Aircraft Vs Thread 5

[Nied]

Anyways---want a brand-new Fw190A? You can buy a kit. http://www.lanedesign.com.br/fw190.htm Seriously, that'd get more attention at any airshow than a "real" P-51 etc. (Well, more attention from the real enthusiasts, maybe not so much from those who the P-51 is the ONLY warbird they can name)

What about a brand new Me-262? While P-51s (both real and re-productions) are almost ubiquitous at most airshows, I'm seeing more and more Yak-9s for some reason.

[VF-19]

I'd sell the F-22 to the UK and Australia for sure, if I was POTUS/congress/SECDEF.

Anyways---want a brand-new Fw190A? You can buy a kit. http://www.lanedesign.com.br/fw190.htm Seriously, that'd get more attention at any airshow than a "real" P-51 etc. (Well, more attention from the real enthusiasts, maybe not so much from those who the P-51 is the ONLY warbird they can name)

If I had the money, time, patience, and most importantly, a pilot's license, I'd get this in a heart beat. My own personal FW-190. I can always pretend that the cannons are real...

[the white drew carey]

Seriously, that'd get more attention at any airshow than a "real" P-51 etc. (Well, more attention from the real enthusiasts, maybe not so much from those who the P-51 is the ONLY warbird they can name)

Ahhh... the P-51 Palomino! What a great plane!

[Nied]

Ahhh... the P-51 Palomino! What a great plane!

I heard it single handedly helped us beat the Russians in World War I!

[anime52k8]

I heard it single handedly helped us beat the Russians in World War I!

no, the Canadians used them to beat the mongols at the battle of the Alamo. learn yourself some history .

(this stupid joke brought to you by the letter /k/)

Edited February 26, 2009 by anime52k8

[Noyhauser]

If I had the money, time, patience, and most importantly, a pilot's license, I'd get this in a heart beat. My own personal FW-190. I can always pretend that the cannons are real...

I'd go for a Dornier-335 in a snap, or a De Havilland Hornet.

[David Hingtgen]

Ooooh, the repro-Me262 has J85s. Rather ingenious, about the easiest to support military-grade engine around.

[Retracting Head Ter Ter]

Ooooh, the repro-Me262 has J85s. Rather ingenious, about the easiest to support military-grade engine around.

Bah! The softies! Whats a Me262 without the constant threat of double flameouts eh?

[Lynx7725]

Bah! The softies! Whats a Me262 without the constant threat of double flameouts eh?

Safer to fly?

[Nied]

no, the Canadians used them to beat the mongols at the battle of the Alamo. learn yourself some history .

(this stupid joke brought to you by the letter /k/)

No you're thinking of the F-86 Cutlass. They designed it in the basement of the Alamo and went on to use it to beat the Japanese in Vietnam.

[Noyhauser]

No you're thinking of the F-86 Cutlass. They designed it in the basement of the Alamo and went on to use it to beat the Japanese in Vietnam.

Seriously people, get your facts straight... Its the Boeing Mosquito made from good american steel and ingenuity; it was the reason why Hitler decided to back down over putting missiles in Cuba.

Edited February 26, 2009 by Noyhauser

[Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0]

Does anyone else think that with all the problems that the F-22 faces that there is a good chance of seeing the F-15 get a major upgrade? I'm thinking thrust vectoring engines, maybe around the 40,000lbs range along with a full glass cockpit for starts. And maybe some new-build airframes as well.

I think the USAF would just get F-15K's instead of thrust vectoring eagles.

[VF-19]

Bah! The softies! Whats a Me262 without the constant threat of double flameouts eh?

You forgot the nasty detail that the original engines also didn't like having sudden throttle changes. Go from low power to high power in one swoop and you'll have double engine fires! Fun!

[David Hingtgen]

Interesting notes on the F-22's performance vs contract requirements:

http://www.f-16.net/news_article3275.html

Most interesting, is the "vs a Mig-29/Su-27"----the F-22 is apparently worth (in a fight) 10 F-35s. So much for the JSF being "90% of the performance for half the cost". (and now costs 1/3 more than the F-22) (of course, this is one of those press releases that's really more of an ad, so...)

[Bri]

That article seems a tad irrealistic. I mean F15s as a pure air superiority fighter having a loss ratio to Su27/Mig29s of more then 1:1? Doubtful statement at best.

