So, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin watched a test flight yesterday of the Sukhoi built T-50 PAK-FA fighter, nosed around its cockpit, and promptly declared it better than the F-22 Raptor. Now that’s an impressive marketing campaign; although, I’m not sure how much real cred the Putin seal of approval carries. I do know the Russians are desperate to revive the fortunes of a flagging defense industry whose products must now compete globally with low cost Chinese knock-offs.
“This machine will be superior to our main competitor, the F-22, in terms of maneuverability, weaponry and range,” Putin told the pilot after the flight, according to an account on the government website.
Putin said the plane would cost up to three times less than similar aircraft in the West and could remain in service for 30 to 35 years with upgrades, according to the report.”
I wonder if the F-22 loving (and JSF hating) Air Power Australia folks have anything to say about the PAK-FA versus the Raptor. Oh, look, here’s a comparison:
“Fights between the F-22A and the PAK-FA will be close, high, fast and lethal. The F-22A may get ‘first look’ with the APG-77, the Advanced Infra Red Search and Track (AIRST) sensor having been deleted to save money, but the PAK-FA may get ‘first look’ using its advanced infrared sensor. Then, the engagement becomes a supersonic equivalent of the Battle of Britain or air combat over North Korea. The outcome will be difficult to predict as it will depend a lot on the combat skills of the pilots and the capabilities of the missiles for end-game kills. There is no guarantee that the F-22 will prevail every time.”
(Video of the test flight below).
Now, while the Air Power Australia guys put together some often impressive analyses, they are a very biased source:
“In basic grand strategy terms, the arrival of the PAK-FA leaves the United States with only one viable option if it intends to remain viable in the global air power game — build enough F-22 Raptors to replace most of the US legacy fighter fleet, and terminate the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter as soon as possible, as the F-35 will no longer be a usable combat aircraft for roles other than Counter Insurgency (COIN), though more cost effective and more appropriate solutions already exist for this role.”
I think we’ll have to await further testing and some closer looks at the PAK-FA before making any conclusions.
– Greg Grant
Not sure it matters which airplane is better. If you can buy 3 or 4 of the Russian plane for each F22, then that means you can have planes covering areas in which there might be no F22’s because the enemy could not afford enough of them to provide coverage everywhere.
ever herd the term “Force multiplier”?
You cannot just buy three or four planes you kind of have to build them first. Russia has ZERO experience building LO aircraft.
I drive a Ford F-150. It cost about 30 grand when I bought it 5 years ago.
Jay Leno drives a Ferrari that costs 300 grand.
Since my truck is cheaper than his Ferrari, obvioulsy i have more vehicles than Jay Leno. Oh, wait a minute. You say Jay Leno owns like 200 cars? And I only own one? How can this be? Oh, that’s right. Jay Leno makes a lot more money than I do.
Even if Russia is telling the truth, and they can buy these planes for a third the price of a Raptor, we will still have more. Because we have a lot more money than Russia.
I guess you don’t read the news Brian. The U.S. doesn’t have a lot more money than Russia. The Chicoms own us. Congress has spent us into oblivion. Russia has hugh gold reserves. Russian has natural oil and gas that is sells to Europe. Obama made us shut down what oil/gas wells we have. WE ARE BROKE as a nation. The Chicoms and George Soros own everything.
I realize that this nonsense is conventional wisdom on internet blogs but you really don’t know what you are talking about. The US GDP is about 8.4 times that of the Russian Federation. If you knew that, you sure have a funny definition of “not a lot more money than Russia.”
Data about FX reserves or gold is mercantilist nonsense. Not important except in how it contributes to GDP.
The Chicoms do not “own” the USA in any sense. They invest in US securities because they see them as the best, safest investment in the world. If they decide to suddently sell US bonds, they will create problems for themselves that are at least as big as those they create for the USA.
What you have buddy is an increasing percentage of unemployment, a national debt worth trillions, and an uncontrollable oil spill.
I think you should wake up for what you own and what you owe.
It’s not even a STealth fighter you people are either uneducated or so dim you buy into this farce. This is a flanker.…… a good airplane that’s 20+ years old and it is close to the performance of an F-15C
Paul the not so Great:
You should educate yourself. If you bothered to click on the links you would get a very quick and enlightening lesson on VLO aircraft technology and how it equates to this new Russian aircraft. But of course you would still disagree! Unlike we uneducated and dim-witted readers who depend on readily available information and believe in fact finding before commenting. You obviously know everything.
The PAK-FA is not called the Toad for nothing. It is flat and wide like a toad. Our new AIM-120C and –D missiles are designed to fly ballistically for better range, and they will come screaming down on the PAK-FAs as their large flat upper surface provides a great radar return. Unless PAK-FA pilots start flying with their wing tips in the vertical, they will always be vulnerable.
