Bharat Rakshak

Consortium of Indian Defence Websites
It is currently 20 Aug 2014 21:22

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours




Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 4014 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55 ... 101  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: 04 Oct 2011 21:15 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 10697
Location: Illini Nation
Austin wrote:
NRao wrote:
RuAF expects to get 75 PAK-FANs by 2020. Considering their predicament (with all due respect to GDP and the like) I am fairly confident that the RuAF could not have made ends meet.


You can read about official plans for RuAF here ( you will have to use translator )
http://lenta.ru/news/2010/12/01/fighters/

Quote:
I suspect that this deal mirrors the MKI to a great extent, where Sukhoi - more than Russia - is the partner. Sounds strange - granted. But, I feel that India will get more out of this deal than that of the MKI.

Most of the PAK-FA for RuAF and IAF will only start coming in the beginning of next decade only a small percentage will hit both AF this decade , hence the numbers of PAK-FA purchased till 2020 is only 70 for RuAF and for IAF it wont be any bigger as the aircraft will only complete its FOC by 2016 and for FGFA much later.


No problems with most, if not all, what you post.

My reluctance to believe in these numbers is based more on what I read about the con-jointed twins are doing in the political arena. I feel Putin is more concerned about his own survival and building - for a lack of a better word at the moment - an empire of sorts. I do not think he has what is best for Russia in mind. It does not mean that he cannot triple the Def budget. It could/would mean that he may be unable to sustain the support in the longer run and therefore have implication that are undesirable. I think even the decisions based on economics are to support their own political end - IMHO.

P Chitkara wrote:
If the AF is looking for a smaller 5th Gen from Russia - as suggested by some members, what direction will the AMCA take, where will it fit in?


It was reported when previous CAS Naik visited Russia a few months ago. It is not something suggested on BR by any member. Just wanted to point that out.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 04 Oct 2011 21:53 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 11104
NRao wrote:
My reluctance to believe in these numbers is based more on what I read about the con-jointed twins are doing in the political arena. I feel Putin is more concerned about his own survival and building - for a lack of a better word at the moment - an empire of sorts. I do not think he has what is best for Russia in mind. It does not mean that he cannot triple the Def budget. It could/would mean that he may be unable to sustain the support in the longer run and therefore have implication that are undesirable. I think even the decisions based on economics are to support their own political end - IMHO.


Thats like saying if Rahul Gandhi becomes the PM tomorrow the defence plans of MOD will change.

Those plans are based on long term planning and they don't change with change of government , heck with Putin at helm it will simply get more support. In the end defence budget its all budget deficit , debt ....as long as you can control those you can spend ......else you will end up with a situation where US or Europe is in


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Oct 2011 03:01 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 10697
Location: Illini Nation
Austin,

Let it slide. We are not on the same page. No use continuing.

Thx.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Oct 2011 06:15 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 05 Jun 2008 11:03
Posts: 1525
Location: Gora Paki
Abduls,

recent Air intl. has some good info on maks 2011 and on ze pak fa will load it up tomorrow.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Oct 2011 16:32 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Posts: 24399
Location: NowHere
Quote:
With regard to the Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA), being jointly designed and developed by India and Russia, both sides noted that the first stage of the preliminary design contract has been successfully completed and the second stage of the PD Contract is to be finalised before September, 2012.
http://www.bharatrakshak.com/NEWS/newsrf.php?newsid=15786

Two stages of preliminary design? interesting. anyone can elaborate?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Oct 2011 09:45 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00
Posts: 2678
@Austin, regarding single seater/double seater for PAKFA

1. It is mentioned by previous Air Chief that PAK-FA/FGFA will be a swing role fighter not multi-role.
2. With NCW gaining prominence, every aircraft involved in the mission acts as a fused unit, reducing the work load.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 12 Oct 2011 09:01 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 11104
Interview with Yevhen Marchuk chief designer and director NPO Saturn ( use translator )

link


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 12 Oct 2011 09:22 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 06 Feb 2009 07:46
Posts: 1456
Location: GSLV++
^^^ Nice article. Thanks! I like the calm and confident attitude. I hope we see the fruits of their labour soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 19 Oct 2011 20:25 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 11104
Item 117 (AL-41F1) Engine - Fiery Heart of the PAK-FA fighter (with english subtitles)



Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 19 Oct 2011 21:47 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 23 Jan 2011 11:24
Posts: 306
Austin wrote:
Thats like saying if Rahul Gandhi becomes the PM tomorrow the defence plans of MOD will change.

