F/A-22: To Fly High or Get its Wings Clipped

[jaffo4011]

I think it is widely known that the F-22 uses 2D TVC and that the Su-35 uses 3D TVC and also that the Eurofighter has NO TVC whatsoever.

I think it's also known that the Su-35's airframe allows for super maneuverability and is-in terms of maneuverability- superior to the F-22's airframe and thus can defeat it in WVR combat.

But stealth alone makes the F-22 nearly untouchable in BVR which makes it an infinitely superior aircraft to any current fighter.

Or were you referring to the Eurofighter Typhoon being humiliated by the Su-37 in the 1996 Farnbrough air show and the UK gov't trying to ground the Su-37 so it won't make the Eurofighter Typhoon look like trash? Because if so I would gladly provide a link.

so let me get this right..you were talking about the best fighter for wvr but when i quote the fact that the typhoon has demonstrably proved itself to be superior to date in that scenario against the f22(i can provide an independent source for that by the way) we then change the tack to bvr performance.(now dont forget that the typhoon has also obtained radar locks on the f22 at bvr too,so even thats not a certainty!).

obviously tvc in any form doesnt automatically lead to superior manoeveribility.its just part of a package.

i cant see why the govt would or could stop the su 37 flying at farnborough either!..to what purpose??? the typhoon has an amazing air show performance(ive seen it) and the mig 29's and su's have been flying at british airshows for years to great acclaim by all enthusiasts and without govt censorship...

 

[Scorpion82]

I think it is widely known that the F-22 uses 2D TVC and that the Su-35 uses 3D TVC and also that the Eurofighter has NO TVC whatsoever.

TVC is an adaptable technology. The Su-35 is still not flying.

I think it's also known that the Su-35's airframe allows for super maneuverability and is-in terms of maneuverability- superior to the F-22's airframe and thus can defeat it in WVR combat.

There is nothing special about "can defeat it WVR".

Or were you referring to the Eurofighter Typhoon being humiliated by the Su-37 in the 1996 Farnbrough air show and the UK gov't trying to ground the Su-37 so it won't make the Eurofighter Typhoon look like trash? Because if so I would gladly provide a link.

Never heared about that, nonetheless it's important to note that the Typhoon prototypes at that time had a very restricted FCS and as it probably was DA2 the aircraft had the less powerfull RB199 engines at that time. TVC provides an edge in the post stall regime, but doesn't automatically make an aircraft more manoeuvreable in every regime of the flight envelope.

was saying the Su-35 ,with All-Aspect TVC and an airframe designed to be super maneuverable, would be superior to the F-22 in WVR because the F-22 relies SOLEY on 2D TVC(which isn't as good as the Su-35's 3-D TVC) to make it "super-maneuverable".

Nonsense. Even without TVC the F-22s aerodynamics are good. No one says as good as that of the Su-35, but the aircraft would still has its own pros. Let alone the fact that TVC is an integral part of the F-22 design. The supposed Su-35 is not even flying at the moment.

And at the time of the Su-35's release it was by far the worlds best fighter and remains to this day the only 3d TVC production plane other than the MKI and probably the most maneuverable production plane.

The Su-35 never had 3-D TVC, nor was it ever operationally used. The radar didn't perform as expected and its MMI was found to be ineffective! Any claim of that the Su-35 (Su-27M) could have been the super dooper fighter is simply unproven speculation and even more wishful thinking.

The Eurofighter couldn't go against a Su-30 MKI or a Su-35 let alone an Su-37. Th only plane that I think is better than the Su-37 is the F-22 and I think 4 Su-37 and AWACS are needed to down one and thats if the Su-37's pilots are amazing. Only 1 Su-37 is needed to down one if the F-22 is drawn into WVR combat again a highly skilled pilots is need for the Su-37.

Except the Su-30MKI no one of the other Flankers were ever operational. And why shouldn't the Eurofighter be able to "go" against them?

 

[T-95]

TVC is an adaptable technology. The Su-35 is still not flying.



There is nothing special about "can defeat it WVR".



Never heared about that, nonetheless it's important to note that the Typhoon prototypes at that time had a very restricted FCS and as it probably was DA2 the aircraft had the less powerfull RB199 engines at that time. TVC provides an edge in the post stall regime, but doesn't automatically make an aircraft more manoeuvreable in every regime of the flight envelope.



Nonsense. Even without TVC the F-22s aerodynamics are good. No one says as good as that of the Su-35, but the aircraft would still has its own pros. Let alone the fact that TVC is an integral part of the F-22 design. The supposed Su-35 is not even flying at the moment.