You could only have more planes if you have enough space to hold them. More planes= more or even bigger carriers and facilities to store them= production= money, last time I checked every military service is trying to kick people out to save money and to open billets. So I doubt Obama is up for spending a few bill to have more of something when he’s cutting jobs.
Al this things will rust and will not last forever, but our life with Jesus Christ will last forever.
I agree, and “this” things will help His enemies see Jesus early.
Amen!!!
Unless JC resurrects himself as an a**-kicking fighter pilot, this means somewhere less than squat.
Sorry to break it to you buddy but it won’t. You just rot in the ground.
“It meets all the requirements for internal carriage for those types of platforms [such as the stealthy F-22]. We have not shot NCADE from a UAV yet, but it is on our horizon.”
Raytheon, Darpa and Air Force officials will not discuss ranges, but those with insight into the technology say radar ranges vary from around 90 mi. with an F-16-size AESA radar to perhaps 150 mi. with an F-15 size antenna. Missile ranges are well over 100 mi. That kind of performance, mixed with new algorithms and advanced datalinks could subsequently make the combination of the faster, higher-flying F-22 and improved air-to-air missile a viable weapon against SRBMs in the terminal phase and possibly low-flying satellites, says a senior U.S. Air Force official.” Ares
A role for F-22s? With so few F-22s why even debate? It seems that Gates misreads the future mission profiles including counters to his threat assessment today regarding the proliferation of missiles (see above), the difference between one and two engines (F-35 isn’t even a concern for Putin), the capabilities of new fighters and the markets for them in Asia and elsewhere. So again, what does it matter? 130 Raptors won’t be much of a threat to greater numbers of very capable aircraft.….
The solution would be to continue Raptors with improvements until we have alternatives or another fighter program.
The question is: how many of these things will the Russians crash at airshows.
about as many as F-22‘s crash during training or testing
How many F22’s have crashed please tell us the numbers…
No F22s have crashed while testing or at airshows. Yet. But then neither have T-50s. Yet.
1992: Preproduction F-22 crash due to software error resulting in PIO. A/C not destroyed.
2004: Production F22 crash on takeoff due to software error in flight controls, since corrected. A/C destroyed.
2009: Fatal production F22 crash on simulated bomb run due to pilot GLOC. A/C destroyed.
We need to build a fighter that is a match for modern fighters and train great pilots. Rather then doing that, we try to use over whelming technology to stay ahead of our foes which is more costly. Lets spend some time training our pilots. Lets send them to do more exercises with potential enemies. Also lets try to not build a air craft with so many bells and whistles that a pilot almost poops him self when you tell him he has to retrain on it.
Case in point, the japanese fly RF-4s or as we called them on base super phantoms. These things regularly beat us pilots in dog fights. The japaense also fly a much leaner version of f-16 and it also tends to do alot better in exercise dog fights.
The Japanese F-2 (upgraded F-16) was such a boondoggle it cost almost as much as an F-22, and was built in equally small numbers. I doubt an RF-4 could beat any of our guys unless they started on our six to begin with. Then it might be a 50:50 chance for the RF-4. If that was not the case I doubt they would be replacing them soon. Plus, it must be a b***h to maintain. Imagine finding 1960s based electronic parts.
The United States has always been 10 or 20 years ahead of the Russians, even when you thought the Russians were a match-up they were just pretending (such as the ICBM race). I’d be surprised if this thing ever even makes it off of the assembly line, all they had to do was make something that looked like an F-22 and say it was just as good, fly it around real fast and they can feel secure.
The F-35B has an internal space to carry a turbofan for VTOL but it is also thought to contain a laser. When the 100kw+ energy weapon stored inside this bay becomes a reality it will change everything. What then?
Queue the sharks with lasers on their heads jokes…
The space where the lift fan goes on an F-35B contains a fuel tank on the F-35A and F-35C. You’ll have to find some where else to store your ill-tempered, laser-equipped sea bass (places pinkie finger near edge of mouth and laughs evilly).
Yep, and we were first sending people into space too.
…wasn’t that the Russians?
Yep, they were also the first to develop combat effective short take off planes too. I dont think we can build an air born laster that small.…considering the only ABL currently in the air uses an airliner for an air frame. I would rather think we should invest in Air born fighter drones before that happens. ALA episode one fighter droids.
about the laser thing; check the firestrike laser built by boeing specificly for the F35…
“The United States has always been 10 or 20 years ahead of the Russians”
Which would mean that this comparison would be valid if the Raptor was a design from 10 to 20 years ago.
The first production standard aircraft flight was 1997.
