F35 - superfighter or lame duck?

[Manonthestreet]

The AWACS can't be within 200 miles of any ground or air threats. It comes within that and it stands out like a beacon in the sky. Even the Moon is more stealthy.

I already covered the things it can do. You can't stand it that it's going online for the Marines in less than 2 months and production ramps up which lowers the price per unit. When it's in full production it will cost about 85 mil. Not much more than a Growler AND less than a new F-15.

As for obsolete systems, exactly what is obsolete? Newsflash, 10 minutes after a new system is introduced, it's already obsolete since they are already working on the next system to replace it.

As for growing pains, the F-15 was introduced in 1976 yet it didn't start coming into it's own until 1980 when the Multiphased radar was introduced into the A model and the C was going into production. So, you have gotten only one thing right. 3 or 4 years to maturity is about right. The F-15 had the same argument since it was the most expensive Fighter ever produced from 1980 and earlier. It cost more than the F-14 if the F-14 had stayed in production. And we all know just how crappy the F-15 turned out to be. It's owned the skies for almost 40 years hands down.

Just how much is the Russians paying you to keep this up, Comrade.

doesnt matter if its pushing massive amount of drones it'll overwhelm the defenses

 

[Manonthestreet]

f-35 cant dogfight and aint stealthy........thing is a sitting duck.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Without resorting to cheap shots, tell us why it's a boondoggle since it goes into service this year?

No it doesnt........they made parade around a few on a ship for rube food......be assured they have zero capability except parade value

Let's take a look at those things that are being "Paraded" around on a few ships.

Can it fire the latest Aim-120 beyond where only the F-22 might see them? Yes

Can it fire the latest Aim-9X heat seeker? Yes

Can it handle managing Drones? Yes

Is it almost impossible for ground attack radars to see much less fire on? Yes

Can it drop Smart Ordinance out of it's internal bay? Yes

Can it land on those postage stamps that the Marines call Carriers? Yes

Is it capable of disrupting ground radar and burn many of them out without launching a single missile or bomb? Yes

Sounds to me like "Parading" it around like that is just what is needed. Just think, in 2 months, the F-35B goes operational and goes into full production. By 2019, it's cost will be down to 85 million. About the cost of a new F-15. Funny, the F-15 went through this same thing where it was just too costly. The only difference is, the Internet wasn't invented quite yet in 1968. You would have been one of those naysayers back then and how did that work out again?

You are ignoring the advances the bad guys are making. The PAK-FA will be BETTER than the F-35 at air superiority. The cost estimates are unbelievable at best.


The second they hang external ordnance off of it it loses its stealthiness so can't come close to the ordnance load of the A-10, or even the AV-8b.

Operating in ground attack mode you get to use the old MK I eyeball, so the radar stealth capability is wasted. Further there are now so many optically guided AAM's that once again, the small radar cross section is wasted.

Can any other aircraft be modified so that they can handle drones? Ummm, yes. For a fraction of the cost.

Yes, it can V/TOL, that's one point in its favor.

The F-18 Growler does an even better job of ECM, and once again it is a fraction of the cost.

Yes, the F-15 had development difficulties. They were overcome with time and money, just like the problems with the F-35 will be. However, in this world, at this time, I would rather have more aircraft, that are actually flying, and capable of doing their missions, than a few, very expensive aircraft, that spend most of their time in the shop.

The PAK-FA has radar right out of the 80s. The Indians already confirmed this and are livid about the billions it already has invested in it. It's already been confirmed that the best rating it can get is a 4.5, not a 5 or 6. You can make it look like a strealth bird but unless it also IS a stealthy bird. The Motors are crap as well.

The ONLY time a F-35 is not a real 5 bird is when the doors open. Ever see one open, fire and close? About a second to 2 time. Even the F-22 becomes partially visible at that time.

Operating in Ground Attack, the F-35, like the F-15E and F-22 uses radar, infra, and Sat positioning to do the job. No MKII aiming. You forget, there won't be a gun able to use until 2017. They don't need to be down in the weeds. And with the stuff even ISIS is walking around with any AC down there is just another target. The A-10 is already obsolete because the big gun is used down in the weeds. if ICUUCMe.

Yes, Air Command Posts already can. As for other fighters, the F-35 already has it. You don't dance with the bird you want, you dance with the bird you brung to the dance. Besides, the only other bird that won't be bagged doing it will be the F-22 and it's already spread pretty thin, Fly your Vaunted Growler into the same area and it lights up every ground system in the area. The Growler depends on the normal Hornets and Super Hormets to keep everyone off it's back. What makes a Wild Weazel work is that it flies around with a huge Hit Me sign on it if you dare. If the ground dares, the EF-18G is capable of hitting them fast and hard. If an enemy fighter (usually a flight) dares the only thing keeping the Growler alive is it's escort fighter cover. There just isn't room enough to add all the toys you want to ad. Only the EA-6 has that kind of generator power.

That Vtol that you so easily dismiss means it can operate off ships that aren't capital ships. They operate off of exaggerated Chopper ships that cost a fraction of what a Carrier does. Comparing the AV-8B isn't too fair. The AV-8B is a gen 3 AC and for the reasons that it can't survive against even the French Rafale which costs a fraction means it's dead in it's track. Yes it did well in the Falklands but the reason was, the Brits had superior Pilots and were facing some pretty old junk by todays standards. If Argentina get's it's orders filled, I suspect they are going after the Falklands once again. The Brits know they need the F-35Bs to combat the threat.

The EA-18G does a better job of Wild Weazel, not hiding from the enemy. They hang a big HIT ME sign on it and wait for the radar to find them then they dispatch the Radar Antennae with SA missiles and smart bombs. The F-35 can do the same but it will likely attack them electronically and burn them out and do it while staying hidden.

All your points are just too easy to dispel. As the F-35 begins going operational in 2 months, and goes into full production at that point, it drives the price down and it still does a good job. The only thing lacking is pilot training and you don't seem to want our pilots trained well.

On the contrary. I want our pilots to be the best trained in the world. To do that they need an aircraft that actually flies. As I said, the problems with the F-35 will eventually be resolved, but not for a long time, nor for a small amount of money. The pipe dream that they will get unit cost down to 85 million is laughable.

Radar from the 1980's? They were able to track a SU-30 at a range of 310 km. That's outstanding performance. The radar that the Indians got is not what the Russians get. The Russians have a long history of providing what they call the "monkey model" to client states and the original Warsaw Pact nations. They simply don't let the best they have out to the general public.

For people who don't know what we're talking about I have provided a picture below. The PAK-FA is the aircraft on the right, SU 30 on left.

The T-50 has a laser anti IR missile countermeasure in development that looks unfortunately very promising.

And where did you get the impression the T-50 has old engines? It will be equipped with the 117 (AL-41F1) engines which are 5th gen engines.

The primary missile will eventually be the ramjet powered Kh-31 which has a speed in excess of mach 4. Boeing actually produced a version of this missile as a supersonic target drone called the MA-31 which I found out about while at a Farnborough airshow a few years ago. Same missile, one at the Boeing stand, the other at the Zvezda Strela stand!

Anyway, the T-50 is likewise having developmental difficulties so we won't know really how they stack up for awhile.

The Indians already came out with the info on the T-50. They were supposed to be a manufacturer of it. The problems they reported (they got a couple of copies, you didn't) was that the Avionics Package was way outdated and the engines were unfit for a combat aircraft. And it lacked the 5 gen ability to be called a Stealth anything. Just because it look stealthy doesn't mean it really is one. It takes longer to paint the F-35 than anything else. It takes 3 full days and they can't miss a step. Making an AC that is pea green doesn't make it a stealth anything. The J-20 has the same problem.

Now, about that IR stuff. You have to get close to the object for it to work. While the T-50 is playing grabassed games with it's toys, the first indication he gets that the enemy is there will be the lock on the radar. It could come from a F-22 or a F-35 and the missile fired could come from any of the US two fighters. Meanwhile, you are now looking where it's coming from and the first indication of the real direction is the visual of the incoming missile. Something that Rickenbaker was famous for. Disrupt the fighter escort enabling the pickoff of the other aircraft at will. Robin Olds and his wingman did the same thing when two P-38s attacked a formation of over 50 German Fighters amassing to attack the bombers.That day, Olds bagged three and his wingman bagged two and both made it home. You don't have to kill them, just disrupt them and turn them into a swarm. The F-22 and the F-35 are designed to do just that without detection firing from the extreme range for the Aim-120 which has a longer range than anything the Russians (or anyone else) has. That is forefront of every enemy pilot will have on his mind going into combat with the US. That is quite a edge.

Now, about that KA-31. It's an antiship missile, not an air to air missile. Once again, your misinformation is astounding. You can't be working for the Russians. They just aren't that stupid.


I suggest you take a good long hard look at the R-77 missile. It comes in two flavors for the Russians and a third variant for export. While it's better than the Aim-7, the Aim-120 flies circles around it. The Russians (Soviets) tried to duplicate the Aim-54 which is the best of the best and at a million bucks per copy was phased out right after the Soviets started to turn out the Aim-54 copy. The R-77 never came close to competing with the Phoenix even though it looks like a copy.

So far, you have proven that you have no idea what you are talking about. You may wish to fire up that Borche and gum that for awhile.

 

[westwall]

No it doesnt........they made parade around a few on a ship for rube food......be assured they have zero capability except parade value

Let's take a look at those things that are being "Paraded" around on a few ships.

Can it fire the latest Aim-120 beyond where only the F-22 might see them? Yes

Can it fire the latest Aim-9X heat seeker? Yes

Can it handle managing Drones? Yes

Is it almost impossible for ground attack radars to see much less fire on? Yes

Can it drop Smart Ordinance out of it's internal bay? Yes

Can it land on those postage stamps that the Marines call Carriers? Yes

Is it capable of disrupting ground radar and burn many of them out without launching a single missile or bomb? Yes

Sounds to me like "Parading" it around like that is just what is needed. Just think, in 2 months, the F-35B goes operational and goes into full production. By 2019, it's cost will be down to 85 million. About the cost of a new F-15. Funny, the F-15 went through this same thing where it was just too costly. The only difference is, the Internet wasn't invented quite yet in 1968. You would have been one of those naysayers back then and how did that work out again?

