pointless upload....if you think that any plane can get close enough to an F-22, you are very, very mistaken. The F-22 does not need to ´be am airshow aerobatic plane. Its weapons systems and advanced seek and destroy electronics will take out anything it wants without ever being seen. So. if you believe that " dog fighting" with a Raptor is actually a thing? Then please do more research and educate yourself on the F-22. most of which is still classified but some of which is explained in layman's terms. These SU´s are great airshow demonstrators, but they lack the stratification of 5th generation fighters.
It depresses me to have to read through all these comments, but hey, I might as well add my own opinion right? So, what I've been hearing is some terrible talk about america and russia, I live in America, and I love it here. While I've never been to Russia, I'm sure it's a beautiful country with very kind people. I hate hearing bias against both and I wish we could focus on our simularities instead of differences. So, something that I have found as a flaw in russian fighter's thrust vectoring is that the engines are so far outside of the aircraft, and this I know will definitely upset the angle of attack the airctaft has in a turn, incfeasing the risk of a stall. But as a plus, the engines vector with yaw, wheras the F22 can only move it's engines up and down. The raptor has a computer that allows the pilot to stay in control in even the most drastic of manuvers, giving it a huge advantage in a slow (or fast) turn fight at close range. Also having stealth technology is definitley an advantage. As for people saying that "radars from world war 2 can detect them" are right... technically. The raptor uses a system of stealth called planform alignment, which aligns parts of the plane together, so radio waves bounce off of it, away from the detector. To thwart this, a very wide reciever can pick up part of the reflection, or a reciever off to the side can pick up the reflection, yet these radars are large and can be easily destroyed, also, radars like those on the pak fa or su 33 will not be able to pick up the reflection. But at close range, heat seeking missles will still work. Also, people saying the program is dead are wrong, we still have the equipment in place to produce more should we need them. (although I hope we never will) The pak fa is a generation 5 fighter, and in fact, is quite beautiful. yet it still has flaws. While it has a huge range, I'm a little worried about it's engine power and effectiveness. While we are on the topic of engines, they aernt stealthy. Which is a huge drawback as SAM sites it passes will be able to target it and destroy it. This gives me a little insight on how the aircraft will fight in combat. I picture it moving into enemy territory and clearing the airspace of SAM sites and engaging of threats that can target it, then high-tailing it back to base before it is attacked. Also, since it doesn't appear to be being produced in large numbers, I have the feeling that it has a large flaw we haven't seen yet. But in comparison to most fighters of today, it definitely is a force to be reckoned with. The su 33/27 aircraft are strong, powerful fighters, but they are definitley aging and it seems that they definitley need to be replaced. Their airframe was also designed in a time where dogfighting still was possibility. All in all, the US and Russia are both powerful, freedom loving democracies, and I hope someday we can set aside our cold-war past and move foreward tward peace. I ask all responses to this comment to please be polite, as there is no reason to get angry over something someone you never will meet has to say. Thank you for taking the time to hear my opinion.
Every one of these videos seems to generate a comment section Cold War reenactment. Can we just agree that these are all some sexy pieces of machinery?
On top of that the glue and paint on f-22 is toxic and it can not stay in the rain because it damages the stealth coating. The f-35 is also non - functional, as it cracks at super sonic speed and if struck by lightning the fuel may explode. The su-35 has got a good record for agility and stealth detection , this means the f-22 and f-35 are pointless.
don't you know you can grow moss on the brain listening to Racheal Maddow and all of those other lib dum shits...The F22 can't take the rain... Amazing people believe stuff like that...
To quote Stormsquad: "When it comes to maneuverability, i still think the F-22 has a clear upper hand against all Russian fighters." Oh really? Yawn. Each and every maneuver we saw the F22 perform we have seen being performed by Russian jets for decades and decades already. It is sad when a person tries to convey a look of neutrality, while everybody with half a working brain can see how that person's opinions are politically tainted. The only reasons why any westerner would view western jets as being more agile and maneuverable than Russian jets is pure ignorance and political bias. How about trying to be honest with yourselves for a change?
