Home » Air » Air-to-Air Combat » Putin Declares New Russian Built PAK-FA Stealth Fighter Better Than F-22 Raptor

Putin Declares New Russian Built PAK-FA Stealth Fighter Better Than F-22 Raptor

by Greg on June 18, 2010

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

Share |

{ 240 comments… read them below or add one }

Maxtrue June 18, 2010 at 11:09 am

"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.

Reply

mike p June 21, 2010 at 5:37 pm

Well it looks like the russians ahd lots of pictures of the YF-23 and F-22 and they kopykatted us again just look at the history the F-86 and the Mig -15
the F-15 and the MIG-25 Foxbat and the F-18 and the mig-29 see where i am getting at?

Reply

Donnell June 21, 2010 at 6:06 pm

To Mike P, A guy sorry to bust your bubble but, the Mig-15 was in service before the F-86 and the Mig-25 was in service before the F-15. The F-18 started out as a Northrop plane called the YF-17 Cobra which lost a fly off between the F-16.The Mig-29 was well on its way in development before the F-18, which was redesigned by McDonnellDouglas after they aquired the plans from Northrop's YF-17.You don't have to take my word for it, just check the history of those planes. Now I do agree with you and everyone else on this post that, the new Russian fighter is a Cheap copy of the F-22

Reply

Enthusiast June 23, 2010 at 6:55 am

Sorry, this is ********. New Russian fighter does not looks like a copy of anything. If you look precisely on both designs, you see that “Raptorsky” actually have MORE DIFFERENCES THAN SIMILARITIES compared to American stealth designs.

Reply

Longshot January 30, 2012 at 12:58 pm

Yes, I see we're just rambling or speaking with no knowledge. The MIG29 design has nothing to do with the with the F18 design.
Similar development technologies, and committed or similar requirements, lead to similar design lines. That does not mean copy.

Anyway, espionage exists, but not just for the Russians. Sorry.
As I said in this post-for example, the Bell X5 is a copy of a WWII German model. And there are several models from several countries with similarities, some copies, and other similar only for their usage requirements, and similar technologies of the time.

Besides all this, when you compare models P-Mike-you should check some dates, because the models that your name, just the Russians entered service before the U.S. models.

In the case of PAK-FA, I think it has similarities to the U.S. stealth models, but with the characteristic signature of Soviet designs. I don´t see this model as a copy, but as duties and similar requirements that sometimes lead to similar designs.
For example, the F117 uses very characteristic profiles. B2 Then, apply other profiles and rounded shapes, such as the F22. Perhaps these forms best serve the stealth mission. Then, when another nation makes a stealth aircraft, it makes sense to use similar profiles, because their efficiency. Not to say that is a copy, although it is possible to use part of the experience of other models already in use, or their own studies conducts to similar results.

Reply

Tad June 18, 2010 at 11:41 am

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.

Reply

mike June 18, 2010 at 6:29 pm

ever herd the term "Force multiplier"?

Reply

bobbymike June 18, 2010 at 8:38 pm

You cannot just buy three or four planes you kind of have to build them first. Russia has ZERO experience building LO aircraft.

Reply

FromPoland July 18, 2010 at 10:46 am

You are a typical American proud to be dumb! Russians have got longer experience with "stealth" then USA. Find out how USA obtained this technology – name Petr Yakovlevich Ufimtsev may be useful… :-) Soviet ICBM warheads have used this technology since 1960's! Until now, they consider LO aircraft as uneconomical. They calculated 1000x reduction of RCS reduces radar detection range only 70%! They decided that increasing radar and SAM ranges will be more cost effective (and they were right!). Stealth fighter was a nonsense in time when BVR missiles had probability of hit at 6% (find out REAL results of 36 firings of AMRAAMs at war – no target in Yugoslavia or Iraq used countermeasures! AIM-7 is worse!). One strike aircraft usually needs 18 aircrafts of support (jamming, cover, tankers, cover of tankers etc.). "Two billion dollars bomber" B-2 was supposed to perform a "raid over Moscow" without the cost of 18 support aircrafts. It's impossible since S-300/400! Instead of "two billion dollars bombers" Soviets made supersonic ALCMs (3x as fast as Tomahawk) with 4500 km range (now 5500 km) so their Tu-95s can fire at USA far outside any US fighters or SAM covers. In their "wiseness" Americans made B-1 bomb bay to small to carry ALCMs so now B-1 is not a real strategic bomber… Today electronics is far better so BVF makes sense and stealth is cheaper. US AMRAAMS and Sidewinders are outranged by their Russian equivalents. Increasing their ranges requires increasing their size. USA can't do that – internal weapon bay of F-22 and F-35 are too small (lesson of B-1 was not learned)! This was a reason for quarrel with European partners – after testing of East German weapons West Europe concluded longer range missiles are must. USA couldn't agree for size increasing so partners parted and Europe produces their own missiles (ASRAAM, IRIS-T, Meteor) better than US ones… Expect that for a small fraction of F-22 cost Russia will get more agile, better armed fighter with marginally larger RCS but with a new generation of IRST with F-22 radar range (F-22 has no IRST). USA could modernize fighters but you have 14 trillions of debs (Russia has none), in China, India, Russia 3/4 students take technical education, in USA 6% of American students take technical education (and you can't hire Chinese or Russian scientists for military programs!)…

Reply

Enthusiast August 2, 2010 at 11:01 am

Great post. However, you are probably wrong with claim that PAK-FA/T-50 will got "marginally larger RCS". We should consider that Russians are not newbies in stealth technology (theory, airframe design, radar absorbent materials).

Reply

Nonnymouse October 27, 2011 at 6:30 pm

No, Enthusiast, FromPoland’s post was hardly great. It was full of senseless bashing of Americans, and pushed a number of stereotypes that would have you gasping in offense if they were about any other nationality.

In other words, FromPoland’s post is garbage, and full of the same nationalistic ******** that pervades military hardware discussions.

Bill July 31, 2012 at 8:33 pm

FromPoland,

How quickly did you pull this story of yours out of your A##? Only someone with a "real" senseless bias and no "outside of your comfort zone" knowledge vomits a story like this! I welcome your response, please argue with me!

Reply

Brian June 18, 2010 at 9:31 pm

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.

Reply

Mario June 20, 2010 at 10:00 am

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.

Reply

Dude July 13, 2010 at 3:51 pm

Exactly. Russia is a 3rd world country run by russian Mafia. Remember Mig 25, everyone was going so crazy over it until a pilot defected with it, it turns out it was piece of ****, almost as good as a F5. LOL !

Reply

Paul the Great June 19, 2010 at 12:32 am

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

Reply

whatever November 3, 2010 at 4:26 pm

suuuuuuuuuuuure, they make all this comotion about it being stelathy while it really isnt.
pak fa is more manauvrable than any western fighter, even more than the su37! the pak fa could easily beat the jsf. jsf doenst have trustvectoring, it isnt a air superiority fighter and is less stealthy. f22 is TO stealthy for the job. its radar is not good enough to find other stealtplanes. people should just use stealthbombers for bombong groundforces an use fighter to combat other fighters

Reply

reality March 9, 2012 at 10:38 am

read comparison dude

Reply

Chuck Haas June 19, 2010 at 5:34 pm

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.

Reply

enthusiast June 23, 2010 at 10:48 am

Russian missiles designers claimed that PAK-FA will be equiped with only a NEW TYPES of air-air and air-surface missiles, many of these are designed for internal weapon bays. They claimed that new air-air missiles will be ultra-long-range, which will surprass all other currently operational missiles with DOUBLED RANGE.

Reply

Dirty D June 19, 2010 at 7:54 pm

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.

Reply

Buzz June 21, 2010 at 4:13 pm

The Russians can't evem amange to build tanks or BMP's. They won't be able to build many of these and the few they do build will crash often. Then they won't have pilots to fly them.