You are ignoring the advances the bad guys are making. The PAK-FA will be BETTER than the F-35 at air superiority. The cost estimates are unbelievable at best.


The second they hang external ordnance off of it it loses its stealthiness so can't come close to the ordnance load of the A-10, or even the AV-8b.

Operating in ground attack mode you get to use the old MK I eyeball, so the radar stealth capability is wasted. Further there are now so many optically guided AAM's that once again, the small radar cross section is wasted.

Can any other aircraft be modified so that they can handle drones? Ummm, yes. For a fraction of the cost.

Yes, it can V/TOL, that's one point in its favor.

The F-18 Growler does an even better job of ECM, and once again it is a fraction of the cost.

Yes, the F-15 had development difficulties. They were overcome with time and money, just like the problems with the F-35 will be. However, in this world, at this time, I would rather have more aircraft, that are actually flying, and capable of doing their missions, than a few, very expensive aircraft, that spend most of their time in the shop.

The PAK-FA has radar right out of the 80s. The Indians already confirmed this and are livid about the billions it already has invested in it. It's already been confirmed that the best rating it can get is a 4.5, not a 5 or 6. You can make it look like a strealth bird but unless it also IS a stealthy bird. The Motors are crap as well.

The ONLY time a F-35 is not a real 5 bird is when the doors open. Ever see one open, fire and close? About a second to 2 time. Even the F-22 becomes partially visible at that time.

Operating in Ground Attack, the F-35, like the F-15E and F-22 uses radar, infra, and Sat positioning to do the job. No MKII aiming. You forget, there won't be a gun able to use until 2017. They don't need to be down in the weeds. And with the stuff even ISIS is walking around with any AC down there is just another target. The A-10 is already obsolete because the big gun is used down in the weeds. if ICUUCMe.

Yes, Air Command Posts already can. As for other fighters, the F-35 already has it. You don't dance with the bird you want, you dance with the bird you brung to the dance. Besides, the only other bird that won't be bagged doing it will be the F-22 and it's already spread pretty thin, Fly your Vaunted Growler into the same area and it lights up every ground system in the area. The Growler depends on the normal Hornets and Super Hormets to keep everyone off it's back. What makes a Wild Weazel work is that it flies around with a huge Hit Me sign on it if you dare. If the ground dares, the EF-18G is capable of hitting them fast and hard. If an enemy fighter (usually a flight) dares the only thing keeping the Growler alive is it's escort fighter cover. There just isn't room enough to add all the toys you want to ad. Only the EA-6 has that kind of generator power.

That Vtol that you so easily dismiss means it can operate off ships that aren't capital ships. They operate off of exaggerated Chopper ships that cost a fraction of what a Carrier does. Comparing the AV-8B isn't too fair. The AV-8B is a gen 3 AC and for the reasons that it can't survive against even the French Rafale which costs a fraction means it's dead in it's track. Yes it did well in the Falklands but the reason was, the Brits had superior Pilots and were facing some pretty old junk by todays standards. If Argentina get's it's orders filled, I suspect they are going after the Falklands once again. The Brits know they need the F-35Bs to combat the threat.

The EA-18G does a better job of Wild Weazel, not hiding from the enemy. They hang a big HIT ME sign on it and wait for the radar to find them then they dispatch the Radar Antennae with SA missiles and smart bombs. The F-35 can do the same but it will likely attack them electronically and burn them out and do it while staying hidden.

All your points are just too easy to dispel. As the F-35 begins going operational in 2 months, and goes into full production at that point, it drives the price down and it still does a good job. The only thing lacking is pilot training and you don't seem to want our pilots trained well.

On the contrary. I want our pilots to be the best trained in the world. To do that they need an aircraft that actually flies. As I said, the problems with the F-35 will eventually be resolved, but not for a long time, nor for a small amount of money. The pipe dream that they will get unit cost down to 85 million is laughable.

Radar from the 1980's? They were able to track a SU-30 at a range of 310 km. That's outstanding performance. The radar that the Indians got is not what the Russians get. The Russians have a long history of providing what they call the "monkey model" to client states and the original Warsaw Pact nations. They simply don't let the best they have out to the general public.

For people who don't know what we're talking about I have provided a picture below. The PAK-FA is the aircraft on the right, SU 30 on left.

The T-50 has a laser anti IR missile countermeasure in development that looks unfortunately very promising.

And where did you get the impression the T-50 has old engines? It will be equipped with the 117 (AL-41F1) engines which are 5th gen engines.

The primary missile will eventually be the ramjet powered Kh-31 which has a speed in excess of mach 4. Boeing actually produced a version of this missile as a supersonic target drone called the MA-31 which I found out about while at a Farnborough airshow a few years ago. Same missile, one at the Boeing stand, the other at the Zvezda Strela stand!

Anyway, the T-50 is likewise having developmental difficulties so we won't know really how they stack up for awhile.

The Indians already came out with the info on the T-50. They were supposed to be a manufacturer of it. The problems they reported (they got a couple of copies, you didn't) was that the Avionics Package was way outdated and the engines were unfit for a combat aircraft. And it lacked the 5 gen ability to be called a Stealth anything. Just because it look stealthy doesn't mean it really is one. It takes longer to paint the F-35 than anything else. It takes 3 full days and they can't miss a step. Making an AC that is pea green doesn't make it a stealth anything. The J-20 has the same problem.

Now, about that IR stuff. You have to get close to the object for it to work. While the T-50 is playing grabassed games with it's toys, the first indication he gets that the enemy is there will be the lock on the radar. It could come from a F-22 or a F-35 and the missile fired could come from any of the US two fighters. Meanwhile, you are now looking where it's coming from and the first indication of the real direction is the visual of the incoming missile. Something that Rickenbaker was famous for. Disrupt the fighter escort enabling the pickoff of the other aircraft at will. Robin Olds and his wingman did the same thing when two P-38s attacked a formation of over 50 German Fighters amassing to attack the bombers.That day, Olds bagged three and his wingman bagged two and both made it home. You don't have to kill them, just disrupt them and turn them into a swarm. The F-22 and the F-35 are designed to do just that without detection firing from the extreme range for the Aim-120 which has a longer range than anything the Russians (or anyone else) has. That is forefront of every enemy pilot will have on his mind going into combat with the US. That is quite a edge.

Now, about that KA-31. It's an antiship missile, not an air to air missile. Once again, your misinformation is astounding. You can't be working for the Russians. They just aren't that stupid.


I suggest you take a good long hard look at the R-77 missile. It comes in two flavors for the Russians and a third variant for export. While it's better than the Aim-7, the Aim-120 flies circles around it. The Russians (Soviets) tried to duplicate the Aim-54 which is the best of the best and at a million bucks per copy was phased out right after the Soviets started to turn out the Aim-54 copy. The R-77 never came close to competing with the Phoenix even though it looks like a copy.

So far, you have proven that you have no idea what you are talking about. You may wish to fire up that Borche and gum that for awhile.

The person with the misinformation is you. The engines are 5th gen, period. The radar is a advanced AESA system that is the equivalent of our best. They no doubt stole it from us but the facts are that your information is crap. The link below has the best info on the aircraft. Yes, I highlighted the wrong missile, sue me, I was in a hurry and was relying on an admittedly faulty memory. However, your completely false info on the PAK-FA is simply ridiculous. You have to stop using wiki for your info.


"Russia’s new T-50-variant Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (PAK FA) may feature the most accurate air-to-air missile system ever devised. The new system specifically targets the ability of skilled fighter pilots to engage in violent maneuvers to break missile locks in older-generation technology, based on a radar system held within the nose of the missile.

The new missile, pegged the K-77M, was described by Russia Today as an “absolute killer.” It notes that what sets the K-77M’s technology apart from its counterparts is the implementation of a “active phased array antenna (APAA)” which essentially solves the lock-on problem by addressing the radar’s “field of view” problem. Previously, this limitation allowed pilots to swing their jets out of the range of a tailing guided missile when in close proximity, evading the scope of the radar’s view. The K-77M essentially implements a solution similar to the Raytheon’s Patriot surface-to-air (SAM) missile system, according to Russia Today.
New Russian Air-to-Air Missiles Will Field Almost Perfect Accuracy The Diplomat"


The PAK-FA News Pics Debate Thread XXIV

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Let's take a look at those things that are being "Paraded" around on a few ships.

Can it fire the latest Aim-120 beyond where only the F-22 might see them? Yes

Can it fire the latest Aim-9X heat seeker? Yes

Can it handle managing Drones? Yes

Is it almost impossible for ground attack radars to see much less fire on? Yes

Can it drop Smart Ordinance out of it's internal bay? Yes

Can it land on those postage stamps that the Marines call Carriers? Yes

Is it capable of disrupting ground radar and burn many of them out without launching a single missile or bomb? Yes

Sounds to me like "Parading" it around like that is just what is needed. Just think, in 2 months, the F-35B goes operational and goes into full production. By 2019, it's cost will be down to 85 million. About the cost of a new F-15. Funny, the F-15 went through this same thing where it was just too costly. The only difference is, the Internet wasn't invented quite yet in 1968. You would have been one of those naysayers back then and how did that work out again?

You are ignoring the advances the bad guys are making. The PAK-FA will be BETTER than the F-35 at air superiority. The cost estimates are unbelievable at best.


The second they hang external ordnance off of it it loses its stealthiness so can't come close to the ordnance load of the A-10, or even the AV-8b.

Operating in ground attack mode you get to use the old MK I eyeball, so the radar stealth capability is wasted. Further there are now so many optically guided AAM's that once again, the small radar cross section is wasted.

Can any other aircraft be modified so that they can handle drones? Ummm, yes. For a fraction of the cost.

Yes, it can V/TOL, that's one point in its favor.