And I can see as usual, you didn't read my comment completely, there is a reasong and I have provided my explanaition as to how its true. Like I said, having 3D TVC doen't mean you are more manaeverable and let me just say that Thrust vectoring is not the holy grail of maneuverability. Lets go back to the basics of maneuverability. An aircraft maneuvers by deflecting air using its normal control surfaces (flaps, horizontal and vertical stabilizers, ailerons, etc.) Now the effectivity of the control surfaces depends on the amount of air being deflected. Too little and the aircraft won't be able to maximize the turn, Too much and the inertia from the aircraft will be too heavy for the aircraft to make a tight turn. The amount of air being deflected is directly related to the aircraft's speed or energy. This is why in the 1960s Col. John Boyd devised his E-M or energy maneuverability theory. Basically a pilot must know where he can find the "sweet spot" that his aircraft will turn best. That sweet spot is called "corner speed" Most modern fighters have a corner speed at around Mach 0.85. This is where they can sustain the most number of Gs or have the best turn rate. However after repetitive maneuvering, an aircraft may slow down to well below this corner velocity and loose much of it's turning capability. At extreme slow speeds like mach 0.2-0.5, the control surfaces barley have enough air to deflect to execute tactical maneuvers. This is where thrust vectoring comes into play, it uses the engine's power to point the nose where the pilot wants at those extreme slow speed environments. In the case of the F-35, advances in flight control software and the extra large control surfaces allow it to maneuver at extreme slow speeds without thrust vectoring. Not as well as the F-22 or the Su-35 perhaps but much better than an F-16 or a Typhoon which are mostly intended for high speed fights
Takao Kancolle And how exactly can you prove that? :D According to you, you simply hate the plane but have no knowledge about it, so the next best thing to do is attack the poster cause you can't attack the post, wow that is so mature :D
Stormsquad simple its because i have NEVER SEEN IT IN COMBAT AND PROVE ITSELF NOR HAVE I SEEN IT MANUVER LIKE IT HAS BEEN PROMISED shit thats on paper is just there, but if it can't result on what its said on paper ITS NOT WORTH RESEARCHING
John Shackleton However, it is impossible to perform a maneuver in an F-22 that will either over-stress the airframe OR cause the plane to stall. The F-22 simply will override the pilot and not permit them to do something that is too risky. The Sukois, in the hands of good pilots can perform every bit as good as the F-22, clearly...but they don't have stealth and they don't have the AI on board to control what the pilot can and can't do. Although, stealth for the most part is a scam.
When it comes to maneuverability, i still think the F-22 has a clear upper hand against all Russian fighters. And knowing that it does not go into combat with drag penalties from weapons carriage only increases its advantage. The Cobra is an easy maneuver to perform, if one looks at the Raptor's J-turn, its basically a cobra with a hammerhead turn at the end. However the Raptor's Powerloop is quite difficult for any flanker since Flankers have inferior power and their Tc nozzles can only pitch 15 degrees in the Y axis. The F-22s nozzles, though only 2D, can pitch 20 degrees in the Y axis. When comparing stats, the F-22 holds a commanding lead against even the best Flanker variant. F-22 vs Su-35 F-22 Empty weight:43,340 lbs Fuel(40%):8,133 lbs Ordinance: 4xAim-120: 1340 lbs 2xAim-9: 376 lbs 480 rounds: 720 lbs Total weapons load: 2436 lbs Combat Load: 53,909 lbs Thrust: 70,000 lbs TW Ratio: 1.30 Wing Loading:64.18 ________________________________________________________ Su-35 Empty Weight: 40.570 lbs Fuel(40%):10,159 lbs Ordinance: 4xR-77: 1540 lbs 2xR-11: 460 lbs 150 rounds: 450 lbs Total weapons load: 2450 lbs Combat Load: 51,179 lbs Max Thrust: 63,800 lbs TW Ratio: 1.24 Wing Loading: 76.73 The Su-35 is very capable but not in the same class as the Raptor. And this is only in performance, try to compare the F-22's AESA against the Su-35's less advanced and less powerful PESA radar. The Su-35's radar cross section, although reduced is still around 1sq meter. It will be easier to detect than the F-22's 0.0001 sq meter and even against the F-35's 0.001 sq m RCS.