Reply

jacint August 24, 2010 at 6:05 am

You are wrong.

"the marginal cost of buying one additional aircraft has come down to (just!) $138 million, and the Center for Strategic and International Studies estimated that a larger order of 70 additional aircraft could have brought that number down to $70 million a pop."
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Arti

70 million is very cheap.

Reply

roland June 18, 2010 at 11:51 am

Al this things will rust and will not last forever, but our life with Jesus Christ will last forever.

Reply

Fred June 18, 2010 at 6:36 pm

I agree, and "this" things will help His enemies see Jesus early.

Reply

Mike June 19, 2010 at 4:04 am

Amen!!!

Reply

hamchuck June 20, 2010 at 1:12 pm

Unless JC resurrects himself as an a**-kicking fighter pilot, this means somewhere less than squat.

Reply

WarScientist June 21, 2010 at 8:38 am

Sorry to break it to you buddy but it won't. You just rot in the ground.

Reply

Hårek Sagen October 8, 2013 at 2:38 pm

I have no idea what you are talking about. I don't know who Jesus Christ is. I believe in nature, everything.

Reply

Tim March 7, 2014 at 1:58 am

Hate to break it to you, but he is just a dead dude. If he even existed in the first place

Reply

Jeff M June 18, 2010 at 12:33 pm

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…

Reply

A. Nonymous June 18, 2010 at 5:40 pm

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).

Reply

kim June 18, 2010 at 11:38 pm

Yep, and we were first sending people into space too.

Reply

blight June 19, 2010 at 12:37 pm

…wasn't that the Russians?

Reply

Matt Payne June 19, 2010 at 5:48 pm

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.

Reply

Matt June 20, 2010 at 6:29 pm

about the laser thing; check the firestrike laser built by boeing specificly for the F35…

Locarno June 21, 2010 at 7:58 am

"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.

Reply

Jeff M June 21, 2010 at 4:20 pm

So if 2017 is when this Russian plane goes into production my 20 year comment stands, but I think it's more likely this Russian jet will be 2020 or beyond.

Reply

Brave Anonymous July 8, 2010 at 1:13 pm

Thats right! a lazer!
Where would we put the batteries you may ask!
Well, we'll just stuff in a nuclear reactor inside aswell thats how! Didn't expect that you manji commies?!

Reply

ihl January 17, 2011 at 12:44 pm

F-35 is a copy of the russian Yak-41 with some improvements,russians sold Yak-41 to the americans…..thats how the F-35 program started, even Yak-41 had some "Stealth" characteristics such as having weapon bays internally to lowed its radar profile….
And for the stealth overall- russians had the knowledge back in 1960's,after some 10 years the technollogy was allowed into USA, and after some more years the F-117 is born ……

Reply

ihl January 17, 2011 at 12:45 pm

so all the so called air superiority USA has and other bragging about stealth advances is owed to the russians, so noone can say USA is 10-20 years ahead of russians…it can only be the opposite way …. im not an USA hater or something but the fact is USA can thank russia for everything they have now …..Another example: even the F-14 that gaining glory and fame with its "revolutionary" sweep wing mechanism – russian Mig-23 had it 3 years before F-14 …. so it was not that revolutionary if u ask me….the list of examples goes on and on…but i dont want to go of topic too much , …. so Pak-fa vs F-22,F-35 …

Reply

ihl January 17, 2011 at 12:45 pm

F-35 would prolly lose coz its mailny a multi role fighter,built to be good in everything, but that means it cannot exceed in anything, the F22 is a different story its a great machine and every pilot in it can surely say they can take down russian Pak fa…. but the same goes to Pak fa pilot against F-22 …. so the only real advantage that is sure and a fact is the plane's priceand in a real life its more than sure that an F-22 would me out numbered if a fight ever happens……today with stealth air battles will turn into WW1&2 air battles but with more speed in aircrafts and only thing that will count will be piloting skills…i tried to be objective in this reply and not to offend anyone,but if i did im sorry….
- F-22 & Pak-FA are both extraordinary planes and will be the pride of their origin countries and they have the right to be proud

Reply

ihl January 17, 2011 at 12:55 pm

only one more thing for all those who say Pak FA is a raptor copy……. Pak FA has the classic Sukhoi plane part coverage like most of the others like su-27,37 …. if u take a closer look into the other suu planes u will see that even if u dont have an eye for details… only similarity is stealth demands in exterior shape of the plane so they cant really look much different from one another…and all other "Stealths" from other nations will look like these ones

guessst September 23, 2011 at 12:23 am

stupid. f-14 wasn't based on mig-23, but f-111 aardvark. ignorance is bliss.

Reply

Longshot January 28, 2012 at 12:24 pm

Is true, the F14 was based in F111, and also true that the Russians applied before that configuration of wings in the MiG-23.

Willi September 8, 2011 at 10:06 am

Cynicism, selective amnesia adn fraud have landed us adn economy where we are today, fift among nations worldwide economically. If or not we like it Russia has been way ahead of us despite what our elected "leaders" continue telling us while they pad their corporate military suppliers pockets with taxpayer money. Russia broke the barrier as far back as 1957 with Aputnik and has not looked back since. It only has two active military bases worldwide outside its territory and one storage facility while we're supporting 800 worldwide at extreme costs we can ill afford. If we're so much better what be the need for so much military spending? Give it a break!

Reply

Donnell June 18, 2010 at 1:08 pm

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.

Reply

enthusiast June 23, 2010 at 11:04 am

- Combat record is nothing considering the fact,t that Soviet fighter jets were mostly obsolete (generation behind), poorly maintained and poorly piloted against most modern US fighter jets (Syria, Iraq, Serbia).

- It's not Raptor copy. Compare them both to be sure that both designs are far from being identical.

Reply

Willi September 8, 2011 at 10:15 am

The four competitions between the fighters placed the SU35 out fron of the F35 already and the SU 47 outstripped it in combat simulations with the Indian Air Force. The Australian Air Force assessed the current and future air worthiness campaigns determining the only U.S. aircraft able to hold its own as the Joint Strike Fighter F22 Raptor and even it will have a difficult struggle against the SU PAK-FA stating: "Unless te allies produce a lot more of the F22 they have no chance of either claiming air superiority or defending their own territory." Other's have made similar statements… Fortunately for the West Russia, unlike the U.S. adn its allies, has not set out on a constant imperialist military policy. It seems completely content to secure its own territory which suggests it will avoid future economic woes. I think we could learn much from their policies.

Reply

Bob June 18, 2010 at 5:22 pm

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.

Reply

Patrick July 28, 2010 at 6:45 pm

Bravo sir

Reply

William C. June 18, 2010 at 1:36 pm

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.

Reply

Paul June 19, 2010 at 12:29 am

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

Reply

So? June 19, 2010 at 3:14 am

F-35 is in production? Do tell!

Reply

Chuck Haas June 19, 2010 at 4:17 pm

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.

Reply

So? June 20, 2010 at 3:46 am

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.

Chuck Haas June 19, 2010 at 4:08 pm

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.

Reply

Tuberski June 18, 2010 at 1:46 pm

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.

Reply

Bob June 18, 2010 at 10:17 pm

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.

Reply

Chuck Haas June 19, 2010 at 3:56 pm

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.

Reply

Nidi62 June 20, 2010 at 10:48 am

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.

Reply

Willi September 8, 2011 at 10:25 am

Your assumption being U.S. pilots, no matter the aircraft technological advantages, would trump all. Such being the case we cannot dismiss the German's as holding the records in this area and when the Russians seriously developed their design, manufacturing and training regime they scored higher kills than the German pilots of the eastern front. This suggests your assumption is not holding to historical facts. I've watched for decades Russian pilots perform unrealistic feats at air shows, agility and stamina of both airframe, engine and pilots that nothing in the west compares. Infrared look down shoot down multiple target acquisition was developed and deployed first by the Soviets during the late seventies. Even the Vietnamese were droping U.S. fighters and bombers with their technology. Since the close of WWII the U.S. and its allies have only confronted second and third level nations… which proves very little. We've been at it in Afghanistan and Iraq for now ten years and are not going to win. Not pessimism, just truth!

