Who is gonna make the 5-gen fighter first?
- Thread starter ghost
- Start date
The F-35 is superior to the F-22 in terms of sensors, and in terms of C4I from what I know. It's only inferior in RCS reduction. Finally I'm not sure that the MiG-35 or Su-35BM can be evaluated on any level as neither has a finalized production variant, and we don't know what their respective finalized production variants will carry.
EDIT: Oh and Todjaeger I think that definition you gave is so far the best we've got.
EDIT: Oh and Todjaeger I think that definition you gave is so far the best we've got.
Dalregementet
New Member
I think the words "complete picture" is up for discussion. What is really a "complete picture"? Will we ever have a "complete picture"? In what way differs the F35 situational awareness from Eurofighter or Gripen?
I think your challenge of the words "a complete picture" is valid. I tend to consider generational gaps a situation where the new platform is an order of magnitude superior to the predecessor. I think the same needs to be said of 5th gen sensors. They need to provide an order of magnitude higher capability, leading to not just a quantitative or qualitative distinction, but a principal one. A capability jump.
I perhaps wouldn't agree with supercruise - even though the airframe is optimised for this flight regime, it aparently still uses too much fuel compared with subsonic cruise, so it is of limited use to the platform anyway despite the kinematic advantages it is supposed to give the munitions it carries.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
I agree, supercruise is not something that would be used to define an aircraft 'generation'. Particularly since this first jet did it sometime around 1947 IIRC, the English Electric Lightning.
What is different with one (or two, depending on which sources of info one believes...) aircraft currently, is that it can do so while carrying a combat load.
Also while supercruise is (or can be) a useful feature in an aircraft, its overall effect on aircraft operations vs. improvements in situational awares and/or missiles tend to make it of lessor import.
-Cheers
Ozzy Blizzard
New Member
Thats extremely subjective. What exactly is a "complete picture"? No one will even have a clear picture of the battle-space, no matter how advanced the sensor suite, thus the above premise seems fundamentally flawed. Information dominance is perhaps a more apt term.
Thats exactly what I said earlier. Its not the individual technologies that demonstrate a generational gap, its the effect the platforms capability has on the battle-space. The introduction of mature BVR capability revolutionized air battle with the introduction of 4th gen platforms, the level of information dominance that sensor fusion and VLO has provided the F-22A has also precipitated a sizemic shift in the manner contemporary battle is waged.
IMHO a capability based definition is superior because if you list a few widgets the people use semantic's. However a platforms effect on the battle-space cannot be argued with. Truly the Typhoon, MiG-35, Rhino (whatever) all essentially fight in the same manner as the F-15C, albeit better. But the F-22A fundamentally changes the way air power operates, thus it has signaled a generational shift.
Ozzy Blizzard
New Member
Supercruise is simply a incremental increase in in the platforms raw performance, albeit a significant one. Its just an advancement of the 4th gen paradigm that emphasizes raw performance throughout the regime and BVR capability. Its the Information dominance and reduction of X band FCR's to tactically insignificant performance ranges that are revolutionary, and its the avionics suite and VLO that provide that.
By the way when we are talking about generations we are referring to fighters, not strategic strike aircraft. Therefore the B-2 has no bearing on this discussion.
Ozzy Blizzard
New Member
Thats a typical Russian definition of generational improvement. Every new Fulcrum or Flanker the Russians produce seems to get another + on the end of it (IIRC the MiG-35 is now a 4++ gen).
Generational differences does not simply indicate a platform is better. The first 4th gen platforms, like the F-15A, were not 4.0 gen with the F-15C being 4.2. The F-15C is the generationly same as the F-15A, it follows the exact same paradigm, it just does its job better. 4.5th gen platforms are different than 4th gen platforms because of the massive increases in information management technology and sensor performance, which provides situational awareness as significantly increased as the raw performance improvement from the F-100 to the F-15. Truly the level of situational awareness in the F-15A could be considered pre-historic by F/A-18F BII standard. In this element of the platforms capability the improvement has been generational in nature, however the airframe still operates with the same set of limitations as its 4th gen brethren, i.e. no VLO.
IMHO placing decimal designations willy nilly (4.2, 4.4 ect) fundamentally misses the point when it comes to generational improvement. 4.5th gen is a special case, because one major element of the platforms capability underwent generational improvement. Considering the option to operate without a pilot will be a cornerstone of 6th gen, i highly doubt there will be a true 5.5th gen platform, even if there are very advanced 5th gen fighters operating in 2030.
I think the reason why we have this generation classifying problem now and not b4 is because the fighters have reached a stumbling block, that is the 9G human tolerence. Its not possible to improve the fighters beyond his 9G ability as humans could not tolerate it.The developers are forced to look and work on the other area's that are not governed by this block, such as stealth,information dominance etc2. Hence why newer planes as well as 4th gen planes are still in the fray by upgrading other capabilities of the fighter and still stay in the race.
My classifying of the planes available, is just to separate them in terms of capability.
And in regards to the 5th Gen, when the F 22 came out the definition was set for 5th gen as having, stealth, supercruise, information dominance, etc2. So the typhoon's and rafales were conveniently classified as 4.5. but when the F 35 came, the definition seems to be conveniently shifted back to accommodate the F 35 even though it does not have supercruise.