Yes, and in fact largely depends on the skill se pilotov.V particular, when raids on Yugoslavia, the F-117 was shot down just using the complex C-125 3rd battery of the 250th Air Defense Brigade. I do not say much about the C-300 and C-400.
+Сергей Садыков the f-117 was made in the late 70s... and flew the same route for 3 nights in a row.. A mistake, that they capitalized on. Had nothing to do with actually seeing it on radar... Wow people are misinformed.
Maybe the u.s might have more advance technology in the F-22 but as far as mueuverablitiy goes Su-30 is far superior. Su-30 is quicker, it can turn and spin around in seconds. F-22 looks clumsy compared Su-30. Im from the u.s and I'm saying this.
+peaceful harmony The maneuvers you see the Su perform are high bleed maneuvers, ones that would get it killed in a real dogfight. Put it this way, the Mig 35 looks good performing the same maneuvers, right? Well, guess how it did in the MMRCA tender? Not so well. The maneuvers that matter most in an A2A battle are instant, sustained turn rates, the ability to recover from bleed, and top-end speed. The Mig got its tail handed to it. The only area it did well was top speed. The F-16 w/o conformal fuel tanks showed in the tender to be much better. The F-22 tops the Mig in all these areas. In addition, you're not taking into consideration that the Su's carry their ordinance externally. This creates drag and wing weight. It's the reason why when going into battle aircraft drop their fuel tanks so that they can be more maneuverable.
The DMMH/FH as of 2009 is around 10 and at system maturity is required to have around 12 DMMH/FH. The F-22 is not a fully mature aircraft but for right now the F-22 exceeds its expectations and will continue to do so. The whole 30 hours thing just cracks me up.
The Sukhoi's have been around for quite a long time now and have been doing awesome aerial maneuvers at least the 80's. The F-22, although a nice looking aircraft and obviously with a stealthy advantage. It almost a one trick pony. Sukhoi's win hands down imo.
So the variants of the SU 27 that have canards and Thrust vectoring are downgraded versions? GOD GIVE ME STRENGTH. Please, I await your great response which hasn't changed a bit.
The difference is that if you talk to an American pilot that flew a sukhoi he would be astonished because most of our jets aren't capable of such high AOA maneuvers like the sukhoi's but if you were to talk to a Russian pilot about how the F-22 felt he would probably be amazed and say "i had so much control". The reason is yes the flight envelope of a sukhoi is crazy but the F-22 will do it slower and steadier. The F-22 can SUSTAIN a turn higher because its computers help it. just my 2 cents :)
You make no sense, they didn't have enough to maintain them but enough to produce variant after variant. They were test beds which cost more then maintaining as you're working on making old tech into something new. Ill try to explain to you again that lack of maintenance or not the SU cannot out perform U.S jets no matter how much money they had to "maintain" them so they ended up losing maneuverability... Nice logic.
Your absolutely right with that. The Su-35 is as good (probably better) than the F-15E/F and as i remember mudhens had quite a bit of trouble with F-22s before getting a visual lol.
Hey,im not a pilot,closest thing ive come to flying one of these is an electric rc plane.but alot of these flashy manouvers,wouldnt they just make a plane an easy target cause they got to slow down to do them? I mean i dont think a cobra is possible at 700 miles an hour right? I bet alot of this stuff is probably just for airshows,....
+bill smith Missiles are fast but rely on heat signatures for close in.If the plane is highly manuevarable they can avoid lock in by enemy pilot and can escape a launched missile by popping flares and changing their flight direction rapidly thus confusing the missile. maneuvers are mostly used in air to air combat where they are lifesaving.Otherwise we would just strap some hi-tech missiles on an airbus and rely on "stealth" than build billion dollar jet fighters.
you're absolutely right none of this crap would mean dick in a real engagement nowadays.. You must remember that all these Cobra maneuver Russian jet fighters are 4th generation fighters.. In a Beyond visual range game which it would 99.9% be every time a raptor or lightning would shoot these planes down before it could detect them..those are facts..
