Nied

You know David I'm glad you pulled this topic back up since there's been something bouncing around in my head for a while. Why don't we pin this thread and make it the officail spot for aircraft discusions? Re-name it the Aviation Super thread! and you've got a pretty good omnibus aircraft thread, one that would save some time for the moderators (considering how many aviation threads have sprung up as of late).

To answer the last question first I beilieve the reason the Chinese are favoring Sukhois lately is becasue Mig just hasn't really been able to do much with the Mig-29. They've had a hell of a time turning it into an effective multi-role aircraft, it just doesn't have the legs for it. China wants aircraft that genneraly give them the same kind of capabilities that the Americans have, the Flanker family can give them that, the Fulcrum family is having more trouble with that. The reason you haven't seen any Chinese Hinds is because they do not operate them, the role of the Hind is unique but the closest Chinese equivelent would be the WZ-9, an armed copy of the Aerospatiale Dolphin. The reason Sukhoi hasn't marketed the Su-47 to any othere countries is becasue it's a technology demonstrator. Sukhoi would need to do alot more work on the Berkut before it would be a combat capable aircraft. The two Russian ATFs (the Su-47 and Mig-1.44) are only prototypes, they're roughly at the same stage that the YF-22 and -23 were at in the early '90s, and Russia hasn't had the cash to take them any further. Right now both projects are dead and useful for little more than showing off what Mig and Sukhoi could do 15 years ago. The Havoc is not dead, it's just in a coma. It was to start taking over as the USSR's main attack helicopter at about the same time the USSR ceased to exist. There are a handful in service, but building new examples has been extremely difficult. I think the reason you don't see many of Russia's more advanced helicopter designs being purchased is because they are rather expensive, and an unknown quantitiy. Part of the price of purchase for any new aircraft covers the development costs, normally those costs are paid off after a good number of examples are built, that's when you see export sales pick up because new exapmles are cheap. Since Russia has only bought a few Havocs Mil hasn't re-couped the development costs yet, and so they have to pass them on to any export customers (and the ones you mentioned aren't exatly flush with cash right now). Upgrades of tried and true designs (like the new Mi-35 development of the HInd) are cheaper and have the advantage of a proven pedigree. I don't know anything about the Kasatka. The Hokum is in the same boat as the Havoc, it's in a state of living death brought on by the collapse of the Soviet Union.

*bump*

From what I understand radar targeting will be incorperated into the last development phase before new avioncis architechure is needed. Targeting via EO and laser (eiter through an add-on pod or integrated into the airframe) is beyond the current architechure. You forgott to paste the article. Anyway given the Japanese love for indeginous work I wouldn't be surprised if they decide to develop thier own custom architechure to allow for Harpoons under the wings. Well Iran and China have laready been mentioned. Iran sprang most readily to mind. They have a large well euqiped air force, (half Russian and half American designs) and seem to have constructed quite a good logistics chain to supply it. Given that they're now constructing whole aircraft I find it har to beilieve that they're incapable of maintaining the more advanced aircraft in their inventory. If I had to guess I'd say they have about 20-30 F-14s operational, and maybe 60 Mig-29s, along with a motley crew of indeginous designs of various types. US forces could probalbly overwhelm such a force but not without considerable cost. I actually wouldn't have mentioned China as little as a few week ago. But recent reports of thier more agressive stance toward Taiwan have me a little rattled. They do have a massive air force, led by J-11s (indeginous built Su-30s), and soon J-10s, add in the thousands of lesser aircraft and the PLAAF is pretty scary. I'd also like to add in North Korea and Saudi Arabia. While the composition of the NKAF is similar to Iraq's there seems to be one key difference: Saddam Hussein never thought much of airpower and as such he put most of the IrAF into hardened shelters to ride out the war (without realising we had weapons capable of penetrating those shelters). Kim Jong Il reportedly wrote an essay on the mistakes Iraq made in the first Gulf War for his generals, one of his key criticisms was Iraq's failure to deploy its airforce. If we were to attack them I'd expect more resistance from the air than we saw in Iraq. Saudi Arabia while nominally an ally is currently embroiled in a low level civil war that could easily lead to one of the most powerful air forces in the middle east becoming our enemy (maybe even being run by a King Bin Laden). ::Edited because I never remember to do simple proofreading before I post::

The same could be said for the F-35 (it's primary arment is JDAMs too). While the F/A-22 does not have a EO or laser targeting system built in it is capable of getting target data from it's radar (while still maintaining stealth no less, the magic of AESA and LPI radar). Up until now we've owned the sky because the other guys have forfeited it. Iraq chose not to use it's airforce, Yugoslavia's was decimated by civil war, and the Afgan air force consisted of two Mig-17s. The current list of potential enemies is full of countries with robust air forces who are quite willing to use them. Just because we've been picking the low hanging fruit so far doesn't mean we have a feast on our hands.

Because they don't need to. They can just as easily sit back and let the gaijin develop all that stuff for them and then take thier pick of the best options, that way all they spend is money. They can then put all thier resources into building better electronics, automotive and other civil technologies which they sell back to the same gaijin for a handsome profit. It's a pretty sweet deal, why would they want to give that up?

