US two generations behind Russian fighter jets

Discussion in 'General Science & Technology' started by Billy T, Jan 6, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Billy T Use Sugar Cane Alcohol car Fuel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,198
    All planned and even still unbudgeted designs concepts for US's Fighter Jets are inferior to Russian fighter jet now flying! I.e. Russia now has #1 fighter plane in the world, much superior to any apiration on US drawing boards! Thus:

    US would easily lose all "dog fights" with the Russians

    The SU-30 has Vectored Thrust with Canards. The fighter can stall from high speed, stopping forward motion in seconds. (full stall). Video below demonstrates its ability to descend tail first without causing a compressor stall. It can also recover from a flat spin in less than a minute. etc. It is an ammazing airplane FLYING NOW!

    Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Notes:

    "...Canards and vectored thrust were among many concepts {US has}examined to extend our fighter aircraft performance. Neither our current or next generation aircraft now poised for funding & production can in any way match the performance of this Russian aircraft NOW FLYING in any near combat situation. Somehow the bankrupt Russian aircraft industry has out produced our complex politically tainted aerospace industry with this technology marvel. ..."

    See it perfrorm at:

    www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1N-VgAnd_A
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 6, 2008
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. cosmictraveler Be kind to yourself always. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    33,264
    Let me see, they have built 10 of these things so far and that's all. Americas Raptor is an equivalent of theirs. There are over 400 Raptors going to be built in the next 5 years. So what do Americans do, stop production and find another type of plane? No, I'd say let them have their planes and so be it. Russia is a Democratic nation and isn't against anyone so what is there to fear, unless you have some type of phobia? You want to use this as a fear tactic don't you. You don't want to say things that can quiet things down , you want to incite a riot, why?:shrug:
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Billy T Use Sugar Cane Alcohol car Fuel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,198
    I know little about fighter jets. Thus, the opinion of Lawrence Livermore Labs weighs heavily with me. They say the SU-30 is supperior to anything the US has in the "current or next generation."

    I have no idea what the Raptor can do. Can it stop forward motion in seconds from full speed, then fall/ fly backwards downward, and then pop up behind any fighter that was chasing it?

    I do not know much about "dog fighting" skills of air planes, but even if I did I would not want to be chasing a SU-30 in a US jet that this could happen to. (Suddently it disapears in its own hot opaque exhaust cloud and then is chasing you.) I.e. Fact that the SU-30 is very manueverable, and can even surround itself with its own hot and opaque exhaust (oil augmented briefly to be opaque is easy) seems very useful for defeating missle with both heat seeking and optical terminal guidance which have very poor manueverability at their very high speed. (They are long and relatively thin to achieve the needed high relative speed so they would snap in two if they did turn quickly like the SU-30 fighter can.)

    As far as how many SU-30 the Russian now have, I doubt we know. Although under Putin Russian has definitely started to turn back to the cold war (long range bomber flown to US air space, after couple of decades of not doing this, Sending warships back into the Med. etc.) I too do not think there will be Russian/US dog fights next week. My concern is next decade. If Russis does waht it has always done there will be many more SU-30 than US has latest its generation fighters. US has always tried to have the piolets "second to none" and the Russians have been willing to lose some less well trained pilots and have more planes in the air to win the battle. Why do you think they will change this long standing philosphy?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 6, 2008
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. cosmictraveler Be kind to yourself always. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    33,264
    The Raptor is "invisible" to Radar! If you can't be seen, then how do you get hit? :shrug:

    By the way, here is the almost same version of the Russian plane, only it was built in America over 5 years ago!

    [edit] McDonnell Douglas-BAe/Boeing AV-8B Harrier II
    Main article: AV-8 Harrier II
    AV-8B Harrier II (1983)
    EAV-8B Matador II (for Spain)
    AV-8B Harrier II Night Attack (1987)
    AV-8B Harrier II Plus (1992) (USMC, Spain, Italy)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AV-8_Harrier_II
     
  8. Billy T Use Sugar Cane Alcohol car Fuel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,198
    You are assuming that the radar is on the ground. All stealth air planes use flat surfaces with radar absorbing coatings on them. The ground based radar beam reflects (mirror like) off the flat surface so does not return a "hit" (reflection) to the ground stations, but when the mirror geometry is by chance correct they are detected in a "bi-static" radar system (Reciever not located at the transmitter. The US's stealth bomber has often been detected when flying thru radar beam from one FAA radar station by a second commerical air traffic control station. - a bi-static detections off the flat mirror like surfaces is not hard if distance is not many dozens of miles.) I believe Moscow has had a well integrated bi-static radar ring net for more than a decade.