NOTE;- The raptor was doing an AFTER BURNER TWIST,TURNS AND FLIP, THAT MADE IT LOOK SNAPPIER ,SHOULD THE SUKHOI ENGAGES ITS AFTERBURNERS IN IT'S MANEUVER EXERCISE ,IT WILL SURELY LOOK LIKE SOMETHING FROM OUTSIDE THE UNIVERSE
If the Sukhoi had it's afterburners on and tried those maneuvers, it would put too much stress on the aircraft and risk damaging the aeroframe causing catastrophic failiure. The F22 is designed for an entirely different purpose. If they were to be in "combat", the F22 would take down a sukhoi before it even knew the F22 was in the air. If the sukhoi spotted the f22, it could potentially mimic maneuvers for a short period of time, potentially taking one down if the situation is right. See, the main point I'm making here is they're both ENTIRELY different aircraft. There will be situations on either side where either plane will win. See that's the main goal of flying one of these things, to get yourself into one of those situations where you can't lose, and avoid those where you can't win. Sometimes at the end of the day, the plane doesn't matter that much, even though both are monstrous technological marvels.
I truly do not share that view for one reasons. As ( TRUST to WEIGHT ratio ) is a key factor to determine climb rates in the design of any aircraft especially combat ,so is STRESS PER SQUARE INCH OF MATERIAL a major issue to be resolved when it comes to design of any mach 2 Capable aircraft BUILT or RETROFITTED TRUST VECTORING. Lets all have in mind as well that the sukhoi is designed to be an air superiority 5th generation combat aircraft and not just a flying piece of acrobatic hunk ment for airshows
Saliu Umar You can't even compare these jets. The F22 was designed to kill you before you even knew he was there. That's its upper hand! It doesn't need to get into an unnecessary dogfight. Talking specs on a dogfight that will most likely never happen is just a waste of time! Even Russia knows this, otherwise there wouldn't be a reason for the 166 units [T-50s] they ordered to be built.
Yeah,lets revisit the ( bvr ) scenario once more.To achieve a KILL in this corridor quite a number of factor have to be brought into the equation,first of which is ( 1 ) how does the adversary react before and after i have launched ok. lets just say this,those sukhoi carries ( ACTIVE / PASSIVE SIGNAL SENSOR DEVICES ) which respond to both very high and low frequency signals,so the moment you turn on your Aiming device in other to create a tracking path for your missile to home in on your target ,He's NOT just alerted but also provided with accurate informations of the location,speed of approach of the Emitter source.Those informations are enough for the pilot to determine when best to deploy his HOT, SHINING,CHAFFS which simply make a waist of all long range missile you fire at him even if you RIPPLE FIRE your missiles. IT'S VERY LIKELY you'll both get into That which most western pilots dread the most,CLOSE CIRCLE DOG FIGHT.
Saliu Umar Ya, you see that scenario is just another "what if." The standard Su-35 / Su-30 doesn't have these sensors. Further more, if he [F22 pilot] doesn't have the option to lock on, the F22 could easily sneak up behind the fighter for a quick easy gun kill [Copy & paste this into google - "U.S. F-22 stealth fighter pilot taunted Iranian F-4 Phantom combat planes over the Persian Gulf"]. P.S - There hasn't been a true "gun to gun" / "circle dog fight" recorded since the Persian Gulf War. Most historians / vets often say it's dead.
Also, i'm glad that the SU-47 project wasn't cancelled. I thiink that the T-50 will stand up to jets like the very original F-22 but will seriously be outperfomed by other jets, it's too big in wingspan, one right turn ang you're a bi blip o radar. The F-22/35s still have this problem, but their smaller so it will occur less. But yes, the F-22 and SU jetsare different. Both extremely capable. exceeding other world standards
It kills me every time some idiot says stealth is a "hoax" or they bring up the anomaly of that F117 shot down in serbia. Are these people so arrogant and ignorant to actually believe that they know more about stealth technology than lockheed martin? LM has been the pioneer in stealth since the 70s, no other company has even come close to stealth until recently, over 40 years later. For the critics, I think they've got the stealth thing covered. People who foolishly try to discredit stealth technology are typically Russians desperately looking for a way to believe that their aircraft is better.
