Tuesday, March 24, 2015

Russia set to have the dominant fighter on the planet?



via Fiscal Times.
The T-50 is significantly faster than the F-22, and has a huge advantage in terms of range – 5,500 kilometers compared to the F-22’s 3,400. The T-50’s detection systems allow it to spot incoming threats at a distance of up to 400 kilometers, compared to the F-22’s 210 km.
Most experts believe that the F-35 would be the dominant plane, should it ever come on line in the form its supporters have promised. But a continuous delay in production leaves Russia with the most dominant fighter jet on the planet.
To take a term from a fellow blogger...DISCUSS!

34 comments :

  1. The Indian Air Force are set to get a customised and more advanced version of the bacis PAK-FA the FGFA

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thank you so much LM for crippling the air forces of the western world.

    ReplyDelete
  3. F35 will never be the dominant plane! Show me any feature or statistic that actually trumps any competitor...
    But then, its rather questionable weather Russia will fair any better with its attempt. I doubt we will see more then a few 100 of these planes and we won't see them an time soon. They also still have to prove their claims. Looking at the stats in here I see a plane that is bigger, with more fuel then the F22 but it still is lighter and faster.. sounds iffy... so do the claims about the radar.

    India might very well drop out of this deal or cut numbers big time also.

    That being said, the sad thing is.. if F35 had not guzzled up all the funds we could instead have seen a continuation of F-22 production with incremental improvements.

    Last point: I think the edge given by stealth will diminish in the coming years. New radars, IR and other sensor improvements will slowly catch up wile the cost of building and maintaining a truly stealthy plane will be a constant drain on resources.

    ReplyDelete
  4. While LM is not blameless, the whole revolutionary vs evolutionary philosophy that permeated the USAF at the time of the F-22 and F-35 initial design and development is what set the stage for the current situation. As someone who has tested the F-22 at Edwards AFB and seen its true capabilities it'll would be interesting to see how the true capabilities of the T-50 stack up against it.

    ReplyDelete
  5. (Trying again in the correct place this time)


    While LM is not blameless, the whole revolutionary vs evolutionary philosophy that permeated the USAF at the time of the F-22 and F-35 initial design and development is what set the stage for the current situation. As someone who has tested the F-22 at Edwards AFB and seen its true capabilities it'll would be interesting to see how the true capabilities of the T-50 stack up against it.

    ReplyDelete
  6. yeah but in comparison to the F-35, the F-22 promised much more modest capabilities...yeah its faster, flies higher, etc...but it didn't promise to be a Gorgon's eye in the sky, a bomb truck that could deliver hell, a superb dogfighter and the pre-eminent interceptor of our time.


    all the F-22 was suppose to do is give us an F-15 replacement in a stealthy package. in hindsight rather modest and it delivered the goods in spades. the F-35, not so much.

    ReplyDelete
  7. All I see is a fast, high-flying BVR missile platform. I don't see how something that big can be dominant. The wingspan is nearly as large as a B58 Hustler

    ReplyDelete
  8. From my perspective it is a little too early to "DISCUSS" The F-35 is an immature design and the PAK-FA is still, for all intents and purposes, in prototype form. One thing I have learnt during my long interest in Soviet/Russian aviation is that their claims often to not match up with reality. Be interesting to have this "DISCUSSION" in 4 to 5 years time though.

    ReplyDelete
  9. and guess what. according to what the USAF is telling us this plane is perfect. it flies high, flies fast and they have better long range missiles than we do. for the PAK-FA maneuvering is irrelevant! additionally they're sticking the largest AESA in its class into the airplane so they launch at distance, and then turn around. because its less expensive than the F-35 they can have more. which means they have a certain amount of quality in the right places AND a quantity that the combined "air forces" won't be able to match.


    plus they're still building the SU-35 which means that their high low mix will be superior.


    our Air Power Zealots have fucked the nation.

    ReplyDelete
  10. i disagree Sven. we've been told to wait for 15 plus years on the F-35 and still don't have anything but an immature design. in some places this child airplane would be considered an adult.


    and that's the problem in my opinion. we let this turkey get a pass because we WANTED the promises of it so bad, we let a corporation RIG/BRIBE and endanger a nation for profits and those in leadership did nothing to hold people accountable for bad decisions...and yes the Marine Corps is part of this issue.