Reply

Longshot February 2, 2012 at 11:14 am

Great report. Painful but true.

Reply

roland June 18, 2010 at 7:02 pm

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&

Reply

roland June 18, 2010 at 7:30 pm

See also: http://www.ausairpower.net/TE-ATF-91.html.
I hope the airforce will also mass produce the YF-23.

Reply

Tim June 18, 2010 at 3:32 pm

Really? The Russians also bragged how their superb tanks such as the T-80s/T-90s could eat the Abrams for lunch until the Desert Storm I proved otherwise… and recently they decided to talk to Thales about buying night vision equipment for their… tanks… because they lacked that capability. Putin himself has never seen an F-22 up close, much less looking at the cockpit, so saying that seemed farcical. Russia is not the same Soviet Union, so it will never be able to field 2, 3 times more than the number of our current F-22s. Dream on, comrades!

Reply

enthusiast June 23, 2010 at 11:37 am

Iraq never had T-80/T-90. Most of their tanks were T-55 from 1950s(!) era. Also, they had small amount of "monkey model" T-72 tanks ((dowgraded version with obsolete ammunion from early 1970s, without night optics, with simple steel armor etc.).
Why you think that US tech should be superior in every way?

Reply

dude November 3, 2010 at 3:53 pm

Iraq doesnt own any T-80 or T-90 dumbass! get your facts straight. so what, no american has seen a PAK FA from close range. besides, even the su37 is more manoeuvrable.

Reply

Willi September 8, 2011 at 10:34 am

Forget Putin, even though I'm certain they as with the west have acquired either drawings or other imagery of the aircraft in their entirety. There are a number of western military sources who've evaluated the SU PAK FA T50 and hold that it has advantages over even the F 22 Raptor, especially in the area of climb and turn radius. It has been determined that due the ability of the SUkoi fighters ability to be upgraded it represents a serious threat. Let's not forget that both the F35 and F 22 have been removed from service due air worthiness issues. The F 22 was just held out of service for wing related problems. I don;t think you could get more serious of a problem than this. Apparently, even the Russian SU 27 was able to do flat stalls without damaging or cracking its wings, Drops from the sky without risk to pilot of aaircraft and engine restarts afterwards without flameouts. They've been able to perform in this manner for three decades…

Reply

Brian June 18, 2010 at 4:04 pm

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.

Reply

recision June 19, 2010 at 4:23 am

Is that like You-are dead (you're).
Or bring out Your dead…???

Reply

Ross June 16, 2013 at 11:40 am

Typical arrogant US crap. The Russians are doing it there way. It is obvious when you look at the overall details released to date the Russians are not even trying to build a super Stealth plane.They are building an ANTI Stealth aircraft with enough Stealth for there purposes. All they want is an aircraft with the strengths to be able to counter an attack by F35's or F22's. They do not see the Pak Fa's role primarily as projecting power like the USA normally does with its aircraft. They have not been prepared to sacrifice any conventional strengths to achieve "super" Stealth at great $ cost also. I have no doubt they could do that but what would they end up with. A less agile, shorter range, less payload, less rugged and more expensive aircraft that could easily end up a sitting duck as radars etc. to detect Stealth aircraft and missiles get better and better over the next 30 years. We don't even know yet how they intend to use there new L Band radar. For all we know they have made a breakthrough in that area already. They are being very tight lipped on that. As in the past the USSR did not try to match the US at projecting power. They did not try to match the US Aircraft Carrier fleet. They simply developed Missiles that could take out US aircraft Carriers so they could never be held hostage to the US Carrier fleet. On aircraft they have always followed the same principle also. The Mig17 was the best fighter/interceptor overall for at least 15 years. It was not until the Phantom arrived the USA got on top of it in Vietnam. Then the Mig21 was a good match for the Phantom as a fighter. The F100 [equivalent of the Mig17] obviously was no match or the US would have used them in Vietnam when at first they went down 9-1 against mainly Mig17's. Some US types often quote F86's from Taiwan achieving a great victory over PLAF Mig17's in the Taiwan Straits.They forget to mention the Chinese Mig 17's were not Russian Mig17's with missiles. The F86's involved were the latest model and had missiles. In Korea the MIG15 and early F86's were about the same now USSR squadron records have been released. In about 1971 the USSR had the MIg25 and nothing Israel or the US had could touch it. There unarmed recon version flew across Israel with impunity. Imagine if the USSR had given a squadron to Vietnam at the time? The USAF would have been grounded waiting for the F15. It had a short engine life but as a Russian said to me – "200hrs – half the life of the engine is a lot of missions in a wartime situation". The Mig31 also in the early eighties had one of the most advanced and powerful Radars of the time. How would the F15 have gone up against one of them flown by a good experienced pilot? You are a fool if you consider the fact the USAF has defeated small poorly trained Air-forces flying downgraded and usually 1 or 2 generation older USSR aircraft proves that US aircraft are better overall always. Time will tell just how good the Pak Fa is but I myself have no doubt it will surpass the F35 in all aspects and probably will match the F22. Its development seems to be going very well and quickly and it can only get better. A new engine by 2018/2020 and as they develop the L Band Radar and there missiles etc. A big versatile and rugged aircraft that will be easy to gradually upgrade as technology improves in different areas. Much easier now for Russia to build advanced aircraft as they have access to a lot of technology from around the world. Something they did not have in the past.

Reply

roland June 18, 2010 at 4:17 pm

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.

Reply

Ebbe June 18, 2010 at 5:24 pm

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.

Reply

Rus June 19, 2010 at 12:42 am

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…

Reply

Sev June 19, 2010 at 2:24 am

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.

Reply

So? June 19, 2010 at 3:16 am

They are not rivets.

Reply

enthusiast June 23, 2010 at 12:01 pm

1. Not "rivets" actually
2. Look at the surface of F-35 or F-22 (at their production stage).

Reply

jack June 18, 2010 at 9:28 pm

Too much vodka ;)

Reply

Brave Anonymous July 8, 2010 at 12:48 pm

Yes! Perestroika! Gorbachev! too much vodka drinking!
Da! Komite Gosudarvene Zopasnstky!
Zhopa!
I am so funny Russian

Reply

CRS June 18, 2010 at 10:02 pm

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.

Reply

roland June 18, 2010 at 10:14 pm

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.

Reply

Mike62 June 19, 2010 at 3:10 am

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.

Reply

So? June 19, 2010 at 3:23 am

The YF-23 is long dead. What a beauty it was though.

Reply

guest June 19, 2010 at 2:08 am

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.

Reply

So? June 19, 2010 at 3:36 am

Gates is anti-F-22 and he was SecDef in the Bush administration as well.

Reply

Matt Payne June 19, 2010 at 5:58 pm

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.

Reply

enthusiast June 23, 2010 at 12:10 pm

Stealth concept in math was developed by Russian(Soviet) physicist Petr Ufimtsev (you can google for information). USA used his theoretical work to develop first stealth aircraft.

Reply

whatever November 3, 2010 at 4:05 pm

obama sucks, he's ruining America. where the pride I used to know! that ass should give the finger to the saudis. no wonder that Russia and China are going to overtake you in the future. by being lazy, you wil get behind. countries like russia, china, israel and greece are always preparing for war whit there enemies while you sit just around. btw, why is everything what the US makes is to expensive!

Reply

WillyPete June 18, 2010 at 10:50 pm

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… :->

Reply

So? June 18, 2010 at 11:35 pm

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."

