of the sky like Screaming Eagles on D-Day.

Interesting note about the Aussies. The first time I heard that rumour it was the multiple-phase "Over the Horizon" radar array at Jindalee that had painted the Spirit. The reason that it didn't make stealth obsolete is that you'd need a brigade to make Jindalee "man-portable".

Long-wave (metric) radar has been oted as having certain effective values over and above short wave (centimetric) radar since WW2. The germans operated on 50cm wavelengths and the Brits on 10 metre wavelengths. Chain Home was better at detection than the Kammhuber Line. However, the Germans got their radar in the air first, thanks to its size, where it became vulnerable to "Window".

I found at least one article that said the -117 that got shot down was hit with bomb bay doors open. If that's the case, then no wonder they got it. WIth the doors open the RCS of a 117 is bigger than an Eagle.

Originally posted by Nipples
The Raptor is a generation beyond (both in stealth and aerodynamics) the Spirit, so I wouldn't go off assuming that just because stealth is one of its selling points that it isn't able to maneuver well.

The B-2 has a smaller RCS then the Raptor. Their stealth technology is of the same generation.

I agree that the B2 probably (although no one on this forum REALLY knows) has a smaller RCS than the F22. This is unsurprising since all the B2 was designed for was stealth, and range for a given payload. As the F22 has to be able to do more than fly straight and dump a load, I wouldn't be surprised at all if it gave up some stealthiness for performance. That said, the Raptor prototypes were just getting in the air around the time the B2 was being shown to the public, so I would imagine the stealth technology they were developed with was more advanced than that used on the B2...even if the end product isn't as stealthy as the original. I probably should have been clearer with my original post.

1.having a better agility then f15 doesnt prove anything. raptors AOA is worse the of mig29 and baby AOA is VERY important. Ofcourse f22 has much better maneuverability then former us planes but it could have been much better then this.
2. Saying "then why did the US do it" is no argument if u know what i mean.
Im sayin US did a huge mistake as they disided to go fully on stealth. The radar network system doesnt work right away u have to configure the whole network, the serbs where not prepared and had not sufficiant know-how nor did iraq but as i told u EU/RUSSIA/CHINA will take down those f22 like nothing.

If you're considering the 90 degree AoA the MiG-29 is capable of during the Cobra manuver, that's VERY limited in time it can handle it. The "actual" AoA of the Fulcrum is limited to 30 degrees before the M variant.


The MiG-29M is the first Fulcrum with a full quadruplex fly-by-wire flight control system that, according to Waldenberg, combines both analog and digital devices incorporating multiple redundancies and utilizes relaxed static stability. Maneuvering performance has been maintained but there has been a substantial increase in permissible angle-of-attack (AOA) over the present 30° and acceptable G-loading
www.sci.fi...

The F-22 has been cleared up to 60 degrees, or even higher for limited times. Although depending on where you read, it's actually capable of unlimited AoA.

1-the f15 is a truck in agility compared with the f16, not to say the su27 or the EF, but also that is relative, for example an f18 is a sucker in speeds of around 350-400knots and up against the f16, but performs much better in lower speeds , also depends in height -for example the mig29 is unbeatible over 5000mts againt the f16-, but i guess that even that isnt the case for the 15, its aerodynamics are to simpler

2-the f22 is a semi stealth plane, even stealth planes are not invisibles, stealth concept is used to X band radar, L-D band in which there are looooots of radars in use airborn and ground ones detects easely any plane-and the people is surprised by the f117 downed in serbia -, , also dont get confused by some reports, remember the b1b case???, a lot of claims about it was superstealth, but late was confirmed that its true rcs was around 1/2 of the b52,basically all this super-duper f22 is marketing for ignorant minds...

3-the raptor is a interesting design well done, with some shortcomings and problems, maybe overcomplicated, but is good, the stealth concepts reduce the treaths but not in the proportion that some raptor lovers believe,its not the wonder woman plane....

60 degrees is not the sustained AoA, until i know is the max or instantaneus AoA


[edit on 1-12-2005 by grunt2]

Originally posted by Kenshin
just wanting some opinions whether or not the S-37 fighter is up there with the likes of the F-22 and the Grippen ?

Personally I think that it is more than capable of going one on one with any western fighter

Hope you guys feel the same

[edit on 9-10-2004 by Kenshin]

As the horse said on Ren and Stimpy...

"No Sir, I don't like it."

I love that it is trying to use FSW concept, but I think that will be on of it's biggest flaws.

If a fighter today used FSW, it would need to take advantage of a variable geometry wing... like wing warping, not swing wing... in order to be more advantagous then the current F-22 Technology.

Anyways... I really don't think there is anything close to the F-22 now, or even for a while.

What makes the F-22 so incredible is it's capability of intergrating all kinds of neat abilities which makes it so versitile.

Don't get me wrong, the Su-37 is no doubt a wonderful aircraft, and I'm happy to see Russia still giving us a run for our money! Healthy Competition is a Great thing!

Hey does anbody have any movies of f22 and s37? Or can u give the link where to download them? Best way would be to upload them to
www.yousendit.com
It would be soooooooooo nice! ^^
I only saw pictures of these planes untill now

All in all, just don’t read anything by Tom Clancy if you are interested in facts not fiction. Same goes for da Vinci’s Code and other bull crap money making schemes targeted to amuse easily entertained simpletons.