The F-18 Growler does an even better job of ECM, and once again it is a fraction of the cost.

Yes, the F-15 had development difficulties. They were overcome with time and money, just like the problems with the F-35 will be. However, in this world, at this time, I would rather have more aircraft, that are actually flying, and capable of doing their missions, than a few, very expensive aircraft, that spend most of their time in the shop.

The PAK-FA has radar right out of the 80s. The Indians already confirmed this and are livid about the billions it already has invested in it. It's already been confirmed that the best rating it can get is a 4.5, not a 5 or 6. You can make it look like a strealth bird but unless it also IS a stealthy bird. The Motors are crap as well.

The ONLY time a F-35 is not a real 5 bird is when the doors open. Ever see one open, fire and close? About a second to 2 time. Even the F-22 becomes partially visible at that time.

Operating in Ground Attack, the F-35, like the F-15E and F-22 uses radar, infra, and Sat positioning to do the job. No MKII aiming. You forget, there won't be a gun able to use until 2017. They don't need to be down in the weeds. And with the stuff even ISIS is walking around with any AC down there is just another target. The A-10 is already obsolete because the big gun is used down in the weeds. if ICUUCMe.

Yes, Air Command Posts already can. As for other fighters, the F-35 already has it. You don't dance with the bird you want, you dance with the bird you brung to the dance. Besides, the only other bird that won't be bagged doing it will be the F-22 and it's already spread pretty thin, Fly your Vaunted Growler into the same area and it lights up every ground system in the area. The Growler depends on the normal Hornets and Super Hormets to keep everyone off it's back. What makes a Wild Weazel work is that it flies around with a huge Hit Me sign on it if you dare. If the ground dares, the EF-18G is capable of hitting them fast and hard. If an enemy fighter (usually a flight) dares the only thing keeping the Growler alive is it's escort fighter cover. There just isn't room enough to add all the toys you want to ad. Only the EA-6 has that kind of generator power.

That Vtol that you so easily dismiss means it can operate off ships that aren't capital ships. They operate off of exaggerated Chopper ships that cost a fraction of what a Carrier does. Comparing the AV-8B isn't too fair. The AV-8B is a gen 3 AC and for the reasons that it can't survive against even the French Rafale which costs a fraction means it's dead in it's track. Yes it did well in the Falklands but the reason was, the Brits had superior Pilots and were facing some pretty old junk by todays standards. If Argentina get's it's orders filled, I suspect they are going after the Falklands once again. The Brits know they need the F-35Bs to combat the threat.

The EA-18G does a better job of Wild Weazel, not hiding from the enemy. They hang a big HIT ME sign on it and wait for the radar to find them then they dispatch the Radar Antennae with SA missiles and smart bombs. The F-35 can do the same but it will likely attack them electronically and burn them out and do it while staying hidden.

All your points are just too easy to dispel. As the F-35 begins going operational in 2 months, and goes into full production at that point, it drives the price down and it still does a good job. The only thing lacking is pilot training and you don't seem to want our pilots trained well.

On the contrary. I want our pilots to be the best trained in the world. To do that they need an aircraft that actually flies. As I said, the problems with the F-35 will eventually be resolved, but not for a long time, nor for a small amount of money. The pipe dream that they will get unit cost down to 85 million is laughable.

Radar from the 1980's? They were able to track a SU-30 at a range of 310 km. That's outstanding performance. The radar that the Indians got is not what the Russians get. The Russians have a long history of providing what they call the "monkey model" to client states and the original Warsaw Pact nations. They simply don't let the best they have out to the general public.

For people who don't know what we're talking about I have provided a picture below. The PAK-FA is the aircraft on the right, SU 30 on left.

The T-50 has a laser anti IR missile countermeasure in development that looks unfortunately very promising.

And where did you get the impression the T-50 has old engines? It will be equipped with the 117 (AL-41F1) engines which are 5th gen engines.

The primary missile will eventually be the ramjet powered Kh-31 which has a speed in excess of mach 4. Boeing actually produced a version of this missile as a supersonic target drone called the MA-31 which I found out about while at a Farnborough airshow a few years ago. Same missile, one at the Boeing stand, the other at the Zvezda Strela stand!

Anyway, the T-50 is likewise having developmental difficulties so we won't know really how they stack up for awhile.

The Indians already came out with the info on the T-50. They were supposed to be a manufacturer of it. The problems they reported (they got a couple of copies, you didn't) was that the Avionics Package was way outdated and the engines were unfit for a combat aircraft. And it lacked the 5 gen ability to be called a Stealth anything. Just because it look stealthy doesn't mean it really is one. It takes longer to paint the F-35 than anything else. It takes 3 full days and they can't miss a step. Making an AC that is pea green doesn't make it a stealth anything. The J-20 has the same problem.

Now, about that IR stuff. You have to get close to the object for it to work. While the T-50 is playing grabassed games with it's toys, the first indication he gets that the enemy is there will be the lock on the radar. It could come from a F-22 or a F-35 and the missile fired could come from any of the US two fighters. Meanwhile, you are now looking where it's coming from and the first indication of the real direction is the visual of the incoming missile. Something that Rickenbaker was famous for. Disrupt the fighter escort enabling the pickoff of the other aircraft at will. Robin Olds and his wingman did the same thing when two P-38s attacked a formation of over 50 German Fighters amassing to attack the bombers.That day, Olds bagged three and his wingman bagged two and both made it home. You don't have to kill them, just disrupt them and turn them into a swarm. The F-22 and the F-35 are designed to do just that without detection firing from the extreme range for the Aim-120 which has a longer range than anything the Russians (or anyone else) has. That is forefront of every enemy pilot will have on his mind going into combat with the US. That is quite a edge.

Now, about that KA-31. It's an antiship missile, not an air to air missile. Once again, your misinformation is astounding. You can't be working for the Russians. They just aren't that stupid.


I suggest you take a good long hard look at the R-77 missile. It comes in two flavors for the Russians and a third variant for export. While it's better than the Aim-7, the Aim-120 flies circles around it. The Russians (Soviets) tried to duplicate the Aim-54 which is the best of the best and at a million bucks per copy was phased out right after the Soviets started to turn out the Aim-54 copy. The R-77 never came close to competing with the Phoenix even though it looks like a copy.

So far, you have proven that you have no idea what you are talking about. You may wish to fire up that Borche and gum that for awhile.

<quote>
The person with the misinformation is you. The engines are 5th gen, period. The radar is a advanced AESA system that is the equivalent of our best. They no doubt stole it from us but the facts are that your information is crap. The link below has the best info on the aircraft. Yes, I highlighted the wrong missile, sue me, I was in a hurry and was relying on an admittedly faulty memory. However, your completely false info on the PAK-FA is simply ridiculous. You have to stop using wiki for your info.</quote>

According to the Indians, the engine is toast. If it can't make the required service life, it's junk. It may be able to supercruise but for how long? A dead engine ends the mission pretty damned quick

<quote>
"Russia’s new T-50-variant Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (PAK FA) may feature the most accurate air-to-air missile system ever devised. The new system specifically targets the ability of skilled fighter pilots to engage in violent maneuvers to break missile locks in older-generation technology, based on a radar system held within the nose of the missile.

The new missile, pegged the K-77M, was described by Russia Today as an “absolute killer.” It notes that what sets the K-77M’s technology apart from its counterparts is the implementation of a “active phased array antenna (APAA)” which essentially solves the lock-on problem by addressing the radar’s “field of view” problem. Previously, this limitation allowed pilots to swing their jets out of the range of a tailing guided missile when in close proximity, evading the scope of the radar’s view. The K-77M essentially implements a solution similar to the Raytheon’s Patriot surface-to-air (SAM) missile system, according to Russia Today.
New Russian Air-to-Air Missiles Will Field Almost Perfect Accuracy The Diplomat"


The PAK-FA News Pics Debate Thread XXIV

NewsFlash: Russia Today is owned by the Russian Government.

Let's take a look at those things that are being "Paraded" around on a few ships.

Can it fire the latest Aim-120 beyond where only the F-22 might see them? Yes

Can it fire the latest Aim-9X heat seeker? Yes

Can it handle managing Drones? Yes

Is it almost impossible for ground attack radars to see much less fire on? Yes

Can it drop Smart Ordinance out of it's internal bay? Yes

Can it land on those postage stamps that the Marines call Carriers? Yes

Is it capable of disrupting ground radar and burn many of them out without launching a single missile or bomb? Yes

Sounds to me like "Parading" it around like that is just what is needed. Just think, in 2 months, the F-35B goes operational and goes into full production. By 2019, it's cost will be down to 85 million. About the cost of a new F-15. Funny, the F-15 went through this same thing where it was just too costly. The only difference is, the Internet wasn't invented quite yet in 1968. You would have been one of those naysayers back then and how did that work out again?

You are ignoring the advances the bad guys are making. The PAK-FA will be BETTER than the F-35 at air superiority. The cost estimates are unbelievable at best.


The second they hang external ordnance off of it it loses its stealthiness so can't come close to the ordnance load of the A-10, or even the AV-8b.

Operating in ground attack mode you get to use the old MK I eyeball, so the radar stealth capability is wasted. Further there are now so many optically guided AAM's that once again, the small radar cross section is wasted.

Can any other aircraft be modified so that they can handle drones? Ummm, yes. For a fraction of the cost.

Yes, it can V/TOL, that's one point in its favor.

The F-18 Growler does an even better job of ECM, and once again it is a fraction of the cost.

Yes, the F-15 had development difficulties. They were overcome with time and money, just like the problems with the F-35 will be. However, in this world, at this time, I would rather have more aircraft, that are actually flying, and capable of doing their missions, than a few, very expensive aircraft, that spend most of their time in the shop.

The PAK-FA has radar right out of the 80s. The Indians already confirmed this and are livid about the billions it already has invested in it. It's already been confirmed that the best rating it can get is a 4.5, not a 5 or 6. You can make it look like a strealth bird but unless it also IS a stealthy bird. The Motors are crap as well.