Reply

hale June 20, 2010 at 11:07 am

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.

Reply

Brave Anonymous July 8, 2010 at 1:03 pm

Yes! We looked him in the eyes and stared down his soul!
He promised he'd let us help the ruskies with all their oil drilling and gas mining and then correctly investing all the money in the democracy institutions but no, he wanted to destroy democracy and betrayed us!
Oh, and he also overwhelmingly overreacted over one russian peace keeper death who choked on champagne bottle cap in Georgia.
Definitely should not trust!

Reply

godzillajet January 23, 2012 at 8:00 am

He dont says its faster because he knows that the raptors speed is classified and that the pilot says its faster than the eagle. some people claim it can fly mach 3 because the top thrust is classified too.

Reply

Alex June 18, 2010 at 11:09 pm

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!!!

Reply

Matt Payne June 19, 2010 at 6:00 pm

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.

Reply

Donnell June 20, 2010 at 2:50 am

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.

Reply

Brian June 21, 2010 at 3:26 pm

Exactly. The problem is very simple. We don't lose enough equipment to justify high rate production. We build equipment, and it doesn't get destroyed. So we don't get bulk discounts, because we don't need to replace it. However, we have to buy *something* from the manufacturers, because they have to stay in business, and federal law prohibits them from selling to anyone except us. So if you want the company that produces those whiz-bang jets to stay in business (so we can buy the next whiz-bang jet from them 20 years from now), you have to buy something from them today. So what we do is stretch those purchases out over a long period of time.

Reply

Guest February 28, 2012 at 5:30 pm

I agree. That is a good method. It helped us in WW2, (sherman vs panzer), and it will help us again.

Reply

blight_ February 28, 2012 at 6:28 pm

We're not at war though. It's expensive to build and store tanks, only to have to trash them once they go obsolete. We would not have built and stored M48's and M60's and now M1's in peacetime. It took several Shock Armies of tanks in East Germany to encourage that kind of spending.

Reply

jsallison June 19, 2010 at 12:38 am

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.

Reply

Matthe payne June 19, 2010 at 6:08 pm

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.

Reply

roland June 19, 2010 at 7:05 am

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).

Reply

Kev June 19, 2010 at 4:06 pm

". 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.

Reply

roland June 20, 2010 at 11:09 am

They (Asian) just need supervision. Their services and materials are cheap.

Reply

Ing3nium June 20, 2010 at 2:08 pm

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.

Reply

jacint August 24, 2010 at 7:00 am

"the marginal cost of buying one additional [F-22] aircraft has come down to (just!) $138 million, and the Center for Strategic and International Studies estimated that a larger order of 70 additional aircraft could have brought that number down to $70 million a pop."
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Arti

So if you want to make the F-22 more competive… buy hundreds of them.

Reply

Jeff නඳබ Fraser June 19, 2010 at 6:07 am

Good thing they can't afford the damn thing. But maybe China can… ****.

Reply

DevilPup June 19, 2010 at 7:22 am

i have serious doubts about the T-50 being able to go toe to toe with the Raptor. however, if Russia manages to Mass produce, we are royally ********. the tiny number of F-22's we bough is hardly enough. and the F-35 isnt a competetor in this category, its designed to go against old strike fighters like the Mig-29. the Raptor and T-50 are in the category of the F-15 and Su-35 as air superiority fighters. a multirole fighter will never be as good as a dedicated airframe, thats just the rule. much as Obama and Gates dont like it, we need the F-22, and a fair number of them.

Reply

Benjamin June 19, 2010 at 6:15 pm

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.

Reply

Armchair Warlord June 19, 2010 at 6:20 pm

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.

Reply

@Earlydawn June 19, 2010 at 7:56 pm

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.

Reply

Chillin June 19, 2010 at 8:13 pm

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.

Reply

MrC June 20, 2010 at 2:48 pm

"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.

Reply

tim UK June 19, 2010 at 7:32 pm

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 .

Reply

Donnell June 20, 2010 at 3:00 am

Well said mate!

Reply

Chuck Haas June 19, 2010 at 3:34 pm

First, did you notice the screws or rivets holding the sheet metal in place as they showed the planes BORT number! The slots in the screws will show up like headlights to every fighter radar out there. They had an amazing number of wires, pitot tubes, antennas and other features that are not stealthy in the least. It is not clear if they have even figured out how to prevent radar from penetrating into the cockpit. Obviously, this is still just a pprototype with a lot of work before it is a finished produce. Actually, it is at a lower state than when we put out the YF-22 and YF-23 on the early 90s. Only thing that worrys me about this plane is the wing mounted radars, which are something of a new feature. That said, I think the electronic warfare systems on the F-22 will help them avoid radar detection, while the Russian radas will just serve to give away their positions.

Reply

Andy June 19, 2010 at 11:19 pm

I hope it's a good plane because the russians may very well turn out to be " the enemy of my enemy".

Reply

Donnell June 20, 2010 at 2:56 am

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.

Reply

chaos0xomega June 20, 2010 at 5:10 am

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.

Reply

dicksauce June 20, 2010 at 7:14 am

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

Reply

roland June 20, 2010 at 11:20 am

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.”

Reply

@Earlydawn June 20, 2010 at 6:51 pm

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.

Reply

Quietwolf June 20, 2010 at 11:22 am

Why should Putin's opinion even matter? All he's done is watch the airshow and looked in the cockpit! If he burps at a meal should we all start a round table discussion on the cooks performance or just take him out and shoot him for serving a "bad" meal? This is a former KGB guy do you think he's interested in offering constructive criticism? If there are flaws in our designs then they will be corrected, if we need more planes, we will build them. How do you think we got to this point in history? Not by second guessing our enemies but by ALWAYS finding a way to kill them. Improvise Adapt Overcome.

Reply

Andres June 20, 2010 at 12:33 pm

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…

Reply

3rdGroupDad June 20, 2010 at 3:27 pm

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.

Reply

Andy June 20, 2010 at 3:46 pm

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.

Reply

Kayaker June 20, 2010 at 5:50 pm

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.

Reply

Brave Anonymous July 8, 2010 at 11:57 am

tey took our jobs!

Reply

Matt June 20, 2010 at 6:40 pm

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)…

Reply

609Gunner June 20, 2010 at 6:52 pm

Looks like the lovechild of an F-22 and a Flanker.

Reply

ZRH537 June 20, 2010 at 9:47 pm

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.

Reply

Brave Anonymous July 8, 2010 at 12:06 pm

Looks like a job for The Money Printer!

Reply

danf June 21, 2010 at 12:21 am

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….

Reply

STemplar June 21, 2010 at 7:17 am

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.

Reply

Tony C June 21, 2010 at 11:53 am

The F-22A is the benchmark for 5th generation fighter design and the Russian's know it is a very high bar to meet. The F-22A has features to defeat both radar and infrared sensors, so the first shot first kill scenario is a gamble at best for either fighter. The costs of stealth is too high for large numbers of F-22A's to have been produced and there are those in the DOD who belive the time of manned fighters is over. If a large fleet of PAK-FA's is produced then the US will have to consider their options again. Right now 187 F-22A's appears to be enough if they are supplemented with F-35's for sufficient umbers. The F-35 is a not an air dominance fighter, but could make a good decoy for the F-22A in a battle!

Reply

Wifey June 21, 2010 at 12:50 pm

I continue to see comments about how we shouldn't be afraid of Russia…Do we REALLY believe that the Russians will be the only country using this if it is even 75% of Putin's claims? Unlikely…

Reply

Jay June 21, 2010 at 12:58 pm

ugh, just look as those engine intakes. I'm no engineer but I would not be shocked if the RCS from each is those gaping maws is more than the entire F-22

Reply

enthusiast June 23, 2010 at 12:58 pm

So what? F-22's engines intakes are also big, but it's considered as stealth.