    Furthermore, with dog fight separations (a few kilometer with missles, I think) the absorbing coatings are not perfect and there is plenty of reflected energy for the SU-30 fighter to detect. For example, a Russian ground based (or even US's own) radar sending energy to the area will scatter / reflect off the US fighter which may be "invisible" to the ground based radar unit, but not to the bi-static system of it transmitting and the SU-30 recieving the signal reflected by the so called "invisible" US plane.

    Note the US defend it ships at sea with a bi-static radar system. The high power radar beam "paints" 360 around the ship and can easily detect the tiny fraction of the energy returned by small radar cross objects (such as one humming bird). (A dopper filter is used to keep slow moving tiny birds for being mistaken as target to shoot down.) This same beam is also recieved by the defensive anti-missle launched by the shipin it own defense - I.e. a bi-static system.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 6, 2008
  9. francois Schwat? Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,515
    Aren't regular fighter jets obsolete, compared to UAVs? From what I've heard, UAVs can be much quicker and can easily outmaneuver most jets because they don't have to be equipped for human pilots. They're therefore not subject to the constraints of the human anatomy.

    It'd be interesting to see how a remote controlled aircraft would do against one of these superior Russian fighter jets.
     
  10. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,822
    If these Raptors cannot be "seen" how do they see each other?

    Isn't there a likelihood of a crash?

    Or do pilots use technology other than radar in the air?

    /pls to be xcused for ignoranmunces

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  11. Vega Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,392
    Foolish woman!!..this is no place for you, this is about boys toys...now go away back to the kitchen!!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  12. Vega Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,392
    The russians sure have an interesting jet set,.the MiG 29s and Su-27s of the 80s were quite remarkable and versatile. However it's not speed and power that wins a dogfight! Superior avionics/stealth and counter measures gives a fighter more advantage over it's counterpart.
     
  13. hypewaders Save Changes Moderator

    Messages:
    12,061
    francois, you're absolutely right. Manned dogfighting, like knights in armor, has been perpetuated past its due for ritualistic, romantic, and marketing reasons. Pilots, and the thousands of pounds of attendant on-board equipment they require do greatly impede a mission requiring rapid deployment, long loitering, and fast acceleration to impact. UAVs can now do all of these things much better than manned systems.

    Front-line manned fighters will become purely symbolic as suddenly as heavily-armored knights on horseback did, when it was discovered how to unhorse them and stab them in the armpits. Right now, it's still more profitable to manufacture manned fighters at over $100 million per copy. But the moment cheaper, smaller, and less-glamorous robots start knocking down our knights (and the technology exists now) it will be the definitive end of an era. It's likely that smaller nations may be the first to embrace this technology. For instance, the United States takes air-superiority for granted, because we've never faced a swarm of suicidal UAVs that can be unobtrusively manufactured today in a country such as Iran.
     
  14. Challenger78 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,536
    However, UAVs are disruptable and easily fooled, even with Human operators.

    and SAM.
    They are equipped with transponders so that they can be seen by friendly forces.. and the sky's a big place.. no crashes yet... This is why we need a military sub forum.. so people aren't ignormunces like me...
     
    Last edited: Jan 6, 2008
  15. Billy T Use Sugar Cane Alcohol car Fuel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,198
    certainly artificial intelligence is not yet even close to human. Why we still control mmars rover etc from the Earth.

    Thus a UAV needs a "unjamable" two link, which will add at least the speed of light delays. I do not think any link is un "jamable" if over enemy high power transmission stations.

    About 30 years ago, I worked on a US jamming system. It was done under SAC's QRC 30 (Quick Reaction Contract 30) Money was not of any concern as SAC wanted it "yesterday." I, only a summer student in a four month project was in charge of the power system and ordered aqbout 50 miles of wire of various sizes before I had any idea of what I would need, (I used a few hundred feet of it.) as doing so woulod save a few days, help earn the 100% bonus if proto-type was delivered on time. And it was cost plus contract, so more we spent the more was the profit.