Better than the Raptor and 2 to 3 times less cost. We call that where I’m from “talk is cheap” The Russians have been tauting there planes as better than everyone else’s, well the combat records speak for themselfs and according to my score card they are losing. Not that I’m doubting the word of Prime Minister Putin, I just don’t believe him. because did’nt the Russians say that about the SU27, SU37, SU47 and now this Raptor copy. Only time and combat will tell and I have to go with history and cast my doubts about this thing.
In WWII, the Germans had arguably the best tanks in the Panther and Tiger. Only problem, they were expensive and hard to produce. We had the Sherman, which was obsolete and not very good, but we had a zillion of them. They were cheap and quick to produce. The Russians had the T-34 which had a good gun and armor, was cheap and quick to produce. The Germans lost the armor war.
Our miltary industrial complex allows perfect to be the enemy of cheap and good enough to get by.
Really, the Russians think they can build 3 of these for the price of a F-22, F-35, or F-15SE? That and the idea it will enter service two years from now are insanity.
I am no fan of APA and for the most part I think they are crazy, although I do support the idea of resuming production of an improved F-22C featuring EOTS or AIRST, side AESA arrays, and other upgrades mostly related to avionics. A system like the F-35’s AN/AAQ-37 DAS would also be useful but may be too difficult to integrate.
I would also like to see a ramjet assisted AMRAAM replacement like the concept Raytheon was showing back around 2005 IIRC.
The truth is that is a Flanker wih a bunch of wanna b low observables stuck to it. Putin is dreaming, they are years (as in many for all of you posting replies) from serious production and even so they may be able to pitch this stuff to India and China but the rest of the world will be buying American. Why? Because it is IN PRODUCTION AND IT IS BETTER.….… DREAMERS
F-35 is in production? Do tell!
While they are still on the line, the F-35 is in production. We are now buying about 30 or more a year. They will be forming test and evaluation units first, training units next, and then combat units, so they don’t become operational for a while, but production units could be used in a pinch as soon as next year I guess, just not very likely, but it is unlikely that we will be fighting PAK-FAs next year also.
LRIP with only a fraction of flight tests performed, a fraction of the flight envelope explored does not sound like the greatest idea to me. Potential modifications may make the early airframes unuseable. I think it’s an LM ruse to lock in the buyers. AFAIK, the F-22 underwent a great deal more flight testing before entering production.
My thoughts exactly, if we kept the F-22 in low rate “lean” production, making long lead buys of some parts so we could close out small parts suppliers, we could continue to produce better F-22s, complicating our enemies planning. Does this F-22 have the side array AESA or not? EOTS or not? Also, it is not surprising the the PAK-FA did not show up until after the F-22 was placed out of production. Think how much smarter it would be to keep the Russians and Chinese guessing as to how long we will keep the F-22 production line going.
The issue I have with Bob’s take is that the limiting factor in Air combat would seem to be really good pilots, not the aircrafts themselves. A society can produce almost unlimited numbers of tank crews, but not so with really good or even exceptional pilots. Matching top pilots with the best technology and great war planning will give us a great chance of success.
Until they are dead. The Japs had some of the best most highly trained , and experienced, pilots in the world at the start of WWII. Only problem, they could not replace them as quick as we could kill them, and replace our own lost pilots. Quanity has a quality all its own.
Actually, the Japanese planes were poorly armored and didn’t have self sealing fuel blatters, and if hit were easier to kill. We saved many of our pilots with better protected planes, and we took great pains to return those that were shot down if possible. So, while the Japs could still train good pilots for a long time, they didn’t last as long as ours did, because their country didn’t value them. By valuing our pilot, the best remained around longer, helping to break in the new pilots.
Happened with the Germans as well. The attrition rate with the Battle of Britain decimated some of their top squadrons. Eventually, the Germans got so deperate they were using kamikaze attacks against bomber raids, except with specially armored planes to provide as much survivability for the pilot as possible. And the Germans had arugably some of the best planes in teh war.
That looks like our US Northrop F-23 or YF-23 Black Wisow II fighter jets. http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=f-23+fighter&...
See also: http://www.ausairpower.net/TE-ATF-91.html.
I hope the airforce will also mass produce the YF-23.
I mean lets be serious about this, did anyone expect Putin to say “Hey its a cheap knockoff of the F-22, and will be shot out of the sky in any realistic scenario for 2/3 rds the price”
If anything Putin just gave the free world more reason to buy the F-35 since the F-18, F-15 and F-16 will judged to be outclassed as adequate front line fighters. If anyone thinks the cheap crap they build their fighters with is going to be anywhere as near as stealthy as a F-35 or an F-22 your out of your mind. In this new world of aircombat, if your detected within missile range before you can detect the other guy, YOUR DEAD.
This new Russian fighter is just a flying coffin, unfit to be used against any moderately advanced western nation.
Is that like You-are dead (you’re).
Or bring out Your dead…???