The ONLY time a F-35 is not a real 5 bird is when the doors open. Ever see one open, fire and close? About a second to 2 time. Even the F-22 becomes partially visible at that time.

Operating in Ground Attack, the F-35, like the F-15E and F-22 uses radar, infra, and Sat positioning to do the job. No MKII aiming. You forget, there won't be a gun able to use until 2017. They don't need to be down in the weeds. And with the stuff even ISIS is walking around with any AC down there is just another target. The A-10 is already obsolete because the big gun is used down in the weeds. if ICUUCMe.

Yes, Air Command Posts already can. As for other fighters, the F-35 already has it. You don't dance with the bird you want, you dance with the bird you brung to the dance. Besides, the only other bird that won't be bagged doing it will be the F-22 and it's already spread pretty thin, Fly your Vaunted Growler into the same area and it lights up every ground system in the area. The Growler depends on the normal Hornets and Super Hormets to keep everyone off it's back. What makes a Wild Weazel work is that it flies around with a huge Hit Me sign on it if you dare. If the ground dares, the EF-18G is capable of hitting them fast and hard. If an enemy fighter (usually a flight) dares the only thing keeping the Growler alive is it's escort fighter cover. There just isn't room enough to add all the toys you want to ad. Only the EA-6 has that kind of generator power.

That Vtol that you so easily dismiss means it can operate off ships that aren't capital ships. They operate off of exaggerated Chopper ships that cost a fraction of what a Carrier does. Comparing the AV-8B isn't too fair. The AV-8B is a gen 3 AC and for the reasons that it can't survive against even the French Rafale which costs a fraction means it's dead in it's track. Yes it did well in the Falklands but the reason was, the Brits had superior Pilots and were facing some pretty old junk by todays standards. If Argentina get's it's orders filled, I suspect they are going after the Falklands once again. The Brits know they need the F-35Bs to combat the threat.

The EA-18G does a better job of Wild Weazel, not hiding from the enemy. They hang a big HIT ME sign on it and wait for the radar to find them then they dispatch the Radar Antennae with SA missiles and smart bombs. The F-35 can do the same but it will likely attack them electronically and burn them out and do it while staying hidden.

All your points are just too easy to dispel. As the F-35 begins going operational in 2 months, and goes into full production at that point, it drives the price down and it still does a good job. The only thing lacking is pilot training and you don't seem to want our pilots trained well.

On the contrary. I want our pilots to be the best trained in the world. To do that they need an aircraft that actually flies. As I said, the problems with the F-35 will eventually be resolved, but not for a long time, nor for a small amount of money. The pipe dream that they will get unit cost down to 85 million is laughable.

Radar from the 1980's? They were able to track a SU-30 at a range of 310 km. That's outstanding performance. The radar that the Indians got is not what the Russians get. The Russians have a long history of providing what they call the "monkey model" to client states and the original Warsaw Pact nations. They simply don't let the best they have out to the general public.

For people who don't know what we're talking about I have provided a picture below. The PAK-FA is the aircraft on the right, SU 30 on left.

The T-50 has a laser anti IR missile countermeasure in development that looks unfortunately very promising.

And where did you get the impression the T-50 has old engines? It will be equipped with the 117 (AL-41F1) engines which are 5th gen engines.

The primary missile will eventually be the ramjet powered Kh-31 which has a speed in excess of mach 4. Boeing actually produced a version of this missile as a supersonic target drone called the MA-31 which I found out about while at a Farnborough airshow a few years ago. Same missile, one at the Boeing stand, the other at the Zvezda Strela stand!

Anyway, the T-50 is likewise having developmental difficulties so we won't know really how they stack up for awhile.

The Indians already came out with the info on the T-50. They were supposed to be a manufacturer of it. The problems they reported (they got a couple of copies, you didn't) was that the Avionics Package was way outdated and the engines were unfit for a combat aircraft. And it lacked the 5 gen ability to be called a Stealth anything. Just because it look stealthy doesn't mean it really is one. It takes longer to paint the F-35 than anything else. It takes 3 full days and they can't miss a step. Making an AC that is pea green doesn't make it a stealth anything. The J-20 has the same problem.

Now, about that IR stuff. You have to get close to the object for it to work. While the T-50 is playing grabassed games with it's toys, the first indication he gets that the enemy is there will be the lock on the radar. It could come from a F-22 or a F-35 and the missile fired could come from any of the US two fighters. Meanwhile, you are now looking where it's coming from and the first indication of the real direction is the visual of the incoming missile. Something that Rickenbaker was famous for. Disrupt the fighter escort enabling the pickoff of the other aircraft at will. Robin Olds and his wingman did the same thing when two P-38s attacked a formation of over 50 German Fighters amassing to attack the bombers.That day, Olds bagged three and his wingman bagged two and both made it home. You don't have to kill them, just disrupt them and turn them into a swarm. The F-22 and the F-35 are designed to do just that without detection firing from the extreme range for the Aim-120 which has a longer range than anything the Russians (or anyone else) has. That is forefront of every enemy pilot will have on his mind going into combat with the US. That is quite a edge.

Now, about that KA-31. It's an antiship missile, not an air to air missile. Once again, your misinformation is astounding. You can't be working for the Russians. They just aren't that stupid.


I suggest you take a good long hard look at the R-77 missile. It comes in two flavors for the Russians and a third variant for export. While it's better than the Aim-7, the Aim-120 flies circles around it. The Russians (Soviets) tried to duplicate the Aim-54 which is the best of the best and at a million bucks per copy was phased out right after the Soviets started to turn out the Aim-54 copy. The R-77 never came close to competing with the Phoenix even though it looks like a copy.

So far, you have proven that you have no idea what you are talking about. You may wish to fire up that Borche and gum that for awhile.

The person with the misinformation is you. The engines are 5th gen, period. The radar is a advanced AESA system that is the equivalent of our best. They no doubt stole it from us but the facts are that your information is crap. The link below has the best info on the aircraft. Yes, I highlighted the wrong missile, sue me, I was in a hurry and was relying on an admittedly faulty memory. However, your completely false info on the PAK-FA is simply ridiculous. You have to stop using wiki for your info.


"Russia’s new T-50-variant Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (PAK FA) may feature the most accurate air-to-air missile system ever devised. The new system specifically targets the ability of skilled fighter pilots to engage in violent maneuvers to break missile locks in older-generation technology, based on a radar system held within the nose of the missile.

The new missile, pegged the K-77M, was described by Russia Today as an “absolute killer.” It notes that what sets the K-77M’s technology apart from its counterparts is the implementation of a “active phased array antenna (APAA)” which essentially solves the lock-on problem by addressing the radar’s “field of view” problem. Previously, this limitation allowed pilots to swing their jets out of the range of a tailing guided missile when in close proximity, evading the scope of the radar’s view. The K-77M essentially implements a solution similar to the Raytheon’s Patriot surface-to-air (SAM) missile system, according to Russia Today.
New Russian Air-to-Air Missiles Will Field Almost Perfect Accuracy The Diplomat"


The PAK-FA News Pics Debate Thread XXIV

I am not going to play fair (well the way you think). It's time to bring in the Indians accessment of the Pak 5th gen fighter. Read? Sorry to bust your bubble but I won't be using the propaganda site you are using. Russia Today is solely owned by the Russian Government. Well, here goes.

Let's start out with a nice article.
India to invest 25 billion in FGFA project Russia India Report
The engine isn't ready and the first batch in 2016 or test purposes will have an interim engine belonging to the SU-27. NO Supercruise. The Avionics are on the drawing board and not ready for production until the future (if at all). The only thing ready is the airframe which can't do the 5gen. It's more a 4.5 gen.

http://www.janes.com/article/50530/analysis-india-faces-crunch-decision-over-rafale-pak-fa

Here is a quote from Janes.

""f you put your resources into the T-50, then the IAF becomes an almost all-Russian fleet, and you are betting your future force structure on an aeroplane that is almost solely on paper at present. If you decide to go with the Rafale, then you are forgetting about having a fifth-generation aeroplane, but at least you know everything on this platform exists and works pretty much as advertised," he added."

Mostly on paper. The Russians are flying the few demonstrators on an interim engine because they still can't get the supercruise engine to work. They are using much of the equipment from the SU-27 which is gen4 at best unless they actually do what they promise on paper. The Russians claim that it will be going into service in 2016. I don't see how. The Engine that it's supposed to get is still in the engineering stage and not in production since it's got so many problems right now. Nothing that time won't cure. But that time is predicted by most as more like 2025 and it might be better than the F-22 by 2025 if the F-22 and the F-35 were to stay static. They won't, you can bet. Plus, by 2025, the US will start fielding 6th gen fighters. And don't even bring up the SU-35 or the Mig-35. Both ended up being such problem children hardly anyone wants to buy them.

The reason India has gone this route is that they will NEVER get a F-22 or a US equipped F-35 for avionics and sensors. When you buy the F-35 for export, you pretty much have to roll yer own on the avionics and sensors. The closest country with that capability is Israel and you want to bet that Israel won't export their stuff either. So the Indians can't get the deal they want from the F-35 so they go with the longshot for the T-50 PAK. Even so, they are still a generation behind the US and will probably stay that way along with Russia.

Now, prove that the T-50 is better than either the F-22 and the F-35 (both flying) with the F-22 in constant upgrades from the systems constantly developing for the F-35 and the F-35 goes into service in July of this year. That's less than 2 months. Prove that the Paper T-50 PAK is better. This is sort of like arguing all those VunderVeapons from Germany for late in WWII. Sure saved them, didn't it. You run what brung you to the dance. And right now, the only two Gen 5 Fighters are the F-22 and the F-35. And the Military and Industry is pretty well tight lipped on both of those. Better for your enemy to think they are less than they really are.