Another thought that just popped up into my head as I submitted my post. Japan's defensive stance give further reason to purchase such an overwhelmingly superior aircraft like the Raptor. Unlike most countries which can go on the offensive to degrade thier enemies ability to strike at them (striking airfields and such) Japan is not able to do that and as such a strike plane like the F-35 is of little use to them for anything more than maritime controll. They would however need an efective BARCAP to fend off enemy strike planes. Considering that such planes would be launching from pristine bases they would be somewhat more effective than planes laucnhing from airfields under constant threat of attack (like USAF raptors would be facing). The F-35 would not be able to do this more effectively than even an F-15 let alone a Raptor, they'd be better off going with one of the eruo-deltas like the Rafale or Typhoon if they arent' going to buy the Raptor.

You are not going to see a large improvement in F-22's ground attack ability. It was first designed "not a pound for air-to-ground" as the F-15 designers used to say. When the Soviets imploded, they needed to add air-to-ground ability to the F-22 to justify it. However, the problem is that its internal bays are just too small. It can only carry two specially designed 1000lb bombs, and that just is not enough for much. Besides, there are still big problems with the moving nozles on the thing. We haven't seen the end of the price increases with that beast. The AF should have picked the F-23. The X-35 is a lot better. It can carry 2 2000lb weapons internally, and way more outside if it needs to. And with up to 4 internal A2A missiles, stealth, and longer range than the F-16, it is a pretty good in the intercepter role as well. A stealthy plane carrying good missiles combined with Japan's AWACs aircraft are going to beat non-stealth world-class dogfighters every time. (By the way, I don't think the X-35 will be called the F-35. The X and F numbers don't match up anymore. It will probably be the F-25.) I haven't heard of any problems with the F-22's TV nozzles before, care to be more specific? As for ground attack capabilities while it is restricted to 1,000 lb JDAMS at the moment (which are in no way different than the 1,000 lb JDAMs used by the rest of the US military by the way), it will have the ability to carry quite a few SDBs as soon as they come online (with no modification to the avionics I might add), and a simple modification to the weapons bay doors would allow it to carry 2,000 lb weapons. The current FB-22 proposal uses the same basic fuselage as the F/A-22, but with bulged weapons bay doors so give clearance to for 2,000 lb JDAMs, I can't imagine why ne bay doors couldn't be fitted to the current F/A-22A fleet. No avionics upgrade would be required since the 2,000 lb JDAM uses the same tailkit as the 1,000 lb flavor. with the exception of sensors, whne it's a question of who's a better strike platform the F/A-22 is far and away superior to the F-35. It has much longer range, much more speed (the F-35 can't supercruise), and it's stealthier. Add in bulged weapons bay doors and it carries a larger payload (2 JDAMS + 2 AMRAAMs + 2 Sidewinders) further faster. I have defended the F-35 before, it is an excelent strike plane that in a pinch could hold it's own until help can arrive. The problem is that help was supposed to come in the form of a Raptor, the F-35 becomes mighty vulnerable if it has to rely on help from another F-35 or Super hornet. In fact the entire procurement structure for the US military was built around the F-22 owning the sky so that the rest of our forces could attack. That's why the F/A-18E/F doesn't need the same A2A performance as the F-14, and the F-35 doesn't need to be any better than a F-16, their vulnerability was to be made up for by the Raptors dominance. The fact that it can be turned into a very potent deep strike platform with very little modification is just gravy.

In other words a guided bomb.

Actually I would imagine that Israel would be interested in buying the F-22. Currently they are surrounded by countires using equipment with very similar capabilities to thier own, most of whom don't exactly love Israel. Egypt is one of the largest operators of the F-16 oustide of the US, Saudi Arabia has a large fleet of F-15s, and Iran has a interesting mix of advanced Russian and American types (F-14s and Mig-29s).

I imagine that Japan has more to legitimately fear from Chinese Su-27s... and J-10s... and FC-1s. While the PLAAF may be a distant threat to our regional interests it is a very real potential threat to Japan itself. And while they are eyeing the F-35, last I heard it was thier second choice behind the F-22.

I understand the security concerns in not letting sensitive technology get into the wrong hands but if we wait until the next decade to start selling Raptors it won't be a concern anymore, no one on the planet will have the technology in the Raptor because the Raptor won't exist anymore. The options right now are to sell the Raptor right now to our closest most trusted allies, or wait and let them buy well marketed Typhoons or Raphales in ten years because the Raptor isn't there to buy. Either scenario has us facing a world where advanced fighters abound, but one has us facing it with only one wing of Raptors (if we're lucky) and there is no capability to build more becasue the production line has long since been torn down. The other still gives us one wing but the production line has been churing out raptors for our allies, which also gives us the ability to build more if we need to (which we most assuredly will).

The Japanese are reportedly very interested in getting their hands on an F/A-22J for the JASDF as a down-the-road F-15J replacement, I would be surprised if the IAF isn't interested as well. Reglardless of the sensitivity of the technology involved, the way things are going if we don't spread the Raptor around no one, not even the USAF, is going to have that technology.