It’s just a nutcraker. Anyone in the market world would say mine is better than them. It looks like they copy some of our F-23 design prototype qualities. On the end the original design is better and will outlast the copycat.
I think the Pak-Fa is heavy on the radar (4) so he who finds first, fires first. Does anyone here really think we have sufficient numbers of F-22s do do much fighting with them? It is rather funny seeing us upgrade F-16s, F-18s. F-15s, and even Warthogs well past their prime, but shut down advances in the best fighter we have. F-35s have a way to go and certainly don’t match up with other two engine aircraft. I hear the Typhoon beats it in simulated dog fights. Lasers? That seems a way off. How do you power and cool them? Will that lower mileage and performance? How heavy and will there be a target able turret?
And what stealthy jet do we have that can penetrate adversarial airspace and launch boost phase missiles or serve as operational control for such a forward force over enemy skies?
Russia is counting on India and others to help with costs and the F-35 fiasco ain’t helping. Without advances made on the Raptor, how do we know that Putin hasn’t some spy-gotten counter built into the Pak-Fa design? I don’t understand the logic.
to answer teh Laser question, the idea is to modify the B modle F-35, replacing the VTOL equipment and lift fan with a shaft driven generator hooked to whatever laser module. in theory, its doable but i dont think the laser is ready yet. it does pose an interesting idea, and would be a serious threat to anythign it would face. but the tech is still a few years out, and would be damn expensive
As electric solid state lasers are smaller and become more of a reality, this is possible. Might be interesting to see how one pilot manages to acquire, identify, lock on, and fire it. Sounds like the computer would be doing most of that kind of work. Certainly it would be useful against SAMs as long as no more than 3 or 4 SAMs are targeting you on a sunny cloudless day.
oh also, the F-35 and typhoon are two very different, and frankly not comparable aircraft. the Typhoon is more maneuverable, and faster than the F-35 is, so its not exactly a fair fight based on airframes.
The PAK-FA seems to be showing a lot of rivets all over it’s body. That can’t help its stealth, can it? At least it indicates that it’s not made of advanced materials.
Not to be a biased russian but every comment I read screams stereotypes and underestimation. The same mistakes as by Dzin Gis Han, Karl Gustav, Napoleon, Hitler…
It does not have to look “sexy” or “cool” to be a good weapon. American weapon system are complex and look sophisticated because they have to attract the attention of the potential buyer who acting like a “savvy” buyer also pays attention to how well it looks…
M-16 looked so modern and sexy and sophisticated when it came out and it still does.. now go ahead and try to make someone in the world buy it over an ugly, uncool, unsexy AK…but which one is a better weapon..? Which one is on the flags of five nations…
Those nations with they Ak on the flag dont seem to be doin so well. We live pretty well due to American invention and innovation. The Ak is popular because its a cheapa$$ pos that cant hit the side of a barn at 150 yards. The M16 I believe was designed for conscripts in Vietnam. It fires a small bullet so that the conscripts could carry more ammo and pray n spray. I believe the M14 was superior to the Ak in every way, so thats the gun we should’ve kept.
They are not rivets.
The first PAK-FA does not have serpentine engine inlets, does not seen to have aft sector LO treatment, and does not seem to have IR treatment on the engine outlets.
The front sector looks initially similar to the F-22 and YF-23 but the angles and creases are actually very different in detail.
I wonder if the current prototypes are LO at all. So in some sense we have no idea what the capabilities of the Russian stealth fighter are, because it might not even exist yet.
Having said that, Gates was a fool to cancel the F-22 at 187 copies.
Apparently the rear end will undergo a lot of change in later airframes. This one is only for testing aerodynamics and FCS integration.
The jet may fail at stealth speed, looking at the body frame. It definitely will fail.
It’s a poor design I may say.
Too much vodka
The day the Ruskies come up with a stealth dogfighter, is that day the US should be concerned. Most of the US fleet is intended for long range engagement, with the ability to dogfight if needed. The Russians have always gone for dogfighter first, and they’re current fleet of Migs and SUs are world class close in. Now they are stealthy too, our long range capability becomes mute. I don’t know, we’ll see if they can get the flight our in, keep them fueled and operational in enough numbers.
I’d say just continue to develop and mass produce F-35 and YF-23 and add recoinnaissance and monitor on it. These two jets are excellent in manurability. And I believe it can beat the Russian latest jet PAK-FA Stealth Fighter.
Sorry to burst your bubble but both those planes are dogs and i don’t mean the fighting variety. A 60’s era F4 could make mincemeat out of both of them. But they do look cool…kinda.
The YF-23 is long dead. What a beauty it was though.
