The undecided air-superiority debate

[SpetsnazWarriorX 0]

Having recently looked into the 'stealth' aircraft of the present and past generations of military aviation, I was left openly wondering what is THE best air-superiority fighter aircraft out there today. Eurofighter? Gripen? F-15? You name 'em, I listen

[dayglow 2]

Are we talking operational or aircraft that will enter service in the next few years? (if the latter it would be F-22 hands down)

For the former the Russians have some amazing planes in the Su-27 family. Great range, good payload (10+ AAMs), decent radar and amazing agility.

But it's not just the plane that wins the fight, the pilot is the key and nothing can top the west for pilots. In a real life situation my money would be on the F-15. The west has had years to perfect BVR tatics where they deiny a shot to the enemy while getting one off on their own. Once within WVR the superior training and tatics of the western pilot would more than make up for the performance advantage of the SU.

COLINMAN

[Paratrooper 0]

Woo, lets have another partialy-informed "which plane is best?" argument...

[SpetsnazWarriorX 0]

Well, yeah... Lol. I WAS actually wondering who would emerge victorious if all four of the best current U.S. jets were pitted against other in guns-only combat. If four pilots of equal skill, ability, etc. battled it out in the F-14, F-15, F-16, and F/A-18, who would get eliminated first, then second, and then finally, who would 'win' the one-on-one gunnery knife fight? My open bet would be the sluggish [compared to the rest anyway] F/A-18 getting eradicated easily first, with the F-16 bravely trying to hold its own against the two twin-engined fighters. Conclusion: F-14 - I dunno why, something of a gut feeling says the F-14 might just get lucky... Have they even tried it sometime?

[Assault (CAN) 1]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Woo, lets have another partialy-informed "which plane is best?" argument...<span id='postcolor'>

Do you know of any aviation experts on this forum? I don't. Just because we may not know everything doesn't mean we can't have a discussion.

In the next five years, the F-22 Raptor will be the fighter to beat. It's engines (Pratt & Whitney F119-PW-100) have the ability to supercruise (go supersonic without the aide of an afterburner). The engines also have a unique feature called 'thrust vectoring' which changes the direction of the engine exaust vertically to give the F-22 good agility. It has internal weapons bays, all of the missiles can be stored internally, adding to the stealth factor. The weapons bays can hold a max of 6x AIM-120C AMRAAM missiles, or 2 AMRAAMs and 2x 1000lb GBU-30 JDAM guided bombs; the two side bays can hold 1x AIM-9M each. If needed, additional weapons can be added to the wings.

With the range of the AIM-120's (24 nautical miles), the F-22 can shoot down enemy planes before the F-22 can even be detected. The radar set, the AN/APG-77 can detect any target to the front or sides of the aircraft and has a range of 40 nautical miles.

The main advantage of the F-22 is it's stealth ability. It is built with advanced composites and radar absorbing materials combined with the design of the airframe which renders it nearly invisible to most current radars, especially from below. The onboard computer has the power of two Cray Supercomputers, combined with fiber-optic data transmission, and integrated communications, navigation, and identification modules, put into an advanced avionics suite configured for easy pilot use. Simplicity is a good thing to have when caught in a dog-fight.

Tyler

[Harnu 0]

I heard that in an Air-to-Air combat, the F22 Raptor has the radar signature of a tennis ball? Is that true?

[Renagade 0]

What are the specs for the eurofighter and also the other new european plane(mainly french i think) and there was another one being joint developed/or we`re getting them by the US/UK that had capabilities like the harrier jump jet.

[red oct 2]

thats one sexy pic you posted, i bet photographers make cash by the shit loads by taking these kinda pics.