When any Aircraft from other Countries do mock battles, both sides cripple their aircraft so you won't know the other sides capability. The Rafale or a few others just might win that battle but to find out how the F-22 really is in battle, you have to do actually deadly combat against it. Right now, the F-15 can pretty well hold it's own against the so called Gen 4.5 fighters since it's been upgraded to that level already. It's been proven in battle already that the F-15 can out turn a Mig-29 which no one admitted to until it did it. The Mig-29 pilot was very experienced avoiding the BVR, closing on the F-15 and the fight went into an old style dogfight. It wasn't the gun that bagged the Mig-29, it was the plain jane Aim9.

The only way you can be truly sure is by pitting the T--50 PAK against the F-22/F-35 in battle and the Russians are a decade away from having it ready. Until then, the best it can do is a Gen 4.5+ and that just ain't good enough anymore.

 

[Manonthestreet]

It'll toast an F-35 in a heartbeat

 

[Daryl Hunt]

It'll toast an F-35 in a heartbeat

How, by running into it? The one copies of the T-50 Pak has no guns, can't fire missiles, drop bombs, no avionics, no sensors, stands out like a sore thumb since they still haven't got idea of what stealth really is, It's using the engines from a SU-27 for the interim since they just can't seem to get the new engine to work right.

Now, since most of it is still on paper, it's not much more than a paper airplane. Today, not in 10 years, how can the Pak-FA defeat a F-35? Give it a paper cut?

BTW, I am retired AF and was at the first forward operating base of the F-15A. I saw the most expensive fighter of the 1970s grow from a fragile, abort crazy desk weight to the best in the World, barring none.It took it about 4 years to get it all together. Yet you expect the F-35 to have it all together right now even before it's operational. When you lose that argument, you turn to a paper airplane that the Russians claim is better. Until it gets it's engines and avionics installed and ironed out, there is no way in hell it's serviceable. Maybe by 2025 as some pros predict but not in 2016 like the Russians Claim. Each time it gets to the date they promised it, they just move the goal posts. Times up. The F-35A goes operational next year and so does the F-35C. The F-35B goes operational in a little over a month. Don't expect the US to wait until 2025 to keep updating the F-22 and F-35. Hell, by then, even the F-15 may be able to take it. By then, the F-15 will just gum it to death.

Now, prove that it IS better than either the F-22 or the F-35. Or are you just gumming yer oatmeal.

 

[HenryBHough]

In Britain they are concerned that the budget they nhas for a squadron might buy thhem eight...but only if the codt overruns end NOW.

Which they won't.

Hey, turkey stuffin' ain't cheap!

 

[Manonthestreet]

Su 35 su 30 fly higher, faster, farther than f-35 carry more missles have better jamming capability against missles fired at them......really is no contest

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Su 35 su 30 fly higher, faster, farther than f-35 carry more missles have better jamming capability against missles fired at them......really is no contest

If the F-35 ever competes at an Air Show then you might be right. It seems that the only real buyers for the SU-35 is Russia and they aren't buying very many of them. Meanwhile, the tried and true Mig-30 seems to be grabbing the export orders.

I checked the range of it's weapons, radar and IR detectors. 85km. At about 150 km, they are already dodging missiles and they can't quite figure out where it's coming from. You are assuming that the US fighters will always cooperate fully with them and let them fight their own fight. The US will pick the fight, the range and type weapons used.

Try again.

 

[Manonthestreet]

The low and slow plane is not the aggressor...it is the target.dogfight 101

 

[Daryl Hunt]

The low and slow plane is not the aggressor...it is the target.dogfight 101

The bird flying fat dumb and happy sure ain't going to be the agressor. Now you are trying to force the US Fighters to get sucked into the strong points of the enemy. We stopped doing that by the end of Vietnam. It's not going to be a gunfight in the opening rounds. It's going to be an Aim-120 game with the other side getting blooded first. How bad it's hard to tell because, unlike you, my crystal ball is at the cleaners. AFter the good stuff is spent by both sides, it's going to be back to the Gen 3 and 4 Aircraft and at that point, the best Gen 4 is still the F-15. I learned that during a Wargame when all the good stuff (at that time the F-15 was used up along with the F-4, F-14 and the F-16. The other side didn't fare any better. Both sides ended up with Attack AC being used as fighters. And the A-10 didn't dare cross the english channel due to the SU7 waiting for it. The A-7 and A-4 was still around. The older Attack birds won by just being more numerous on both sides.

You have no idea on the deaths of both sides in their shiny new fighters. Keep it up much longer and we will be throwing rocks at each other.

 

[westwall]

You are ignoring the advances the bad guys are making. The PAK-FA will be BETTER than the F-35 at air superiority. The cost estimates are unbelievable at best.


The second they hang external ordnance off of it it loses its stealthiness so can't come close to the ordnance load of the A-10, or even the AV-8b.

Operating in ground attack mode you get to use the old MK I eyeball, so the radar stealth capability is wasted. Further there are now so many optically guided AAM's that once again, the small radar cross section is wasted.

Can any other aircraft be modified so that they can handle drones? Ummm, yes. For a fraction of the cost.

Yes, it can V/TOL, that's one point in its favor.

The F-18 Growler does an even better job of ECM, and once again it is a fraction of the cost.

Yes, the F-15 had development difficulties. They were overcome with time and money, just like the problems with the F-35 will be. However, in this world, at this time, I would rather have more aircraft, that are actually flying, and capable of doing their missions, than a few, very expensive aircraft, that spend most of their time in the shop.

The PAK-FA has radar right out of the 80s. The Indians already confirmed this and are livid about the billions it already has invested in it. It's already been confirmed that the best rating it can get is a 4.5, not a 5 or 6. You can make it look like a strealth bird but unless it also IS a stealthy bird. The Motors are crap as well.

The ONLY time a F-35 is not a real 5 bird is when the doors open. Ever see one open, fire and close? About a second to 2 time. Even the F-22 becomes partially visible at that time.

Operating in Ground Attack, the F-35, like the F-15E and F-22 uses radar, infra, and Sat positioning to do the job. No MKII aiming. You forget, there won't be a gun able to use until 2017. They don't need to be down in the weeds. And with the stuff even ISIS is walking around with any AC down there is just another target. The A-10 is already obsolete because the big gun is used down in the weeds. if ICUUCMe.

Yes, Air Command Posts already can. As for other fighters, the F-35 already has it. You don't dance with the bird you want, you dance with the bird you brung to the dance. Besides, the only other bird that won't be bagged doing it will be the F-22 and it's already spread pretty thin, Fly your Vaunted Growler into the same area and it lights up every ground system in the area. The Growler depends on the normal Hornets and Super Hormets to keep everyone off it's back. What makes a Wild Weazel work is that it flies around with a huge Hit Me sign on it if you dare. If the ground dares, the EF-18G is capable of hitting them fast and hard. If an enemy fighter (usually a flight) dares the only thing keeping the Growler alive is it's escort fighter cover. There just isn't room enough to add all the toys you want to ad. Only the EA-6 has that kind of generator power.

That Vtol that you so easily dismiss means it can operate off ships that aren't capital ships. They operate off of exaggerated Chopper ships that cost a fraction of what a Carrier does. Comparing the AV-8B isn't too fair. The AV-8B is a gen 3 AC and for the reasons that it can't survive against even the French Rafale which costs a fraction means it's dead in it's track. Yes it did well in the Falklands but the reason was, the Brits had superior Pilots and were facing some pretty old junk by todays standards. If Argentina get's it's orders filled, I suspect they are going after the Falklands once again. The Brits know they need the F-35Bs to combat the threat.

The EA-18G does a better job of Wild Weazel, not hiding from the enemy. They hang a big HIT ME sign on it and wait for the radar to find them then they dispatch the Radar Antennae with SA missiles and smart bombs. The F-35 can do the same but it will likely attack them electronically and burn them out and do it while staying hidden.

All your points are just too easy to dispel. As the F-35 begins going operational in 2 months, and goes into full production at that point, it drives the price down and it still does a good job. The only thing lacking is pilot training and you don't seem to want our pilots trained well.

On the contrary. I want our pilots to be the best trained in the world. To do that they need an aircraft that actually flies. As I said, the problems with the F-35 will eventually be resolved, but not for a long time, nor for a small amount of money. The pipe dream that they will get unit cost down to 85 million is laughable.

Radar from the 1980's? They were able to track a SU-30 at a range of 310 km. That's outstanding performance. The radar that the Indians got is not what the Russians get. The Russians have a long history of providing what they call the "monkey model" to client states and the original Warsaw Pact nations. They simply don't let the best they have out to the general public.

For people who don't know what we're talking about I have provided a picture below. The PAK-FA is the aircraft on the right, SU 30 on left.

The T-50 has a laser anti IR missile countermeasure in development that looks unfortunately very promising.

And where did you get the impression the T-50 has old engines? It will be equipped with the 117 (AL-41F1) engines which are 5th gen engines.

The primary missile will eventually be the ramjet powered Kh-31 which has a speed in excess of mach 4. Boeing actually produced a version of this missile as a supersonic target drone called the MA-31 which I found out about while at a Farnborough airshow a few years ago. Same missile, one at the Boeing stand, the other at the Zvezda Strela stand!

Anyway, the T-50 is likewise having developmental difficulties so we won't know really how they stack up for awhile.

The Indians already came out with the info on the T-50. They were supposed to be a manufacturer of it. The problems they reported (they got a couple of copies, you didn't) was that the Avionics Package was way outdated and the engines were unfit for a combat aircraft. And it lacked the 5 gen ability to be called a Stealth anything. Just because it look stealthy doesn't mean it really is one. It takes longer to paint the F-35 than anything else. It takes 3 full days and they can't miss a step. Making an AC that is pea green doesn't make it a stealth anything. The J-20 has the same problem.

Now, about that IR stuff. You have to get close to the object for it to work. While the T-50 is playing grabassed games with it's toys, the first indication he gets that the enemy is there will be the lock on the radar. It could come from a F-22 or a F-35 and the missile fired could come from any of the US two fighters. Meanwhile, you are now looking where it's coming from and the first indication of the real direction is the visual of the incoming missile. Something that Rickenbaker was famous for. Disrupt the fighter escort enabling the pickoff of the other aircraft at will. Robin Olds and his wingman did the same thing when two P-38s attacked a formation of over 50 German Fighters amassing to attack the bombers.That day, Olds bagged three and his wingman bagged two and both made it home. You don't have to kill them, just disrupt them and turn them into a swarm. The F-22 and the F-35 are designed to do just that without detection firing from the extreme range for the Aim-120 which has a longer range than anything the Russians (or anyone else) has. That is forefront of every enemy pilot will have on his mind going into combat with the US. That is quite a edge.

Now, about that KA-31. It's an antiship missile, not an air to air missile. Once again, your misinformation is astounding. You can't be working for the Russians. They just aren't that stupid.


I suggest you take a good long hard look at the R-77 missile. It comes in two flavors for the Russians and a third variant for export. While it's better than the Aim-7, the Aim-120 flies circles around it. The Russians (Soviets) tried to duplicate the Aim-54 which is the best of the best and at a million bucks per copy was phased out right after the Soviets started to turn out the Aim-54 copy. The R-77 never came close to competing with the Phoenix even though it looks like a copy.

So far, you have proven that you have no idea what you are talking about. You may wish to fire up that Borche and gum that for awhile.

<quote>
The person with the misinformation is you. The engines are 5th gen, period. The radar is a advanced AESA system that is the equivalent of our best. They no doubt stole it from us but the facts are that your information is crap. The link below has the best info on the aircraft. Yes, I highlighted the wrong missile, sue me, I was in a hurry and was relying on an admittedly faulty memory. However, your completely false info on the PAK-FA is simply ridiculous. You have to stop using wiki for your info.</quote>

According to the Indians, the engine is toast. If it can't make the required service life, it's junk. It may be able to supercruise but for how long? A dead engine ends the mission pretty damned quick

<quote>
"Russia’s new T-50-variant Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (PAK FA) may feature the most accurate air-to-air missile system ever devised. The new system specifically targets the ability of skilled fighter pilots to engage in violent maneuvers to break missile locks in older-generation technology, based on a radar system held within the nose of the missile.

The new missile, pegged the K-77M, was described by Russia Today as an “absolute killer.” It notes that what sets the K-77M’s technology apart from its counterparts is the implementation of a “active phased array antenna (APAA)” which essentially solves the lock-on problem by addressing the radar’s “field of view” problem. Previously, this limitation allowed pilots to swing their jets out of the range of a tailing guided missile when in close proximity, evading the scope of the radar’s view. The K-77M essentially implements a solution similar to the Raytheon’s Patriot surface-to-air (SAM) missile system, according to Russia Today.
New Russian Air-to-Air Missiles Will Field Almost Perfect Accuracy The Diplomat"


The PAK-FA News Pics Debate Thread XXIV

NewsFlash: Russia Today is owned by the Russian Government.

You are ignoring the advances the bad guys are making. The PAK-FA will be BETTER than the F-35 at air superiority. The cost estimates are unbelievable at best.


The second they hang external ordnance off of it it loses its stealthiness so can't come close to the ordnance load of the A-10, or even the AV-8b.

Operating in ground attack mode you get to use the old MK I eyeball, so the radar stealth capability is wasted. Further there are now so many optically guided AAM's that once again, the small radar cross section is wasted.

Can any other aircraft be modified so that they can handle drones? Ummm, yes. For a fraction of the cost.

Yes, it can V/TOL, that's one point in its favor.

The F-18 Growler does an even better job of ECM, and once again it is a fraction of the cost.

Yes, the F-15 had development difficulties. They were overcome with time and money, just like the problems with the F-35 will be. However, in this world, at this time, I would rather have more aircraft, that are actually flying, and capable of doing their missions, than a few, very expensive aircraft, that spend most of their time in the shop.

The PAK-FA has radar right out of the 80s. The Indians already confirmed this and are livid about the billions it already has invested in it. It's already been confirmed that the best rating it can get is a 4.5, not a 5 or 6. You can make it look like a strealth bird but unless it also IS a stealthy bird. The Motors are crap as well.

The ONLY time a F-35 is not a real 5 bird is when the doors open. Ever see one open, fire and close? About a second to 2 time. Even the F-22 becomes partially visible at that time.

Operating in Ground Attack, the F-35, like the F-15E and F-22 uses radar, infra, and Sat positioning to do the job. No MKII aiming. You forget, there won't be a gun able to use until 2017. They don't need to be down in the weeds. And with the stuff even ISIS is walking around with any AC down there is just another target. The A-10 is already obsolete because the big gun is used down in the weeds. if ICUUCMe.

Yes, Air Command Posts already can. As for other fighters, the F-35 already has it. You don't dance with the bird you want, you dance with the bird you brung to the dance. Besides, the only other bird that won't be bagged doing it will be the F-22 and it's already spread pretty thin, Fly your Vaunted Growler into the same area and it lights up every ground system in the area. The Growler depends on the normal Hornets and Super Hormets to keep everyone off it's back. What makes a Wild Weazel work is that it flies around with a huge Hit Me sign on it if you dare. If the ground dares, the EF-18G is capable of hitting them fast and hard. If an enemy fighter (usually a flight) dares the only thing keeping the Growler alive is it's escort fighter cover. There just isn't room enough to add all the toys you want to ad. Only the EA-6 has that kind of generator power.

That Vtol that you so easily dismiss means it can operate off ships that aren't capital ships. They operate off of exaggerated Chopper ships that cost a fraction of what a Carrier does. Comparing the AV-8B isn't too fair. The AV-8B is a gen 3 AC and for the reasons that it can't survive against even the French Rafale which costs a fraction means it's dead in it's track. Yes it did well in the Falklands but the reason was, the Brits had superior Pilots and were facing some pretty old junk by todays standards. If Argentina get's it's orders filled, I suspect they are going after the Falklands once again. The Brits know they need the F-35Bs to combat the threat.

The EA-18G does a better job of Wild Weazel, not hiding from the enemy. They hang a big HIT ME sign on it and wait for the radar to find them then they dispatch the Radar Antennae with SA missiles and smart bombs. The F-35 can do the same but it will likely attack them electronically and burn them out and do it while staying hidden.

All your points are just too easy to dispel. As the F-35 begins going operational in 2 months, and goes into full production at that point, it drives the price down and it still does a good job. The only thing lacking is pilot training and you don't seem to want our pilots trained well.

On the contrary. I want our pilots to be the best trained in the world. To do that they need an aircraft that actually flies. As I said, the problems with the F-35 will eventually be resolved, but not for a long time, nor for a small amount of money. The pipe dream that they will get unit cost down to 85 million is laughable.

Radar from the 1980's? They were able to track a SU-30 at a range of 310 km. That's outstanding performance. The radar that the Indians got is not what the Russians get. The Russians have a long history of providing what they call the "monkey model" to client states and the original Warsaw Pact nations. They simply don't let the best they have out to the general public.

For people who don't know what we're talking about I have provided a picture below. The PAK-FA is the aircraft on the right, SU 30 on left.

The T-50 has a laser anti IR missile countermeasure in development that looks unfortunately very promising.

And where did you get the impression the T-50 has old engines? It will be equipped with the 117 (AL-41F1) engines which are 5th gen engines.

The primary missile will eventually be the ramjet powered Kh-31 which has a speed in excess of mach 4. Boeing actually produced a version of this missile as a supersonic target drone called the MA-31 which I found out about while at a Farnborough airshow a few years ago. Same missile, one at the Boeing stand, the other at the Zvezda Strela stand!

Anyway, the T-50 is likewise having developmental difficulties so we won't know really how they stack up for awhile.

The Indians already came out with the info on the T-50. They were supposed to be a manufacturer of it. The problems they reported (they got a couple of copies, you didn't) was that the Avionics Package was way outdated and the engines were unfit for a combat aircraft. And it lacked the 5 gen ability to be called a Stealth anything. Just because it look stealthy doesn't mean it really is one. It takes longer to paint the F-35 than anything else. It takes 3 full days and they can't miss a step. Making an AC that is pea green doesn't make it a stealth anything. The J-20 has the same problem.

Now, about that IR stuff. You have to get close to the object for it to work. While the T-50 is playing grabassed games with it's toys, the first indication he gets that the enemy is there will be the lock on the radar. It could come from a F-22 or a F-35 and the missile fired could come from any of the US two fighters. Meanwhile, you are now looking where it's coming from and the first indication of the real direction is the visual of the incoming missile. Something that Rickenbaker was famous for. Disrupt the fighter escort enabling the pickoff of the other aircraft at will. Robin Olds and his wingman did the same thing when two P-38s attacked a formation of over 50 German Fighters amassing to attack the bombers.That day, Olds bagged three and his wingman bagged two and both made it home. You don't have to kill them, just disrupt them and turn them into a swarm. The F-22 and the F-35 are designed to do just that without detection firing from the extreme range for the Aim-120 which has a longer range than anything the Russians (or anyone else) has. That is forefront of every enemy pilot will have on his mind going into combat with the US. That is quite a edge.

Now, about that KA-31. It's an antiship missile, not an air to air missile. Once again, your misinformation is astounding. You can't be working for the Russians. They just aren't that stupid.


I suggest you take a good long hard look at the R-77 missile. It comes in two flavors for the Russians and a third variant for export. While it's better than the Aim-7, the Aim-120 flies circles around it. The Russians (Soviets) tried to duplicate the Aim-54 which is the best of the best and at a million bucks per copy was phased out right after the Soviets started to turn out the Aim-54 copy. The R-77 never came close to competing with the Phoenix even though it looks like a copy.

So far, you have proven that you have no idea what you are talking about. You may wish to fire up that Borche and gum that for awhile.

The person with the misinformation is you. The engines are 5th gen, period. The radar is a advanced AESA system that is the equivalent of our best. They no doubt stole it from us but the facts are that your information is crap. The link below has the best info on the aircraft. Yes, I highlighted the wrong missile, sue me, I was in a hurry and was relying on an admittedly faulty memory. However, your completely false info on the PAK-FA is simply ridiculous. You have to stop using wiki for your info.


"Russia’s new T-50-variant Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (PAK FA) may feature the most accurate air-to-air missile system ever devised. The new system specifically targets the ability of skilled fighter pilots to engage in violent maneuvers to break missile locks in older-generation technology, based on a radar system held within the nose of the missile.

The new missile, pegged the K-77M, was described by Russia Today as an “absolute killer.” It notes that what sets the K-77M’s technology apart from its counterparts is the implementation of a “active phased array antenna (APAA)” which essentially solves the lock-on problem by addressing the radar’s “field of view” problem. Previously, this limitation allowed pilots to swing their jets out of the range of a tailing guided missile when in close proximity, evading the scope of the radar’s view. The K-77M essentially implements a solution similar to the Raytheon’s Patriot surface-to-air (SAM) missile system, according to Russia Today.
New Russian Air-to-Air Missiles Will Field Almost Perfect Accuracy The Diplomat"


The PAK-FA News Pics Debate Thread XXIV

I am not going to play fair (well the way you think). It's time to bring in the Indians accessment of the Pak 5th gen fighter. Read? Sorry to bust your bubble but I won't be using the propaganda site you are using. Russia Today is solely owned by the Russian Government. Well, here goes.

Let's start out with a nice article.
India to invest 25 billion in FGFA project Russia India Report
The engine isn't ready and the first batch in 2016 or test purposes will have an interim engine belonging to the SU-27. NO Supercruise. The Avionics are on the drawing board and not ready for production until the future (if at all). The only thing ready is the airframe which can't do the 5gen. It's more a 4.5 gen.

http://www.janes.com/article/50530/analysis-india-faces-crunch-decision-over-rafale-pak-fa

Here is a quote from Janes.

""f you put your resources into the T-50, then the IAF becomes an almost all-Russian fleet, and you are betting your future force structure on an aeroplane that is almost solely on paper at present. If you decide to go with the Rafale, then you are forgetting about having a fifth-generation aeroplane, but at least you know everything on this platform exists and works pretty much as advertised," he added."

Mostly on paper. The Russians are flying the few demonstrators on an interim engine because they still can't get the supercruise engine to work. They are using much of the equipment from the SU-27 which is gen4 at best unless they actually do what they promise on paper. The Russians claim that it will be going into service in 2016. I don't see how. The Engine that it's supposed to get is still in the engineering stage and not in production since it's got so many problems right now. Nothing that time won't cure. But that time is predicted by most as more like 2025 and it might be better than the F-22 by 2025 if the F-22 and the F-35 were to stay static. They won't, you can bet. Plus, by 2025, the US will start fielding 6th gen fighters. And don't even bring up the SU-35 or the Mig-35. Both ended up being such problem children hardly anyone wants to buy them.

The reason India has gone this route is that they will NEVER get a F-22 or a US equipped F-35 for avionics and sensors. When you buy the F-35 for export, you pretty much have to roll yer own on the avionics and sensors. The closest country with that capability is Israel and you want to bet that Israel won't export their stuff either. So the Indians can't get the deal they want from the F-35 so they go with the longshot for the T-50 PAK. Even so, they are still a generation behind the US and will probably stay that way along with Russia.

Now, prove that the T-50 is better than either the F-22 and the F-35 (both flying) with the F-22 in constant upgrades from the systems constantly developing for the F-35 and the F-35 goes into service in July of this year. That's less than 2 months. Prove that the Paper T-50 PAK is better. This is sort of like arguing all those VunderVeapons from Germany for late in WWII. Sure saved them, didn't it. You run what brung you to the dance. And right now, the only two Gen 5 Fighters are the F-22 and the F-35. And the Military and Industry is pretty well tight lipped on both of those. Better for your enemy to think they are less than they really are.

When any Aircraft from other Countries do mock battles, both sides cripple their aircraft so you won't know the other sides capability. The Rafale or a few others just might win that battle but to find out how the F-22 really is in battle, you have to do actually deadly combat against it. Right now, the F-15 can pretty well hold it's own against the so called Gen 4.5 fighters since it's been upgraded to that level already. It's been proven in battle already that the F-15 can out turn a Mig-29 which no one admitted to until it did it. The Mig-29 pilot was very experienced avoiding the BVR, closing on the F-15 and the fight went into an old style dogfight. It wasn't the gun that bagged the Mig-29, it was the plain jane Aim9.

The only way you can be truly sure is by pitting the T--50 PAK against the F-22/F-35 in battle and the Russians are a decade away from having it ready. Until then, the best it can do is a Gen 4.5+ and that just ain't good enough anymore.

I never claimed the PAK-FA was better than the F-22. Far, FAR from it. The F-22 is the best air superiority fighter in the world and will remain so for decades. It is ridiculous that we have abandoned production on that aircraft in favor of the F-35.

My point is this is no longer WWII technology where you could adapt a single airframe to a multitude of roles such as the Mosquito, or the P-38. Today, when you try and make an airframe able to do all things, it does none of them as well as a dedicated airframe. I actually had an opportunity to talk to one of the test pilots of the F-35 at this last Tailhook, and while his answers were necessarily vague as regards performance, some things did become apparent.

It will not ever be able to do as good a job in the CAS role as the current A-10.

It can't compete with the F-22 in the air superiority role.

It can definitely replace the AV-8B (and is superior to it in all categories) but at the cost per unit I would rather have an upgraded version of that aircraft, and in much larger numbers.

The reason why India won't be getting a F-35 is for the cost of a single airframe they can produce a whole squadron of aircraft, and don't sell the Indians short. Their technological capabilities are advancing exceptionally quickly. In fact they are probably going to be the next player in the armed UAV game.

 

[westwall]

The low and slow plane is not the aggressor...it is the target.dogfight 101

The bird flying fat dumb and happy sure ain't going to be the agressor. Now you are trying to force the US Fighters to get sucked into the strong points of the enemy. We stopped doing that by the end of Vietnam. It's not going to be a gunfight in the opening rounds. It's going to be an Aim-120 game with the other side getting blooded first. How bad it's hard to tell because, unlike you, my crystal ball is at the cleaners. AFter the good stuff is spent by both sides, it's going to be back to the Gen 3 and 4 Aircraft and at that point, the best Gen 4 is still the F-15. I learned that during a Wargame when all the good stuff (at that time the F-15 was used up along with the F-4, F-14 and the F-16. The other side didn't fare any better. Both sides ended up with Attack AC being used as fighters. And the A-10 didn't dare cross the english channel due to the SU7 waiting for it. The A-7 and A-4 was still around. The older Attack birds won by just being more numerous on both sides.

You have no idea on the deaths of both sides in their shiny new fighters. Keep it up much longer and we will be throwing rocks at each other.

Yes, this is the first post of yours that I agree with completely. Numbers MATTER! The high tech aircraft will indeed rule the roost so long as they are operational, but, they breakdown far more frequently than their simpler counterparts. It's great having the 200 best aircraft in the world. It truly is. But, like the Germans found out with their 3,000 best tanks in the world, being buried under 100,000 tanks of lesser quality, is still being buried.

 

[Manonthestreet]

The low and slow plane is not the aggressor...it is the target.dogfight 101

The bird flying fat dumb and happy sure ain't going to be the agressor. Now you are trying to force the US Fighters to get sucked into the strong points of the enemy. We stopped doing that by the end of Vietnam. It's not going to be a gunfight in the opening rounds. It's going to be an Aim-120 game with the other side getting blooded first. How bad it's hard to tell because, unlike you, my crystal ball is at the cleaners. AFter the good stuff is spent by both sides, it's going to be back to the Gen 3 and 4 Aircraft and at that point, the best Gen 4 is still the F-15. I learned that during a Wargame when all the good stuff (at that time the F-15 was used up along with the F-4, F-14 and the F-16. The other side didn't fare any better. Both sides ended up with Attack AC being used as fighters. And the A-10 didn't dare cross the english channel due to the SU7 waiting for it. The A-7 and A-4 was still around. The older Attack birds won by just being more numerous on both sides.

You have no idea on the deaths of both sides in their shiny new fighters. Keep it up much longer and we will be throwing rocks at each other.

Obviously you need to go back from the beginning of the thread cause your bs has been addressed multiple times

 

[Daryl Hunt]

The low and slow plane is not the aggressor...it is the target.dogfight 101

The bird flying fat dumb and happy sure ain't going to be the agressor. Now you are trying to force the US Fighters to get sucked into the strong points of the enemy. We stopped doing that by the end of Vietnam. It's not going to be a gunfight in the opening rounds. It's going to be an Aim-120 game with the other side getting blooded first. How bad it's hard to tell because, unlike you, my crystal ball is at the cleaners. AFter the good stuff is spent by both sides, it's going to be back to the Gen 3 and 4 Aircraft and at that point, the best Gen 4 is still the F-15. I learned that during a Wargame when all the good stuff (at that time the F-15 was used up along with the F-4, F-14 and the F-16. The other side didn't fare any better. Both sides ended up with Attack AC being used as fighters. And the A-10 didn't dare cross the english channel due to the SU7 waiting for it. The A-7 and A-4 was still around. The older Attack birds won by just being more numerous on both sides.

You have no idea on the deaths of both sides in their shiny new fighters. Keep it up much longer and we will be throwing rocks at each other.

Obviously you need to go back from the beginning of the thread cause your bs has been addressed multiple times

I am sure that you need to hear what the Russians turned out about the T-50. It's interesting as all get out. Just click on the link below.
All about Russia's Newest Advanced Stealth Fighter - Documentary

The tell of the first real airframe (without the proper engines and devoid of most of the avionics) flew in 2009. You talk about the F-35 trying to do it all. Well, watch that documentary and see another bird that is being designed to replace the Mig-29, all the Su-3X series and even the ground attack birds. The Russians are so tight over funding that they have no choice but to put it all in one basket and even to con India into helping. Right now, it's the boondoggle that is having the same problems the F-35 has had in the past. The difference is, the F-35 goes operational in less than 1 month. And it CAN do it all. I look for the T-50 to go into production in the year 2025 or thereabouts. It was 20 years behind the F-22 so do the math. 20 years from the time it was first started. It started around 2003 so add 20 years to that. So the earliest would be 2023 but 2025 is a more likely time.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

The low and slow plane is not the aggressor...it is the target.dogfight 101

The bird flying fat dumb and happy sure ain't going to be the agressor. Now you are trying to force the US Fighters to get sucked into the strong points of the enemy. We stopped doing that by the end of Vietnam. It's not going to be a gunfight in the opening rounds. It's going to be an Aim-120 game with the other side getting blooded first. How bad it's hard to tell because, unlike you, my crystal ball is at the cleaners. AFter the good stuff is spent by both sides, it's going to be back to the Gen 3 and 4 Aircraft and at that point, the best Gen 4 is still the F-15. I learned that during a Wargame when all the good stuff (at that time the F-15 was used up along with the F-4, F-14 and the F-16. The other side didn't fare any better. Both sides ended up with Attack AC being used as fighters. And the A-10 didn't dare cross the english channel due to the SU7 waiting for it. The A-7 and A-4 was still around. The older Attack birds won by just being more numerous on both sides.

You have no idea on the deaths of both sides in their shiny new fighters. Keep it up much longer and we will be throwing rocks at each other.

Obviously you need to go back from the beginning of the thread cause your bs has been addressed multiple times

I am sure that you need to hear what the Russians turned out about the T-50. It's interesting as all get out. Just click on the link below.
All about Russia's Newest Advanced Stealth Fighter - Documentary

The tell of the first real airframe (without the proper engines and devoid of most of the avionics) flew in 2009. You talk about the F-35 trying to do it all. Well, watch that documentary and see another bird that is being designed to replace the Mig-29, all the Su-3X series and even the ground attack birds. The Russians are so tight over funding that they have no choice but to put it all in one basket and even to con India into helping. Right now, it's the boondoggle that is having the same problems the F-35 has had in the past. The difference is, the F-35 goes operational in less than 1 month. And it CAN do it all. I look for the T-50 to go into production in the year 2025 or thereabouts. It was 20 years behind the F-22 so do the math. 20 years from the time it was first started. It started around 2003 so add 20 years to that. So the earliest would be 2023 but 2025 is a more likely time.

It sure got quiet all of a sudden. I guess he doesn't like the Russian facts by the Russians brought into play. The F-22 didn't break the Russian bank, the F-35 has. I am sure he is a Reagan fan. It's right out of Reagan's Starwars playbook.

 

[vegas]

I never claimed the PAK-FA was better than the F-22. Far, FAR from it. The F-22 is the best air superiority fighter in the world and will remain so for decades. It is ridiculous that we have abandoned production on that aircraft in favor of the F-35.

My point is this is no longer WWII technology where you could adapt a single airframe to a multitude of roles such as the Mosquito, or the P-38. Today, when you try and make an airframe able to do all things, it does none of them as well as a dedicated airframe. I actually had an opportunity to talk to one of the test pilots of the F-35 at this last Tailhook, and while his answers were necessarily vague as regards performance, some things did become apparent.

Actually, we have been adapting a single airframe/aircraft to a multitude of roles.

The F-15 was originally intended for air-air and now we have the E Strike Eagle version. Same with the F-16. Same with the F-4. Even the Navy's Tomcat tried to be the 'Bombcat' and it turned out to have potential. In short, just about every fighter platform we had, we tried to see how far we can make that platform do more than just one role. We wanted jacks-of-all-trades and very few masters-of-one.

It will not ever be able to do as good a job in the CAS role as the current A-10.

It can't compete with the F-22 in the air superiority role.

It can definitely replace the AV-8B (and is superior to it in all categories) but at the cost per unit I would rather have an upgraded version of that aircraft, and in much larger numbers.

Continuing what I said above, instead of making a completed design do multi-role multi-missions after the fact, the F-35 was designed from paper to BE multi-role multi-missions capable.

Take a look at the 'old' Navy, for example. With the 'old' Navy, a carrier would sail with up to six platforms: F-14, F-18, A-6, Hawkeye, Viking, and helos. With the 'new' Navy, there is the F-18, Hawkeye, and helos. One does not need to be a logistics or HR expert to see the differences. Even with our national wealth and military budget, we cannot afford the 'old' Navy and the Navy knew it.

Again, we have always tried to make as many jacks-of-all-trades as possible, and very few masters-of-one. So the issue is about raising the bar of those trades and that is what the F-35 is supposed to do. Precision munitions give us the Small Diameter Bomb (SDB) and eventually there will be smaller and more accurate bombs, which will give the F-35 the same punch as the F-15 Strike Eagle in situations where low RCS is less important. The A-10 is in a class by itself in CAS the same way the SR-71 is in recon, so there is no legitimate comparison here. Maybe we can make an institutional change to allow the Army the authority to fly fixed wings and give the A-10 to the Army, if the Army wanted it.

The F-35 is not supposed to compete against the F-22 in air superiority but if we can raise the bar of air superiority a little bit higher for a multi-roles multi-missions platform, we can do it with the F-35 in situations where the F-22 is not available, such as our allies who cannot afford to develop their own versions of the F-22.

An upgraded Harrier ? How extensive of an upgrade before we might as well design a 'Harrier II' ? And how much would this 'Harrier II' be in terms of program development and per unit cost ? Fly-by-wire flight control is pretty much the norm today so we can expect this 'Harrier II' to have one. The weight savings over a mechanical-hydraulics FCS is definite but that does not equate to being less expensive. We will need a new engine. This 'Harrier II' will need a better radar as well. How far should we go ?

Like it or not, the F-35 is inevitable, maybe not in this version, but a jack-of-all-trades from scratch is inevitable.

 

[vegas]

The radar is a advanced AESA system that is the equivalent of our best.

Not likely.

Russia's entry into AESA is recent. Before that, they were fielding the passive ESA technology. But even if the Russians managed to steal American AESA technology, that does not mean they can manufacture the components to the same miniaturization and quality level.

Not only that, there is the software side of it.

The main advantage the AESA system have over the PESA system is that the AESA system offers true multi-modes multi-operations capability. Everything else, from PESA to the planar to the classical concave dish, have only pseudo multi-modes capability.

With the AESA system, the main array can be virtually divided into several smaller arrays and each sub-array can perform its own beam shaping and create unique pulse characteristics for true multiple modes operations. Volume search should have different pulse characteristics than track, which should have different pulse characteristics than boresight. The entire process falls under (keyword search) sub-array partitioning and choreography software.

Looking Inside Scanned-Array Radar Signal Processing

...allows the radar to do things that are physically impossible with a conventional antenna, such as changing the beam direction instantaneously, having multiple antenna patterns for transmitting and receiving simultaneously, or even subdividing the array into multiple antenna arrays and performing multiple functions—say, searching for targets, tracking a target, and following terrain—simultaneously.

So while the Russians may have the base AESA technology, whether indigenous or stolen or both, inferior quality manufacturing will render any software sophistication inapplicable.

Keep in mind that there was once the military aviation boogie-man was the MIG-25 that got the Americans all nervous, especially when it was claimed that that Foxbat's radar was so powerful that it could achieve burn-through against ECM. Then when we finally got our hands on the Foxbat via the defection of Viktor Belenko to Japan, we found out the Foxbat radar was basically junk. Yes, it was powerful enough to achieve burn-through, but the overall system was so poorly designed that it could offer its pilot only target general location, not airspeed, altitude, and heading. It was up to the pilot to monitor the scope to see the target representation moving from sweep to sweep to know the target is moving.

The Russians maybe good or even great aerodynamicists, but when it comes to avionics, they are still at least one generation behind US.

 

[westwall]

The radar is a advanced AESA system that is the equivalent of our best.

Not likely.

Russia's entry into AESA is recent. Before that, they were fielding the passive ESA technology. But even if the Russians managed to steal American AESA technology, that does not mean they can manufacture the components to the same miniaturization and quality level.

Not only that, there is the software side of it.

The main advantage the AESA system have over the PESA system is that the AESA system offers true multi-modes multi-operations capability. Everything else, from PESA to the planar to the classical concave dish, have only pseudo multi-modes capability.

With the AESA system, the main array can be virtually divided into several smaller arrays and each sub-array can perform its own beam shaping and create unique pulse characteristics for true multiple modes operations. Volume search should have different pulse characteristics than track, which should have different pulse characteristics than boresight. The entire process falls under (keyword search) sub-array partitioning and choreography software.

Looking Inside Scanned-Array Radar Signal Processing

...allows the radar to do things that are physically impossible with a conventional antenna, such as changing the beam direction instantaneously, having multiple antenna patterns for transmitting and receiving simultaneously, or even subdividing the array into multiple antenna arrays and performing multiple functions—say, searching for targets, tracking a target, and following terrain—simultaneously.

So while the Russians may have the base AESA technology, whether indigenous or stolen or both, inferior quality manufacturing will render any software sophistication inapplicable.

Keep in mind that there was once the military aviation boogie-man was the MIG-25 that got the Americans all nervous, especially when it was claimed that that Foxbat's radar was so powerful that it could achieve burn-through against ECM. Then when we finally got our hands on the Foxbat via the defection of Viktor Belenko to Japan, we found out the Foxbat radar was basically junk. Yes, it was powerful enough to achieve burn-through, but the overall system was so poorly designed that it could offer its pilot only target general location, not airspeed, altitude, and heading. It was up to the pilot to monitor the scope to see the target representation moving from sweep to sweep to know the target is moving.

The Russians maybe good or even great aerodynamicists, but when it comes to avionics, they are still at least one generation behind US.

You know the tech is stolen, or the Clintons gave it to them years ago, however they got it, they have the advantage that they didn't have to spend time developing it. I'll grant you it's not as good as our best, but it's better than any of the rest of the worlds. One generation? I don't think so. I think they are probably 10 years max behind us.