Please look at these links and then tell me if you still think the F-35 is a dog or not. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fm5vfGW5RY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzDke56vMiU
I can assure you both F-35 and F-22 are more than enough for any Russian aircraft
Avionics can always be upgraded. You’re stuck with the airframe for the life of the aircraft. Starting with a small “affordable” airframe is short changing yourself. The F-35 is a STRIKER first and foremost. It was supposed to complement the F-22, not replace it. There’ve been many fighters which were turned into effective strikers/bombers. Have there ever been bombers turned into successful fighters?
Quite a few. DeHavilland Mosquito springs to mind. Can’t think of a US aircraft that fits the bill, though no doubt there have been.
An honorable exception.
The Junkers Ju 88 was developed as a light, fast bomber, and later served very effectively as a heavy fighter. In the G versions, it also became arguably the best German night fighter of WWII.
The French 1950’ies era Sud Aviation (SNCASO) S.O. 4050 Vautour II was produced in fighter, attack and bomber versions, although by all accounts it could at best be described as “decent” (as in “chronically underpowered”).
Not sure about any modern examples.
Regards & all,
Thomas L. Nielsen
Luxembourg
Tornado ADV is a fighter built from a strike chassis.
Although that is an interceptor rather than a fighter (in the sense that it is built around medium-to-long range missile engagements) — it’s not especially manouvrable itself..
Well I’m in for numbers over perfection.… its a newer frame, our secrets have undoubtedly leaked, and our goverment is corrupt and dysfunctional. For all but the gov’t comment, Thank you Obama supporters. A-holes.
Gates is anti-F-22 and he was SecDef in the Bush administration as well.
dont blaim obama.…blame bowing for building some parts in china. Lockeed for building parts in mexico. The real problem is we are using research from WW2 which the russians have had time to research too. Stealth was being developed then by the nazi and we owe alot of our stealth to their stealth research. You also dont have to do alot of spy work when composite and material over views can be gotten easily enough if you know where to look.(FOIF) I currently am using it to track what goes in and out of white sands. By the way.…what does a biological test range need 56 million gallons of jp-4 for any way? Also, the russians are not as much of hacks as we want to beleave. The developed a lot intresting in the cold war. If you think they are stupid look into their research on small pox and how to deliver it. They can be advanced with things when they see the need. They see the world wants a counter to our fighters so they are doing like any other company does and switching to a needed product.
If you ask me, I am anti 35 as I beleave the money could have been used to make better 22’s and a newer cleaner navy air frame.
Notice what the man said!
It will be faster, have longer range, and be more maneverable than the F-22…
Not that it would have better stealth, better weapons, or any of a whole host of other characteristics!
Of course, we ALL know how trustworthy Comrade Putin is… :->
He’s a statesman. He knows about military aviation no more than Obama or Sarkozy. What is interesting is what Pogosyan (head of Sukhoi) said. “The main difference between the 4th and 5th generation is not speed, not maneuvrability, but stealth.”
He knows far more about military aviation than Obama and Sarcozy considering that he actually has some has flight experience; he flew as a copilot in a sukoi to Chechnya to attend a local election when he was acting President back in 2000.
But all-in-all, I don’t think this matters. In a few decades, drones, advanced LRSAMs, and maybe lasers will make these stealth aircraft obsolete. Even then there probably will never be a war that the F-22 and PAK-FA go head to head. The US main seem stupid in cutting off the F-22 early, but imo it’s a good decision, even the most advanced aircraft need to land, and at that point a cheap drone can take it out.
If this aircraft is better than the F-22 than we need to really push our engineers to the limit and manufacture cheap, advanced, and affordable Stealth Fighters. Also manufacturing these new fighters has to automated. In conventional war you must beat the others guys capacity to replace his machines. In other words the U.S. has to use the formula of the Russians. MASS PRODUCE AS MANY AS YOU CAN CHEAPLY AND ONLY USE WHAT WORKS IN COMBAT!!!!! NO FANCY EXTRAS!!!
The US defence industy would collapse if we did that. Same way how germans had problems because they had too many different air craft and not enough interchangable parts between them.
Actually Matt thats not true. The US military industry is only doing what the government is telling them to do.Example; US war factories are only running at a very low production rate and could easily out produce any other country when task to do so.When US commmanders asked for more armoured ground vehicles in Iraq. The order was given and those plants cranked out thousands of up-armoured Humvees and Mraps in a very short amount of time. The production rate of US arms is slowed down and drown out to keep those factories open to maintain the industial base and to keep jobs.
And there’s the problem. Way too many senior rankers on the uniformed and civilian sides of the acquisition process that can’t be told to STFU, STFD and keep your f’n peapickers off the project.
There no longer seems to be a point where a design is locked down for production as ‘good enough’ with future R&D pointed at a later version. Advances in computer tech over the years have made it way too easy to jump in and ‘just one more thing’ a design to death.
We need some gold-plated SOBs in the system that can stop these jackholes. And it isn’t just aircraft, the Navy’s ship program is just as fubar’d for the same reasons. We’d be lots better off with a steady rain of base hits instead of perpetually striving for home run or bust.