The “plan” has nothing to do with a “mother of all contingency plans”. It’s just a scrap of a tactical scenario; they had a short life time and were updated continuously.

There are a literally tons of such “plans” on all sides, nothing shocking or new about it.



Man, this thread just never ends, and it’s all the same crap which has been chewed on just about every forum.

My x-box 360 is better then your play station, cuz it got removable faceplate blah blah.

Same old crap.

The Raptor is a beautiful, graceful bird and another rip of for all of us, the tax payers.

It’s the Bradley fighting vehicle all over, and over, and over again.

For the ones who don’t know how Pentagon and the Defense industry really work, there is a comedy about it. I think it’s called “Pentagon Wars”.

To all the people raving about “stealth” and how it’s the best and the newest high-tech in military aviation, ask Pyotr Ufimtsev about it and why Soviet defense ministry shelved that project back in early 60s. Old, old news, but it sure works for getting extra couple of billion out of congress, time and time again.

BVR? MiG-31, and yes, it can bring down a Raptor, a bomber, a cruise missile, a seagull etc. All factored in.

Advanced weapon systems, radar, electronics, etc? Glass cockpits and flashy lights have nothing to do with a weapon, same as decorative gold trim, gem covered grip and engravings on a blade of a sword. That crap is for generals to wave around at their little back scratching shindigs.

Russians have the most advanced radar technology that we know of, not to say that we know a hell of a lot, but from what we do know, they got a definite edge. In mid 90s US/Russia ran a joint early-warning radar test, and their system from early 70s tracked a 10cm sphere which our newest installation could not. Same goes for deep ground scanning radars. We can’t even begin to touch them there.

the russians havent the most advanced radar tech, that is exagerated iska, but i agree that they have mastered and are more advanced in some areas, like europeans and americans are better in other areas

[edit on 3-12-2005 by grunt2]

naXaH,

For a few decent F/A-22 Raptor videos, try www.fa22raptor.com/media/index.html and click on "Video Gallery" in the left column.

[edit on 3-12-2005 by ConceptX]

Originally posted by iskander

To all the people raving about “stealth” and how it’s the best and the newest high-tech in military aviation, ask Pyotr Ufimtsev about it and why Soviet defense ministry shelved that project back in early 60s. Old, old news, but it sure works for getting extra couple of billion out of congress, time and time again.

I thought Ufimtsev only discovered the theories behind fractorial mathematics and its use for predicting RCS of two-dimensional objects. I was not aware of any Russian attempt to apply these theories, at least not before Denys Overholser, a mathematician at Lockheed.

If Ufimtsev would have had a background in military aircraft, perhaps he could have made the connection and changed history...

For a good explanation on why LO missiles and aircraft currently work, see www.aeronautics.ru/lbandradars.htm.


[edit on 3-12-2005 by ConceptX]

the russians didnt took the concept because was not worth to them, the americans designed such system thinking that low frecuency radars wouldnt exist in the future because the integration of tracking in pasive home misiles and the need of higher resolution -didnt thought about active heads or better maths to suit in lf radars-, instead the russians like the D-L band radars, so they didnt took the concept, just look the last fighter radars, the american ones operate only in X band, instead the russian ones also operates in L-D band


[edit on 3-12-2005 by grunt2]

“If Ufimtsev would have had a background in military aircraft, perhaps he could have made the connection and changed history...”

You seem to miss the profound differences in Soviet approach to r&d. While in US research is highly specialized and localized, Russian approach is based on a common foundation. Just look at our medical community. Enormous amount of highly specialized professionals in extremely narrow fields, all do to economical system, aka profit margin rule. Why have a do it all tool when you can charge for a set?

Soviet approach allowed a system in which research could be coordinated through various institutions while retaining security.

If you think Ufimtsev’s published work is the only study done on the “stealth” theory at the time, you’re simply mistaken. Stealth research goes back to WW1 with the use of transparent surfaces on bi-planes. Logically, do you think that Soviets would not give a second though and not thoroughly investigate all possible aspects of low RCS concept?

“only discovered the theories behind fractorial mathematics and its use for predicting RCS of two-dimensional objects.”

Think about it, what Ufimtsev published was the work on a TESTING tool, which is designed for testing stealth technology concept in question.

I hope would agree, that in the environment of the “iron curtain”, Soviets would take special care of releasing scientific publications, and would not release Ufimtsevs work if it was considered of any strategic importance.

Zdarova naXaHy, 3ax zdes. Black Sun Empire katish, ili pindosnu.

Edit:spelling



[edit on 4-12-2005 by iskander]

“On the other hand, the width of low-frequency bands makes it difficult to detect a target with sufficient accuracy (in the range of 30-50m), to provide targeting information to SAMs or AAAs. Thus LO aircraft and missiles at the moment continue to enjoy the advantages of stealth."

Oh I love that. Indeed, obsolete beam riders would have difficulties tracking a LO target on its terminal attacks phase. What about an active hi-res seeker from let’s say 5km or 10km out tracking a target with in 30 to 50ms’ radius?

Sorry guys but when i saw this picture i just couldny resist

Originally posted by Russian Boy
Sorry guys but when i saw this picture i just couldny resist
www-public.tu-bs.de.... " target='_blank' class='tabOff'/>

What picture?

[edit on 7-12-2005 by waynos]

[edit on 7-12-2005 by waynos]

[edit on 7-12-2005 by waynos]