Anyones guess what will happen but with the JSF being a wildcard I doubt they will cancel the F22 rightaway. The airforce could opt for some latest versions of the F15/F16s as a stopgap measure and a minimum number of F22s to keep the production line open to buy time (and money).

[hobbes221]

...first 500 or so F-35s will cost $200 million each

I though these were the 'cheap' stealth, stealth lite, the diet coke of stealth? Oh wait it's ONLY the first 500, let's see 5 times 2, add the zeros... and wow only $100,000,000,000 until the price goes down.

watch, with my typing skills I'll have messed up on the zeros and look like a dumba$$, I swear I feel like Porky Pig on a keyboard some days

Thas, htat, thtas that's all folks

[Noyhauser]

Interesting notes on the F-22's performance vs contract requirements:

http://www.f-16.net/news_article3275.html

Most interesting, is the "vs a Mig-29/Su-27"----the F-22 is apparently worth (in a fight) 10 F-35s. So much for the JSF being "90% of the performance for half the cost". (and now costs 1/3 more than the F-22) (of course, this is one of those press releases that's really more of an ad, so...)

Point taken, but the F-35's "current" costs should be taken with a grain of salt.... We could always bring up the projected per-unit costs of F-22s from 2001 and look at them now. When the JSF starts rolling out fighters (and firming up foreign orders) that will drop significantly.

[Evil Porkchop]

That article seems a tad irrealistic. I mean F15s as a pure air superiority fighter having a loss ratio to Su27/Mig29s of more then 1:1? Doubtful statement at best.

Anyones guess what will happen but with the JSF being a wildcard I doubt they will cancel the F22 rightaway. The airforce could opt for some latest versions of the F15/F16s as a stopgap measure and a minimum number of F22s to keep the production line open to buy time (and money).

Aren't Su27/MiG29s also pure Air Superiorty fighters too though? I think that all 3 aircraft a for the most part evenly matched and it would come down to the pilots.

[Bri]

Yes, the SU27 and Mig 29 are also air superiority fighters. However the article puts a lightweight fighter like the MIG 29 over the F15 which seems silly to me. A heavy fighter like the F15 can support a heavier radar and carries more fuel so it would have serious advantage in BVR. Assuming the electronics of the Migs and Sukhois would be on par (which is doubtful). Also the chance of an F15 engaging a Mig29 or Sukhoi without AWACS, Rivet Joint, Compass Call, tankers etc seems unlikely. Making the less then 1:1 ratio unlikely.

If the article refers to dog fight skills then it makes no sense. No way a F22 would be able to go 30:1 against Mig29s in dogfights. To much relies on pilot skills and its mainly intended for BVR.

[Retracting Head Ter Ter]

Yes, the SU27 and Mig 29 are also air superiority fighters. However the article puts a lightweight fighter like the MIG 29 over the F15 which seems silly to me. A heavy fighter like the F15 can support a heavier radar and carries more fuel so it would have serious advantage in BVR. Assuming the electronics of the Migs and Sukhois would be on par (which is doubtful). Also the chance of an F15 engaging a Mig29 or Sukhoi without AWACS, Rivet Joint, Compass Call, tankers etc seems unlikely. Making the less then 1:1 ratio unlikely.

If the article refers to dog fight skills then it makes no sense. No way a F22 would be able to go 30:1 against Mig29s in dogfights. To much relies on pilot skills and its mainly intended for BVR.

In the annex to the report under "Assumptions made", it probably says :

Assuming :

Max Jenius in the F-22

Hikaru Ichijo in the Mig-29

Edgar Lasalle in the F-15

[miles316]

What we the US should do is scrape off the stealth RAM and replace the skin with conventional material on the F-22. The F-22 RAM is the most difficult part of the plane with its construction and maintenance it takes up the most man hours. During the construction applying the RAM requires specialty equipment in a clean room with highly trained personnel who cant readily switch between other parts of the plants. Basically the F-22 aerodynamics, engines, avionics, and weapons/RADAR are the most advanced in the world. A non RAM coated F-22 would still be the best non stealthy fighter in the world. The US still needs a replasement for the F-15 A-C models which are developing structual defects after years of use.