[dayglow 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (SpetsnazWarriorX @ June 26 2002,18:41)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Well, yeah... Lol.  I WAS actually wondering who would emerge victorious if all four of the best current U.S. jets were pitted against other in guns-only combat. If four pilots of equal skill, ability, etc. battled it out in the F-14, F-15, F-16, and F/A-18, who would get eliminated first, then second, and then finally, who would 'win' the one-on-one gunnery knife fight? My open bet would be the sluggish [compared to the rest anyway] F/A-18 getting eradicated easily first, with the F-16 bravely trying to hold its own against the two twin-engined fighters. Conclusion: F-14 - I dunno why, something of a gut feeling says the F-14 might just get lucky... Have they even tried it sometime?  <span id='postcolor'>

Man that's a tough question. I wouldn't rule out the F/A-18. What do you mean by sluggish. Actually if the fight was a slow, twisting, turning affair then the F/A-18 actually is the best high alpha performer. From what I have read one rule is to never get into a slow-fight with the Bug. The F-16 is the best sustained turn performer, so if the fight stayed level, then the F-16 would be able to turn inside the other planes and hold that turn, so after a few hard turns, the F-16 is better able to hold the turn. The F-15 is a great all around plane and with it's engines it would be able to hold it's energy better. It would fight in the vertical using it's T/W advantage. It isn't a slouch in the turn either. The F-14 with it's swing wing is a good turner and has amazing rudder authority at low speed. A good pilot can swing it around with the rudder. It may not look as manouverable, but remember navy pilots learn to fly against the A-4/F-5/F-16 in adversary training and they learn how to outfly a smaller, more ninble plane.

Myself, guns only, I would go with the F-16/ F/A-18 myself. Both can turn faster and harder and have advanced flight control computers that makes flying on the edge of the envelope easier. The F-14/F-15 can too, but it's more dependant on the pilot than the airframe. Ultimately I'd say the F-16 flown by a smart pilot and not getting too slow would beat the F/A-18

Can you tell my fist love is flight sims? All in all there are too many variables so really a x vs x plane debate comes down to who is the loudest cheerleader.

COLINMAN

[LBGS_Stewart 0]

actuly when i was watching Discovery wings on the sattlight and they had a thing on stealth. is i reamber right i think they said the F-22 had a siginture of a Dragon fly. dont quote me on this this is what i am getting from memory but not shure if i got the facts strate. but steath dose it really play a bit part yes it dose actuly think about it. you cant shoot what you cant see. and if you are not seen you most likly wouldnt be shot. but on another note i dont reamber which air craft was or just a tattic they used they had two aircraft up forward with the Radar off and one in the back with it going and when it picked something up on radar the computer would relay it from one aircraft to the ones in the front and this giveing another advantage because the aircraft wherent as easy to detect with its radar off,

[billytran 0]

The F-22 Raptor is probably the best fighter jet out there. The awesome maneuverability, stealth, supercruise etc. all contribute to one bad ass jet. The Russians have a lot of cool aircraft too. The Su-35 is probably the most likely to challenge the F-22 since more countries will have them. The MiG-35 probably has a chance against the F-22 but nobody can afford it.

The US has a big advantage over other countries as far as air superiority goes because they have AWACS. A fighter squadron with AWACS support will always beat one without it.

BTW, does anybody know anything about the S-37 Berkut? It looks pretty cool with those forward swept wings, but what other features does it have.

[dayglow 2]

The thing you have to remember about both the Mig-35 and S-37 is that they were both technologyical demonstrators. They were airframes and nothing else. They didn't have working avionics such as radar or EW suites so their performance is just speculation. The S-37 with it's forward swept wings would probably be the most manouvrable fighter ever, but that doesn't count anymore

select the movie on the left hand side

missile shots from across the circle can happen now. The winner of the fight is the one with the best sensors and BVR tatics and the West is way ahead in this. That's what the F-22 was built for. First sight, first shot, first kill.

COLINMAN

[Harnu 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> but on another note i dont reamber which air craft was or just a tattic they used they had two aircraft up forward with the Radar off and one in the back with it going and when it picked something up on radar the computer would relay it from one aircraft to the ones in the front and this giveing another advantage because the aircraft wherent as easy to detect with its radar off,<span id='postcolor'> They guy behind is the wingman I believe. The front guy gets the stealth, while the back guy gives the info.