Reply

ZRH537 June 21, 2010 at 1:53 pm

The problem is they are going to shut down F22 plants all together. So when the US finally realizes they made another ooppsy and russia has 300-400 pakfas to our 187 raptors, the us will notbe able to just start making more F22. The day will come when we will all wish obama and gates were never in charge

Reply

LtWashington,M March 18, 2011 at 12:44 pm

God, what's up with your stupid political allegiances entering again and again into another otherwise interesting discussion forum. We are spending more on military than China, Russia, Europe, etc. COMBINED! How do you people come up with this shit? The reason we have to cut spending in defense is because we don't have the money. What don't you get? If you haven't noticed, by the way, the world has responded to the Bush years of aggression and fascism by cranking their own Military industrial complexes into full speed mode. Have you ever left the US? Have you spoken with Russians, Arabs, Chinese, Europeans? I'm confident the answer is a definitive NO. Everyone mistrusts us so much that we will never again gain legitimacy as the World's Arsenal of Democracy. That's because of childish and stupid thinking like yours. No.1 priority for US is to reduce spending like you fascists always say. The B2 bomber weighs like 70 tons (maybe 170). If you made it out of 70 tons of PURE GOLD, you would still have a billion dollars left to stick in the bomb bay. We are fine with our state of the art military advancing along the lines it already is.

Reply

Mitch June 21, 2010 at 10:47 am

Isn’t this what the russians said about the T-72 vs the Abrahms tank? Isn’t this what the russians said about thier Legacy Fighter vs the F-16 ? Isn’t this what the russians said about thier subs vs our subs ? Isn’t this what the russians said about…………
Talk is cheap. What did you expect him to say people?

Reply

chaos0xomega June 21, 2010 at 11:44 am

Except the T-72 was a major threat. After the fall of the Soviet Union German and US engineers found that the T-72s armor was impenetrable by the Abrams and Leopard 2's cannons (even when firing HEAT/other AT rounds). If you're using the POS Iraqi T-72s to make that judgement, then you have to realize that those are not the same as a Russian T-72.

As for fighters, both the Flanker and Fulcrum are very capable aircraft. The Fulcrum (in German hands) was a nightmare for American f-15 and f-18 pilots (primarily due to the Fulcrum's helmet sight which wasn't available to the USAF/USN until 2003).

Likewise, Russian subs are dangerous. I don't know about the Typhoon,but the Akula (attack sub) was rightly feared by many american submariners. They were quieter, faster, and more agile than the Los Angeles class

Reply

citanon June 21, 2010 at 10:23 pm

Uhh, I think you're mixing a grain of fact (Fulcrum) with a whole boatload of BS there. Do you have sources for anything you are saying?

Reply

talkmoreprogram June 27, 2010 at 1:32 am

lol, then why the German got rid of Fulcrum as fast as they possibly could? And no, Rus subs have NEVER been quieter than US's one.

Reply

enthusiast June 28, 2010 at 4:21 pm

Germans got rid of Fulcrums for another reasons (spare parts). Also they joined NATO, so they got rid of non-NATO military equipment, incl. MiG-29. But they were impressed with MiGs, even with their early export versions.

Russian Akula2 SSN is quiter than improved LA class. According to some US navy officials, Akula2's noise level is really low, comparable to 4th generation Seawolf.

Reply

talkmoreprogram August 8, 2010 at 11:32 am

I'll do you a favor and give you a name, Lt Col Kock, he was the commander of German Mig-29 squadron. Read him and find out why they couldnt even use it for national air policing. OK? Oh, and there's no such thing that NATO members must get rid of non-western weapons. What the heck you think former Warsaw Pact nations have been flying? F-22?

Reply

Enthusiast August 19, 2010 at 8:35 am

So you want to claim that Gernany got rid of MiG-29 because it was bad or not capable fighter jet? It's wrong. They had another reasons.

godzillajet January 22, 2012 at 10:48 am

The german submarines are the best and the fulcrum was just better because it has a helmet sight but know f-15, f-16, f-18 have the more advanced JHMC for the
f-22 it was deleted but therefore HMD is planned.

Reply

STemplar June 21, 2010 at 5:26 pm

Again comparing capabilities alone is looking at the issue through a straw, at the end of the day, anything that Russia had that was decent didn't do them a darn bit of good. The point is the nation buckled and collapsed. We also know Russian soldiers had to forage for their own food in garrison in East Germany, pray tell how would they be able to sustain operations under combat conditions if they can't even feed their own people while in garrison, it doesn't get easier when the shooting starts.

In all these scenarios people talk about it is always some video game head to head match up. Even were the Chinese to deploy some credible aircraft with pilots that were anywhere near the level of ours, why would l engage them is some silly dogfight, when l can send my nuclear attack subs to sever the flow of oil from the Persian Gulf and collapse their economy?

Reply

Brave Anonymous July 8, 2010 at 8:20 am

Soviet Russia? or Union? or … all commies so no difference there right!?

Collapse whose economy there? cuz, like, for a moment I thought that… nvm

Reply

Skysoldier173 June 21, 2010 at 5:40 pm

Well, lets find out, 1 day we really will find out. Putin is a gangster, wtf does he know about aircraft? the Russians are so broken they cannot afford thier own fighter planes. The best Sukoi's go to market, while the JUNK stays home. Sell the Raptor to our allies, keep the line OPEN . Wat are they doing w/ the F-15SE? Is it going to active air wings? OR are they selling it? Don't hear about it no more. ANYBODY KNOW?

Reply

enthusiast June 23, 2010 at 1:04 pm

Russian export mods of Sukhoi are inferior compared to their own "domestic" fighter jets.

F-15SE is nothing more than paper project and one mock-up

Reply

talkmoreprogram June 27, 2010 at 5:34 am

Go and tell that to IAF

Reply

enthusiast June 28, 2010 at 8:13 pm

Since when IAF had air combat with domestic soviet aircraft. IAF equiped with 4th gen Eagles and Vipers against obsolete (3rd generations) soviet fighter jet in the hands of arabs was much different story.

Reply

Infidel4LIFE June 21, 2010 at 1:46 pm

Hope they sell them to IRAN, since they eventually will be bombed by the Israelis, the US, UK, or a combination of NATO air. Hard to believe the "Supreme" Leader, appointed by the "Big Guy" Himself, would go against his own people, torturing and MURDERING God's people. WAT A SHAM!! Cyrus the Great must be spinning in his grave. F-ing USURPERS, DIE DIE DIE!!!!!!

Reply

Anthony Wilson June 22, 2010 at 1:00 am

its just a cheap copy of f-22. typical russians…. the f-22 looks better by looking at it. the engine nozels of the f-22 look way more cool than on pak fa.

Reply

Tim June 22, 2010 at 1:02 pm

I know Tornado Pilots who tell me that the Russian Radar and Missiles are hopeless along with their counter measures . By the time the Russians see a Tornado on their radar they will have a couple of Amramms seconds away .

Don't believe the Ruskie ? Chines Crap they are just trying to get the USA to bankrupt itslef on MIlitary projects .

Reply

Brave Anonymous July 8, 2010 at 12:27 pm

Cool! were those the same Torando pilots who landed on red square?

Reply

Infidel4LIFE June 22, 2010 at 6:48 pm

in 1991 i saw hundreds of burning hulks of t-72's BMP's etc. NOTHING has changed, we could still clean thier clock, Iraqis, Russians, it don't matter. Our worst enemy are stupid politicians, we never really needed to go back and occupy Iraq. BUSH destabilized the whole region. Thanx Dubya…

Reply

enthusiast June 23, 2010 at 1:06 pm

Iraqi army had obsolete equipment (mostly from 1950's,60's era, some from early 1970s)..

Reply

talkmoreprogram June 27, 2010 at 5:35 am

lol, when do you think M-60 was designed?