Those plans are based on long term planning and they don't change with change of government , heck with Putin at helm it will simply get more support. In the end defence budget its all budget deficit , debt ....as long as you can control those you can spend ......else you will end up with a situation where US or Europe is in

(Maybe not applicable to case specific, but in general..)

In my viewpoint its the reverse, political leadership and political situation guides the defense stance of a nation.

Research is a long term process one cannot fast forward that. What to research on is a completely politically driven process. With change in political situation people tend to drop few things of the priority list and put on new things.

For example congress had a stance that India will not go for a full nuclear test, and I don't think any ten years plan included a nuclear test in 1998. But Vajpayee decided to go for it and India became a nuclear powered state.

Vision of the leader is not a thing to be underestimated. That always leaves it's mark.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 26 Oct 2011 02:02 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 01 Feb 2009 23:19
Posts: 1907
I came across this excellent animated video of PAK-FA. Its worth a watch.
http://vimeo.com/30889105


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 26 Oct 2011 21:30 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 28 Apr 2011 11:27
Posts: 345
Boreas wrote:
Austin wrote:
Thats like saying if Rahul Gandhi becomes the PM tomorrow the defence plans of MOD will change.


Was just reading a post on BR itself where Rahul Gandhi was quoted as saying in parliment that India needs to start expanding its horizons as far as military might and reach is concerned and start expanding its sphere of influence.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Oct 2011 16:49 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Posts: 767
coming from the future Prime Minister of India, thats good to know :wink:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Oct 2011 20:29 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 27 Oct 2011 18:01
Posts: 28
P Chitkara wrote:
If the AF is looking for a smaller 5th Gen from Russia - as suggested by some members, what direction will the AMCA take, where will it fit in?


well, I don't know if this has been said, but the Mikoyan LMFS may be probable for a small, single pilot fighter.
I don't think it can hold up the Air Superiority reins though...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan_LMFS
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Oct 2011 23:32 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 01 Feb 2009 23:19
Posts: 1907
^^
According to reliable Russian posters in various forums, LMFS project is dead. So, no hope from that front.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 28 Oct 2011 02:24 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 27 Oct 2011 18:01
Posts: 28
Gaur wrote:
^^
According to reliable Russian posters in various forums, LMFS project is dead. So, no hope from that front.


oh. :(
I would have liked to see how that would have turned out...

sorry!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Nov 2011 08:10 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Posts: 4086
Location: Frontier India : Nemo me impune lacessit
PAK FA performed 100th flight on 3 Nov


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Nov 2011 13:07 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 32451
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
sooner we get the key deliverables into the pakfa the better
- new 5th gen engines
- side looking radars
- main and wing root radars
- new joint air dominance aam to outshoot the amraam-D and C7
- new joint wvr cagefight missile to replace the r73mk2.
- a new stealthy ARM of long legs


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Nov 2011 13:44 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26
Posts: 1360
Location: Atop Orthanc, cursing, "Damn it where are those backfires??"
^ I think some of these are already ready or v.close - the ARM for example (KH-58ushke?). And possibly newer versions of the SRAAM/LRAAM.

One mijjile i'd really like to see in the IAF soon is the VLRAAM type - KS-172/R33. Now that would be a game changer.

CM


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Nov 2011 14:21 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 11104
Cain Marko wrote:
One mijjile i'd really like to see in the IAF soon is the VLRAAM type - KS-172/R33. Now that would be a game changer.

CM


The KS-172 is probably a dead project but you can expect the RVV-BD/R-37 will soon find its way to the MKI , the PAK-FA will have a new VLRAAM as the RVV-BD wont fit the internal bay.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Nov 2011 04:51 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 05 May 2007 01:20
Posts: 261
Location: ghaziabad
Austin wrote:
Cain Marko wrote:
One mijjile i'd really like to see in the IAF soon is the VLRAAM type - KS-172/R33. Now that would be a game changer.

CM


The KS-172 is probably a dead project but you can expect the RVV-BD/R-37 will soon find its way to the MKI , the PAK-FA will have a new VLRAAM as the RVV-BD wont fit the internal bay.