[dayglow 2]

Also the radar on the F-22 is totally new LPI (low probability of intercept) design. Basically it is completely digital and solid state, no moving parts including the attenna. The attenna face is actually made up of dozens of tiny independant radar attenas all working in a different bandwith and scanning different parts of the sky. Each individual attenna theoredically doesn't put out enough energy to tip of RWRs and since there all using different frequencies, nothing is picked up. The computer then sorts and reads all of the signals providing a picture for the pilot. Pretty cool eh?

COLINMAN

[Ruud van Nistelrooy 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (SpetsnazWarriorX @ June 27 2002,02:05)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Having recently looked into the 'stealth' aircraft of the present and past generations of military aviation, I was left openly wondering what is THE best air-superiority fighter aircraft out there today. Eurofighter? Gripen? F-15? You name 'em, I listen  <span id='postcolor'>

Well, i dunno where this thread has gone since, but i like to study the odd poiece of military hardware.

All yanks will say that the F-22 is the god of all fighters, and, lets face it, it is, probably no aircraft can go toe to toe with an F-22.

Well, the F-22 is pretty useless. All military airforces are going for the whole destroy aircraft while they are on the ground type of thing. NATO has great air power to do this incredibly successfully. The F-22 in itself is strictly air to air. It does have air to ground capability, but, its in no way better than an F-15 at taking out ground targets.

The conclusion - the F-22 will be 200million dollar flying eye candy. As always, the daft yanks will build thousands of them anyway simply because it looks pretty good, but the fact remains it will probably never be used for its intended purpose - to shoot down enemy aircraft in the air. Even then it is overkill, F-15 and F-16's can still do that job very effectivly. Unless the US declare war on China, Europe, Russia - a force that can actually retaliate with large numbers of fighters - the F-22 is, in two words, fucking useless, and also a waste of money. As with much yank equipment, i think it was just designed to show the world that the yanks are better at making fighters than everyone else, because it doesn't really serve any other purpose that older aircraft do not.

Plus, people have been debating the effectiveness of stealth for ages, it is after all, pretty easy to detect them so long as you know what you're doing and you have specialised equipment.

Most combat will be done BVR from now on, if there ever will be combat air to air between fighters again. As such, i think all ofd these aircraft are pretty similar, the F-22 has its stealth, which gives it an advantage, but its debatable how big an advantage it is. I think its the russians who lead the way it fucking up stealth, i read somewhere they're working on radar that goes after heat signitures and stuff really effectivly.

My conclusion - all these next generation fighters are pretty much the same - the F-22 wins the top trumps contest for being stealthy, but thats cancelled out because it costs 3 times more than a SU-30 or eurofighter.

The Sukhoi series gets muchos extra points for flexibility (Air to Air, BVR, Dogfighting, AWACs, dedicated Air to Ground....). The eurofighter has some mean BVR weapons though.

[Tex -USMC- 0]

Stealth aint where its at, at least not in fighters. Definitely in tactical/strategic bombers though. The F117 has earned its laurels, and will continue to do so.

No, for fighters, its really not necessary to be truly stealthy. A low observable design coupled with liberal use of RAM does help though.

No, in the air superiority game, Airborne Early Warning is where its at. To have a great big eye in the sky that can be the proverbial ring master, putting everything where it can do the most good, is far more important a factor than who has the spiffiest fighter. Besides, get a big enough radar in the right spot and you will start getting hits on stealth aircraft eventually.

[Sadico 1]

The best fighter aircrafts currently in service are the Rafale and the Su-33, but that will change in a few years (Typhoon, F-22, JSF, J-10, etc)

Dayglow, the aim-9x has nothing new. Missiles such as the aa-11, the python 4 and the asraam are just as capable and have been in service for some time now.

