Russian SU-30 MK video

[Buzzard7]

Would like to see the Typhoon lock up distance on the Raptor. I should probably wish for something that they might actually release info wise. Wonder if we considered the long range AtoA missle our allies use for the Raptor. Would love to see how datalinking could negate a long range weapon.

[macerxgp]

If the Raptor's radar cross-section is as small as it was intended to be, the Typhoon won't be able to lock it up until it get's into infra-red range.

[Wolfala]

Times like this that I miss Boroda

[expat]

Stealth is great if you have the ability to use it to it's fullest ablity.
In Vietnam you had F4's with better missile caperbility than the vietnamese but you couldnt use your missiles to their fullest extent until you had a visual  id on the target ......
(9political vullshi"£ getting in the way )
Im not saying the f22 is crap it is not , niether is the typhoon or the Su  series  they are all top notch fighters , the deciding factor will be  rules of engement, and how many fighters you have  and the most important aspect pilot training, i dont care how good a certain aircraft is if you only have a few of them and masses of enemy hove into view your in all probabilty going to loose your superfighter   .F117 was shot down  it is not impossible for a F22 to go the same way nothing is indestructable ....   

[Rich46yo]

JSF was not designed to take on the Flanker. An attack plan would have the Raptor doing a sweep and escort for the JSF. Never forget the gorilla that comes with a US airstrike.  Sweep,SEAD,escort, strike packages. Now if we have air superiority then the gorilla may be smaller. The Typhoon is a very capable aircraft. On the threat display it would be engaged before it got into medium BVR range if it ever came to fighting them.

This is without question wrong!

The JSF is designed to be a day #1 strike fighter and it will be entering enemy airspace, and destroying targets, alone. It will be, without question, more then a match for the SU-30 if running clean. Even still some of you underestimate the advantage of stealth in combat. Even after all this time You just dont get it do you? The Flankers only chance at surviving is to run and hope the missile doesn't catch them.

Not that it matters. An enemy's air defense network, and assets, is target #1 in a war anyways. America and her allies will be able to field an entirely stealth, precision munitions, strike package in the opening nights of combat. An enemies airfields, radars, aircract..ect are going to get pulverized on the opening nights anyways. How do you defend against an enemy you cant see?

And yes. The F-35, as well as some of our legacy aircraft, are designed to be in a network. They can use the assets of the entire network.

[macerxgp]

Stealth is great if you have the ability to use it to it's fullest ablity.
In Vietnam you had F4's with better missile caperbility than the vietnamese but you couldnt use your missiles to their fullest extent until you had a visual  id on the target ......
(9political vullshi"£ getting in the way )
Im not saying the f22 is crap it is not , niether is the typhoon or the Su  series  they are all top notch fighters , the deciding factor will be  rules of engement, and how many fighters you have  and the most important aspect pilot training, i dont care how good a certain aircraft is if you only have a few of them and masses of enemy hove into view your in all probabilty going to loose your superfighter   .F117 was shot down  it is not impossible for a F22 to go the same way nothing is indestructable ....   

That F-117 shoot-down was a one-time fluke. For ONE TIME the F-117 mission planners used the same route as before. So, on ONE TIME the Serbs were able to use field-modded radars, modified to operate on a wavelength small enough to detect an aircraft with the radar cross-section reducing methods used by the F-117, and by luck, they locked it up and shot it down.

The F-22 was designed (in the latter stages) with the shortcomings of the F-117 in mind (one of the key liabilities being the F-117's vulnerability to field-modified shortwave radar) and so these kind of fluke shots wouldn't happen again. And even when fighting the F-117, you have to know EXACTLY where to aim the radar, or else it does you no good. You'd be tracking every fly and bird in the sky otherwise. The F-22 is even better about avoiding detection than the F-117 was.

[indy007]

I've read that the Australian Air Force don't like their shiny new F-35s after they were totally out classed by the Russian made, Chinese flown flankers.
http://202.6.74.101/news/stories/2008/09/24/2373045.htm

That was a computer analysis done by a person that's always been an opponent of the F-35 program, and lacking any and all technical details of what the F-35 is actually capable of.

I've also read that even the Eurofighter Typhoon could engage the F/A-22 raptor at medium range BVR. I can't find the link though.

EU Typhoon is a great aircraft, but it's not built in remotely the same fashion. It has a frontal RCS the size of a chicken or basketball. The F-22 has an RCS the size of a small ball bearing. There's a reason there's upwards of a $100 million difference between the two. The F-22 will always get the first look, first shot, which dictates fights.

The only place other aircraft like the Su-37 prototype, EU Typhoon, latest Saabs, etc can hang with the F-22 is point blank, WVR dogfighting... but that's not how the F-22 was designed to fight. If it sticks to its mission profile and design, it will turn every thing else into confetti in a hurry.

[SmokinLoon]

Im no expert, but I fail to see how doing a back flip stall projects Russia ahead of NATO and its western allies.

[Wolfala]

That was a computer analysis done by a person that's always been an opponent of the F-35 program, and lacking any and all technical details of what the F-35 is actually capable of.

EU Typhoon is a great aircraft, but it's not built in remotely the same fashion. It has a frontal RCS the size of a chicken or basketball. The F-22 has an RCS the size of a small ball bearing. There's a reason there's upwards of a $100 million difference between the two. The F-22 will always get the first look, first shot, which dictates fights.

The only place other aircraft like the Su-37 prototype, EU Typhoon, latest Saabs, etc can hang with the F-22 is point blank, WVR dogfighting... but that's not how the F-22 was designed to fight. If it sticks to its mission profile and design, it will turn every thing else into confetti in a hurry.