RVV-BD is the only long range awacs killer missile in russia.i gues our mkis will get them.pak-fa will initially rely on rvv-sd and rvvmd before moving on to newer missiles


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Nov 2011 05:00 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 05 May 2007 01:20
Posts: 261
Location: ghaziabad
param.karandikar wrote:
P Chitkara wrote:
If the AF is looking for a smaller 5th Gen from Russia - as suggested by some members, what direction will the AMCA take, where will it fit in?


well, I don't know if this has been said, but the Mikoyan LMFS may be probable for a small, single pilot fighter.
I don't think it can hold up the Air Superiority reins though...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan_LMFS
Image


drdo,ada,hal can start developing amca with mig's help. i think we can easily expediate the amca by integrating a number of already existing subsystems. drdo can take their time in developing the indigenous stuff,they can take as much as time as possible :D .but that should not be at the cost of iaf. for amca we can initially integrate tvc versions of ej-200 or ge-f414 or rd-33mk. for modern cockpit we can use the COCKPIT NG solution from elbit. for hmd we can use bae hmss for eurofighter.iaf wants an indigenous aesa,so we can take helf from selex,eads and iai in creating a good aesa with swashplate wide field of regard stuff. ew ,jammmers rwr,mission computers ,towed decoys we can jointly develop with israeli companies like rafael,iai,elisra etc.,,for stealth we can take help from boeing (which is desperate to provide stealthy solutions with its super hornet international roadmap and f-15 silent eagle). thus by 2021 we can have amca in service.
let the drdo guys take their time


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Nov 2011 07:16 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 32451
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
the only example I know of clients being allowed to install own systems on american fighters is probably F-16Sufa where some Elisra ECM kit was put in. request to use EL-2032 was denied.

so no mix-n-match is possible if certain systems are denied or subject to intrusive monitoring. LM/Boeing themselves will find alternative kit, qualify it and use that for such clients.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Nov 2011 12:40 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 11104
While we are at PAK-FA there is an interesting revelation of information by US congress on F-22 perhaps the closest rival of FGFA/PAK-FA , interesting becuase it revels information LM wont tell , there was an F-16 versus F-22 duel where the F-22 was shot down , while I was aware of F-18 duel and win , F-16 is new.

Perhaps the key reason why the program was quitely stopped although it was touted as silver bullet or is it too high tech to be a viable and practical war machine ?

But it makes a good read to avoid pitfalls for our programs.

Quote:
Winslow T. Wheeler and Pierre M. Sprey on F-22

Study after study show that pilot skill dominates all other factors in winning or
losing air battles. The F-22's maintenance costs have the Air Force to
slash in-air pilot training. In the 1970s, fighter pilots were getting
20 to 30 hours a month of air combat training. Today, F-22 pilots get
10 to 12 hours. High tech theorists claim flying can be replaced by
ground simulators. Experience teaches that simulators can be used for
cockpit procedures training but, by misrepresenting in-air reality,
they reinforce tactics that could get pilots killed in real combat.

The Air Force, Lockheed, and their congressional boosters tout the
F-22 as the silver bullet of air combat. The F-22's so-called stealth
may hurt more than it helps. In truth, against short wavelength
radars, the F-22 is hard to detect only over a very narrow band of
viewing angles. Worse, there are thousands of existing long range,
long wavelength radars that can detect the F-22 from several hundred
miles away at all angles. Believers in stealth's invisibility should
ask the pilots of the two - not one, as commonly believed - stealthy
F-117 bombers taken out of action by old Russian radar-directed
defense systems in the 1999 Kosovo air war. Moreover, a new
whistleblower scandal is presenting evidence that the F-22's stealth
skin has failed to meet its stealth requirements because it has been
badly fabricated and dishonestly tested.


The vaunted invincibility of the F-22 founders on two incurable flaws:
First, the plane's so-called "low probability of intercept" radar may
now be easily detected, thanks to the proliferation of spread spectrum
technology in cell phones and laptops.
That creates an environment
where, if the F-22 pilot turns on his radar, he announces his presence
over hundreds of miles. Even better for the enemy, the radar makes an
unmistakable beacon for opposing missiles.

Second, when combat forces F-22 pilots to turn off radars, they'll
find themselves forced into a close-in, maneuvering fight. Compromised
by stealth and heavy radar electronics, the plane's agility, short
range missiles, and guns are nothing special - as one of us observed
at Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada when an F-16 "shot down" an F-22 in
exercises.


As for the plane's advertised ability to cruise supersonically the
F-22's low fuel capacity (27% of takeoff weight, only two thirds of
what's needed for combat-useful supersonic endurance in enemy
airspace) reduces this to an air show trick.
Why the big fuel
shortfall? To make room for stealth technologies and radar
electronics.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Nov 2011 13:03 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 32451
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
looks like the pakfa design has managed some things better with benefit of observing the F22 issues in hindsight - two tandem internal bays for heavy caliber missiles and should have a bigger fuel fraction of takeoff weight for persistence mashallah.

btw american fanboys went batnuts at gunsight and OSF footage taken by a rafale of a f22 during al dhafra exercise....anyone who says they can survive against the f22 and track it is automatically a huge liar!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2540567/posts


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Nov 2011 13:09 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 11104
Singha wrote:
looks like the pakfa design has managed some things better with benefit of observing the F22 issues in hindsight - two tandem internal bays for heavy caliber missiles and should have a bigger fuel fraction of takeoff weight for persistence mashallah.