I don't think at all that stealth is a "hoax", its a excellent new technology that gives the new warplanes a great advantage, but don't confuse that with invisibility...not even close, comparing with older models its a very good advantage and not even fair. But if we compare with new 4+ gen models that gap becomes smaller. The stealth will help you to a certain point and then its even game. In a long distance engagement its ideal, but after those few seconds the field is pretty much closer and it depends on the pilots experience and training....
Ill try to explain to you one last time in as many layman terms i can, get it right this time. 1. I never said they had "no" money to maintain em i said they didnt have enough to maintain em properly.Understand the difference 2.Su27 started in production in 84 when Russia was a superpower n after 90 when economy crashed the variants they produced were only demonstrators i.e. only 1 or 2 planes built n only started production after receiving an order i.e. after they got money from the buyer.
Guys stop arguing about which plane is the best! They are all different and capable of heaps of different things! Like the su-35 is capable of a greater weapon capacity while the f-22 is able to carry them internally for stealth missions! The Su-35 is great with its agility but the f-22 can out perform it in very high altitudes but not low altitudes. I hope you get that they all have an equal chance of winning as they are all exceedingly great fighters!
I always thought the su35/37 would beat a raptor in a dogfight. But after watching a few of these videos, I think the f22 can hold its' own - not bad for a jet designed in the 80s- and with only 2d tvn - to be able to fight with jets designed in the 90s and 00s. But only combat can answer the question of which is the better jet.
life lesson, don't follow an su at low speed, The su is designed for subsonic combat whereas the f22 is a zoom and boom fighter, its stuby design gives it the abiity to do a superonic 28d/s turn, it also has sturdy 2d vectoring whice will alway give it a better turn rate after mach 1
I'm almost baffled on how little the education is in these comments. he F-15 Eagle verse Su-30 had a 1.35 kill ratio. SO just over a 50-50 chance to win in a dog fight. Now with that being said there was an aviation war games that was held over Alaska. 145 planes. F-22, F-15, F-18, F-16 and a couple F-14 tomcats. Mostly made of F-15, and F-18. Only 1 F-22 Raptor. Now remember what I said in the beginning. 1.35 ratio for the F-15 over the Su-30? 50-50 chance? The raptors kill ratio was 144-1 in the games. It shot down every single plane during the exercises. Most of the pilots interviewed almost all had the same thing to say. He came up on my radar after firing the missile. Until then we never knew he was there and we all would be dead. So guess what folks the Su-30 can tap dance all day long. The raptor will show up kill you and be gone before you even get a radar hit. Fancy flying will do nothing to stop that. Oh and for the others that are behind on their info. The Raptor is not grounded. They have 187 battle ready and another 5 test planes as well that can be put into use at any time needed. They are not grounded. They did however stop production your right. Why? Because they said if 144 of our best planes and pilots cant shoot down 1 Raptor...Then we don't need anymore to protect us against the enemy now do we?
I have no doubt in the capabilities you mentioned of the F-22. I am familiar with the exercise in Alaska because I participated in it in 2005. However you mention the F-14 which was retired by the Navy a few years ago. Where are you getting your facts from?
Your correct. My bad on typing in the F-14 tomcats they have been out of the game for a bit.,The other info is correct. That much I know. Glad to hear you were there. I heard it was something. My info was from a local F-15 Eagle driver out of Portland Oregon who was also at the event. He said bias opinions aside the Su-30,Su 35 pilots can fly fancy all they want. He said they are impressive. But when it comes down to the simple facts of the technology and capabilities of the F-22 Raptor especially now that they fixed the oxygen issues in the early fazes. The competition is dead meat. You cant out fly what you don't even know is there or not. His exact words were it was very creepy...I'm glad the F-22 Raptors are our's. Sean.