[S.F.F.R 0]

Ok.

About stealth technology - if use this technology as F-117 - SUCKS !!!

F-117 very not stabile (Yogoslavia - 1 shoot down + 2 trouble with engine)

F-22 - good composite stealth technology and avionoc.

About AIM-9. Russian R-XX series better.

[SpetsnazWarriorX 0]

F-117 'stealth fighter' is its common name, although I've tried to find out its combat record regarding air-to-air kills. The term 'fighter' given to any aircraft, should mean that it can effectively and effeciently hold its own in any air-combat situation. However, I strongly reckon its pretty useless in any dogfight, simply because of the lack of a cannon, even though its capable of carrying two AIM-9 Sidewinders. But even then, there's a delay of some sorts, with the internal bay doors opening and closing, etc. So, by the time any form of missile has been launched, the ol' Nighthawk will have been blown clean out of the sky.

Another thing I heard recently within the last couple of years, was the fact that Iraqi military has discovered the technology behind 'stealth'. So, really, stealth isn't that taboo or secretive in the military aviation business these days. I would prefer stealth to become obsolete, and so bring back the good old days of 'Top Gun' visual-attack ranges!

Regarding my earlier comment stating that the F/A-18 was, in my opinion, sluggish; what I meant was, it cannot turn as quickly as any of the other aircraft I mentioned. Its top speed is only a mere Mach 1.9 or so, and in a slow-paced knife fight, it would lose speed far too easily to remain competetive. I don't think it can perform an Immelman or Split-S without stalling or breaking up into bits.

[EveronVetsAgainstTheWar 0]

The Rafale is a cool fighter but it's no way the BEST fighter in the world, and France has less than 50 of them.

[billytran 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Ruud van Nistelrooy @ June 27 2002,10:04)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Well, the F-22 is pretty useless. All military airforces are going for the whole destroy aircraft while they are on the ground type of thing. NATO has great air power to do this incredibly successfully. The F-22 in itself is strictly air to air. It does have air to ground capability, but, its in no way better than an F-15 at taking out ground targets.<span id='postcolor'>

It's no good to make one jet to do everything. That makes for lots of sacrafices and you never get exactly what you want. The F-22 is our next generation air dominator, and the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter is our air to ground fighter. The F-35 can do air to air, but it's optimized for air to ground. F-22 is not meant to be a real air to ground fighter.

[Ruud van Nistelrooy 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (billytran @ June 27 2002,17:33)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">4--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Ruud van Nistelrooy @ June 27 2002,104)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Well, the F-22 is pretty useless. All military airforces are going for the whole destroy aircraft while they are on the ground type of thing. NATO has great air power to do this incredibly successfully. The F-22 in itself is strictly air to air. It does have air to ground capability, but, its in no way better than an F-15 at taking out ground targets.<span id='postcolor'>

It's no good to make one jet to do everything.  That makes for lots of sacrafices and you never get exactly what you want.  The F-22 is our next generation air dominator, and the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter is our air to ground fighter.  The F-35 can do air to air, but it's optimized for air to ground.  F-22 is not meant to be a real air to ground fighter.<span id='postcolor'>

The F-22 is just eye candy. Given the tactics of NATO - to destroy enemy aircraft way before they can even take-off - makes them a mere convenience.The JSF is a great piece of kit - and ultimatly will be more useful. The NATO military has Artillery, Bombers, Gunships, Cruise missles... all to destroy enemy aircraft on the ground - the safest place to hit a fighter. So what is the point of having F-22's if another fighter, at about a 6th of the price, can take on all those *sarcasm* incredibly nasty iraqi Mig-21's as well as destroy ground targets?

The only use for a F-22 is against bigger nations anyway. It seems we're just fighting middle eastern and asian countries - in these cases F-15's, 16's and 18's do the job just fine. The eurofighter as well will be ample to take on any Russian made equipment as well.