Reply

enthusiast June 28, 2010 at 8:02 pm

M-60s were not used against old generation and downgraded Iraqi tanks.
US had used their most modern tanks (M1 Abrams) against obsolete and poorly equiped Saddam's armored forces.

Reply

talkmoreprogram August 8, 2010 at 11:37 am

M-60 was not used in GW? Go back to your history class please! And at least Saddam got tanks, lot of them. What did Chechnya got? See how Russian got their axx kicked there? Let me tell you one 'secret': there's no such thing as a easy war.

FromPoland July 18, 2010 at 11:35 am

Hundreds burning t-72s? Tell me more American crap… :-) According to your DoD in Desert Storm Iraq lost 1000 T-72 to US Army, 1000 more to US Navy and 1000 more to US Air Force! The problem is Iraq could have only max 950 (import+local production) T-72 and lost… 16! 4 were destroyed in fights and 12 were left because lack of fuel or were broken down… This is reason why in 2003 Iraq had 900 T-72… :-) Some of "burning T-72" presented by your propaganda officers during press conferences were in fact… T-55 from Yom Kippur War in 1972! :-))) The only tank battle in Desert Storm Iraq actually wined so US Commanders decided to put off Iraqi campaign for 4 months and later used mainly air strikes! :-)))

Reply

enthusiast June 23, 2010 at 8:20 am

"In this new world of aircombat, if your detected within missile range before you can detect the other guy, YOUR DEAD."

Myth. Long range missiles could be jammed or avoided. Dogfight is still very real scenario for air combat. Russian stealth fighter got major advantages in terms of aerodynamics and maneuverability – airframe with better aerodynamics, engine with 3D thrust vectroing , LERX feature, all-movable vertical tails.
But Russians designers did not forget about beyond visual range combat as well. PAK-FA should have better BVR capabilities (than both F-35 and F-22) with its 5 (five) AESA-radars – one big X-Band AESA radar (1500 elements, a way more powerful than F-35's radar, much more modern than Raptor's APG-77), two smaller side looking radars, and also, it will have two L-Band radars. Some speculations speaks, that L-Band radar is specially designed for much easier detection of stealth aircraft. Because radar absorbent materials (which are used on stealth aircraft) does not work very well against L-Band waves.

Reply

talkmoreprogram June 27, 2010 at 5:39 am

"L-Band radar is specially designed for much easier detection of stealth aircraft" – please stop wasting your time and everyone else's here, it shows u dont know jack about radar. Oh and talking about AESA, how long has US deployed them in OPERATIONAL aircrafts? Not technical demonstration like what RUS is having now.

Reply

enthusiast June 28, 2010 at 8:06 pm

It's just speculations about L-Band radars which will have "anti-stealth" purpose.
Russians are not noobs in radar development. Latest AESA for PAK-FA should be very capable radars.

Reply

godzillajet January 23, 2012 at 9:47 am

The Raptors radar has is most advanced radar in the world, with 2300 elements, theres no eurofighter ,JSF or PAK-FA radar that can catch up to the APG-77. The f-22 will see the PAK-FA on 230+ km, the PAK-FA the f-22 on 90km and only the raptor has "first lock, first shot, first kill" advantage. And those L- band are not so anti-stealth because its not proofed or even true and even then the Raptor will see it first because they cannot see targets on long ranges as good as x-band . The f-22 has a lowered heat signature so IRST wont help it much to track the f-22 and the PAK-FA has no lowered heat signature.

Reply

enthusiast June 23, 2010 at 1:20 pm

As for air-air missile, PAK-FA have bigger and longer internal weapons bays. What does it mean? Missiles with much longer range (for example, "AWACS-killer" missiles with nearly 400 km range) which PAK-FA will be able to carry internally…

Reply

soroush June 25, 2010 at 6:03 pm

russians have always proved they have upon hand over americans later due to the financial problems but better they have upon hand in helicopters by ka-52 and mi28n comparing to apache rh-64. tank t 95 vs abrahams. borei class submarine. all models of missels from balestic missels (topol m)to airdefence (s400)ones from bulava to shekval torpido and so on. now there is no wonder in creating a better 5th gen with plasma tecnology then f22 or f35(with less efficiency). look at the previous gen isn t su 30mk su34 su 35 mig ovt better than f18 superhornet f15e or f16c

Reply

talkmoreprogram June 27, 2010 at 5:41 am

They cant even build a decent UAV, they have to go buy from Israel and do the reverse engineering, but still they cant make it now. And now some one tell me they are going to build a better 5th gen? Cheap talk!

Reply

enthusiast June 28, 2010 at 8:09 pm

You have not clue what you talking about.

Reply

Tim July 18, 2010 at 9:30 am

And we assume that you do? It's a fact that Russian defense tech has fallen way behind the West. With the insistence to buy France's Mistral ships and Thales night vision and range finder equipment, Israel's UAVs, Italy's light-armored vehicles, etc., couple with scraping many of their current programs of the same equipment types, Russian powersayers admitted that they seriously needed to modernise or else.

Reply

Enthusiast August 19, 2010 at 8:52 am

>It's a fact that Russian defense tech has fallen way behind the West.

Russia is ahead in another areas of military techology – missile tech, air defense, aerodynamics, ICBMs, space boosters and some other areas.

Mistral? So what? Russia want to get experience with construction of such class of ships (USSR/Russia never had similar class in navy). Israel UAV? They buying limited amount of Israeli UAVs known as best in the world for knowledge and experience (Russia has a lot of their own UAV developments, if you don't know that)
Many other countries are buying foreign equipment, even US. So what?

Reply

PMARTIN June 28, 2010 at 9:21 pm

PUTIN, He could only hope. The F-22 is a far better aircraft than the Russian have, They can only hope there plane can stand up to our's. The F-22 is a far better war fighter and winner.

Reply

Brave Anonymous July 8, 2010 at 12:32 pm

Yes! a winner! take that PUTIN!

Reply

Richard July 23, 2010 at 4:02 pm

if they would have picked the right plane in the first place this wouldn't have happened. F-23 was a better plane than the raptor. period

Reply

blight July 23, 2010 at 8:49 pm

How so?

Reply

Rich July 23, 2010 at 8:03 pm

to the guy blaming obama. hate to tell you those sercets leaked way before he was pres. get a******* clue

Reply

Dfens August 19, 2010 at 10:14 am

It's too bad the F-22 wasn't even the best of the 3 ATF options. The Grumman forward swept wing airplane would have turned better, but was killed by the General who said that there would be no canard equiped aircraft in his Air Force. Then the YF-23 showed its stuff too late in the fly off. There should have never been a "too late" but that's all history now. And finally, who would have guessed that it would take so damn long for Lockheed and Boeing to build the F-22? What a waste! Missed opportunities at every turn. Waste, fraud, and abuse galore. It would not surprise me at all if the Russian aircraft was better than the F-22. It should certainly have better range and speed. Its advantages there are obvious just from looking at a picture of the airplane.

Reply

godzillajet January 25, 2012 at 1:02 pm

The air force chief killed the plane bcause canards are not stealthy and how can the yf-23 be faster when they have the same engines and the f-22 is not as heavy than the f-23 ? The yf-23 flies 2655 kph+ and the raptor the same the US JUST DONT PUBLISHED IT ! The yf-23 was a little bit more stealthy but less maneuverable and it had big problems with its weapon bays.

Reply

Brad November 19, 2010 at 12:32 pm

There's a lot of talk about just how much more advanced US aircraft, especially F-35 and F-22, are against Russian counterparts. Perhaps so, but it would be a terrible mistake to underestimate Russian aircraft capability and, especially, their missile hardware. Allowing for the Russian doctrine that states "quantity has a quality all its own" and, that Russian aircraft designs are some years behind that of the western nations, Putin's comments should not be summarily dismissed. The Su and Mig bureaus are manufacturing some outstanding aircraft. The latest blocks can almost certainly outperform F-15s and F-16s in dogfight maneuvering and missile performance. Certainly, the only qualitative difference between such airframes is the training of the men in the cockpit.

