F-35

[MLB 51]

Israel to make helmets for US F-35 fighter

[Hooked on Huskers]

SU- families are equal or superior than our F-22/F-35. Amazing maneuverability....the key thing, thrust vectoring engines are light years ahead.

 

BTW, half the cost.

 

Rusky' SU-30MKI (export)

 

 

older MiG 29: (another company)

 

 

[Army Husker]

Looks like an F-18...

[MLB 51]

Looks like an F-18...

I'd put an F-18 or 22 against it any day.

[Army Husker]

This just seems like one of those projects where the designers went over board to impress people and the brass in the military got hard ons over it and nobody ever stopped to ask.....do we really need this?

I'm not in the military, but IMO, no. We don't really need this. There is an old cliche about always fighting the last war . . . and to my admittedly untrained eye this looks like a weapon designed to fight a war from decades ago.

 

The future isn't manned aircraft. This is a colossal waste. Over a trillion dollars.

Speaking from personal experience here. Not sure if many remember the Comanche helicopter. Billion dollars + wasted and a no-go on the airframe. Now we are finally dropping money on the Echo model Apache helicopter. We, merica and all that, can save so much money upgrading our current fleet while not sacrificing air superiority. Just have to keep the lobbyists out of it................

[Hooked on Huskers]

Looks like an F-18...

I'd put an F-18 or 22 against it any day.

well, Aussie Airpower was just the opposite.....scroll down Hornets vs. Flanker page

 

http://www.ausairpow...vs-Flanker.html

 

the last paragraph...

 

In conclusion, the Flanker in all current variants kinematically outclasses the Super Hornet in all high performance flight regimes. The only near term advantage the latest Super Hornets have over legacy Flanker variants is in the APG-79 AESA and radar signature reduction features, an advantage which will not last long given highly active ongoing Russian development effort in these areas. The supercruising Al-41F engine will further widen the performance gap in favour of the Flanker. What this means is that post 2010 the Super Hornet is uncompetitive against advanced Flankers in BVR combat, as it is now uncompetitive in close combat

[carlfense]

SU- families are equal or superior than our F-22/F-35. Amazing maneuverability....the key thing, thrust vectoring engines are light years ahead.

Eh?

[zoogs]

Yeah, that's funny. People say the same about the Eurofighter. Every plane's got its fans.

 

The Flankers are very sexy looking planes though.

[carlfense]

Yeah, that's funny. People say the same about the Eurofighter. Every plane's got its fans.

 

The Flankers are very sexy looking planes though.

Impressive machines . . . and it's probably correct that they're comparable to or slightly more capable than the Super Hornet.

 

But the F-22 is a different animal.

[ZRod]

Looks like an F-18...

I'd put an F-18 or 22 against it any day.

well, Aussie Airpower was just the opposite.....scroll down Hornets vs. Flanker page

 

http://www.ausairpow...vs-Flanker.html

 

the last paragraph...

 

In conclusion, the Flanker in all current variants kinematically outclasses the Super Hornet in all high performance flight regimes. The only near term advantage the latest Super Hornets have over legacy Flanker variants is in the APG-79 AESA and radar signature reduction features, an advantage which will not last long given highly active ongoing Russian development effort in these areas. The supercruising Al-41F engine will further widen the performance gap in favour of the Flanker. What this means is that post 2010 the Super Hornet is uncompetitive against advanced Flankers in BVR combat, as it is now uncompetitive in close combat

Keep reading and you will find the F-22 is still the bench mark.

 

But the Russians always know how to do it cheaper.

[MLB 51]

Looks like an F-18...

I'd put an F-18 or 22 against it any day.

well, Aussie Airpower was just the opposite.....scroll down Hornets vs. Flanker page

 

http://www.ausairpow...vs-Flanker.html

 

the last paragraph...

 

In conclusion, the Flanker in all current variants kinematically outclasses the Super Hornet in all high performance flight regimes. The only near term advantage the latest Super Hornets have over legacy Flanker variants is in the APG-79 AESA and radar signature reduction features, an advantage which will not last long given highly active ongoing Russian development effort in these areas. The supercruising Al-41F engine will further widen the performance gap in favour of the Flanker. What this means is that post 2010 the Super Hornet is uncompetitive against advanced Flankers in BVR combat, as it is now uncompetitive in close combat

That has nothing to do with the comparison of the SU v. F-18 or 22.

[Hooked on Huskers]

I wish Rusky's vector thrust engines and airframes combined with US radars, electronics and avionics gear. Gathered and shared US and Russian engineers for one team and one factory.........you know, peacepipe meetings. I like canard wings (some models i.e. SU-30). Why don't commercial airliners use canard wings?

[rawhide]

Ya know that F-22 has vectored thrust and supercruise, right?.

 

http://www.lockheedm...pabilities.html

 

Cost/benefit of canards for airliners.

[Hooked on Huskers]

Ya know that F-22 has vectored thrust and supercruise, right?.

 

http://www.lockheedm...pabilities.html

 

Cost/benefit of canards for airliners.

Probably wrong but I think F-22 is restricted nozzle angle ........ up or down only. Russians features a unique rotating nozzles which can provide thrust vector deflection in all directions. The first was MiG29OVT (1991). However Rusky's weak link: gas hog (common knowledge).

 

see vectoring closeup at 1:45 mark:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeiqMn7xb_Y

[zoogs]

I believe it's right that the F-22 has restricted angle thrust vectoring. It's no slouch, but every design has tradeoffs and the F-22's thing isn't close quarters dogfighting, it's splashing bogeys while being invisible from 20 miles away.