Сергей Сторожев hey no hatred for any nation ...............but SU35s rocks and F22 costs so much dat Washington actually planned to stop its production while Russians upgraded most available SU27s to SU35s and they are amazing killers and need pilots with warm hearts and cool heads dats what Russians are. I am proud of SU30MKI and it kills every available F labeled planes on this side of F22. SU30MKI is India's pride :D Russians always helped Indians widout conditions !!!
I guess he's missing the real point of the whole post. The F22 is capable of so much damage and to this day cannot be detected until the shot is fired. They desided there was no need to produce anymore. I'm not sure why Suddhatma cannot get that. When 1 Raptor took out 144 planes in a air to air trial in Alaska its ratio was 144-1. So Obama said at this time there is no point in making anymore than the 192 we already have. Unless the time comes to do so.
Guys...listen up! OLD NEWS F22 Beaten by: 1)T-38 Talon 2)F16 HAF Red Flag 2008 (Including all the Aggressor squadron with score 11-0) 3)Rafale (almost yesterday) Whos next ?????
my god the F 117 was a relice from the 70s it had been in service since the mid 70s. They were able to detect F 117 in serbia by using a massive power eating radar that blew electronics for miles around including itself.
F 117s were early 1970s stealth tech. They are no longer in service. It was not a simple sa 3 read deeper it was a late model russian radar set and it was destroying electronics every where to transmit a massive beam.
If ya want to compare things - then just think about this: Russia has 1 aircraft carrier. America has 11. The Russian planes ARE very very good. But they are older technology compared to the futuristic technology of the F-22. It's like comparing the Soyuz to the Space Shuttle. It's like comparing an Atari video game of 1980 to Call of Duty 8.
Takao Kancolle Oh sure prove what I said is wrong? C'mon, how can you prove it? People at F-16.net are actual pilots and mechanics who know stuff about planes. Not a bunch of fakes like you and Joshua lol
Takao Kancolle Uh no, I simply laugh at you guys, the way you simply try to act all hotshot cause you think "oh this guy is putting up stuff I simply don't like so lets prove him wrong without any knowledge whatsoever" thats literally you :D and its just funny how you guys act.
they did on f-15, search f-15 mtd, if u dint know about it im sure if the mtd went operational everyone would stop bitching about how superior flankers are just because of manuvrability
You can argue advantages but stealth is not one of them. OLS radar can help detect F-22. The reality of the situation is that the SU's jamming and semi stealth also makes it difficult to detect. In reality the fact both aircraft would jam each other they would have to dogfight each other with their eyes.
It may sound weird to many but the most objective criterion of how good and successful a plane is - is its commercial success as their's no way but real warfare to objectively evaluate their full combat potential. All those test flights/simulated combats don't give a complete idea about it. And judging by this very same criterion Su-30 is an absolute winner compared to F-22. 195 Raptors built including 8 pre-production ones (187+8), none - sold. More over production ceased in 2011. Su-30: 465 units built, more than 440 units sold abroad. So do the math.
WTC2014 Affordable!? Like 2 Super Hornets (which are not cheap at all). And seriously it's a mediocre plane which can barely be called a 5th generation fighter. SU-27 has a slightly better maneuverability performance compared to F-15 not to mention SU-30 and SU-35. Plus F-35's top speed is 1.6M slower than F/A-18E/F with its 1.85M. Stealth ability is not even a panacea to all problems.
Dude it is completely stupid to compare a PAK FA to an F-35 since the F-35 is a multirole plane and the PAK FA is an air superiority plane. It can only be compared to the F-22.
you kids are so funny comparing su with f-22 lol the reason why the f-22 is so expensive is because it has futuristic weapons and technology the government made these jets to fight against alien invasions .... duh its our only hope
I think Omni Potent's been breathing too much of the F-22's life support system. You can have all the stealth you want, the most powerful AESA radar, advanced real-time intel updates...but if your plane chokes and asphyxiates pilots before they even reach the battlefield, you're out $412 million/plane (2012 dollars).
Stormsquad Have you seen what IRST can do, simply hiding the exhaust will do little to nothing to help a raptor, why the fuck are you still on here posting more bullshit you have no right, as you were humiliated multiple times.