If anybody contributing to these posts really thinks that pilots, with the same training, are superior, or even better off, in an F-15c vs. Su-35 or Su-37, then a serious re-alignment of thinking is in order. It is also fair to say that Russian missile technology in air to air combat is at least the equal if not superior to US hardware.

Reply

genmax November 20, 2010 at 1:08 am

Time for Russia to start rebuilding its empire…. make a couple thousand of these and the US wouldnt even think of intervening unless Russia attacked western Europe or maybe Poland.

Reply

Justin H November 20, 2010 at 2:12 am

Pak-fa is estimated to cost $100mil. How is that cheaper than F-35?

Reply

Justin H November 20, 2010 at 2:16 am

I wonder if its too late to retrofit F-22s with IR sensors.

Reply

Justin H November 20, 2010 at 2:19 am

The Chinese wont even buy this (they want to build their own) and they are the only real threat we might face in the near future.

Reply

roberto Quafe December 9, 2010 at 11:42 pm

Fatigue on the wings of the f22 in comparison to constituent of the Raptor flabitnoid is un realistic. We all remember that in the f111 the stress load on the tail wheels was ever encountering to the egypt load and furthermore no one has yet to compete with the radar assembly in either the f22 or the f111 or bitle 116 jato species . so relax folks.

Reply

Happa Kraut soldier January 29, 2011 at 11:59 am

US aircraft works period!! Stripped with some elses pilots, avonics, and 0 years dated. logistics we don't end up without fuel, misslies and training to go with it!! Doctrine ours work period!! No bulshit!!! Add the upgrades, and our training with other countries!! No wonder Isreal, and Japan buys these aircraft!!! (iseral Always take Commie Junk and put good old Western tech and make it work for a quick buck!! Japan and Iseral Avonics are based on ours anyway so take your unreliable equipment wih 4 to 1 ratios,with unproven weapons in combat, no fuel,training or tatics and go back to moscow or take some Aim9L up your tailpipe! Betters to be dead than RED!!

Reply

croissant April 19, 2011 at 12:14 am

Of course Putin will market Russian equipment. He needs money; he needs to rebuild their industry. How good or bad PAK FA is in comparison to F22 is too early to judge. Condescending comments about F22 superiority over PAK FA are just as good as Putin's rambling.

Reply

Evolve April 28, 2011 at 5:00 am

U guys are funny :) Let us enjoy the new jet for its technology, please. USA will never ever go to war with Russia, who has nuclear capability to destroy it several times over possibly with very little chance of retaliation. Please, graduate from that war nonsense.

Reply

theonewhoknows August 13, 2011 at 10:50 am

Oh and lets not forget…. entire F-22 fleet was grounded. And that was before F-22 saw any combat. So the aircraft itself is already having problems with the reliability of its onboard systems. F-35 is still in development and will remain so for quite some time. But according to the people that do understand the current fighter market F-35 will be already now useless. And we just have to wait when MIG will roll out its answer to the JSF.

Reply

godzillajet January 22, 2012 at 11:20 am

Maybe Putin is right with his claiming but only with maneuverability, weaponry and range you cant defeat a plane, the raptor has a published speed of Mach 2.25+ but in reality it is as fast than the f-15 eagle which is on par with the PAK-FA the pilots say the raptor is faster than the eagle (some people say it flies mach 3). The f-22 has a radar cross section of 0.001 and the PAK-FA of 0.5 square meters, the raptors radar has 2300 and the PAK-FA 1500 transmitters and until the PAK-FA gets in service the f-22 will have HMD and IRST on block 40 upgrade. The PAK-FA will supercruise at speeds from mach 1.5-1.8 the f-22 at speeds of mach 1.82 and like the top speed or the maximum thrust the true supercruise is still classified.

Reply

godzillajet January 28, 2012 at 9:54 am

All what Putin is saying doesnt matters because the raptor is better and 2025 a 6th gen. fighter will be developed to replace the super hornets and when the f-22 will have a kill rate of 60 per-cent the f-xx will have a kill rate of 90 because it will use high-energy lasers and 6th gen stealth.

Reply

Mastro March 9, 2012 at 11:35 am

Russia might have similar problems selling this as the French with the Rafale.

Rafale is great- but not as good as the F35/Typhoon/Gripen- so only sales to India.

The people (3rd world types) that have been buying Su27/35's might pass on this- or still find it too expensive compared to Chinese stuff.

Russia needs a sales campaign other than "Use it to kill your own people!"

Reply

Dan May 1, 2012 at 10:48 am

It will all turn to Remotely controlled aircraft soon anyway. Human meat on a jet craft, guess what is holding the jet back? THE MEAT.

I see Swarms being the next big thing. Aircraft that is about a foot long with "lighter than air" bladders remotely controlled by a pilot that operates the entire swarm for tactical decisions but the swarm itself is controlled by algorithms. Once over field of operations they expand with 1 – 36 feet of space between them, and using Mesh networking to communicate between. This would then create a large sensor array that is almost impossible to shoot down or detect as they are under radar size limits and would then allow for precision aiming of long range missiles and rail gun Mach 12 artillery to take out airports, bases, etc so that enemy air can not land or refuel.

They can be dropped from a high altitude bomber or missile and float down.

That swarm sensor array would be sensitive enough to send intelligence back to remotely controlled drones if you really want to dog fight it out, but that drone can out turn any human air craft.

Only reason to have F22 or F35 at all now is for display purposes and just in case we get in a fight with a space capable nation that can shoot down our space assets making swarm tactics limited to line of sight or radio. Even then you could use a Swarm to branch out over critical assets and form a type of shield to intercept incoming missiles.

Or have it send info direct to Army squad leaders forearm computer.

Basically put, it is becoming stupid to field more then 100 of any direct human controlled aircraft.

Reply

free psn code generator download November 11, 2012 at 11:39 pm

Hey There. I found your blog the usage of msn. This is a very neatly written article.
I’ll make sure to bookmark it and come back to read more of your useful info. Thank you for the post. I will certainly comeback.

Reply

wordsSHIFTminds November 15, 2012 at 6:44 pm

Hi mates, nice post and good arguments commented at this place, I am genuinely enjoying by these.

Reply

dddeeee August 29, 2013 at 2:14 pm

TR3b and X47b are still superior to T50 :p

Reply

www.streetfire.net August 9, 2014 at 4:05 am

Eitel screens male customers for ‘red flags,’ qualities which indicate a
fellow is not ready or is not able to be in a balanced, committed relationship.
You need to realize that when the time to meet a person who is crucial in your life comes,
you have to be ready. The reality is you may end up dating
several men before your Prince comes along.

Reply

Sarah June 18, 2010 at 4:23 pm

about as many as F-22`s crash during training or testing

Reply

matt payne June 19, 2010 at 5:44 pm

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.

Reply

Donnell June 18, 2010 at 5:10 pm

How many F22's have crashed please tell us the numbers…

Reply

kim June 18, 2010 at 7:37 pm

No F22s have crashed while testing or at airshows. Yet. But then neither have T-50s. Yet.

Reply

The_Hand June 19, 2010 at 3:41 am

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.

Reply

So? June 19, 2010 at 3:22 am

Apparently the rear end will undergo a lot of change in later airframes. This one is only for testing aerodynamics and FCS integration.

Reply

roland June 19, 2010 at 3:55 am

The jet may fail at stealth speed, looking at the body frame. It definitely will fail.
It's a poor design I may say.