I'm not claiming to be an expert - but lets look at the doctrine of how we've fought over the past 20 + years. GCI/AWACS directing focused attacks against enemies with poor SA and crippled GCI in aircraft that were not designed from the outset to work autonomously with their own sensor suites.

The 27/30 class of aircraft personally, while pretty to look at - is LIGHTYEARS ahead of what we've faced in every conflict since the Gulf War. It was designed from the outset to work outside of the GCI/AWACS and autonomously.

My doctrine - seeing as that thing can lob 10 missiles my war - Lock it up as FAR AWAY as possible, as soon as I get spiked, if I am at RMax, let loose an active radar missile (AIM-120), then angle off 45 to 50* keeping the radar at the outer edge of its gimble limits to lower my closing velocity - then hope and pray the missile gets to 15NM, select zone 5 - and RUN 180* in the other direction and pray my missile went mad-dog and got him. Kill the jammer b/c I assume every missile he's probably going to fire at me is running at me in home-on-jam mode.

But that is me. I'd rather not have to face a real frontline MIG-29 or SU-27/30 class with any real type of AWACS/GCI on the otherside.

[Kazaa]

"There is no aircraft in any country's inventory that could stand up to it in a dog fight."

What do you think against the FA-22 or any other....

Dogfighting went obsolete with the medium range A2A missile... well the missile in general.

[Race]

Dogfighting went obsolete with the medium range A2A missile... well the missile in general.

Vietnam anyone?

Race

[indy007]

But that is me. I'd rather not have to face a real frontline MIG-29 or SU-27/30 class with any real type of AWACS/GCI on the otherside.

That's the catch. You don't have to dash up and launch anymore. The radar on the F-22 is LPI, meaning even with a STT lock, the target's threat warning receiver probably won't show it.

Since they got the datalinks running, you can send up a 4 ship formation, let 1 loiter 80nm away and paint targets. The other 3 can close from different directions and fire rmax amraam attacks all day long without ever being seen. EASA radar doesn't use gimbals, so you don't even have to shoot, notch, and sprint.

Pretty amazing stuff.

[Wolfala]

That's the catch. You don't have to dash up and launch anymore. The radar on the F-22 is LPI, meaning even with a STT lock, the target's threat warning receiver probably won't show it.

Not to debate the finer points, but i'm trying to stay on the conservative side based on the data that we have. I see the anology of the F22 radar as a flouresant lamp and conventional radars as spot lights. Anything radiating can be detected - which is why emissions control is becomming tremendously more important then in the past. Its just a question of how far scaled out you are from the source. One major hole in the logic is that we would have air supremacy - more or less uncontested. But China, Iran, Syria have all invested in double diget SAMs over the last 15-20 years since examining the Gulf War 1.

The IADS we had in that war was picked apart b/c it was, for lack of a better word Vietnam ERA. The SA-2/3 were early 60s, GCI and Fire Control were still centrally located. The S-300 series (SA-10) was the USSR's first Track Via Missile system fielded (same idea that the Patriot used), though they expanded upon it in a layered defence for hi-altitude ops, and lower tier defences. No one has been up against the double diget SAM threat, and i'm not saying that it won't happen, but just as with every weapon - there is a countermeasure. The USSR's countermeasure to our AWACS advantage were to make their new generation of SAMS so robust that NATO would have to position their AWACS hundreds of miles behind the line just to remain clear of their engagement envelope.

Don't get me wrong, data-links are great and we've been using them for 60 years. But consider operating against an adversary who didn't get the 2nd run soviet hand-me-downs and actually has relevant training and operational experience. Be under no illusions, that is a slug fest - with parity on equipment and training the past 20 years would have no precidence in that environment.

[Rich46yo]

Some of us are old enough to have seen three or four generations of Russian aircraft cause the sky to start falling on our heads.

The biggest "scare" of them all was the Mig-25 scare. Remember that scare? It was this super fighter that was going to cause the end of days for America and her allies. And the thing turned out to be, at least the early versions, to be a piece of junk. By that time we had started training our bomber crews to fly NOE and it turned out the 25 had a useless radar for finding anything flying 500' or under. Sure it was fast but what good is "fast" when thats all you have? Then some Russkie decided he liked Capitolism more and flew one of the things to Japan where we got to take it apart. It turned out the Russians do pretty well with what resources they have, and we already knew that, but the MIG-25 was not a good enough reason to notch up our development even more. But it was the cold war and we did anyway, ending up with the F-15, 16, and F-14.

In the history of modern era Jets Yank legacy fighters have filled the sky with red when in combat against Russian aircraft. I'm sure the SU-30 is a fine legacy fighter/bomber. But IT IS a "legacy" fighter. Fancy air show dances mean about as much to air combat as did the Mig-25s speed records. In fact they mean very little.

And to judge a modern jet fighter you have to look at the system as a whole. The Jet itself, the avionics,the weapons, the supporting assets, the reliability of the engines, and the training of the Pilots. The reality is an SU-30 armed force, like Indonesia, would have a really bad time of it against an F-35 armed force like the RAAF. Most of all when you figure in the entire package the RAAF would throw at them.

And actually, to tell you the truth, I'm not sure the Russians themselves could do much better. Against an adversary like NATO I think the air war would be short, sharp, and painful for them.

[Chalenge]

I dont believe dogfighting is obsolete and I dont believe it will be obsolete for a long time to come. Missiles can be defeated and when your out of missiles and you dont have a gun your done. I would call that video showmanship that only sets up the pilot for a cranium sectional. In the time it takes to get back into forward flight he would be sliced diced canned and sold for chum. NATA and US forces train far beyond the best Russian personnel and NATA and US forces have much better equipment and technology.

NATA countries dont have to fear military forces of any kind. Todays threat is computer based and political (lets not go there).