Takao Kancolle HAHAHAHA, you think IRST can be so totally reliable, let me tell you how IRST works. Using an IRST means looking through a pipehole, so this means any plane stealth or not would have to be at exactly the right place at exactly the right time and the chances of that alone are like 1 in a 100+ times. Now with a stealth plane whose RCS and IR signature has been greatly reduced, the chances of detecting that plane would take not just the right place and time but also weather, moisture, distance and bla bla bla, so there chances of detecting that maybe 1 in a million HAHAHAHA. So it would be unwise to use something like that :) Ohh and if you think you humiliated me, then please you gotta try harder, your li'l kid Joshua is doing nothing more than self humiliation, so I suggest both of you get back to watching you anime porn.
The F-15 SMT Active could have became a perfect 4++ generation fighter: 2D thurst vectoring (maybe not as good as 3D thurts vectoring on Su-35), cannard, a good radar... However I'm not very sure if there's the resources for building it, maybe the raptor consume to much budget :P, who knows
Chris Far You are right,I do agree when you said the SU 35 will look like a piece of shit against the F-22,the SU 35 will fall to it's doom before it even sees the Raptor coming. hahahaha :-D
I don't F-22 is complete invisible on the radar screen. SU-35 is more maneuverable and agile than the F-22. I am not sure which one will win until they face in the battle.
so does the f-22,which can and will knock out the su 27 30 and 35..f-22 is superior in aerodynamics and weaponry..the su will be deadman before it even knows the f-22 is even there,,F-A-C-T..the f-22 is the most advanced..
Suddhatma Mukherjee Fact is the SU-35 will be history before it even sees the F-22,,hmm F-22 had killed 144 Sukhois over Alaska in the wargames excersise,I doubt it very much if the SU-35 would be able to take on the F-22 in any combat operation..The F-22 will kill the SU-30 and SU-35 dead.
Right and yet when did any Sukhoi fly the Alaskan sky ? Are you still stuck with simulated outputs ? No issue - I repeat myself "u can keep your facts to urself "
Even if one jet is superior to the other, there are other factors one must consider (ie., pilot training and experience, capacity to handle that particular jet, strategies and tactics, weapons, supporting elements in the air, ground, space, and sea, etc.). And a bit of luck, also.
Yep, the SUs are true dogfighters whilst our friendly f22s are more multi-role. The thing is america makes jets that are so easy to fly that the pilot skill is lowered, i dread to think what the pilots of the F35/bs will be like on carriers. Not many people know but there are different dogfight tactics against SU-30/35s that are comepletely seperate, SUs will drag you to low altitude, use ground reflection to avoid radar, then outmanouver you, they got the name FLANKER for just that reason.
There are long-range missiles in Su-30/Su-35 arsenal like КС-172 (firing range up to 400 km), Р-37 (300km) and РВВ-АЕ (200km) which give them overwhelming superiority over F-22 in a beyond-visual range combat. At the same time F-22 uses AIM-120C-7 AMRAAM (firing range 105km). AIM-120C-8 (AIM-120D) (180km) is still in development. As a matter of fact Russia is an only country to have long-range air-to-air missiles in possession after F-14 Tomcat with its AIM-54 Phoenix was phased out of service.
WTC2014 Once again: Russian КС-172 (firing range up to 400 km), Р-37 (300km) and РВВ-АЕ (200km) missles compared to American AIM-120 AMRAAM 105KM NOT NM.
The SU 35 has to see the F-22 first..Missile firing range doesn't mean jack shit,-,if the SU 30 or 35 can not see the F-22 on Radar,also the F-22 has avionics that will jam those KC-172 missiles,making them 100% useless at hitting their targets.
