MILAVIA Forum
Military Aviation => Military Aircraft => Topic started by: God Bless USA on May 25, 2008, 12:21:21 PM
-
First according to globalsecurity web site. Simulations conducted by British Aerospace and the British Defense Research Agency compared the effectiveness of the F-15C, Rafale, EF-2000, and F-22 against the Russian Su-35 armed with active radar missiles similar to the AIM-120 Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM). The Rafale achieved a 1:1 kill ratio (1 Su-35 destroyed for each Rafale lost). The EF-2000 kill ratio was 4.5:1 while the F-22 achieved a ratio of 10:1. In stark contrast was the F-15C, losing 1.3 Eagles for each Su-35 destroyed. The F-15 Eagle is ageing (and falling apart in flight) and the F-22 Raptor is very expensive. Now what would you do to remedy USA fighter program for the future?
-
Just the fact alone that the EF is 4.5 times better than Rafale, shows that the simulation is biased. I would "buy" the result if the Rafale and EF were pretty close, say they were both having the same score.
And so much with the Raptor, it ain't "Made in Mars" after all....
-
FYI, there is already a topic like this........with the same idea............
Yeah, I wouldn't trust a 'simulation' done by BAE, its biased just like any 'simulation' from a private company is............besides a 'simulation' is just that, a 'simulation' nothing more. You want real results, go to Red Flag...........
Anyway, long story short, we should buy more F-22s.............the F-15 will still kill anything that is has to come up against............
-
I would like to seen how a F-15 Eagle with thrust vectoring would have performed. I know the F-22 Raptor has it. Russia is starting to use it. Is there anyother country using thrust vectoring?
-
I think that a new engine with TVC is being tested for the EF-2000... ::)
And they should be thinking on putting TVC on the Gripen too (imagine that :o)
-
Many of the new fighters are being designed with it, the F-35 has it as well............360 degrees I believe. That type of technology was first tested on the F-16(US wise, I believe it was before the Russians but I may be mistaken), the F-15 was used to test the type of thrust vectoring that the F-22 utilizes, up and down...............
The Russian's tested it on the Su-27 and now have the Su-35 and 37 which use the 360 degree vectoring on both engines.
At this time, the EF2000 doesn't use TV as far as I know, instead using canards instead of elevators to increase its maneuverability. This goes for the Gripen and the Rafale as well.
-
Easy. Boeing goes back to building comercial jets, LM disapears and you can buy your fighters from Europe! ;D
Anyway I wouldn't be too worried about the 35s. How many Su-35s the VVS even has? However PAK-FA should make it's first flight around 2009 (?) and enter service in ??, so anyway F-22 would be a wise pick considering the future IMO.
The Russian's tested it on the Su-27 and now have the Su-35 and 37 which use the 360 degree vectoring on both engines.
I wouldn't worry about the 37 either. VVS doesn't have it.
-
In the end we don't really have to worry about anyone............................I mean lets be realistic, even with the F-22 in service, there is some black project out there that can kill tons of aircraft in a blink................
Russia's economy is coming back ten fold so they are going to start rearming and we are going to go back into a Cold War if not WWIII.............(no I'm not trying conspire or anything).........course this could be in 10 or 50 years................
-
Doubt it would be a Cold War, more of a arms race like Europe had before the break out of WW1. Communism is mostly dead remember, the whole point of the Cold War was Democracy-Capitalism versus Communism.
-
Well it's still democracy vs autocracy.
Anyway I wouldn't underestimate PAK-FA, although there has been too many bubbles about it. Russians will have their 5th generation sooner or later. Su-35 is just a plane Suhkoi has and VVS almost doesn't have. So that model is nothing to be worried about.
-
A Cold War is not necesarly one form of government against another...............its just a political war..............so we could have another Cold War again..................
I'm not underestimating it..........I'm just not giving it anything...........until it flies.......we have nothing to worry about............
-
Does that mean you don't agree or don't care...............?
-
To iluveagles:
I'm pretty sure the F-35 does not have thrust vectoring. The stovl version has vectoring in the downward direction for stovl purposes, and it may be usefull for VIFFing (vectoring in forward flight) like the Harrier can do.
I think we should continue to develop stealth, while not ignoring agility, long range missiles, data links, EW countermeasures, multirole capability, and sheer numbers of capable platforms. This means we must spend more MONEY (and, of course, get congress to allocate it) We have the resources and intellectual ability to best anything the rest of the world can throw at us-whether we have the will is another question. I feel our next real fighter combat challenge may occur in the Straights of Taiwan, against vast numbers of aircraft.
Shawn A.