Problem is…some thing new comes out and we dont put on the shelf tell next year. Personally I would eather see a better VLS system on ships then see them stick a rail gun on the next ship like they are talking and see it blow up in our face due to lack of development. We also need to stop devlopment of weapons for specfic platforms and make them so they are usable by multiple ships or aircraft.
The APA assessment is complete hogwash. Even if the Russians are properly estimating the costs of the PAK-FA and buy a small bundle of them, they are still an overwhelmingly small percentage of combat aircraft worldwide. The F-35 is more then sufficient against earlier-generation fighters, its own acquisition issues aside.
The best way to ensure U.S. air dominance throughout the decade in simple; NUMBERS. All the stealth in the world isn’t going to help us if we don’t have the bench depth to absorb losses in a major shooting war. Again, I emphasize; F-15SE.
Thinking of reducing the cost for F-22,F-35 and F-23 and making it more competative than PAK-FA ? Here are few tips how:There are five ways we can reduce the cost to manufacture F-22, F-23, F-35 and other planes and thereby make more productions at lower cost. 1. Have all materials, services, technology and assembly here in the United States. The reason why F-22 and F-35 cost too high because some of the materials and services/ assembly are imported (From Europe). 2. Either we make it here or have our asian ally ( Singapore, Thailand or Philippines) manufacture it for us. Asian currency are 40 times lower than our currency thereby making the material and services at low price. 3. If we’re going to manufacture all the parts and assembly here (USA), make sure there is a fix contract with JSF, so the price will not change at any time of the year. 4. Make sure we have the capital to create this planes. 5. Use materials we already used before on our other stealth planes for the body frame or use materials or experiment with spider webs (Spider webs are known to be stronger then steel).
“. Either we make it here or have our asian ally ( Singapore, Thailand or Philippines) manufacture it for us. Asian currency are 40 times lower than our currency thereby making the material and services at low price
“
And their quality control is 40 times lower as well. My father works for a major engineering/manufacturing conglomerate that has many DOD contracts. They’ve had tons of issues with quality control in their asian manufacturing plants even though they are within the company, not just contracted out.
They (Asian) just need supervision. Their services and materials are cheap.
1. Not true, this was significantly raise the price. Buying parts overseas is the only way to get partner nations on board. Without this less planes would be ordered and costs would go up. But yes, on a pure dollar value per part it is more expensive.
2. Doubtful Asia has the manufacturing base for such high end work. Even if they did, they don’t have thousands of workers with US Security Clearance.
3. If you go to a fixed price contract Lockheed would have to charge a higher price per plane to be sure they don’t get stuck with the bill in the end. Experemential and highly costly. That is alot of risk for a company to take on, so you would have to pay a big premium. Fixed price doesnt make sense until you have a proven product.
4. Good point…
5. New materials could actually cut costs. Computing power gets better/ cheaper all the time because we find new ways to make them. It could also raise costs of course, but increase performance.
I think the biggest problem we will have is numbers. If they can produce even 1 1/2 per every 1 (F-22 or F-35) we have it will result in the loss of U.S. support aircraft (i.e. tankers) in a fight and this will make things far harder for us. I think the answer to this is buy (50–100) more F-22’s, cancel the F-35A and produce more F-35B’s for the Air Force. The F-35B’s can operate closer to the front while the F-22 can operate from a greater distance without refueling.
Why the F-35 hate? The F-22 has one advantage over the F-35 (it goes somewhat faster — exactly how much is unknown) and many disadvantages (range, weapons carriage, size, avionics, sensor suite, maintainability, cost). According to test pilots the aircraft handle about the same in the air so it appears the F-22’s only advantage over the –35 is its ability to disengage at a higher speed — thanks to engines that are optimized for supercruise instead of subsonic maneuver.
I believe the real reason F-22 production was shut down is because analysis indicated that the F-22 is not a better air superiority machine than the F-35, and in fact is probably at a significant disadvantage when facing stealthy aircraft with IR sensors thanks to its size, hot engines and lack of its own IR sensors — a threat environment the F-35 would dominate in. It appears the Russians are trying to build an airplane we already have a countermeasure for — the F-35.
Uh, the F-22 has quite a few more advantages that you didn’t mention. Its computer systems are more advanced. Pilots say that it allows them to strategist instead of house keeper. It also has more advanced datalinks, allowing it to function in a C3 role.
Also, you seem to have missed the stealth issue — the F-35’s stealth level was downgraded during the R&D process. It’s still extremely low-observable, but it’s not the F-22.