The Su-35 never had 3-D TVC, nor was it ever operationally used. The radar didn't perform as expected and its MMI was found to be ineffective! Any claim of that the Su-35 (Su-27M) could have been the super dooper fighter is simply unproven speculation and even more wishful thinking.



Except the Su-30MKI no one of the other Flankers were ever operational. And why shouldn't the Eurofighter be able to "go" against them?

Please provide a link to a credible web site that says that the Su-35 was never operational because I happen to know that Russian Air Force uses 12 as Front Line Fighters. I should also mention that I think it dose have an all-aspect thrust vector control engine(correct me if I'm wrong)? And another thing I should mention is that one of the those 12 Su-35's has a greatly reduced radar cross section(as an experiment with stealth tech) and the Russians said that they reduced enemy radar detection range of the Su-35 by half with a full weapons load so shouldn't it, with the latest Russian radar and the R-77E, have first sight fist shot first kill on the Typhoon? I think they shared some of these study findings with Chinese for their J-11B because the Chinese said something about reducing their Flankers radar cross section to 5m sq. as opposed to the 25m sq. of the original J-11.

My opinion is that the F-22 is unmatchable in combat but it can't go against even 3 Su-37's without getting shot down. 2 Su-37's is plausible and thats a maybe. as for the Eurofighter I don't think that 2 Typhoons can go against an MKI (we will see they are having an exercise with them) let alone shoot down 4 Su-37's, or whatever the number was.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Please provide a link to a credible web site that says that the Su-35 was never operational because I happen to know that Russian Air Force uses 12 as Front Line Fighters. I should also mention that I think it dose have an all-aspect thrust vector control engine(correct me if I'm wrong)? And another thing I should mention is that one of the those 12 Su-35's has a greatly reduced radar cross section(as an experiment with stealth tech) and the Russians said that they reduced enemy radar detection range of the Su-35 by half with a full weapons load so shouldn't it, with the latest Russian radar and the R-77E, have first sight fist shot first kill on the Typhoon? I think they shared some of these study findings with Chinese for their J-11B because the Chinese said something about reducing their Flankers radar cross section to 5m sq. as opposed to the 25m sq. of the original J-11.

My opinion is that the F-22 is unmatchable in combat but it can't go against even 3 Su-37's without getting shot down. 2 Su-37's is plausible and thats a maybe. as for the Eurofighter I don't think that 2 Typhoons can go against an MKI (we will see they are having an exercise with them) let alone shoot down 4 Su-37's, or whatever the number was.

I have to say i'm a bit schepticle as to eurofighter's claims of 4 to 1 kill ratio's against SU 35's especially with all the brand new bits being proposesd, tested and produced for the thing. The Typhoon can cruise faster and probably has a lower frontal RCS but then again probably has a less capable radar. As far as the WVR environment, i've heard all the claims that the Typhoon "dominates" the F22 in this reguard, mainly from the Typhoon clan in this forum. However if indeed the Typhoon had a better kill ratio in WVR vs the Raptor i've got a feeling its got something to do with the absance of a JHMCS on the F22, since there isn't really a need to get on your opponants tail any more the ability to get your next gen WVR missile on target quickest is paramount. So in this reguard the Su 35 & F22 can point the nose very quickley due to the 2D TVC which the typhoon doesent have.

But i'm having trouble figureing what you mean by SU 37 and how an F22 will get shot down in a 3 to one scenario. AFAIK the SU35 has 2D TVC. The SU 37 is purely a demonstrater (aka MiG 29OVT) and doesent even have the avionics package of the Su 35. With the ZHUK AE and R77M the SU 35 will be a very capable customer, however the F22 will be able to launch 6 AIM120's each at BVR and most probably will never be detected by the flankers, not to mention the effect an electronic attack would have on them as the AMRAAM's rain down. I'm not sure how they would aviod the 30 to 1, 120 to 1 and the like kill ratio's that other 4th gen and 4.5 gen platforms suffered vs the Raptor. Its a set of tactics married to the very capable technology which produces a combination that will be very very hard to counter, and i'm not too shure how the Su 35 would do any better than other lagacy platforms. So could you explain this magic 3 to 1 number were the F22 would be outmatched????? 7+ to 1 maybe, only because the F22 runs out of AMRAAM's.