THe Y designation actually comes from the real worl d US tri-service designation system which the UN spacy seems to mostly have adopted. As it currently works the Y is tacked on before the actual type designation for prototypes of production craft (like YF-22, or YF-17). The Spacy must not be following the tri-service system exactly since they would properly call the VF-19 prototype YVF-19 (that and their penchant for using out of order letters like S for certain subtypes).

Actually the GPS "nipple" has been a feature on the A-10A since the mid '90s. I still haven't been able to spot an external difference between the A and the C.

Ah but the terain following radar would mostly be used on the ingress and egress to combat, once in he thick of things it would be relying mostly on visual or in N/AW conditions the FLIR and NVGs. It's my understanding that is why most of the new generation of nav/attack pods (LITENING, ATFLIR, and Sniper XR) do not incorperate such a radar, while older systems like the dual pod LANTIRN does.

The two seater pictured on the last page is basically it. The only difference would be that the pods housing the main gear would be elongated so that they could house senors in the front (terrain following radar on one side FLIR/Laser turret on the other). As I was asking Knight26 it may have recieved a simlified canopy as well, (think less F-4 and more F-15B).

From what I understand the N/AW A-10 wasn't going to be much better than a LANTIRN (or now LITENING) equiped A-10C. The terain folowing radar would've been nice (though it's less useful now that the Hog has moved up high with the rest of the Air Force). Other than the extra crew member I don't see what the A-10B has over the A-10C. Hey Knight26 is it true that they were going to ditch the cool sideways opening canopy on the prototype in favor of a more traditional upward hinged one?

I always imagined that the cannon fodder scheme was actually the official UN spacy standard scheme, and that in the lax atmosphere of war time various pilots or even whole squadrons chucked the rule book and painted up thier mounts as they pleased. Thus the paint schemes we see in the TV show and DYRL are just one offs painted put on thier planes by aces or particularly creative pilots. I would imagine that the majority of Valkyries, even VF-1S and Js are in the standard brown on white scheme, with the occasional plane (or even whole squadrons) in a creative custom scheme. In DYRL we see a standard brown VF-1A with custom squadron markings, I bet most Valkyries look like that instead of Hikaru's or Roy's.

That's cool. I'm having trouble not seeing the shinden in some views, but I think that will go away once it's painted. I love how poor the frontal visibility is, very 1930s racer.

F-35s

I doubt any nation can outstrip our manufacturing capabilities. However that is no the issue. The issue is how easily we can defeat a nation that we deam to be a threat to our interests. I don't think anyone here is argueing that we are about to enter another World War in which having the F-22 will be crucial to secruing the borders of the United States. But we will enter into conflicts where establishing air superiority over a target area will be signifigantly harder than it has been in the past. Like I have said, the only working IADN we have faced was Iraq's in the first Gulf War, Serbia's was destroyed by ten years of civil war, Afganistan's didn't exist, and Iraq's was destroyed after the first gulf war (after they decided not to use thier airforce). We won't be so lucky in the future.

Actually I was responding to Noyhauser. But in response to your comments I'd say that we do have threats to our air superiority. Certainly we don't have to worry about an enemy nation launching a strike on our bases of operation, but there are plenty of nations with the capability to deny thier airspace to our aircraft. Like I said on the last page the last real operational Integrated air defense network we faced was Iraq's in the first gulf war, and they chose to tie one hand behind their back and leave thier air force on the gorund. Most potential adversaries that we'd face in the next few years (let alone 10-20 years down the road) do have an actual air force and have publicly demonstrated thier willingnes to use it. And I haven't said that the Raptor shouldn't be given ground attack capabilities, it already has those (they are somewhat limited yes but more than effective). I've only advocated delaying further upgrades until the budget situation gets better.

Computer chips are not large structural components, the tooling to create them is not that large or expensive (especially when we are talking about older components like these). THe Air force decided to switch to a new architechure because at the time the money was there to do it and it would give the airplane room to grow in the future if it is needed. However the current spiral upgrades ought to make the Raptor quite capable for the time being, and it could still be upgraded at a later date. The JSF may be modular but nothing short of a re-design could turn it into an air superiority fighter. It's a strike plane with good self defence capabilities but like I said it just doesn't have the payload or the range to do the F-15's mission as good as the F-15 does, let alone better.

That's with current plans though. Plans that were written up before we went on a collosally expensive snipe hunt in the middle east. The air Force chose to go with re-developing the avionics because they felt it was a viable option. That no longer apears to be the case, however that doesn't mean that there are no other options. As I said re-opening or opening a new fabrication facility for the i960MX chips would be far cheaper than re-designing the avionics system. It would allow that F-22 to get into the air (with quite a bit of strike capability), and a new avionics system could be designed after the F-35 program is more mature. I don't beilieve that the F-35 is capable of taking on the mission of the F-15, it wasn't designed for that and it simply does not have the capability for it. It has neither the range nor payload to take on the air superiority mission of the Eagle. It's a hell of a replacement for the F-16 and Baby Hornet, but it's not an air superiority fighter by a long shot.