Su-35 vs F-22/F-35

miketheterrible wrote:F-35C is by far the best due to being a jump jet and replaces those Harriers which sucked.

bitcointrader70 wrote:Sorry but that’s not true at all. F35 has an AESA LPI radar and amraam is active homing with anti jamming measures.  Even if it gets detected after lock and launch the su35 is performing  defensive measures losing speed and altitude while the f35 sits pretty. And with amraam it can turn and go home after launch. With the best RWR in the game it will detect su35 blasting its radar way before it needs to use its own radar. And there are rumours that f35/f22 can fire amraam passively with its RWR without having to use it’s own radar.

If it’s 6 f35s vs 6 flankers it’s even worse for the flankers because via data link and sensor fusion one f35 can providing firing solutions for the other 5 and the flankers have no clue many planes they are dealing with it and totally blind with missiles coming out of nowhere.

It’s a bad situation all around and that’s why the US spent trillions on 5th gen jets because stealth, better radars, better missiles, and sensor fusion give you huge advantages.

bitcointrader70 wrote:

If it’s 6 f35s vs 6 flankers it’s even worse for the flankers because via data link and sensor fusion one f35 can providing firing solutions...

Mir wrote:

miketheterrible wrote:F-35C is by far the best due to being a jump jet and replaces those Harriers which sucked.

No biggie but the "B" is the jump jet variant.

Backman wrote:

bitcointrader70 wrote:

If it’s 6 f35s vs 6 flankers it’s even worse for the flankers because via data link and sensor fusion one f35 can providing firing solutions...

Haha. This reads like a Lockmart pamphlet.

m-m-m-muh sensor fusion

In a seriousness , not enough is known about these systems in either aircraft to make a judgement like this. Sensor fusion can mean a lot of things. I'm sure su 57's are capable of communicating with each other. Sukhoi is just as big into this kind of jargon as Lockmart is.

ALAMO wrote:OK, the next one who will punch a retard is guilty!
One...two ... three ...

ALAMO wrote:OK, the next one who will punch a retard is guilty!
One...two ... three ...

miketheterrible wrote:
I would, but I have him on ignore as he just wouldn't stop being stupid.

bitcointrader70 wrote:

ALAMO wrote:OK, the next one who will punch a retard is guilty!
One...two ... three ...

Hahaha I’ll whoop your ass in real life tough guy. When and where boy

NASA missions under threat because of astronaut shortage

ALAMO wrote:

miketheterrible wrote:
I would, but I have him on ignore as he just wouldn't stop being stupid.

That makes me guilty, as I still have not checked how to turn on the ignore option
Soooorry!
Beer is on me!

franco wrote:
Doesn't he sound a bit like the young Frenchmen who liked to show pictures of himself (on steroids IMO)

Arkanghelsk wrote:Bitcoin trader should stick to losing bitcoins on bitcoin trading.

BVR has never been implemented in real world scenario.

Repeating the marketing material from Northrop Grumman is not necessary when you will sell the plane not based on qualitative features, but on diplomatic pressure.

F35 will stay far away out of combat zone and will never be seen ever.

Turkey opted for S400 than f35, that alone speaks for itself.

US is going back to f15, and israel sticks to using f16 for strikes on Syria

Nuff said

bitcointrader70 wrote:
Is that why Russia is developing a variety of IR medium and long range AAMs? And has BVR weapons of its own? Is that why Russia is making ultra long range SAMS and BVR weapons to kill bombers and AWACS. For a concept you claim is unproven it seems that Russia is pretty heavily invested. Gee I wonder why.

But when he was over the Russian city of Sverdlovsk, the unimaginable happened. His U-2 spy plane was hit by a Soviet missile

bitcointrader70 wrote:What China got out of the Su-35 purchase, (PLAAF officer interview)

This is a surprisingly candid interview about the Su-35 and it's capabilities vis-a-vis Chinese built Flankers

​

[https://mil.sina.cn/sd/2018-12-09/detail-ihmutuec7501376.d.html?from=wap&fbclid=IwAR0Zimt46\_KUVu7lzkOy6OXCwaKc\_jbkDrSlt\_K9Qdn1WqMdPc7DTwlb24g](https://mil.sina.cn/sd/2018-12-09/detail-ihmutuec7501376.d.html?from=wap&fbclid=IwAR0Zimt46_KUVu7lzkOy6OXCwaKc_jbkDrSlt_K9Qdn1WqMdPc7DTwlb24g)

​

Google translate link here: [https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fmil.sina.cn%2Fsd%2F2018-12-09%2Fdetail-ihmutuec7501376.d.html%3Ffrom%3Dwap%26fbclid%3DIwAR0Zimt46\_KUVu7lzkOy6OXCwaKc\_jbkDrSlt\_K9Qdn1WqMdPc7DTwlb24g](https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fmil.sina.cn%2Fsd%2F2018-12-09%2Fdetail-ihmutuec7501376.d.html%3Ffrom%3Dwap%26fbclid%3DIwAR0Zimt46_KUVu7lzkOy6OXCwaKc_jbkDrSlt_K9Qdn1WqMdPc7DTwlb24g)

​

Highlights:

\- The SU-35 serves as an excellent benchmark for the Chinese military to gauge the effectiveness of their own development vs international standards.