And as far as a Typhoon vs an MKI, why exactly do you think the number is two typhoons to one MKI? The typhoon has several advantages over the SU 30, the 4 to 1 kill ratio may be overstated but they would at least achieve parity against an MKI. Smaller RCS, better missiles, higher cruise, i'm not too sure how the Captor satcks up against the BARS, i see the typhoon as having an advantage. Maybe not the 4 to 1, maybe 1.5 or 2 to one.

 

[T-95]

I have to say i'm a bit schepticle as to eurofighter's claims of 4 to 1 kill ratio's against SU 35's especially with all the brand new bits being proposesd, tested and produced for the thing. The Typhoon can cruise faster and probably has a lower frontal RCS but then again probably has a less capable radar. As far as the WVR environment, i've heard all the claims that the Typhoon "dominates" the F22 in this reguard, mainly from the Typhoon clan in this forum. However if indeed the Typhoon had a better kill ratio in WVR vs the Raptor i've got a feeling its got something to do with the absance of a JHMCS on the F22, since there isn't really a need to get on your opponants tail any more the ability to get your next gen WVR missile on target quickest is paramount. So in this reguard the Su 35 & F22 can point the nose very quickley due to the 2D TVC which the typhoon doesent have.

But i'm having trouble figureing what you mean by SU 37 and how an F22 will get shot down in a 3 to one scenario. AFAIK the SU35 has 2D TVC. The SU 37 is purely a demonstrater (aka MiG 29OVT) and doesent even have the avionics package of the Su 35. With the ZHUK AE and R77M the SU 35 will be a very capable customer, however the F22 will be able to launch 6 AIM120's each at BVR and most probably will never be detected by the flankers, not to mention the effect an electronic attack would have on them as the AMRAAM's rain down. I'm not sure how they would aviod the 30 to 1, 120 to 1 and the like kill ratio's that other 4th gen and 4.5 gen platforms suffered vs the Raptor. Its a set of tactics married to the very capable technology which produces a combination that will be very very hard to counter, and i'm not too shure how the Su 35 would do any better than other lagacy platforms. So could you explain this magic 3 to 1 number were the F22 would be outmatched????? 7+ to 1 maybe, only because the F22 runs out of AMRAAM's.

Maybe the 3 to 1 number was a little high, but I do have to mention the Su-37's technologies ,even when compared to the F-16 Block 60/62, were highly advanced. It featured a ground avoidance system, asymmetrical TVC, a full glass cockpit and more. These are all technologies(except for the full glass cockpit I think) that are yet to be introduced into any F-16 and some arent even planned for the F-35. The Su-35 as stated by KNAPOO's website has a reduced RCS which means the Su-37's RCS is probably reduced too because it was just a modified Su-35. An Australian analyst said that by 2015 (and I'll get the link for this) Flankers will have upgrades available for them that would make them better than the F-35.

When in air-defense missions with countries that have S-400 and S-300 couldn't they just send information to the planes from the ground or just hit stealth fighters? Wouldn't that make the Flankers aware of the F-22 or F-35?

and just a little info about the S-400 and S-300 the manufacturer claims a detection range of 400km against a target with RCS of 0.002. Even a website which is pro F-35 (I will give you the link) claims it is at high risk flying over the skies with S-300's present. I'm presenting this information to know whether in a scenario were an S-400's radar is present would the Su-35's still be at a disadvantage because of the F-22's and F-35's stealth or would they just be told were they are by GC and draw them into WVR combat.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Maybe the 3 to 1 number was a little high, but I do have to mention the Su-37's technologies ,even when compared to the F-16 Block 60/62, were highly advanced. It featured a ground avoidance system, asymmetrical TVC, a full glass cockpit and more. These are all technologies(except for the full glass cockpit I think) that are yet to be introduced into any F-16 and some arent even planned for the F-35. The Su-35 as stated by KNAPOO's website has a reduced RCS which means the Su-37's RCS is probably reduced too because it was just a modified Su-35. An Australian analyst said that by 2015 (and I'll get the link for this) Flankers will have upgrades available for them that would make them better than the F-35.

Again i ask whether your talking about an SU35 or 37 because i was under the impression that the that the Su 37 was purely a demonstrater and not combat capable. I'll assume you meant an upgraded SU 35. As for as the Su 37's "technologies" and their supposed superiority to the F16 Block 60/62 the only advantage i can see is the TVC. The "ground aviodance system" wouldn't be the same one they have in commercial airliners would it?? If not could you explain what was so special about it and how this makes its avionics superior to an AESA equiped F16 E/F?????? IIRC the SU37 didnt even have HOTAS.....

And i have a very hard time believing KNAPOO's claims that the SU 35 has a significantly reduced RCS, given the lack of russian experiance with RCS reduction. The Flanker is a BIG platform, which is one of its strengths, but it means it has a BIG RCS, and slightly reducing it wont really help.

As for as the "australian anylist" your barking up the wrong tree. Your referring to Dr Carlo Kopp and the site is Air Power Australia. The link you were looking for:

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Flanker.html

If you take a look at these threads youll see the extensive and heated debate that comprehensively dealt with these questions such as the Flankers capabilities vs the F35 and F/A 18E/F:

http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5982

http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4973

You'll see that i was prominent in the debate and that these threads were closed. You'll also see the reaction many posters had to Dr Carlo Kopps analysis and that i was virtually his only defender. On a platform v platform basis, with ESM cued IRST + laser range finder directed R27EP/R77EP BVR missile shots the flanker will be able to enguage the F35 in BVR. In classic terms the Flanker can outfly the F35 in allmost every aspect, however when the F35 is part of an intergrated system with and AEW&C (sorry GF, i know you'll probably want to kill me for saying this but you were right about the F35, i was wrong) the combination of AIM120, offboard sensors, LO and EA make the F35 more than a match for the Su 35/37 in BVR combat, even with all of the proposed upgrades. In a one on one fly off with these upgrades the flanker would be better than the F35, but the chances of that happening are pretty slim.

When in air-defense missions with countries that have S-400 and S-300 couldn't they just send information to the planes from the ground or just hit stealth fighters? Wouldn't that make the Flankers aware of the F-22 or F-35?

Even IF the S300/S400 can detect the F22/F35 at usable ranges and in a meaningfull way it may be able to inform the flanker through voice commands, but thats a lot different from a radar or IRST track that can be used for a missile shot.

and just a little info about the S-400 and S-300 the manufacturer claims a detection range of 400km against a target with RCS of 0.002. Even a website which is pro F-35 (I will give you the link) claims it is at high risk flying over the skies with S-300's present. I'm presenting this information to know whether in a scenario were an S-400's radar is present would the Su-35's still be at a disadvantage because of the F-22's and F-35's stealth or would they just be told were they are by GC and draw them into WVR combat.

I have a very hard time believing the S400 can detect .002m2 sized RCS at 400km ( i thought it was .02m2 an 160NM, theres an order of magnitude difference there) and just because the web site said so doesent mean its spot on true. It's a very capable system dont get me wrong but that kind of performance is (AFAIK, most of the data would be classified) not consistent with western systems. Anyway what radar are you reffering to??? The 30N6E series engagement radar or the 40V6MD aquisition radar????

But even if it is capable of detecting an F22 that doesent mean it can track and engage it, thats a whole different story. And then if it can actually track the F22, it doesnt mean the Flanker can use that information to engage the F22, the datalink capabilities needed for that are well beyond the russians capabilities. The F22 on the other hand will be able to detect, track and engage the Flanker at very long ranges.

And none of this takes EW and SEAD into account, if S400/S300 was the only thing that allows you to engage the F22, it would probably be the first system to be targeted which is important given the USAF's EW & SEAD/DEAD capabilities. None of this takes its limitation to line of sight into account.

As far as the F35 flying arround battlespace with an S400/S300 equiped IADS i would be worried about it too. The F35 has narrowband stealth that is optimised arround X band wavelengths used in most fire controll and aquisition radars. It would be much more vulnerable to the S400/S300 system than the F22 which has a much more effective and comprehensive LO tech.

 

[Scorpion82]

You guys mix up the new Su-35 (Su-27SM2) and the old Su-35 (Su-27M). The Su-35 were never used by the RuAF beyond operational evaluation. 15 aircraft were built (6 prototypes, 6 preproduction aircraft and 3 production aircraft). The Su-37 was a single demonstrator built from the 5th Su-35 preproduction aircraft.

BVR performance depends on much more than radars and missiles...

If the claimed encounters between Typhoon and Raptor are true, than you should know that the Typhoons being involved were only block 2 IOC aircraft without HMD/S.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

You guys mix up the new Su-35 (Su-27SM2) and the old Su-35 (Su-27M). The Su-35 were never used by the RuAF beyond operational evaluation. 15 aircraft were built (6 prototypes, 6 preproduction aircraft and 3 production aircraft). The Su-37 was a single demonstrator built from the 5th Su-35 preproduction aircraft.

Thats what i thought.

BVR performance depends on much more than radars and missiles...

I agree... Thats why i'm very sceptical of claims that the F 18E/F is the best 4/4.5 gen air superiority fighter in service simply because it houses the APG 79, as many have claimed. Without that peice of equipment the SH isnt all that special as an air superiority fighter. However sensors and missiles are very important in BVR combat, and im not too sure how well the CAPTOR stacks uo against the BARS for target RCS v Detection and track radii. Rate of climb, wing loading, sustained cruise and supersonic manuever are all very important too, but the BVR game is dominated by sensors, onboard and offboard, and in this respect the current tranche of Typhoon is not a stellar performer.

If the claimed encounters between Typhoon and Raptor are true, than you should know that the Typhoons being involved were only block 2 IOC aircraft without HMD/S.

So if they neither were equiped with JHMCS then i wonder how the Typhoons claimed "domination" was achieved. Did the Typhoon get on the Raptors "6" more oftern than not??? If so this isn't a realistic indication of combat capability... Given the capability of the missile systems envolved you're not going to need to get behind the other guy, you just point and shoot. Therefore you would assume in a real WVR engagement, the Raptors IR supression would be much more usefull than the Typhoons lower wing loading.

 

[Chrom]

About RCS reduction: Russians claim what with RAM and some other (cheap)upgrades any MIG-29 achieve 0.3m2 RCS, SU-34 is claimed less than 1m2 RCS allthought it is essencially Su-27 airframe for RCS purposes.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

About RCS reduction: Russians claim what with RAM and some other (cheap)upgrades any MIG-29 achieve 0.3m2 RCS, SU-34 is claimed less than 1m2 RCS allthought it is essencially Su-27 airframe for RCS purposes.

You have to be scheptical about russian marketing data. And there's some niggleing questions. Is this from the frontal hemosphere? At what wavelengths?

 

[Chrom]

You have to be scheptical about russian marketing data. And there's some niggleing questions. Is this from the frontal hemosphere? At what wavelengths?

Well, no more sceptical than about USA or any other marketing data. About wavelength i would imagine usuall 3-10 ghz fighter/fire guiding radar wavelengst.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Well, no more sceptical than about USA or any other marketing data. About wavelength i would imagine usuall 3-10 ghz fighter/fire guiding radar wavelengst.

Actually the yanks are natoriosly veuge on their platforms capabilities, they dont advertise the PAC 2's target range vs rcs as XXkm vs XXRCS like the russians do blatently. That tells you they probably have higher capabilities than any data released. You cant say the same for the russians.

X band huh??? figured.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

My two cents on the Typhoon.....

The platform is IMO the best 4.5th generation air superiority operational today, followed by the MKI and SH. It is perhaps the ultimate expression of 4th generation theory on air superiority. Sustained supersonic cruise, low wing loading, great rate of climb, good supersonic, transsonic and subsonic manueverability, all intended to allow excellent BVR performance against teen/teenski or 4th generation platofrms and to a lesser extent good WVR performance. Its only weak point may be its radar capabilities, which will be improved in future traches with AESA systems in development now. However the platform will allways be constrained by its nosecone size as AESA's need some serious cooling.

The typhoon however is not a 5th generation platform, and the timeframe of its design doesnt make it one. It is an exellent 4.5th generation platform but there is nothing essentially revoloutionary about it. It just does everything a 4th gen platform can do, only better. It does not have the same emphasis on information domminance that true 5th generation platforms have. It may have some systems geared toward this goal like PIRATE, but there is no comprehensive approach like real LO. The combination of comprehensive LO, networking with capable offboard sensors, LPI AESA, EA, sensor fusion and high speed datalinks enable true 5th generation platforms to utilise tactics that are very very hard to counter. These are tactics that the Typhoon will not ever be able to fully utilise, due to its fundimental lack of LO. A networked system with 5th generation platforms and MESA backed AEW&C will enable platforms to launch BVR missile shots at verry long ranges, undetected by opposing AEW&C or fighters, without illuminating their radars, and with very little electronic emmitions at all. 5th gen platforms can engage without enemy detection. Even with LPI AESA the typhoon will still be very visable to long range radars, and fighter radars.

The typhoon essentially plays the 4th generation game, albeit very well. It simply does what teens/teenski fighters do just better, it doesent comprehensively play the information dominance game that 5th generation platforms do. Thats why it will allways be half a generation behind its 5th gen counterparts.

 

[Chrom]

Actually the yanks are natoriosly veuge on their platforms capabilities, they dont advertise the PAC 2's target range vs rcs as XXkm vs XXRCS like the russians do blatently. That tells you they probably have higher capabilities than any data released. You cant say the same for the russians.

X band huh??? figured.

HEHE! But yanks do it with some other systems, no? And you can look at other russian systems where they also dont advertise as "as XXkm vs XXRCS "
This can be attributed to less security restrictions about _particular_ version of S-300 than _particular_ version of PAC-2, or unfavorable abilities of PAC-2 compared to other SAM's in same class... you never know.

And you know "That tells you they probably have higher capabilities than any data released" is pretty weak argument. Looking in the past, at now declassified data and comparing them to 30 years old public data, we can conclude what useally USA tends to rather exxagerate own weapon capabilites.

 

[Scorpion82]

However sensors and missiles are very important in BVR combat, and im not too sure how well the CAPTOR stacks uo against the BARS for target RCS v Detection and track radii. Rate of climb, wing loading, sustained cruise and supersonic manuever are all very important too, but the BVR game is dominated by sensors, onboard and offboard, and in this respect the current tranche of Typhoon is not a stellar performer.

Yes sensors are very important. I think that most people underrate Captor due to its mechanically scanned array. The Captor demonstrated impressive tracking range performance. To quote a pilot "well beyond 160 km" against a fighter sized target! The BARS primarily achieve its range due to cheer size and power, but you should note that PESA has some limitations and one of its weaknesses is range performance. For electronic beam sweeping phase shifting is used and phase shifting reduces the power. That means the higher the sweep angle the lower the range. This problem isn't present in MSA radars, though these have other weaknesses. Using the data which are available the N-011M Bars overall performance looks not that impressive in contrast to the smaller and signigicantly lighter Captor.

So if they neither were equiped with JHMCS then i wonder how the Typhoons claimed "domination" was achieved. Did the Typhoon get on the Raptors "6" more oftern than not??? If so this isn't a realistic indication of combat capability... Given the capability of the missile systems envolved you're not going to need to get behind the other guy, you just point and shoot. Therefore you would assume in a real WVR engagement, the Raptors IR supression would be much more usefull than the Typhoons lower wing loading.

Typhoon is small and very agile. The aircraft has good low speed manoeuvreability and nose pointing capabilities even without TVC. But it makes no sense to speculate about things we know nothing about.

 

[Scorpion82]

My two cents on the Typhoon.....Its only weak point may be its radar capabilities, which will be improved in future traches with AESA systems in development now. However the platform will allways be constrained by its nosecone size as AESA's need some serious cooling.

The Captor isn't really seen as a weak point. The customers are currently more than satisfied with its performance. AESA is primarily developed as an increasing number of export customers requires it. AESA is of course the way to go in the future and I think they will go for it. Many people tend to jugde about radars by their antenna technology, but a radar just don't conist of an array! BTW Typhoon's nose coon is about the same size as for the Super Hornet. ~1500 T/R modules say enough, does it?

The typhoon however is not a 5th generation platform, and the timeframe of its design doesnt make it one.

Honestly I don't care about the 4th, 4.5th and 5th generation definitions. They are crappy and most people simply use them to say "hey my platform is better".

It is an exellent 4.5th generation platform but there is nothing essentially revoloutionary about it. It just does everything a 4th gen platform can do, only better. It does not have the same emphasis on information domminance that true 5th generation platforms have.

Ah yes and what is so revolutionary about the F-22 except stealth and supercruise? TVC and AESA are relative easy adaptable technologies!

It may have some systems geared toward this goal like PIRATE, but there is no comprehensive approach like real LO. The combination of comprehensive LO, networking with capable offboard sensors, LPI AESA, EA, sensor fusion and high speed datalinks enable true 5th generation platforms to utilise tactics that are very very hard to counter. These are tactics that the Typhoon will not ever be able to fully utilise, due to its fundimental lack of LO. A networked system with 5th generation platforms and MESA backed AEW&C will enable platforms to launch BVR missile shots at verry long ranges, undetected by opposing AEW&C or fighters, without illuminating their radars, and with very little electronic emmitions at all. 5th gen platforms can engage without enemy detection. Even with LPI AESA the typhoon will still be very visable to long range radars, and fighter radars.

So F-22 is no "true" 5th gen because its datalinking capabilities are currently limited to F-22 to F-22 and AWACS and the like to F-22. Typhoon has full sensor fusion and compareable networking capabilities to the F/A-18E/F for the moment. The JTRS is still not operational and work is underway to enhance Typhoon's current capabilities. The Typhoon can employ similar tactics as the F-22, though the Raptor will enjoy the advantage of more stealthiness and probably cinematical advantage for a longer time.

The typhoon essentially plays the 4th generation game, albeit very well. It simply does what teens/teenski fighters do just better, it doesent comprehensively play the information dominance game that 5th generation platforms do. Thats why it will allways be half a generation behind its 5th gen counterparts.

The Typhoon doesn't have the stealthiness of an F-22 or F-35 that's the big difference not the lack of information. Of course US forces have much more intelligence platforms which can contribute their data but that hasn't to do with a particular platforms capabilities!

 

[Chrom]

The Captor isn't really seen as a weak point.

s!

It really is. Any ESA technology is a full generation ahead in perfomance against any slotted array technology. True, advantage however is not in detection range - but rather in such less "proofable" areas as ECM resistance, LPI, number of "true" tracked targets, maximal "volume" between tracked targets, multitasking, beam shaping, etc.

 

[T-95]

About RCS reduction: Russians claim what with RAM and some other (cheap)upgrades any MIG-29 achieve 0.3m2 RCS, SU-34 is claimed less than 1m2 RCS allthought it is essencially Su-27 airframe for RCS purposes.

In the press confrence KNAAPO said something about applying RAM to missiles with spray cans nfloorl: nfloorl: nfloorl:

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

The Captor isn't really seen as a weak point. The customers are currently more than satisfied with its performance. AESA is primarily developed as an increasing number of export customers requires it. AESA is of course the way to go in the future and I think they will go for it. Many people tend to jugde about radars by their antenna technology, but a radar just don't conist of an array! BTW Typhoon's nose coon is about the same size as for the Super Hornet. ~1500 T/R modules say enough, does it?

Bigger allways has bennifits, especially with the cooling requirements for AESA's, so the point isnt how mant T/R modules you can get into your nosecone its how you house the liquid cooling components, which will be a constricting factor in the Typhoon. Captor is its weak point when comparing it to the super hornett.

Honestly I don't care about the 4th, 4.5th and 5th generation definitions. They are crappy and most people simply use them to say "hey my platform is better".

No mate there is a real distinct difference between 4.5th generation platforms and 5th gen, and there is also a masive difference in what you can do with them. Thats the important point, not to justify one platforms supremacy or annother.

Ah yes and what is so revolutionary about the F-22 except stealth and supercruise? TVC and AESA are relative easy adaptable technologies!

So F-22 is no "true" 5th gen because its datalinking capabilities are currently limited to F-22 to F-22 and AWACS and the like to F-22. Typhoon has full sensor fusion and compareable networking capabilities to the F/A-18E/F for the moment. The JTRS is still not operational and work is underway to enhance Typhoon's current capabilities. The Typhoon can employ similar tactics as the F-22, though the Raptor will enjoy the advantage of more stealthiness and probably cinematical advantage for a longer time.

The Typhoon doesn't have the stealthiness of an F-22 or F-35 that's the big difference not the lack of information. Of course US forces have much more intelligence platforms which can contribute their data but that hasn't to do with a particular platforms capabilities!

Your missing the essential point i was making.

F22 will be a "true" 5th gen platform as soon newer datalinks are installed. Typhoon will never be a "true" 5th gen platform no matter what kit you put in it, neither will the super hornett.

And its not just inteligence gathering and distribution, the Typhoon will probably do that allmost as well as 5th gen platforms, its denying it from your enemy. That is something the Typhoon does about as well as a Mig 35, which is an order of magnitude differnce when compared to the F22.

And its not just the F22's LO, real supercruise, TVC or AESA that makes it revoloutionary, its the whole package which is more than the sum of its parts. All these technologies have been in previous platforms but they have never been comprehensively installed in a single airframe. Whats revoloutionary about it is its capabilities, not just "its stealth" or "its TVC". Its what you can do with it that really matters.

The point is that the with apropriate networking which is a given, against an enemy with AEW&C support and decent threat aircraft, 5th generation platforms will be able to function as part of a larger system in a manner the Typhoon will never be able too. F35/F22 will be able to aquire and enguage targets at maximum BVR ranges cued from compleatly from offboard sensors aka without using their radar, therefore not emmiting anything, keeping their LO intact and invisable to threat platforms. Add an EA to that equasion and it is a truely formidable combination and something the Typhoon will never be able to do in the same way. Thats the thing about information dominence, its not just information gathering, thats only half the story, its denying that information to your enemy. When facing a foe who has an AEW&C capability, the Tyhoon will be in the same boat as the F15, F16, F18, Su30, MiG 35 and all the other 4th generation platforms, it can hide behind electronic noise, or let its opponant know where it is and what its doing. All the networking in the world wont change this simple equasion for the Typhoon. Thats why it will never have information dominance in the same manner that 5th generation platforms will, and that is the truely revoloutionary thing about the F22 and F35.

Thats my point and its why the Typhoon is a 4.5th generation platform rather than a 5th. It plays the game in the same way as the F15, F16, F18, SU30, MiG 35, Rafale and any other 4th gen platform, albeit very well. The F22 and F35 are playin a whole new game, and thats what is revoloutionary. Its not just its stealth or networking or AESA, its what the combination of all of these technologies into a single platform allow the operator to do. And its not a game the Typhoon can play.

 

[Scorpion82]

Bigger allways has bennifits, especially with the cooling requirements for AESA's, so the point isnt how mant T/R modules you can get into your nosecone its how you house the liquid cooling components, which will be a constricting factor in the Typhoon. Captor is its weak point when comparing it to the super hornett.

As mentioned before the Typhoon's nose coone is similar to that of the SH. The room there should be similar at all.

No mate there is a real distinct difference between 4.5th generation platforms and 5th gen, and there is also a masive difference in what you can do with them. Thats the important point, not to justify one platforms supremacy or annother.

All the 5th gen was introduced by LM for the F-22 and they claim supercruise, stealth, AESA, sensor fusion and networkcentric warfare as the "5th gen" definition. In its useless bla bla in my opinion and more a marketing tool than anything else.

F22 will be a "true" 5th gen platform as soon newer datalinks are installed. Typhoon will never be a "true" 5th gen platform no matter what kit you put in it, neither will the super hornett.

So LM is lying because they claim the F-22 to be the first true 5th gen because it hasn't the super dooper NWC capabilities Sorry but this is exactly what I mean. Claiming capabilities as decisive for the generation definition while it lacks in this platform, but is present in another.

And its not just inteligence gathering and distribution, the Typhoon will probably do that allmost as well as 5th gen platforms, its denying it from your enemy. That is something the Typhoon does about as well as a Mig 35, which is an order of magnitude differnce when compared to the F22.

Stealth to make it short and that is exactly what I said.

And its not just the F22's LO, real supercruise, TVC or AESA that makes it revoloutionary, its the whole package which is more than the sum of its parts. All these technologies have been in previous platforms but they have never been comprehensively installed in a single airframe. Whats revoloutionary about it is its capabilities, not just "its stealth" or "its TVC". Its what you can do with it that really matters.

Exactly and that is what makes the Typhoon such a good AA platform the combination of all the factors. No one says the Typhoon is in the same class as the F-22, no reason to discuss about it.

The point is that the with apropriate networking which is a given, against an enemy with AEW&C support and decent threat aircraft, 5th generation platforms will be able to function as part of a larger system in a manner the Typhoon will never be able too. F35/F22 will be able to aquire and enguage targets at maximum BVR ranges cued from compleatly from offboard sensors aka without using their radar, therefore not emmiting anything, keeping their LO intact and invisable to threat platforms.

Advanced fighters such as Typhoon or Rafale can do so as well. The difference is that they are easier to detect by the enemy. That makes a difference, but denying such simple facts is ignorant or just wishful thinking.

Add an EA to that equasion and it is a truely formidable combination and something the Typhoon will never be able to do in the same way. Thats the thing about information dominence, its not just information gathering, thats only half the story, its denying that information to your enemy. When facing a foe who has an AEW&C capability, the Tyhoon will be in the same boat as the F15, F16, F18, Su30, MiG 35 and all the other 4th generation platforms, it can hide behind electronic noise, or let its opponant know where it is and what its doing. All the networking in the world wont change this simple equasion for the Typhoon. Thats why it will never have information dominance in the same manner that 5th generation platforms will, and that is the truely revoloutionary thing about the F22 and F35.

And when stealth aircraft could be detected by advanced AWACS etc. the F-35 and F-22 are in the same boat as well. LO doesn't mean invincible, but more difficult to detect and track.


I think one of the main problems for many people is the lack of knowledge about a particular platform, so they tend to underrate it by their lack of knowledge.