    The system's simple comuter used small bi-stable tiny neon lamps as high powered ground radars could probably burn out any transitistors. System had to simultaneously jam many USSR frighters (Their voice coms) as it might be the only SAC bomber still surviving long enough to get close enough to Moscow to drop its nuclear bombs.
     
  16. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
    that was a perfect vid

    /rapture
     
  17. sly1 Heartless Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    692

    whos really behind? Dogfights are a thing of the past, so if you plan for them arent you really the one behind? Fighter pilots dont really ever see their targets anymore, when your radar and ROF is in miles whats the point. This is like saying russians bayonetts are superior so they are "generations" ahead......
     
  18. cosmictraveler Be kind to yourself always. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    33,264
    Most fighters today only want to get a blip on the radar to shoot their missiles at whatever is out there then leave for another kill. Fighters don't get within 5 miles of each other any longer so the way a fighter handles isn't really important any longer.
     
  19. Echo3Romeo One man wolfpack Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,196
    This post is premature by at least a few decades. In point of fact, as of right now there is no UCAV system in the world that can satisfy the demands placed on manned combat aircraft in all roles. A few instances where Hellfire-equipped Predators have been used in a CAS role have foreshadowed what the future may hold. However, the most advanced dedicated UCAV programs are still in the conceptual stage, some with rudimentary technology demonstrators flying, but none anywhere close to being able to deploy a system operationally. The UCAV systems that do exist (EADS Barracuda, Hermes 450, Boeing X-45, Northrtop X-47) are still in their technological infancy.

    In truth, the F-22's successor will probably end up being some sort of UCAV, but the F-22 is intended to fully supplant the F-15C by ~2020 and fulfill the air superiority role well into the 2040s. It will be a while before the RISE OF THE MACHINES.

    Pretty much. The SU-30 is a neat airplane, and the OMG COBRA MANEUVER is a really cool thing to see in person. But, like you and a few others have said, maneuverability tends to be pretty far down the list of deciding factors in an air to air engagement. During ODS in 1991 a wide majority of kills against the Iraqi air force were performed at BVR ranges before the enemy had time to maneuver or even respond to being illuminated. During exercises with the Indian Air Force (e.g. Cope India '06) some SU-30s did perform rather well against USAF assets, but the USAF aircraft were under some rather extreme handicaps (no AWACS, no AMRAAMs, no AESA onboard radar, etc.) which severely shrunk their engagement envelope, resulting in many WVR engagements occurring more often than they would have if the ROEs were relaxed and both sides had been allowed to use the best of their technology.
     
  20. Echo3Romeo One man wolfpack Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,196
    Can you source this quote? I'm curious where it came from, as LLNL is devoted to nuclear weapons/nuclear energy research, so it strikes me as weird to see them assessing something that normally falls under the USAF ISR or a similar, more specialized intelligence agency. I'd be curious to see the context.

    The USAF is set to procure a total of 183 F-22s. The number has been reduced three times since the initial target of 750 airframes was set in 1994 after the F-22 was chosen as the winner of the ATF flyoff. That said, it is starting to look like that number is going to go up again since F-15s have been facing some maintenance and safety issues related to the fact that some of the older airframes have logged triple the flight hours that they were initially designed for, resulting in a few catastrophic in-flight failures (including one death) and numerous restrictions placed on their operations in-theater. The sooner we can build more F-22s the better, from a safety standpoint alone, never mind the fact that the F-22 is sex on wings.
     
    Last edited: Jan 6, 2008
  21. Buffalo Roam Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,931
    And the pilot still counts mre in a fight than the plane,

    Now Billy T if the Su 30 is such a signafacant advance over any U.S. design is the IAF working on this?

     
  22. Avatar smoking revolver Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,083
    King of the skies!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  23. Buffalo Roam Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,931
    I do not see a capability that isn't in the F-22 Raptor already, and there are already up grades comming on line for the F-22, and the fact is that the Su-30 is still nothing but a up graded Su 27.




     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page