RJL681 Антон я тебя процитирую, а то дауны не понимают с первого раза. I don't know if you are familiar with what radar cross-section (RCS) is. In case you don't: it is a measure of how detectable an object is with a radar. A larger RCS indicates that an object is more easily detected. F-22 has RCS of 0,4-0,5 square meters (it was supposed to be 0,1 sq m but turned out to be a little higher than expected. Initially Lockheed Martin said it was 0,0001 sq m or -40 dBsm but later it was revealed they had tested Raptor in a millimeter frequency range and from front foreshotening (a fighter pilot can't expect to be so lucky everytime) Even though radars of moder fighters use centimeter wave frequency that's why it's 0,4-0,5! But let's not blame LM for this little "trick"! ))) To them-it's just business, they are interested in selling their planes. But let me go on, Su-35 radar "Irbis-E" is capable of detecting an air target with RCS of 0,1-0,5 (which is Raptor) at the distance of at least 165 kilometres (102,5 miles) for RCS 0,1 but no more than 240 km (149 miles) for RCS 0,5. SU-35S has RCS of 1 sq m. F-22 AN/APG-77 radar can detect such a target at the distance of 100 to 120 miles (different sources, including U.S. ones, give a little different information). As you can see there's not much of a difference between these two radars, they are pretty much equal in terms of their detecting ability. Let's assume for a second AN/APG-77 is better than Irbis-E and still it doesn't change a thing as F-22 can't destroy SU-35 right after it has detected its target. F-22 uses AIM-120C-4/AIM-120C-5 with a shooting range of 65 miles (AIM-120C-7/D is still in development (75 miles)). F-22 will be detected long before it gets a lock-on (SU-35 will already be detected either). SU-35 uses all range of air-to-air missiles from close-range to long-range and Raptor uses only close and medium-range ones (the U.S. doesn't have long-range missiles anymore, the last was AIM-54 Phoenix used by F-14 Tomcat). Russian mid-range РВВ-СД is comparable to AMRAAM (shooting distance 68 miles). So it's a mutually dangerous situation for both planes. And if long-range missiles are used like КС-172 (248 miles) or Р-37 (186 miles) SU-35 can start shooting right after it has detected F-22 (102,5-149 miles) which can become a rather hairy situation for Raptor. As a brief conclusion I wanna say that the importance of stealth technology is a little overestimated. Modern radars have reached the point where they can detect literally anything without much of a trouble and they have always been a few steps ahead stealth (for example F-117A was shot down by S-125 in Serbia in 1999 (F-117 is old but S-125 is much older)). F-22 is a good plane (in case you think I consider it bad) but not for its price. That's why its production ceased in 2011. Why pay that much for a plane which moreover doesn't give ultimate superiority if any over some of upgraded 4th generation planes? Simple cost/effectivness rule.
I love how people bitch around with F-22 vs. T-50 or F-22 vs. Su-35.... The primer fighter of the russian airforce is the Su-27 and Mig-29 and even Mig-31... The number of F-22 is impressive but russian planes such as Su-35 and 37, T-50 are not even in serial production or in very few numbers available.... Su-27 and Mig-29 get fucked up against F-22,F/A-18, F-15 and F-16..... Not to mention Eurofighter and Rafale.... NATO jets are simply better.
That's why the radar and jamming is so good on the su's. Both aircraft are phoenominal and can put their nose on you from any position. But F-22 is to expensive. Should have given F-15 or F-14 thrust vectoring.
All these arguments are pointless, trying to compare apples to oranges. F-22 is a 5th gen fighter, Su-30,35 are 4th gen. If fair comparison is to be maid it would have to be between F-22 and the F-50 (Sukhoi PAK FA) which is a comparable 5th gen aircraft.
I'd say it's a fair comparison. They're both the most advanced fighters in each country's arsenal, so why not? The F-22 is only projected to have a kill ratio of 2:1 over the Sukhois (you'd expect better odds for the Raptor). An F-35 would be incapable of defending itself against a Sukhoi - about 2.5 losses projected for every kill. By the way, "4th and 5th gen" are meaningless terms. Stealth fighters aren't nearly as stealthy as most people imagine - nothing at all like the B2. It really is a sham. The F-35 is about as stealthy as the F-18E it's supposed to replace. But it IS newer, far more expensive, and less agile with shorter range. The F-22 is no game changer, either - its production was cancelled for a reason. As for the T-50, Russia and India have found out first hand what a dead-end headache it really is, and its production is due to cease after building only 12 of them. And the F-35 will also be cancelled 5 years from now when it STILL isn't ready.