\- Su-35 is very maneuverable, possibly the most maneuverable fighter in the PLAAF

\- The N035E is an excellent PESA radar. It's pretty much the best PESA radar you can practically develop.

\- However, it's substantially weaker than the current generation of Chinese AESAs.

\- The N035E radar has some interesting features, for example it is capable of detecting a target at extended ranges (350km) if it's only required to scan a small area (about the size of the HUD). This is not particularly useful without AWACs cueing.  

\- ESM/ECM systems are not as good as the J-16s. If the J16 were to be rated a 10/10, the Su-35 would be an 8.5/10 on ESM and 8/10 on ECM performance.

\- The IRST is also worse, due to the state of the Russian electronics/optics industry.  

\- The R-77 and R-73 can be used on China's older stock of Russian fighters (Su-27/Su-30MKKs).

\- R-77/R-73 are unremarkable, and performance trails the Chinese PL-10 and PL-15 missiles. (Wouldn't the PL-8 and PL-12 be a better comparison?)

\- The Su-35 has an interesting feature, the "БОСЭС" or "Duel" which, if programmed with the capability of the opposing fighter, can automatically track the enemy in real time and recommend optimized decisions. It presents a good look into the Russian understanding of air combat modeling  - and China may seek to do something similar for their 5th generation fights. (Coupled with advances in Chinese AI technology).

\- The 117S engine is very good. It has 13% more dry thrust than the older AL-31F, which is already superior to the domestic WS-10.

\- The Su-35s have some form of datalink capability, and have some level of integration into Chinese air defense networks.

\- The Su-35 is giving China lots of experience with a super maneuverable thrust vectoring aircraft, and is influencing Chinese decisions on where to go with fighter development.  

\- They've learned quite a bit via dissimilar air combat training exercises with the Su-35.

\- "the 117S engine is also the key subsystem for the first time after the introduction of the Su-35" - I think this means that the engine is the primary reason the Su-35 was bought.

\- The officer's dream heavy 4.5th generation fighter would be a J-16 with 117S engines.


A pretty honest interview about su35 from a Chinese insider.

Thinking that su35 can take on an f35 is some deluded thinking from people on this forum. F35 has a 360 degree DAS. Better IIR missiles in WVR range. Better long range missiles in AMRAAM a radar with much better performance. AESA is always better than PESA. A better ECM package. And stealth.

Look first see first kill first.  Flankers EO isn’t as good as the f35s Garry and i seriously doubt the flanker has the necessary sensor fusion to reliably Q off AWACS/ground based radars to launch R77 and give mid course corrections with its own radar that won’t be able to see the F35 from the reasonable distance. Russian entire air defence doctrine is based on its fighters avoiding massive air battles with western 4.5 and 5th gen jets for a reason. They will rely a lot on artillery, long range missiles, and their ground based air defenses to get the job done.

"The classical air combat starts at high speed, but if you miss on the first shot—and the probability is there because there are maneuvers to avoid missiles—the combat will be more prolonged. After maneuvering, the aircraft will be at a lower speed, but both aircraft may be in a position where they cannot shoot. But supermaneuverability allows an aircraft to turn within three seconds and take another shot."
— Sergey Bogdan, Sukhoi chief test pilot

Mir wrote:It is funny that back in 2008 Rand Corporation found that the Su-35 could shoot down 2.4 F-35s for every Su-35 lost. Rand Corporation is an American nonprofit global policy think tank created in 1948 by Douglas Aircraft Company to offer research and analysis to the United States Armed Forces. It is mostly financed by the U.S. government.

Naturally the Pentagon/USAF refuted all these claims and in turn claimed that the F-35 Wunderwaffe is 400% more effective in air-to-air combat than any other aircraft other than the F-22 (naturally!).

"The classical air combat starts at high speed, but if you miss on the first shot—and the probability is there because there are maneuvers to avoid missiles—the combat will be more prolonged. After maneuvering, the aircraft will be at a lower speed, but both aircraft may be in a position where they cannot shoot. But supermaneuverability allows an aircraft to turn within three seconds and take another shot."
— Sergey Bogdan, Sukhoi chief test pilot

Now this very well known fact could make the Rand Corporation's outlook even worse than they actually thought!