StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I just wanted to throw this out there for commentary from those who know more than I do..

Modern Combat Aircraft- Who has the best what, and why? Some simple categories..

Interceptor- I ~assume~ that an ASRAAM-equipped F-22 takes the cake, but ive been wrong before. How capable are the last-generation Soviet 'Superfighters'? Pending entrance of the F-22 into major service, how do the aformentioend Soviet Superfighters compare with the late-build F-15s and F-14s? And are the people in Europe building anything on par?

Genericus Fighterus- I dont know what else to call it.. the F-16s, the F-18s, the Viggens and Eurofighters and the like of the world. Designed not to be the best aircraft in the sky... but the best aircraft we can afford alot of.

Groud-Attack- RAF Tornado? Something from Sukhoi or Illuyshin? Do the A-10s advantages outwigh its disadvantages? Dont you wish we still had F-111s and that SOMETHING had come out of the A-12 program?

Just seeking information... I grew up consuming manuals on military hardware, but they just dont print as many, or as easily accesible, ones as they did then.

Marcus wrote:How capable are the last-generation Soviet 'Superfighters'?

The post soviet (we can't afford to implement them but we've got the designs) no one knows for sure, though there are a mix of crappy and terrifing rumours.

(I even heard one about the Russian Federation developing a working cloaking device )

NecronLord wrote:
The post soviet (we can't afford to implement them but we've got the designs) no one knows for sure, though there are a mix of crappy and terrifing rumours.

Which superfighters? The Russian Su-35/37 series is a very formidable heavy fighter- nothing can match it in the air until the F/A-22 comes out. The Indian's already have it inventory- the Su-30MKI is an Su-37UB in all but name. China's Su-30MKK aircraft aren't nearly as well equipped, though they're still extremely fearsome. What a difference an I and a K makes ...

If you mean the MiG MFI or the Sukhoi Su-47 FIRKIN (previously S-37 Berkut), then in the first case, this was meant to be the Russian 'Raptor killer' but it got axed, and is now being used a technology testbed for MiG's part in the PAK FA program (current program to create the next generation Russian fighter)- MiG is a subcontractor. Sukhoi, the prime contractor and victor of the tender to design the fighter, is using the Su-47 design for both testing and as a base for the new fighter- a line-drawing of the proposal was put up by Jane's Defense Weekly- it's a twin-engined (pair of 175kN class AL-41F turbofans) design in the same weight and size class as the FLANKER, with wings similar to those of the F/A-22 and a fuselage very similar to the Su-47 (with no canards). Of course, this design will be much refined as the process goes on. First prototype flight is expected in 2006, with IOC in 2010 and service in 2012.

(I even heard one about the Russian Federation developing a working cloaking device )

Ah ... the 'plasma stealth'. Everyone's skeptical about it. It's still pie in the sky, IMO.

Marcus wrote:Interceptor- I ~assume~ that an ASRAAM-equipped F-22 takes the cake, but ive been wrong before.

The F/A-22 will carry the AMRAAM and AIM-9X. The US withdrew from the ASRAAM project.

How capable are the last-generation Soviet 'Superfighters'?

Very.

Pending entrance of the F-22 into major service, how do the aformentioend Soviet Superfighters compare with the late-build F-15s and F-14s?

Generally superior to the Western designs, though the F-14D is probably a superior interceptor to any of those fighters.

And are the people in Europe building anything on par?

The Eurofighter Typhoon, which is quite good.

Genericus Fighterus

Prepare to be attacked for fake Latin.

I dont know what else to call it.. the F-16s, the F-18s, the Viggens and Eurofighters and the like of the world. Designed not to be the best aircraft in the sky... but the best aircraft we can afford alot of.

What about them? Eurofighter isn't supposed to be a "generic fighter." Viggen is being replaced by Gripen, IIRC. F-35 will dominate this market, though the Gripen may seize the low-end with its lower costs.

phongn wrote: Generally superior to the Western designs, though the F-14D is probably a superior interceptor to any of those fighters.

Didn't they get rid of AIM-54 Phoenix?

1.) Im terribly well aware that it isnt real latin, being in my usage something of a verbal shorthand.

2.) Ahh, I suppose my mental grouping of production fighters into 'expensive and limited numerically' and 'less expensive, greater numerically', as represented by the USAF F-15/F-16, had blead over into other matters. It was my apparently misunderstanding that the Eurofighter was in the school of the F-16, intended to be more affordable and produced in greater numbers.

MKSheppard wrote:

phongn wrote: Generally superior to the Western designs, though the F-14D is probably a superior interceptor to any of those fighters.

Didn't they get rid of AIM-54 Phoenix?

Effectively, the F-14 will be retired in the not too distant future and it is still the only aircraft capable of using that missile.

Some one forgot the JSF as a low end high numbers fighter. it will whoop any thing in that classes ass like there's no tomorrow. VTAL, and stealth, and lotsa other technological nuggets, c'mon it rocks.

Some one forgot the JSF as a low end high numbers fighter. it will whoop any thing in that classes ass like there's no tomorrow. VTAL, and stealth, and lotsa other technological nuggets, c'mon it rocks.

darthdavid wrote:Some one forgot the JSF as a low end high numbers fighter. it will whoop any thing in that classes ass like there's no tomorrow. VTAL, and stealth, and lotsa other technological nuggets, c'mon it rocks.

i thought the funding on that program got pulled?

Col. Crackpot wrote:

darthdavid wrote:Some one forgot the JSF as a low end high numbers fighter. it will whoop any thing in that classes ass like there's no tomorrow. VTAL, and stealth, and lotsa other technological nuggets, c'mon it rocks.

i thought the funding on that program got pulled?

Bit behind the times considering they'll start delivering the first units not a million years from now.

Lockheed won the JSF contract. I think the JSF is going to enter service before the end of the decade.

Still, I love the new Super Hornets.

Arrow Mk84 wrote:Still, I love the new Super Hornets.

The problem with the Super Hornets is that they have too short of legs still. They simply don't have the same range as the F-14 or A-6.

Vympel wrote:
Ah ... the 'plasma stealth'. Everyone's skeptical about it. It's still pie in the sky, IMO.

The opinion of the world stealth experts is that no one will have it within 50 years. I hold the opinions of designers who have actually built stealth aircraft and come from nations with more advanced electronics over totally unsupported Russian claims.

Col. Crackpot wrote:

darthdavid wrote:Some one forgot the JSF as a low end high numbers fighter. it will whoop any thing in that classes ass like there's no tomorrow. VTAL, and stealth, and lotsa other technological nuggets, c'mon it rocks.

i thought the funding on that program got pulled?

Umm no, the USN and USMC order recently got cut back, but the F-35 still is looking at firm orders for thousands of aircraft to about a dozen airforces.

Marcus wrote:I

Interceptor- I ~assume~ that an ASRAAM-equipped F-22 takes the cake, but ive been wrong before. How capable are the last-generation Soviet 'Superfighters'? Pending entrance of the F-22 into major service, how do the aformentioend Soviet Superfighters compare with the late-build F-15s and F-14s? And are the people in Europe building anything on par?

Of the planes named only the F-14 is actually and Interceptor. And that was only in mission, the design is a quite good fighter.

Groud-Attack- RAF Tornado? Something from Sukhoi or Illuyshin? Do the A-10s advantages outwigh its disadvantages? Dont you wish we still had F-111s and that SOMETHING had come out of the A-12 program?

Tornado and F-111 are both interdiction/strike aircraft. Not ground attack. Assuming we count things, which only exist as prototypes, the best is probably one of the recent Su-25 upgrades

Marcus wrote:I just wanted to throw this out there for commentary from those who know more than I do..

Modern Combat Aircraft- Who has the best what, and why? Some simple categories..

Interceptor- I ~assume~ that an ASRAAM-equipped F-22 takes the cake, but ive been wrong before. How capable are the last-generation Soviet 'Superfighters'? Pending entrance of the F-22 into major service, how do the aformentioend Soviet Superfighters compare with the late-build F-15s and F-14s? And are the people in Europe building anything on par?

Raptor is the best out there, equipped with AIM-120 AMRAAM and AIM-9X Sidewinder. With its combination of stealth, highly accurate missiles, and target prioritizing AI system, it's virtually unbeatable in most fights. If they're pitted class-to-class (F-14 against MiG-31, F-15 against Su-27), Russian and American fighters were roughly equivalent. American fighters tended to be slightly better for radar and weapons systems, Russian fighters were usually a touch more maneuverable for the large ones.

Genericus Fighterus- I dont know what else to call it.. the F-16s, the F-18s, the Viggens and Eurofighters and the like of the world. Designed not to be the best aircraft in the sky... but the best aircraft we can afford alot of.

Late block Falcons are still among the best. The Gripen's close in capabilities, but the new Sniper/Pantera system maintains the electronic superiority. I don't know exactly how their maneuverability compares, but everything I've heard makes it sound as if they're fairly close.

Groud-Attack- RAF Tornado? Something from Sukhoi or Illuyshin? Do the A-10s advantages outwigh its disadvantages? Dont you wish we still had F-111s and that SOMETHING had come out of the A-12 program?

Depends on what you're looking for. In CAS, the Thunderbolt II is probably still among the best. Its 30mm GAU-8A Avenger autocannon is very useful against armor assets, and it is actually hard for other fighters to take out because it is so slow. The Frogfoot (Su-25) is another good CAS aircraft. Other than that, I can't think of a good one in use right now. The Harrier is a horrible airplane. It's weak structurally and has problems with vibration. Lockheed Martin engineers who have tried to develop electronics pods for it have given up because the centerline on it vibrates worse than the wingtip pods of a Hornet.

Just seeking information... I grew up consuming manuals on military hardware, but they just dont print as many, or as easily accesible, ones as they did then.

True. I'm still trying to find better resources than what I have. I've got decent World War II sources and moderately good modern sources, but they're all almost a decade out of date.

Sea Skimmer wrote:

Col. Crackpot wrote:

darthdavid wrote:Some one forgot the JSF as a low end high numbers fighter. it will whoop any thing in that classes ass like there's no tomorrow. VTAL, and stealth, and lotsa other technological nuggets, c'mon it rocks.

i thought the funding on that program got pulled?

Umm no, the USN and USMC order recently got cut back, but the F-35 still is looking at firm orders for thousands of aircraft to about a dozen airforces.

Unfortunately, the cost of the prototypes alone (six or eight aircraft combined between the -32 and -35, can't recall off the top of my head) would have paid for a few hundred Raptors. Even one of the planners who helped develop the F-35 feels it's an unnecessary aircraft. No mission it fulfills cannot currently be done by another aircraft.

The US And Britain ordered 3,006 of the JSF And They said delivery will be ready by 2008.

The Dark wrote: Unfortunately, the cost of the prototypes alone (six or eight aircraft combined between the -32 and -35, can't recall off the top of my head) would have paid for a few hundred Raptors. Even one of the planners who helped develop the F-35 feels it's an unnecessary aircraft. No mission it fulfills cannot currently be done by another aircraft.

Surely the US needs JSF as a fighter it can export?
MDC/Boeing had trouble selling the F-15 to all but the very richest countries. How many nations could afford even a token force of Raptors? And how sellable is the Super Hornet?

Unfortunately, the cost of the prototypes alone (six or eight aircraft combined between the -32 and -35, can't recall off the top of my head) would have paid for a few hundred Raptors. Even one of the planners who helped develop the F-35 feels it's an unnecessary aircraft. No mission it fulfills cannot currently be done by another aircraft.

The JSF is expensive but frankly with stealth becoming as important as it is, we'll need a stealth replacement for a lot of those aircraft.

The Dark wrote:
Unfortunately, the cost of the prototypes alone (six or eight aircraft combined between the -32 and -35, can't recall off the top of my head) would have paid for a few hundred Raptors. Even one of the planners who helped develop the F-35 feels it's an unnecessary aircraft. No mission it fulfills cannot currently be done by another aircraft.

There are no real JSF prototypes. Both the X-32 and X-35 where technology demonstrators. But the costs behind them include all of the heavy devolopment work which does cost billions. Really though, the F-35 is three aircraft that happen to share 75% of there parts. When judging costs it should be thought of as such.

The JSF is far more important then a few hundred F-22's. Already there are orders equal to nearly 3/4's of the F-16 production run, though the F-16 has orders through 2009 and may have more coming.

Also remember that many other countries are counting on it and have paid quite a bit of money. The UK has two billion in the project for development, and several other nations gave 175 million each to have a say in more minor aspects of the design.

Arrow Mk84 wrote:Lockheed won the JSF contract. I think the JSF is going to enter service before the end of the decade.

Still, I love the new Super Hornets.

The Super Hornet is meant to replace the Tomcat as fleet protector and interceptor. One slight problem. The Super Hornet is inferior in every single respect. And it gets worse. All the standard Hornets are going to be replaced by the JSF eventually. So they replace the strike element of the fleet with a better aircraft but put a worse aircraft to replace the Interceptors of the fleet.

The Super Hornet is the wost possible choice the Navy can make. The entire Hornet series will be replaced by the JSF and they put an inferior design to replace the Tomcat.

The Interceptors capabilities of the F-14 are of minimal use. Most of the threat they where to counter never existed in the first place. And for medium range work, the Super Hornet is more capable.