The F-22 has far better range and can get there faster thanks to it’s supercruise ability. It can also carry internally more weapons (including bombs) than the F-35. It has superior avionics (AGP-77). Maintainability for the F-35 is unknown since it is not in service. And the cost of the F-22 would’ve been significantly reduced if we had purchased the numbers originally ordered. The F-22s also have a special coolant injected into engine exhaust to keep the IR level down, forgot where the link is.
“The F-22 has one advantage over the F-35″
1) The F-22’s radar cross section is about an order of a magnitude smaller. This includes flat exhaust nozzles, as opposed to the F-35’s conventional round nozzle that makes it a lot less stealthy from the rear.
2) Supercruise and speed. We know how much faster it goes, and it’s a lot. The F-22 can supercruise and fly at Mach 1.5–1.7 for a sustained period of time, and top out at Mach 2+ with afterburners. The F-35 has conventional performance; it will cruise at Mach 0.8–0.95 and reach Mach 1.6 with afterburner.
3) Twice the air-to-air load. The F-22 carries 6 AMRAAMs and 2 Sidewinders, the F-35 will carry just 4 AMRAAMs. If it wants AIM-9X Sidewinders for close-range fighting that will take advantage of its DAS, the AMRAAM load will go down to 2.
4) Thrust vectoring. The F-22 is far more maneuverable.
You are totally off when you say that the F-22 runs hot. Every source I’ve read has stated that IR stealth was a part of its design.
More Putin BS , if they manage to build thirty in the next ten years I would be greatly surprised . The Eurofighter would make mince meat of this piece of Ruskie Crap never mind the F22 on a sunny day .
I’m sure all the commie lovers will tell us the end is nigh and that the Chinese and Ruskies with unreliable engines/missiles/awacs/avionics and poor training and logistics are going to wipe out the US airforce .
Sorry but they are years behind the RAF nevermind the US airforce .
Well said mate!
Ah yes. There are always a fistful of those completely willing to piss on the bonfire of logic. Hmmm. Yeah it’s a cool looking plane. Stealthy? Not even close looking at it’s design. Looks like straight surfaces..at least enough to be detected by any second rate radar, not even considering how far we (the US) have come in that area in the last 20 years or so. Let me toss some facts out there.
–the F-15, much, much older technology than the 22 and 35, has a roughly 100 to 0 victory record against it’s adversaries, including some of Russia’s previous “better than US planes” such as the Mig-29. Another really cool plane, however “cool” don’t always get it.
–The US had a very, very quick victory over the 4th largest army in the world in Gulf War 1.
–It does little good if you have developed an airplane that is a third of the cost of it’s rivals if the developing country has only one tenth (or less) of the money to build them.
–The engineering record of Lockheed, the company developing both the F-22 and the F-35, is without peer.
I’m sure I could come up with quite a few more favorable comparisons for the US school of thought in the areas of airborne defense but these should do it for anyone possessing a brain and independent thought.
Jim
I hope it’s a good plane because the russians may very well turn out to be ” the enemy of my enemy”.
Hey man there is no F-23, The F-22 was chosen over it. The two prototypes don’t even fly anymore.1 is sitting in a museum on display and the other one was dis-assembled.
Anyone that doesn’t accept the possibility that Putin was speaking the truth is a fool. Likewise, anyone who readily accepts what Putin said as gospel truth is a fool. The fact of the matter is we don’t know, and we probably won’t know for a few more years yet. The Russians have had their fair share of successes over the years, its always possible that this may be one of them.
Furthermore, there is a distinct possibility that through economies of scale, this could very well be an F-22 equivalent. Half the price of the F-22 is what the cost of an F-22 would have been if the original quantities were ordered. Russia could easily get those quantities, maybe even by multiple times, if it can build itself a quality aircraft that is up to spec.
Remember, there are a lot of countries out there that want the F-22, but can’t have it. They are being told to settle for the F-35, an aircraft of questionable capability which is behind schedule and drastically over priced, and facing an uncertain future. If Russia is fast enough with the design, and it is a good enough design, it may well win over some customers. Remember, its not the Cold War era, much of the stigma in arms purchasing is gone. We could rely on a lot of nations buying from us or the Russians exclusively, thats simply not the case anymore.
Even if Russia only ends up with 30 planes… what if China purchases another 300? If this plane is as good as they say, none of our allies, barring maybe the Europeans, will have a plane capable of engaging it in a 1-on-1 situation…
And finally, I would like to throw in something that a now retired Air Force Colonel once told me: “People forget about the missiles.” The Russians have longer ranged, faster flying, and more maneuverable missiles than we do, and american stealth is not-fool proof. Don’t get me wrong, its good, but its not a 100% safety net. I have spoken with F-15/22 pilots down at (Eustis-)Langley AFB who train against each other regularly. While its not common, the F-15 pilots do manage missile kills vs the F-22.