    ReplyDelete
  11. from the archives:
    "While almost as capable as the F-22 in the air-to-air role, [F-35] will be superior in the air-to-ground mission, complementing the capabilities of the F-22. The Joint Strike Fighter will recapitalize combat capabilities currently provided by the F-16 and A-10. Optimized for all-weather performance, Joint Strike Fighter will specifically provide affordable precision engagement and global attack capabilities."

    A key goal of the Joint Strike Fighter program was to deliver 5th generation capability at an affordable price, which in 2001 was $69 million, But now we have a seven-year delay with many faults (especially engine), poor reliability and performance, and a much higher price which is especially a problem for JSF foreign partners.

    ReplyDelete
  12. RUSSIAN ECM TECHNOLOGY MAKS 2011: https://youtu.be/eintB0XJcJA

    ReplyDelete
  13. I was stunned how outclassed the F22 was until I saw the number of planes- F22-181, T50 - 3. Numbers matter. Even if it takes 20 F35's, or 5F22's to take down one T50, what counts are how many the Russians have. Even if the T50 is only US$50m per unit, Russia can't afford that many.


    As an aside, perhaps the US could cancel the F35 program (paying the penalty amount in the contract), and buy 2400 T50's instead! Similar amount of money, 5 times the capability! (I know, I know...won't happen, but I'm just saying)

    ReplyDelete
  14. The IAF has very little confidence in Russian avionics and seem to replace it with French , Israeli or Indian made alternatives every chance they get. This was guaranteed to happen anyway.

    But recently they have been making their concerns with the sensors, the sensor fusion and the power plant known quite vocally. The total procured number was already cut from around 250 to 144 IIRC and may be cut further if the aircraft turns out to be a disappointment.

    ReplyDelete
  15. The T-50 has more raw power and better aerodynamic properties than the F-22, but the F-22 has better stealth and most likely has a slight edge in electronics. Main difference I see is that the T-50 has an IR sensor and the F-22 does not, which makes a major difference.



    Anyway, the article then asks the question of how many Russia can produce. In all honesty, the Russians don't have to produce much. We were only able to make 187 Raptors and the JSF is a failure so we set the bar low. They plan to build at the minimum 100 Su-50's and if the deal with the Indian's allows them to make more they could build enough to equal or surpass the number of Raptors we have.


    The T-50 is also cheaper than the F-22 or F-35, which follows the historical path of Russian aviation: paying less money and getting a lot more bang for the buck.

    ReplyDelete
  16. well what everyone is ignoring is that the financial papers have turned against the F-35. the message is finally getting out to everyone that the airplane is a waste.


    when you have financial papers that representatives read calling a plane a shit bird then you know things have changed. thats the part of the story that's being ignored by the supporters....oh and you should check out the latest from national defense mag. the program manager is trying to get some daylight between himself and this piece of Shiite.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Just read it. Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan is tied to the F-35 program in such a way that you could say it would change his career for the worst if it went under. He's put his whole lot of eggs behind that program and his whole reputation and everything that he is is deeply tied to it now. Sounds like he made a bad bet, but now that his bed's made he has to sleep in it. I find it hard to have any sympathy for him.

    ReplyDelete
  18. True, the IAF is involved in a fair bit of Diplomacy and international intrigue with a shoe string of a budget (when compared to the type and scale of aircraft they want to buy) when it comes to Aircraft purchases. The "old" figure for sanctioned/approved squadrons for the IAF was 66. This number was brought down to 37 when our economy collapsed. It is yet to be revised and in all probability will be revised in the future as the Pakis become more unstable and the Chinese find a solution to Taiwan can then concentrate more forces on our Border. The Su-50 will be made in larger numbers than current plan of 144. Its just a matter of finding funding and finding an enemy to justify that funding. Our neighbourhood is the perfect place for that.


    I would not be surprised if even the Israelis are given a technical presentation and demonstration of this aircraft by either the Russians or India.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Sven, Sol may have a point here. Its good to discuss an aircraft through every stage of its developmental process

    ReplyDelete
  20. the t-50 was required to be at least as maneuverable as the Su-35 which means it will be one of the most maneuverable combat planes ever.

    ReplyDelete
  21. That is interesting.

    With the F-35, US went all in with revolutionary. But years went. Decades went. And still no revolution.

    Other nations went evolutionary.
    And they kept evolutionary revisions and versions coming.

    So far evolution got stuck. So stuck that the next "6th gen" evolution might catch up on it before the wannabe 5th gen reaches maturity.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Solomon, I think its interesting to note that the RAAF wants to maintain our F/A-18F and more importantly F/A-18G alongside F-35s and are talking about using the Growlers to provide jamming support for the F-35, which as we all remember was meant to be stealth, they are also worried about the range and want the F/A-18s (using standoff weapons) as our long range strike platform. I also wonder what manoeuvrability the F-35 will end up with as in now has a 4G limit (and others such and an alpha limit) until the figure out a solution to the current problems.

    ReplyDelete
  23. If the F-22 was not put on the side track, the USAF would already have F/A model and probably some next Batch. What would F-22 need to again put it on top of the list?


    - more powerful engines (or new muzzle tech)
    - update of detection systems and more modern AN/APG AESA radar


    And that's enough... PAK-FA is not that faster, it's main advantage is based on size of plane, range is based on much larger fuel tanks and ability to mount larger radar station in nose. It can take more ordinance again, it's more "space" to put them or sling under it.


    But yeah... thanks LM for fuck up R&D of F-22

    ReplyDelete
  24. It's too big and in different aerodynamic design, I doubt he would be even close to Su-35 agility.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Above you have the dimensions of the T-50 and here are the Su-35s, Length 21.9m Span 15.3m Height 5.9m, all are pretty close, as is weight. In this picture you can see a sort of leading edge root extension canard type device that helps and don't forget 3D thrust vectoring.

    ReplyDelete
  26. i'm not an aviation guy but from what i've read weight and size alone have nothing to do with agility. thrust to weight ratio, wing loading, control surfaces etc...all play a part.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Your right, and it adds up there to, also both use whats called a blended wing body, which effectively adds to wing area and reduces wing loading (f-16 does this a little also).

    ReplyDelete
  28. Kinda hard for F22 to have any electronic advantage as its development was never fully funded so its stuck at a very early development stage that would have problems rivaling gen 4+ let alone any gen 5 plane. F22s best assets are its excelent kinematics and stealth

    ReplyDelete
  29. >-47. It is said that R&D of this plane was not stopped and still in action.


    No, other projects is a mysterious possible successor of MiG-31 - MiG's, it seems, does a R&D on the next-gen interceptor. No info about, not sure if some work undergoes.



    And Su-47 - this projects work on PAK FA programme - tests some stuff. For example - pod's design was first tested on Su-47. So nothing special about it.

    ReplyDelete
  30. >And that's enough...


    F-22 needs its aerodynamics adjusted to the more modern level. You should read Pavel Bulat's papers, he is a gas-dynamic scientist and did a lot of research about F-22 aerodynamics. Papers are pretty awesome, he explains why F-22 is strong at certain points and why weak at others.



    For example F-22 battle range is a weak point - it can do far better, but at that moment, when F-22 was designed, it wasnt that clear how certain things should be done.


    So some kind of F-22bis would a hell of an enemy, yeah.

    ReplyDelete
  31. >has a slight edge in electronics.


    It is not that obvious, PAK FA will have an additional L-range AESAs, for example. So whose electronics will be better - question is open.

    ReplyDelete
  32. It is close to a "a bit redesigned Su-30SM", yeah. Su-35 is unmatched.

    ReplyDelete
  33. >and more advanced version


    Popular cliche =). They will have a more advanced version of EXPORT version of PAK FA. Think of it as Indians have Su-30MKI and Venezuela has Su-30MK2.

    ReplyDelete
  34. >The IAF has very little confidence in Russian avionics and seem to replace it with French

    The problem persisted back at S-30MKI times, when Russia could afford a big avionics redesign.

    And now you will not find an export version of Radar Complex(!) of T-50. So replacing some stuff - you are welcome, but altering the key sensors - i do not think so. Well, optics can be altered, but radars - no way, does not makes sense.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.