I am under the impression that these awesome projects f22/35 have already been shelved??
I am further under the impression that what the Russians have done in terms of developing thrust vectoring has pretty much rendered obsolete to a large enough degree all the developments that would have made the f22/35's worthwhile.
What is the latest on these planes? Can US/EURO collaboration field anything competitive with the latest Russian designs?
This might be the impression you have, but several areas are incorrect, if not opposite what you seem to think.
The F-22 Raptor is no longer in production, but has entered service (~183 IIRC). The F-35A/B/C Lightning II is in flight and system testing, and also due to commence LRIP soon, if it has not already done so.
I could be mistaken, but the F-35 I believe is considerably further along in testing and development than the PAK-FA, with the F-35 having achieved first flight December 15th, 2006. The PAK-FA on the other hand, did not have its first flight until January of 2010.
As for thrust vectoring negating advances made by the F-22 and F-35 programmes... That is not accurate in the least. All thrust vectoring does is (potentially) increase the maneuverability of an aircraft. That maneuverability increase can aid an aircraft in a dogfight, and/or escape/evade inbound missiles, but not much more than that, at least from a warfighting perspective. Flight demos for airshows are of course a completely different story.
Where the real work has been done on the F-22 and F-35 programmes is in the areas of Sig management, sensor fusion, systems integration (more the F-35 than the F-22) and maintenance reduction. All of these have impacts on warfighting capabilities.
With Sig management, the aircraft can become harder for enemy assets to detect, target and engage. It is much better if ones enemy does not know that one is present and therefore does not get shot at, than to be better at evading shots the enemy takes. With sensor fusion, more and more distributed sensor systems gave a better picture of a battle space, making it easier for enemy targets to be detected and engaged. With Sig management and sensor fusion acting in concert, an aircraft can become capable of taking effective warshots at hostile aircraft, before the hostiles even become aware they are being engaged. Put another way, Sig management and sensor fusion are capabilities that enable one to act, thrust vectoring only allows one to (possibly) react.
Now, here at DT we do not like "vs." type threads, as it does lead to nationalist chest thumping of "no, MY country is better..." type discussions, and the question of competitive designs does sound like where this could head. Having said that...
In the US/European aerospace industry there have been several new aircraft designs which came out in the US and Europe after the fall of the Soviet Union. Granted some of them originated from Cold War era design requirements, these are still new aircraft. In the US there are the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, EA-18G Growler, the F-22 Raptor and the upcoming F-35A/B/C Lightning II. For Europe, there is the Eurofighter Typhoon, Rafale and Gripen. In addition to these, there are the various earlier aircraft designs which have had updates done and/or new variants developed.
By contrast, Russia has three 'new' aircraft in development. These are namely the PAK-FA, the MiG-35, and the Su-35. Of these, the Su-35 is a development of the Su-27, while the MiG-35 is a development of the MiG-29M, albeit heavier and with new avionics. In short, the PAK-FA is really the only entirely 'new' design from a platform/airframe level. Hence why it could be designed from the start to be LO.
Another area to keep in mind, and consider the ramifications of. Since the fall of the Iron Curtain, and the breakup of the Soviet Union, how many air campaigns has Russia waged, and how many has the US/NATO engaged in? That sort of operational experience, both in terms of what sort of kit/capabilities a force requires, as well as testing of doctrine, will dictate service needs.
-Cheers