And I’m going to throw my lot in with the YF-23 crowd. That is the plane we should have purchased. The only advantage the F-22 had over it was maneuverability (and as I understand it, the difference was questionable). And it would have been a cheaper plane too, as it used parts that shared commonality with the F-15.
Haha I love how everyone’s commenting like we are a war with Russia or something.… The day I worry about whether or not an F-22 or F-35 could ‘win’ in a dogfight against this new aircraft is the day I’ll wish I had built a bomb shelter. We both have ICBM’s remember.. Mutually assured destruction ring a bell? I just don’t see how this is in anyway relevant. peace
I agree. Back at you. Peace man.
But it is always good to be prepared. Ever wondered if North Korea over South Korea, Iran over it’s nuke and Israel, and China over Taiwan will wage war against us? And who are their allies?
The famous writer Mark Twain once said “It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so.”
I think the concern is exports. Russia has shown a willingness to sell relatively advanced systems to mid-level allies simply to counter-balance U.S. power in their region. If Russia buys fifty of these, it’s not a game-changing event. If they do something more drastic, like strip off some of the fancy radars and sell three-hundred airframes to Iran, well.. that’s a problem.
the speed of a jet-fighter in dogfight situation is frequently near supersonic (the advantage of the height, to reach that advantage you need to climb fast you need speed an thrust for that). There is no way to fight an enemy fighter just with your eyes at those speeds hence modern dogfighting relies on radar and avionics. Stealth is not just in a BVR scenario a useful tool. I see a big advantage for the F-22A even in the close-in combat…
Sure everything is bigger and better in RUSSIA, we’ve been hearing that crap for decades. If its that way why did we basically kick there asses in the air war. Why are items limited for purchase and who bailed them out duringf WW!!. They didn’t do it on there own as they would have you to believe. Once a Commie always a Commie. Putin is still KGB.
I think there are more dangerous enemies than the russians. We probably have many mutual interests and russia may very well turn out to be an important ally.
ANYTHING that the Russians make is a copy cat model of the West. Thats PRE and POST Cold War. Putin, the infamous KGB thug that he is is still fighting the COLD WAR and the WEST. Once a Communist, ALWAYS a Communist.
People really give the F35 too little credit… Ok so its not the perfect dogfighter; well niether was the F16 and it was alright… The F35A/C can carry 6 AIM120s in each of its to weapons bay… It has the HMD; the PAKFA cant match that… Russia talks about sensors; the F35 has better ones… I do think the F22 is needed and who knows mabye it will be treated like the B1 was… More to the point the AF will start getting F35s in FY2011 and already have F22s; russia is behind in production and qualtity… plus as for numbers 2000+ F35s is higher than what russias realitivly small budget can do because even with cuts USA still spends 40% of all world military spending and more than the EU, china, and russia combined (think though that last part may have changed)…
Looks like the lovechild of an F-22 and a Flanker.
Since the US cancelled the F22, i have always said that the US will now fall behind in Air superiority. Gates has no clue and is focused only on the here and now, he is not focused on the future. Think about this, If gates were in charge back in the 70’s and 80’s we would have never built the F15,F16,F18 that we have now, because he would have felt that the F4 phantoms and F5 were enough for the US. Well good thing he wasnt in charge then because we wouldhave fought the First Gulf war, The 2nd gulf war and Afghanistan with F4’s and F5 tigersharks. It is stupid, Russia and china are currently building there 5th gen fighters and we cancel ours, and Gates wants to moth ball 2 aircraft carriers. The F35 is not and cannot do what the F22 can. Iran, NK and China are going to be a problem, and we are going to be stuck trying to provide security with F15’s and F16’s “two less Carriers” against SU27’s, J-10’s and the Pakfa 50. I think Gates and obama are destroying us from inside out.
What good is all this speculation. Gates is tasked with disarming America. No tech can replace the loss of will to dominate. Obama hates America and American power and Gates, being a good corporate drone , is only to happy to manage American power down — after all he is just doing his job…and that seems to be the most important criteria in the chain of command.…
We are worried about Russia now?? I think they took their shot when they were called the USSR and lost badly. Everyone gets on here with their Xbox scenarios and comparing the specs of aircraft which is all pointless. It boils down to logistics, period. Amateurs talk capabilities, pros talk logistics. How many can they really afford to build? What will they be able to maintain? How can they deploy? What kind of realistic training and flight time will their pilots receive? Will they receive proper combat support ie EW? Sorry but with 180 F22s deployed, a F35 production about to gear up, additional F18s with upgrades in the pipe, and extremely capable modern iterations of the F15 and F16 available for production, I consider the Russians and the Chinese both a big fat joke. There are those that love to inflate the threat for the purpose of selling more weapons, but at the end ot the day we are going to both numerically and technologically dwarf Russia and China, to say nothing of quality of training and logistics. Putin is a Cold War throw back clown, period.