The Russian exuberance in the 90's with the ++ may be unfounded, but right now with proper development jump from their basic 4th gen design with the Su 35 BM and MiG 35 does give credence to it as they are not the same as a 4th gen platform anymore.
My classifying of the planes available, is just to separate them in terms of capability.
And in regards to the 5th Gen, when the F 22 came out the definition was set for 5th gen as having, stealth, supercruise, information dominance, etc2. So the typhoon's and rafales were conveniently classified as 4.5. but when the F 35 came, the definition seems to be conveniently shifted back to accommodate the F 35 even though it does not have supercruise.
The Russian exuberance in the 90's with the ++ may be unfounded, but right now with proper development jump from their basic 4th gen design with the Su 35 BM and MiG 35 does give credence to it as they are not the same as a 4th gen platform anymore.
superhornet
New Member
good point! I agree with you. the classifying problem in a sense is caused by the super advanced F22. European and Ruassia counterparts are not able to develop a purely 5 gen fighters in terms of budget and demands. so without choice, they roll out Rafale, Typhoon and Su35,SuXX. as as result, classfying problem emerges and the development of F35 even deteriorate the situation and makes things more complex.
whatever, i believe everyone agree that at present there are only two fighters in 5 gen shortlist---F22 and F35(soon)
we don't know Russian and chinese 5 gen fighters because we don't have enough information about them. and russia and china are always inclined to secretly develop and research new fighter program. however, it's undeniable in the near 10 years, the two countries' 5 gen fights will not come into service because their technology at almost all aspext lag behind US.
and i've heard Tyhoon is a little bit more competent than Rafale..is that true?
USA:
F-22
http://www.defenceaviation.com/2008/06/specifications-of-f-22-raptor.html
F-35
http://www.defenceaviation.com/2007/06/f-35-joint-strike-fighter-relax.html
Russian Su-PAKFA
http://www.defenceaviation.com/2008/01/su-pakfa-russian-stealth-fighter.html
And India Variant Sukhoi/HAL FGFA
http://www.defenceaviation.com/2008/10/sukhoihal-fgfa-indian-stealth-fighter.html
Japanese Mitsubishi ATD-X ShinShin
http://www.defenceaviation.com/2008/01/mitsubishi-atd-x-shinshin-japanese.html
And Iran
http://www.defenceaviation.com/2007/09/iranian-stealth-plane.html
These are the only programs with concrete evidence of existence.
Well Clearly US has won the competition of "The first 5th gen fighter" to come out.
And looks like F-35 is going to come earlier than Su-PAKFA.
And there is Iran it looks more like a attack plane than a fighter plane.
F-22
http://www.defenceaviation.com/2008/06/specifications-of-f-22-raptor.html
F-35
http://www.defenceaviation.com/2007/06/f-35-joint-strike-fighter-relax.html
Russian Su-PAKFA
http://www.defenceaviation.com/2008/01/su-pakfa-russian-stealth-fighter.html
And India Variant Sukhoi/HAL FGFA
http://www.defenceaviation.com/2008/10/sukhoihal-fgfa-indian-stealth-fighter.html
Japanese Mitsubishi ATD-X ShinShin
http://www.defenceaviation.com/2008/01/mitsubishi-atd-x-shinshin-japanese.html
And Iran
http://www.defenceaviation.com/2007/09/iranian-stealth-plane.html
These are the only programs with concrete evidence of existence.
Well Clearly US has won the competition of "The first 5th gen fighter" to come out.
And looks like F-35 is going to come earlier than Su-PAKFA.
And there is Iran it looks more like a attack plane than a fighter plane.
windscorpion
New Member
No its because in the past no one really cared much about the "generation" thing, now its become a marketing tool and a million forum users and bloggers can talk about it on-line. That is what makes it a "big issue".
Can u plz tell me a bit about plane on 3rd no??
I think the G-load limitation will become irrelevant. The F-35 already shows the way out. Instead of a manouvering fighter jet, you have datalinked thrust vectoring missiles, guided by the FCS of the fighter. The F-35 launches it's weapons, uses DAS to guide them onto target, and simply exits the fight. No manouvering involved on the part of the fighter.
Next generation aircraft
The F22 is hands down the best FIGHTER out at the moment. I say fighter because this is what the F22 is designed for. Next generation aircraft should be designed how the Europeans have done it with the typhoon, rafale and gripen. NOT just designed for the air dominance role but have the ability to carry out a number of missions and tasks while still having a minimal RCS. Next generation is also a matter of technological and software advances that cost a lot of money and can take years to develop. We can only wait and see what the future brings us.
The F22 is hands down the best FIGHTER out at the moment. I say fighter because this is what the F22 is designed for. Next generation aircraft should be designed how the Europeans have done it with the typhoon, rafale and gripen. NOT just designed for the air dominance role but have the ability to carry out a number of missions and tasks while still having a minimal RCS. Next generation is also a matter of technological and software advances that cost a lot of money and can take years to develop. We can only wait and see what the future brings us.
You're mistaken. The F/A-22A is a full multi-role aircraft. It's main role is air superiority but it's quite capable of SEAD, CAS, and strike missions.