Strangely enough the PAK-FA is a smaller fighter then Su-35 but carries more internal fuel as reveled by Sergei Bogdan its test pilot.

Quote:
btw american fanboys went batnuts at gunsight and OSF footage taken by a rafale of a f22 during al dhafra exercise....anyone who says they can survive against the f22 and track it is automatically a huge liar!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2540567/posts


If the single engine F-16 can get it the twin engine rafale with much better sensor fusion and superior flying qualities will get her as well.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Nov 2011 14:34 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 28 Apr 2011 11:27
Posts: 345
param.karandikar wrote:
Gaur wrote:
^^
According to reliable Russian posters in various forums, LMFS project is dead. So, no hope from that front.


oh. :(
I would have liked to see how that would have turned out...

sorry!



Wouldnt be a bad idea for India to tie up with MIG for the AMCA. MIG probably has a ton of research info with regards to a 5th gen fighter. It would at least help to kick start the AMCA and bring down timelines and cost.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Nov 2011 15:58 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 32451
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
PAkfa has to be a pragmatic product that interworks with legacy networks and fighters as well.

read somewhere the much hyped F22 zero-emission directional laser datalink works only with other raptors, so they cannot use that to exchange data with any other a/c in the usaf lol.

apart from ofcourse high cost, and a lack of suitability to the mud moving mission there might be other hidden gems as alluded to in the Austin article as to why numbers were so drastically cut from 800 to 200.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Nov 2011 19:39 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 32451
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
1000s of man hrs spent on the topic of pakfa compressor blades being visible.

but the losing contender for JSF Boeing X-32 had this huge mouth which would certainly make some of the blades visible in the center. its weapons bays were along the sides rather than bottom (on current LM JSF)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mikelynaug ... /lightbox/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Nov 2011 20:11 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Posts: 24399
Location: NowHere
The guided fan blade design angling to deflect the radar waves in the direction away from the source is interesting.. how ever the focus could be where the re-deflected wave is hitting and guided further on is the major aspect of the engine housing design.

I don't a major issue with radar deflections as much as IR emission issues for the pak-fa from the rear. I hope they have advanced on the passive scanning and detection as well, which is where raptor kills with a short burst scan + lock and disappear.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Nov 2011 22:14 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 28 Apr 2011 11:27
Posts: 345
Singha wrote:
1000s of man hrs spent on the topic of pakfa compressor blades being visible.

but the losing contender for JSF Boeing X-32 had this huge mouth which would certainly make some of the blades visible in the center. its weapons bays were along the sides rather than bottom (on current LM JSF)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mikelynaug ... /lightbox/


The X-32 was supposed to be stealthier but less maneuverable than the winner wasnt it?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Nov 2011 22:40 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Posts: 24399
Location: NowHere
yes, but just like in mmrca deal, the usaf chose the one that is more agile, turn rates, and still carries all those stealth characteristically. sope, the lm became the raptor.

furthermore, I guess boeing was not without problems in terms of vtol and other issues.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Nov 2011 16:14 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 32451
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
maybe the X-32 hide the engine faces behind the side weapons bays and used a Y-splitter in the center to push air in. also the chin intake is very far fwd vs typical ones like F16/tiffy and slightly angled up. this might contain any reflected radar waves.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Nov 2011 18:52 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 22 Jan 2011 08:04
Posts: 41
Check this blog discussion out on Col. Ajai Shukla's blog (BROADSWORD) on his relentless crusade against the MMRCA and for the JSF program.

http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=8726844009873922462&postID=7468797475848058112

If you scroll down to Col. Shukla's response on "1 November 2011 13:04" to some of the reader comments, you will read this:

Quote:
Firstly… why do I not mention that India is engaged in a partnership with Russia to produce a “fifth generation” PAK-FA? Simple answer! The PAK-FA is not a fifth generation fighter, and will never be unless India funds every paisa of the Russian R&D that is needed to make it so. I happen to know a great deal about the PAK-FA programme. And you’ll have to wait to read about it, which I promise will happen soon.


And then, again, another comment from Col. Shukla on "2 November 2011 08:03" on his take on FGFA vs. J-20:

Quote:
And for those who say that the FGFA will be superior to the J-20… I can only say that they must have a crystal ball that I don’t. None of us can say with any confidence that the FGFA will be superior to the J-20. And, looking at the trajectories of Russia on the one hand, and China on the other, I am willing to bet a magnum of champagne that the J-20 (regardless of where it is today) will be a superior product to the FGFA in the 2020s. The Russians simply don’t have the will any longer.