-
That's interesting that you think the " next real fighter combat challenge may occur in the Straights of Taiwan, against vast numbers of aircraft". Very possible but I think Africa because in time China will deploy assets there including fighters and down the road be more useful to China then Taiwan. With no big players left in Africa there's nobody there to really say no to them. Once China has a bigger part or share of Europe's Economy nobody will have spine to say anything to them just like my country now. Sudan location is interesting with Chinese help could cause a problem in the Red Sea region one might say is a slightly important oil region. And in time push through Chad and be a force in Central Africa. Nigeria is another goal or stepping stone in Africa for China and one of China's main sources of oil from Africa which is by the way on the other side of Chad. If Chad falls China heavily invested in two oil producing countries on either side and depending on who holds the power could cut Africa in half, in theory. Can't you just see it China leader saying "China is only deploying forces to save the peace" in Africa and will only a be temporary. I know this is a little far reaching but it's sure interesting and the Chinese are long term planners.
Link
China's Hu urges more Africa ties
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4949688.stm
-
Going off of the pictures of the F-35B, that variant appears to have TV.
-
You may be right about the TV. I also think the B model will be a good seller for LM because the short-take-off-landings is such a asset to have. Fighters could be deployed off big bases in different places making hard to find to target them.
-
Does that mean you don't agree or don't care...............?
Who you talking to?
-
You..........
-
Oh, i was just deciding on whether or not i should point out the fact that "its not a war between governments, its just polictical" or what ever it was makes no sense, its the same thing isnt it?
-
What I was trying to say, and I didn't put it in very good terms, was that its not a shooting war, its a war of words and threats, more or less...............
-
I agree with nonpilot on the F-35B. There will finally be a STOV fighter with speed, range, ETC.. I believe all airforces should have some F-35B's in there inventory. I believe the extra cost is worth having a fighter available just in case your runways are unavailable!
-
If a runway isn't available you have more problems than needing a STOV aircraft...........
-
South Korea is a example where the F-35B could come in handy. Most of the USAF base are north of Kunsan Air Base. Kunsan is located just south of the middle of South Korea. In a suprise attack on Kunsan it is about a 15-minute jet flight from North Korea. So what I was trying to say is if there is suprise attack in a country so small with so many bases within a short stiking distance the F-35B come in handy. We finally have a STOV aircraft that can fly at fighter speeds, why not use it!
-
But look, if you have North Korean Jets making it into South Korea without our radar picking them up, you have a lot more problems than needing a STOV aircraft, like a North Korean stealth aircraft.............I mean come on, there is a such thing as planning for feasible enemy strikes and then there is completely implausible scenarios.
Look, even if a North Korean jet(which is a pretty unsophisticated piece of old Soviet technology)hits its burners(in which case I wouldn't be surprised if the plan blew apart)and flys across the DMZ, it will not be able to sustain supersonic flight for a long period of time, if at all, and as soon as it is detected F-16s out of Kunsan will be scrambled, so thats three minutes, five tops, and they are ready to shoot it down. Not only that, but it will have to evade SAM sites and AAA.
Overall, a North Korean jet getting over the DMZ, getting to Kunsan and then destroying all of the runway and taxiways(an F-16 could take off of a taxiway if nessecary, especially if you see the length of all of the taxiways and runways at Kunsan).
If I were you, I'd be more worried about a North Korean nuclear device.
-
We should of took care of North Korea and Iran's nuclear project along time ago. But that is a different subject. I am looking at this from a stance that for the first time we have a fighter with STOVL technology. Why not have a few in the inventory just in case, somewhere someone sneaks in below radar. History has shown it has happened. I think it would be a great investment.
-
North Korean attack may come in many forms but most likely would be missile and artillery. I think the F-35B could or might avoid being targeted if spread on on smaller bases or even moved between a small number of bases. North Korea would have to have current targeting info to assigned missiles/rockets to hit, just makes it a little harder. I think there are other perks as well just think of the cost and maintenance issues for running a large or normal size air base where in most cases there's more then one runway. Some repair and maintenance shops would have to be maintained but I still think it's an asset overall. I'm opened mined enough to think eight ten years from now Army pilots flying the B models from forward deployed Army Squadrons. The Marines do it why not bring your own air support right? The F-35B is a huge step past the Harrier in many ways and may grow into one of the best sellers down the road.
-
I am looking at this from a stance that for the first time we have a fighter with STOVL technology.
Didnt your marines buy the Harrier jump jet and 'Americanize' it?
-
Yes the USA bought the British Sea Harrier. They bought it and improved it! Just like nonpilot stated there is benefits from having a STOVL aircraft like the F-35B. Now we have an aircraft that is a versatile asset. Stealth, speed of a fighter, STOVL plus its was designed in the USA. The United States Marines are planing on buying them. Some countries will have access to the F-35B. I am a firm believer that the countries that will have access to the F-35B should buy them for there Airforce, not just the Navy. This is especially true for the USAF! Why waste an asset, that the oppositional forces will know that we do not need a large airports to support it.