[Nied]

Yes, the SU27 and Mig 29 are also air superiority fighters. However the article puts a lightweight fighter like the MIG 29 over the F15 which seems silly to me. A heavy fighter like the F15 can support a heavier radar and carries more fuel so it would have serious advantage in BVR. Assuming the electronics of the Migs and Sukhois would be on par (which is doubtful). Also the chance of an F15 engaging a Mig29 or Sukhoi without AWACS, Rivet Joint, Compass Call, tankers etc seems unlikely. Making the less then 1:1 ratio unlikely.

If the article refers to dog fight skills then it makes no sense. No way a F22 would be able to go 30:1 against Mig29s in dogfights. To much relies on pilot skills and its mainly intended for BVR.

I believe the assumption was for the advanced variants of both fighters (Mig-29SMT or Mig-35 in the case of the Fulcrum, and Su-30 or Su-35 in the case of the Flanker). The newer versions do have excellent electronics and radars so I wouldn't be surprised at all if they could out perform a basic F-15. Remember the vast majority of the F-15 fleet are still using mechanically scanned radars, while the recent Sukhoi and Mig fighters have moved to electronically scanned systems of some form.

[Retracting Head Ter Ter]

I believe the assumption was for the advanced variants of both fighters (Mig-29SMT or Mig-35 in the case of the Fulcrum, and Su-30 or Su-35 in the case of the Flanker). The newer versions do have excellent electronics and radars so I wouldn't be surprised at all if they could out perform a basic F-15. Remember the vast majority of the F-15 fleet are still using mechanically scanned radars, while the recent Sukhoi and Mig fighters have moved to electronically scanned systems of some form.

OK, if its F-15A vs Su-35 then a <1:1 ratio seems probable but thats still stacked.

[David Hingtgen]

Don't forget the missiles. If it's an AA-11 vs an AIM-9M...

[Bri]

So we are talking about a situation where the most advanced Migs and Sukhois engage the oldest USAF birds in uncontrolled airspace with equal supporting units? To make it more sporty they both don't use their AIM-120s or AA-12s but close up and go toe-to-toe with short range missles and cannons. Yes, I can see where the numbers are coming from.

I guess it's all in the game off course. To sell new material they need to make a look good to whatever is around now. Under realistic conditions I would find it hard to believe that F15Es and F16C Block 50s (or potential upgrades/new to build airframes to the level of F15Ks and F16E Block 60s) wont be able to take on the latest Russian designs. There are probably just as many if not more F15Es flying around then Su30/Su35/J11s.

Edited February 27, 2009 by Bri

[David Hingtgen]

I think the point is more to show how inferior the F-35 is as a fighter, than to bolster the F-22's status. (less money for the F-35 means more for the Raptor) I think the most praise the F-35's got so far is that it's "comparable to" the F-16 in a dogfight. That's not what I'd expect a brand-new plane that's supposed to replace the F-16 for the next 30+ years to be.

[David Hingtgen]

Half of Australia's Super Hornets are to be modified on the production line to allow for future conversion to E/A-18Gs. They'll basically be F/A-18Fs with lots of extra wiring/software inside.

[Nied]

Half of Australia's Super Hornets are to be modified on the production line to allow for future conversion to E/A-18Gs. They'll basically be F/A-18Fs with lots of extra wiring/software inside.

My understanding was that all future F/A-18Fs were going to be like that. Looks like they're making the switchover during productions of the RAAF's lot.

[Nied]

So we are talking about a situation where the most advanced Migs and Sukhois engage the oldest USAF birds in uncontrolled airspace with equal supporting units? To make it more sporty they both don't use their AIM-120s or AA-12s but close up and go toe-to-toe with short range missles and cannons. Yes, I can see where the numbers are coming from.

I guess it's all in the game off course. To sell new material they need to make a look good to whatever is around now. Under realistic conditions I would find it hard to believe that F15Es and F16C Block 50s (or potential upgrades/new to build airframes to the level of F15Ks and F16E Block 60s) wont be able to take on the latest Russian designs. There are probably just as many if not more F15Es flying around then Su30/Su35/J11s.

I think the point is that pound for pound the Su-27 or Mig-29 have worn down the US's previous advantages. They have electronically scanned radars versus the F-15s mechanically scanned ones (a decent electronically scanned radar can have double the range of a mechanical counterpart) and rough parity in missile technology and kinematic performance. In a real war-time scenario an F-15 would likely have the numerical and command assets you mentioned, but those alone aren't going to give it the type superiority the USAF is used to having against newer foes, making a conflict significantly more costly.