1. What exactly constitutes a 5th Gen fighter? Is there even a definition set in stone about these generation allocations?
2. All the gurus and enthusiasts on BR might want to throw some light on Col. Shukla's claims that PAK-FA is going to be a 4th Gen fighter by default!
3. How does China, a country that still uses Russian engines and radars in their current 4th generation projects, suddenly overtake Russia in 5th generation engine, avionics, weapons and stealth? (No matter how much is spent by China on R&D, theft and reverse engineering).
4. Who on BR is willing to side with Col. Shukla and bet their magnum of champaign that the J-20 will outclass our FGFA?
5. I am really looking forward to the Colonel's promised blog on the PAK-FA in the near future.

Whatever the case, Shuklaji just gave this thread a lot of fodder to ruminate on :mrgreen: haha


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Nov 2011 19:27 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Posts: 24399
Location: NowHere
if one considers raptor, then:-
1. all aspect stealth [RF, IR, Optical? - is there a paint that reflects the color of the surrounding light?]
2. super cruise
3. advanced sensor package including passive and active lpi, with mission computing and awacs integration.
4. internal weapons or weapons designed per 1 above.

the above should match raptor.. of course, generations can be different considering the previous generation features. in the sense, your 6 could me my 5 or reverse.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Nov 2011 21:19 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 32451
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
er I had posted gun camera footage taken by rafale in DACT with F22.
F22 is kind a one trick pony - if its initial amraam shot does not work, it will come in range of enemy radar and aam shots too. both the e-canards should have its measure once they can track / see it as the rafale did.
and it also talks to other ponies of its same breed onlee - does not have the laser data exchange etc with F-15 / F-16 and other non blue blooded 'donkeys'
some of its brochure specs are not yet there due to fund cuts and delay pushbacks but fanboys use guerilla mkting to refer them as present...some capabilites are unlikely to be ever funded.

JSF's stealth story is good looking only when using a bunch of 250lb SDB bombs, 2 x 2000lb internal carriage of PGM is probably not a huge leveller....


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Nov 2011 21:33 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24
Posts: 1693
Location: Been there, still doing it
Rumor has it that the X-32 lost because the AF/MC/USN brass thought it was 'ugly' and they did not want to be seen flying it. :)

On the Raptor being a one trick pony, I remember reading F-15 pilots saying theY could see the F-22 with their own eyes but their sensors and weapons could not. Go figure.

Added later: Re the Wheeler and Sprey article. If they are right, the only logical explanation for the US refusing to export the F-22 would be that they don't want anyone to know how useless it is...:)


Last edited by Cosmo_R on 07 Nov 2011 21:43, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Nov 2011 21:38 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 31 Aug 2011 10:39
Posts: 1256
Cosmo_R wrote:

On the Raptor being a one trick pony, I remember reading F-15 pilots saying the could see the F-22 with their own eyes but their sensors and weapons could not. Go figure


The TFTA F-15 lacks L-band radar :wink:

From the F-22's performance in air shows / simulated combats so far, except for the Khanate fighter, every other fighter (such as Rafale) seems to get the better of it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Nov 2011 21:53 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 11104
In reality the Stealth Advantage of F-22 ( or for that matter PAK-FA ) is in the ability to fire the first BVR Shot and using Supercruise Kinematics to its advantage , thats the best they can hope for in an early kill.

Once the merge happens and it ends in 1 vs many ,many vs many or 1 vs 1 , it will boil down to superior aerodynamic performance ,kinematics ,T/W and supermanouverability and Sensor Fusion and Weapons . Stealth will offer almost very little or no advantage , as any decent modern radar ,EO/IIR/IRST will be able to see stealth fighter as Rafale camera/EO footage shows. Any aircraft that has these advantage will win at the end of day.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Nov 2011 21:59 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 11104
Cosmo_R wrote:
On the Raptor being a one trick pony, I remember reading F-15 pilots saying theY could see the F-22 with their own eyes but their sensors and weapons could not. Go figure.


Thats comical , So the kills of F-18,F-16 , Rafale against F-22 is because the pilots could see it and sensor could not.

Probably they need to hire future pilots with the best vision possible as thats the only weapon that can effectively deal with stealth as sensors cannot see them :rotfl:

Oh I forgot the kills of Zoltan Dani against F-117 using old SA-3 SAM and radars in a mid night sortie , I guess he used his eye to aim at F-117 and kill it :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 4014 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55 ... 101  Next

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Feedfetcher, hecky, Parikshit, RajKM, Yashu and 41 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group