The fact is, the F-22 may be the snazziest piece of kit the USA have ever produced, but the fact is it is a complete waste of 100-200million dollars, given that it doesn't really fit into NATO tactics, and that there is still no competition in the world for a good ol' F-15 (considering the sukhois haven't been mass produced really). We all know the USA squander money on pointless shite, but the fact remains, it would be more effective and efficient to buy 6 F-15's for 200million rather than a single F-22. The F-22 lacks the flexibility to justify its cost.

It is, quite simply, utterly useless. The JSF isn't, and i think everyone would be wise to invest in these rather than the overrated F-22.

[foxer 0]

The only use for a F-22 is against bigger nations anyway.

How do you know bigger nations won't ? I think this is technology to stay ahead of everyone,soo bigger nation,smaller nation will know that america still has big military/very high tech military.So they won't do somethig stupid.Like take over countries(unless they are living in africa).

Do you know the f-117 was made in the 1970s ? Crazy isn't it ? We didn't even know about it until the gulf war.Soo i wonder what other planes they are hiding from us and only will bring it out in the next big war.

[SpetsnazWarriorX 0]

Thing is, when IS the 'next big war' going to happen? Because, it seems to me, a lot of nations are all content with this "unity, peace, let us all get along together like a big fairytale" shit. Back in the days of WWII, most nations were cocky, world domination-hungry superpowers [at the time]. Germany, they wanted to take over the world, and no-one was truly a superpower in the immediate years of WWII, until U.S. became the pioneer [i think...?] in nuclear arms. So, today, there are so many extremely powerful nations; U.S., U.K., India, Pakistan, Israel, Russia, China, Middle-East combined together, and many more. But, all these countries are fairly unified in one way or another, and I reckon a war can only be referred to as a 'World War', if more than four continents start battling all-out. Someone I knew, said that Operation Infinate Justice could've so easily erupted into a world war. I think not, because Afghanistan is a fairly primitive nation when it comes to warfare [apart from terrorism], and in total reality, warfare is only decided using high-power weapons, military aviation, and as Intruder puts it: "Peace through superior firepower"

[Ruud van Nistelrooy 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (foxer @ June 27 2002,21:09)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The only use for a F-22 is against bigger nations anyway.

How do you know bigger nations won't ? I think this is technology to stay ahead of everyone,soo bigger nation,smaller nation will know that america still has big military/very high tech military.So they won't do somethig stupid.Like take over countries(unless they are living in africa).

Do you know the f-117 was made in the 1970s ? Crazy isn't it ? We didn't even know about it until the gulf war.Soo i wonder what other planes they are hiding from us and only will bring it out in the next big war.<span id='postcolor'>

Well, look at all the newest technology the yanks are bringing out - stealth fighters, stelth bombers, stealth ships, stealth tanks, stealth gunships, stealth troops, stealth burgens, stealth hats, stealth shoe laces....

i'd imagine it'd be yet another overly elaborate stealth thing with better missles. Expect to see them bombing Iraqi residential areas in 2004, where they can really show off just how technologically superior they are, and how easily they can elude primative iraqi radar. Just like the gulf war really.

It is gonna be really funny when someone finds a sure fire way of detecting stealth aircraft, or of course when one of them gets shot down by an evil farmer brandishing a musket or something.

Then again, it's also something to think about - would the yanks send 1 billion dollars (5 f-22's) worth of hardware into the gulf, or anywhere that they risk getting shot down?

And after all, they could just get shot to shit on the ground, or an aircraft carrier could hit a WW2 mine etc... etc... (insert all the ways you can think of destroying an F-22 no matter how bloody stealthy it is, there are a few of them).

Its not like America needs F-22 just to scare small/big nations. Thats what nuclear weapons do and also the existing big fuck off most powerful army in the world does this pretty well. Its not like the Al-queda will be shitting themselves because the yanks are sending F-22's against them