Reply

Willi September 8, 2011 at 10:54 am

Let's see, China works closely with Russia in development not only in Aircraft and Avionics but missiles and Space technology and they have no less than six versions of stealth fighters, two bombers and seven varriants of stealth Drones. I see no reason to deubt Russian claims. Regarding IR Sensing, it was already revealed that these sensors were imbedded along the fuselage … emulating natures Shark and were integrated into the SU35 S a decade ago. What better means of integrating them? Quite innovative you have to admit. In that the Raptor is the only fighter the west has that stands a chance against the PAK FA seven nations have already stated that the west will need many more examples to remain effective in holding their own territory secure. However, manufacturing costs are the determining consideration, especially where the PAK-FA is three times less costly. Even South Korea is considering purchasing the fighter for its airforces.

Reply

So? June 19, 2010 at 3:31 am

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?

Reply

Brave Anonymous July 8, 2010 at 8:49 am

Its a bitch!

Reply

Chimp June 19, 2010 at 5:33 am

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.

Reply

Locarno June 21, 2010 at 8:13 am

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..

Reply

So? June 19, 2010 at 7:12 am

An honorable exception.

Reply

Thomas L. Nielsen June 21, 2010 at 2:03 am

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

Reply

DevilPup June 19, 2010 at 7:15 am

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

Reply

DevilPup June 19, 2010 at 7:24 am

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.

Reply

Chuck Haas June 19, 2010 at 4:29 pm

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.

Reply

Chuck Haas June 19, 2010 at 4:36 pm

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.

Reply

Annoying economist June 19, 2010 at 7:19 pm

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.

Reply

enthusiast June 23, 2010 at 12:45 pm

>>>Not even close looking at it's design. Looks like straight surfaces..at least enough to be detected by any second rate radar,

It's not issue for the first flying prototype.

>>>the F-15, much, much older technology than the 22 and 35, has a roughly 100 to 0

Syrians claimed that they shot downed 3 Israeli F-15.
Mig-29 and F-15 are not in same class. Also these few Iraqi downgraded 29s were outnumbered. Don't forget about major advantage with AWACS and AEW in BVR , which was used by F-15s. "Eagle" had never fought in fair fight. Also it's never faced equal/modern Soviet aircraft.

Reply

Enthusiast August 19, 2010 at 8:36 am

Spare parts was the only serious reason

Reply

Enthusiast August 19, 2010 at 8:43 am

Ok, M-60 was in limited usage in Iraq. It does not change anything. Iraq had obsolete and poorly equipment armored forces and incompetent command.
Iraq even had not _REAL_ T-72 tanks

What's wrong with Chenya? Every city is trap for tank. RPG attack (with something newer than ancient RPG-7' and its first warheads from early 1960s era) on tank's top is deadly for any tanks, including "invulnerable" M1 Abrams.

Reply

Enthusiast August 19, 2010 at 9:00 am

you are racist P.O.S.__you ridiculous arguments about superiority of "nordic race" are not satisfied in history__Slavic word "slavs" is nothing to do with "slave", check your facts you poorly educated dumb ass

Reply

crackedlenses August 19, 2010 at 9:22 am

No place for racists here, stop or be run out.

Reply

talkmoreprogram August 20, 2010 at 6:36 am

the funny thing is somehow other Mig-29 operators didnt have that problem!? And the truth is German Mig-29 had been under some significant upgrades. Again, if you bothered to read what people who actually flied them said, you would not use the word ONLY.

Reply

Marc August 23, 2010 at 5:55 pm

Especially since the F-86 was a design rip-off of the Mig-15 to counter the Mig-15

Reply

PolSciIR August 23, 2010 at 6:23 pm

Lets look at this intelligently… if you can.

East Germany was being re-integrated with West Germany. West Germany was equipped with Western equipment, and East Germany was equipped with lower levels of Soviet-bloc equipment. West Germany had all the money, East Germany was poor. The Bundeswehr, being the West German military, was the body into which East German military units were folded into.

Why would the Western-equipped military body with all the money spend extra and give that money to their former enemies to maintain Soviet-bloc equipment? They wouldn't. So instead, they spread the former East German equipment around to their allies for research purposes, like sending Mig-29s to the United States to pick apart.

Reply

PolSciIR August 23, 2010 at 6:25 pm

Of course, that's without even looking at the cost of further training on dissimilar weapons systems.

Reply

talkmoreprogram August 23, 2010 at 10:37 pm

'limited use' because of limited number, not capability. You think what Iraq is? An ancient tribal country with no city?

Reply

talkmoreprogram August 23, 2010 at 10:38 pm

then could you very please to enlighten me why they even bothered spending money upgrading them in the first place?

Reply

PolSciIR August 24, 2010 at 12:20 am

To make them compatible with NATO C4 systems. Soviet technology was not configured remotely that same as Western systems. An AWACs can't provide effective direction to a dissimilar weapons system without modification.

Reply

talkmoreprogram August 24, 2010 at 12:39 am

lol, so you basically said German didnt want to keep Fulcrum just because they were not western, not because they were inferior. And now you say they wanted to make them compatible. OK, its beyond me, really!

Reply

Enthusiast August 24, 2010 at 3:44 am

Do you have any information when and where M-60 had engagements with a iraqi tanks? More than half of Iraqi tanks were abandoned by their crews or broken.
M-60's combat usage in Iraq does not change the facts. Iraq had obsolete and underequiped armored vehicles, which were mostly generation behind (or even two generations behind, i am talking about tanks from 1950's. e.g. T-54/T-55) compared to what US and coallition had used (M1A1). The same thing with Iraqi military aviation and SAM.
It's always annoying when someone claiming how strong and modern Iraqi army was. I am really don't understand American bravado in terms of Gulf war. Because in reality it was "baby beating".

Reply

Enthusiast August 24, 2010 at 3:50 am

Where Germans claimed that they didnt want to keep mig-29 because these planes "were inferior"? Please provide any source.
The only _serious_ reason in that time was spare parts (maintaince issues).

Reply

talkmoreprogram August 24, 2010 at 4:35 am

like i said, find and read what the commanding officer of the German Fulcrum squadron said. Simple!

Reply

talkmoreprogram August 24, 2010 at 4:41 am

the only FACT i know is that there's no such thing as an easy world. Do you know that Baghdad had a thicker air defense umbrella than Murmansk, home of the Northern Fleet? Iraq had tanks, SAM, fighters, arty, and had LOTS of them. What Cheynian had? only light infantry, and only a few of them. Yet they gave the Russian a hard time. No, they actually WON. And Cheynia is not half way around the world from Russia.

Reply

blight January 17, 2011 at 3:28 pm

Russians were initially doing experiments on plasma to disrupt radar returns. A google search on "plasma stealth" reveals a few tidbits.

Reply

Tom August 13, 2011 at 12:36 pm

It's pretty funny to presume that a Mig-35 could see a F-22… 90 km away, when the matter of fact is no Russian fighter jet has seen a F-22 at all.

The L-Band radar on the T-50 is still a wishy washy dream. Russia is now behind US and the West on AESA radar by at least a decade. Even the Indians rejected the Mig-35 due to the failed performance of its proposed -much exaggerated- radar.

Your assessment on the Su-27 dominating F-15 is just Russian bravado talking… It's understandable, since the Russian air force couldn't manage to beatup the tiny Georgia air force, much less the U.S.

Reply

godzillajet January 25, 2012 at 10:30 am

The raptor is superior , but the typhoon can be compared to the PAK-FA too, the PAK-FA is better I know, but youcan compare the typhoon with it and maybe the JSF or the silent eagle.

Reply

Longshot January 28, 2012 at 1:54 pm

Correction: Mig23 is a couple of years after the F111. But the F111 entered service in 1967 and flew the Sukhoi Su17 a year earlier, in 1966. They were manufactured at the same time, the same as the Mirage Dassalut G, canceled in 1968.

And before them was the Bell X5, a U.S. prototype, which first flew in 1951.

Reply

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: