Thats not how it works. This kind of thing isn't done at the platform level.A UCAV and PAK-FA are fundamentally two different concepts so a direct comparison is rather pointless.
-DA
Manned and unmanned fighter aircraft poll
- Thread starter F-15 Eagle
- Start date
-DA
Not any more pointless then the comparison to a MiG-25 earlier....... which was my whole point. If you're going to compare the dogfighting capabilities of a UCAV to a fighter aircraft in service, you might as well compare it to the more advanced types, since to replace manned fighters it has to be able to take out even the more advanced types.
Well the difference is that there are actually Mig-25's in air forces we could actually get in a fight with. PAK-FA doesn't exist. I also don't believe in dogfights the way most people who frequent these boards do. I really don't understand what you are quibbling about. I said earlier that had the Mig been caught unaware by a UAV with AIM-92 or perhaps a more capable UCAV with proper sensors(AESA) and AIM-9x or AIM-120 then which is easily within the reach of current technology, say a modified Mariner, G-Hawk UAV or even an X-45a test platform the results could have been tragic for the Mig. Thats it. Do read too much into it. By the time PAK-FA comes out, our technology or tactics will advance enough to compensate.
-DA
IMHO Already now human presence on board of fighting AV have more disadvantages then advantages.
1 - Restrictions on accelerations and maneuverability - Humans just physically can not sustain loads more than 9 G
2 - aditional live support and emergency systems quite heavy- more than 2% of weight in some cases
3 - aditional information and human interface systems- aditional weight as well
4- special aerodinamic configuration needed for optimal cockpit placement
5 - large internal volume occupied by human and support systems
6- deterioration of LO properties of aircraft
7-aditional expences to people traning
8 - risk to human life
so in my view future air dominance system will be look like - main fighter with pilot and combat operator in it and mosqito - type group of UAV
UAV's provides data- relay chain to keep humans out of danger zone. It has all essential equipment on board- AESA radar, passive sensors, optical and laser sensor- ALL except human support- interface. So main job of human is battle managment- battle situation assessment, some strategic decision making, choosing targets. - All other tasks like speed/tactical position control UAV would do automaticaly.
1 - Restrictions on accelerations and maneuverability - Humans just physically can not sustain loads more than 9 G
2 - aditional live support and emergency systems quite heavy- more than 2% of weight in some cases
3 - aditional information and human interface systems- aditional weight as well
4- special aerodinamic configuration needed for optimal cockpit placement
5 - large internal volume occupied by human and support systems
6- deterioration of LO properties of aircraft
7-aditional expences to people traning
8 - risk to human life
so in my view future air dominance system will be look like - main fighter with pilot and combat operator in it and mosqito - type group of UAV
UAV's provides data- relay chain to keep humans out of danger zone. It has all essential equipment on board- AESA radar, passive sensors, optical and laser sensor- ALL except human support- interface. So main job of human is battle managment- battle situation assessment, some strategic decision making, choosing targets. - All other tasks like speed/tactical position control UAV would do automaticaly.
It has since the end of the Cold War. I'm not to worried about a fighter that...Time will tell, time will tell
1. Isn't even a prototype yet
2. I'm aware of and monitoring it's development
3. I have a healthy technological lead over
4. I can outnumber
5. I can out system
-DA
F-15 Eagle
New Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #27
The PAK-FA is not even a prototype yet, not one has been built and you think it will start flying next year.
nfloorl: Then it will be delayed until 2010, then it will be delayed again for 2011, 2012, 2014 and the sad story continues with the PAF-FA keeps being delayed until it cost way too much money that they have to cancel it. But you can still have hope for the PAK-FA is you want. Uh...The F-15 is a twin engine fighter but its in the same class as the F-35. Just because the F-35 has one engine don't mean its a light fighter. Since the single F135 or F136 engine produces as much thrust as the F-15s two engines not to mention the PAK-FAs two small engines. The F-35 has greater range, weapons payload, is faster and more maneuverable and has greater acceleration than the F-15 or the PAK-FA(which only exist in their dreams). The F-35 is more of a heavy class fighter. The F-22 is way above the dreamy PAK-FA that does not even exist.:nutkick
Last edited:
Two prototypes are in production right now with flight tests scheduled for next year. But ok. Sure. You can believe what you like. Again time will tell, and if the money is there, the PAK-FA will fly.The PAK-FA is not even a prototype yet, not one has been built and you think it will start flying next year.
If it doesn't yet exist in any definite form, how do you know what it will be like? Sounds like some generalized bs without the specifics.
EDIT: And please go easy on the smilies. It hurts my head to try to figure out what they all mean in conjunction with what you type. Thanks ahead of time.
F-15 Eagle
New Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #29
I doubt the PAK-FA will ever be built in large numbers if it ever does enter service. I have an idea of what the PAK-FA will be like because of what I read from some articles.Two prototypes are in production right now with flight tests scheduled for next year. But ok. Sure. You can believe what you like. Again time will tell, and if the money is there, the PAK-FA will fly.
If it doesn't yet exist in any definite form, how do you know what it will be like? Sounds like some generalized bs without the specifics.
Again until we see it fly (preferrably in combat) we won't know what it's really capable of. Articles that you read most likely fall into the intensly pro or intensly anti category (as most that I've seen). As for numbers in service, only time will tell. Perhaps you are right. But this doesn't mean that it won't be exported in larger numbers then those in service at home (just like the new T-90S tank).
Ozzy Blizzard
New Member
My response to the original question:
In the short to mid term: i.e. a generation or two, there will be a mix of manned and unmanned fighters. But given enough time the limitations of flesh and blood will be too significant. By 2050~70 say (7th or 8th generation), the need for maned combat aircraft will have passed IMHO.
In the short to mid term: i.e. a generation or two, there will be a mix of manned and unmanned fighters. But given enough time the limitations of flesh and blood will be too significant. By 2050~70 say (7th or 8th generation), the need for maned combat aircraft will have passed IMHO.
IMHO we are already in the day of mixed manned and unmanned fighters. In general I understand your opinion about the future but too much can change over the next 60 years to even say what form warfare will take or the tech we will fight it with IMHO to make any realistic assumption. That even includes the state of humanity. We are already enhancing our natural bodies today. What will "human" be in 2070?
-DA
F-15 Eagle
New Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #33
I don't understand why Russia exports large numbers modern fighters to other nations but builds almost none for itself. Take for example the SU-30 with over 300 exported to other nations like China, India, and Venezuela but Russia only has 9 for training and Russia still relies mostly on 20 year old SU-27s. Its the same sad story with the PAK-FA when Russia builds large numbers for export allies but builds none for itself. Russia is also more likely to export the new SU-35BM to other countries but will not buy the SU-35BM for itself. The same with the T-90S tank. Do you know why Russia does this? It makes no sense at all to me.
Obvious. Look at what's happened since 1991.I don't understand why Russia exports large numbers modern fighters to other nations but builds almost none for itself. Take for example the SU-30 with over 300 exported to other nations like China, India, and Venezuela but Russia only has 9 for training and Russia still relies mostly on 20 year old SU-27s. Its the same sad story with the PAK-FA when Russia builds large numbers for export allies but builds none for itself. Russia is also more likely to export the new SU-35BM to other countries but will not buy the SU-35BM for itself. The same with the T-90S tank. Do you know why Russia does this? It makes no sense at all to me.
When the USSR fell apart, there was a general economic collapse in the successor states, including Russia.
At the same time, the proportion of GDP spent on the military was slashed. Total military spending in Russia fell to maybe 10% of the Soviet level, 15% at most.
Russia inherited the bulk of the USSRs armed forces, & for political reasons, the armed forces were not cut in size to match their shrunken budgets. Therefore, most of the budget went on operating costs. New equipment purchases dropped to almost nothing. Even so, there wasn't enough money to operate all existing equipment, so much was stored, unused, including many new or nearly new aircraft, tanks, etc., & a lot of what was notionally in service was very lightly used.
Eventually, the armed forces were cut down to a more manageable size, & spending began to increase. But they're still under-resourced in proportion to their size, & they still have large stocks of high-performance, lightly-used equipment. It would be insane to buy new aircraft (or tanks, or whatever) in large numbers, when they still have more perfectly good old - but hardly used - aircraft than they can operate. Better - and much, much, cheaper - to modernise as much of what they already have as they can afford to operate, & invest in R&D to keep up to date, to be able to build new types when needed. In the meantime, keeping the factories afloat with exports is rational, to maintain capacity for when it's needed by Russia.
If you have a garage with two cars in it, a bit old but hardly used, still almost as new, why buy a new one? Use your current one until it wears out, then get one out of the garage.
BTW, Russia isn't building any PAK-FAs for export - yet. You're talking of future projects as if they're accomplished facts. Also, I suspect you're overestimating Russias wealth. Even with the growth of the last decade, Russias total GDP is now in the same league as the UK, less than Germany.
Several issues at hand here: production capacity, funding (including rampant corruption, hopefully with Serdyukov as the minister of defense that can be cleared up), and once again having large stocks of older weapons that can be modernized. Remember that the Su-30 is almost the same airframe as the Su-27. So for example an Su-27SM is pretty close to an Su-30MK, and the rumored Su-27SM2 is supposed to be the domestic name for the Su-35BM or rather an Su-27S modernized to the Su-35BM standard. Finally these new weapons are not as good as they're advertised. They certainly don't offer a whole generation of improvement over current platforms, which is why they're not being inducted very quickly. For example there was an announcement about a new tank to be demonstrated this year. Supposedly it's the Object 197 completed. It's supposed to be the future tank. With it just around the corner, why step up T-90S production beyond the bare minimum to keep production lines running and the army getting at least enough to parade around on Victory Day? Other platforms which are a little more needed are being produced in larger numbers. For example 4 battallions are being re-armed to new BTRs this year, and 4 were last year. That's not quite fast enough to replace everything within a few years, but certainly enough to replace a large chunk over the next decade, especially if you consider increasing production as more funding becomes available.I don't understand why Russia exports large numbers modern fighters to other nations but builds almost none for itself. Take for example the SU-30 with over 300 exported to other nations like China, India, and Venezuela but Russia only has 9 for training and Russia still relies mostly on 20 year old SU-27s. Its the same sad story with the PAK-FA when Russia builds large numbers for export allies but builds none for itself. Russia is also more likely to export the new SU-35BM to other countries but will not buy the SU-35BM for itself. The same with the T-90S tank. Do you know why Russia does this? It makes no sense at all to me.