[DarkReaper]

Besides you just know that every sam and jet will try to take out those nice slow AWACS in the first engagement of the war.

Russia has the range advantage on the US. I mean their bog standard R-27ER has a range of 130km, far more than AMRAAM or even the R-77M with a range of 175km and fire-and-forget capability. I mean just load some Mig-31s with those and spam the AWACS with missiles.

The high speed of the migs and the long range of the missiles will prevent effective countermeasures.

Ah just read that Russia has designed a special anti-AWACS missile 'K-100' with a range of up to 400km and air-launched.

[Bri]

I think the point is that pound for pound the Su-27 or Mig-29 have worn down the US's previous advantages. They have electronically scanned radars versus the F-15s mechanically scanned ones (a decent electronically scanned radar can have double the range of a mechanical counterpart) and rough parity in missile technology and kinematic performance. In a real war-time scenario an F-15 would likely have the numerical and command assets you mentioned, but those alone aren't going to give it the type superiority the USAF is used to having against newer foes, making a conflict significantly more costly.

I was under the impression a large number of F15s would be upgraded with active phased array radars?

I don't believe airframes make that much of difference anymore (unless they are stealthy ofc). It's information warfare that wins or loses air superiority. Hence my belief that pretty much any decent fighter would do well in a high-tech airforce assuming its equiped with the latest radar and missle tech. Maybe I have to much faith in command, control and communication in that respect.

That said -and slightly OT- any future conflict for any major airforce would be costly if they can't deal with ground based air-to-air fast and effectively. The Isreali's learned that the hard way in the Yom Kippur War. Stealth cracked Iraqi and Serb airdefences but will it work in the future? Imo that's a far greater threat to air superiority then Russian high spec fighters.

[Noyhauser]

Besides you just know that every sam and jet will try to take out those nice slow AWACS in the first engagement of the war.

Russia has the range advantage on the US. I mean their bog standard R-27ER has a range of 130km, far more than AMRAAM or even the R-77M with a range of 175km and fire-and-forget capability. I mean just load some Mig-31s with those and spam the AWACS with missiles.

The high speed of the migs and the long range of the missiles will prevent effective countermeasures.

Ah just read that Russia has designed a special anti-AWACS missile 'K-100' with a range of up to 400km and air-launched.

Yeah and you should also take statistics on Russian missiles, as well as their reliability, with a grain of salt. Simply put, Russian missiles are still a generation behind the United States. The K-100 has never even flown operationally... partly because it could not secure funding until recently. That should be a pretty clear indication as to the level of funding for AAMs that presently exists Russia. The record of the R-27 during the 1998 to 2000 Ethiopian/Eritrean War (Which the Russians used as a testing ground for new AAMs,) was dismal; of twenty four missiles launched only one hit.

Moreover few countries would ever possess such advanced weapons. Prior to September 11th the USAF had a serious aversion to air casualties due to political considerations. Thats really no longer true. If we ever went up against a state possessing such advanced airframes like Flankers, the USAF/USN would likely deploy overwhelming force. India (which we're highly unlikely ever to face a confrontation with) with forty eight SU-27s, can't hold out against a sustained air campaign. The same goes for China, though the margins are a slimmer. Still, war with either of these states will almost certainly result in a U.S. victory with its present capability for the foreseeable future, the only question is the margin. Much of the histrionics involved is based on defence manufacturers and armchair strategists trying to claim a gap exists to drum up support for more sales.

Thats not to say that buying more F-22s is a bad idea, but some of the arguments being brought up to support it don't hold up to scrutiny.

[F-ZeroOne]

AESA radars don't hold all the advantages; my understanding is that range can come at the expense of a narrower field-of-view; I believe the Eurofighter consortium decided that the technology wasn't quite mature enough at the time they decided to go with a mechanically operated array (though an AESA is a possibble future upgrade).

[Temjin]

I'm just wondering something on the F-14, why sometime it has those long black rectangular shape painted above the intake?

pic from this site

http://www.richard-seaman.com/Aircraft/Air...cats/index.html

[David Hingtgen]

Anti-slip stuff for when you're walking on top of the intakes.