Kenshin.................Su-37 Super Fulcrum? you must mean Terminator, the Su-35 is the Super Flanker

and the MiG corporation has cancelled the MiG-35 which is widely believed to be the MiG 1.42/44

Here is the unbiased, realistic studied and factual list of a modern-near future force...
These have been debated by military strategist. If you look around you will see files on them.

1. F/A-22
2. Typhoon (Debatable)
3. Su-30xxx
4. F-35
5. F-15C AESA
6. Rafael
7. F/A-18E
8. Mig-29SMT (2)

It's a hard call to put the SMT last as it should be in place of the Rafael.

Its first designation was the MiG-1.42/44, but was later renamed the MiG-35. I never said that it was in operation, I simply stated that it was/is the best fighter plane design in the world.

A bold statement for a fighter that was rarely flown and never had a chance to evolve; usually done in the testing phase...


Though, don’t get me wrong as I do have a place for Russian/my fighters and believe they are widely underestimated. They could easily hold their own at arms reach or in a knife fight while fighting its counterpart...


[edit on 18-12-2004 by ChrisRT]

So your saying that because it was rarely flown that means it isn't a great fighter. How do we know for sure it hasn't flown more times than the say it has, you never know, the military doesn't tell the people everything.

Originally posted by Kenshin
So your saying that because it was rarely flown that means it isn't a great fighter. How do we know for sure it hasn't flown more times than the say it has, you never know, the military doesn't tell the people everything.

I totally agree... But since most have no information on it there is no place to call it the best or even nearly the best...
Read my edit above. It would be logical to assume that the U.S. has the edge due to its long history with stealth and highly capable computers coupled with sensor fusion.

Eleven Thousand

[edit on 18-12-2004 by Kenshin]

^^^ Dude, back off!! I don’t think we are better... I have Russian in me... I was stating that many people underestimate Russian technology. I respect it and see it for its full potential. When I become a pilot I hope I never have to fight a Russian fighter, if I’m in anything besides an F/A-22 or F-35 I stand a good chance at loosing. You guys would best all but the F/A-22 in a dog/knife fight and probably anything else in BVR combat because Russian missiles are more advanced and longer ranged.

the Su-30 isn't that amazing of a plane, here's the future

1.F-22
2.T-50
3.F-35
4.MFI
5.Rafael
6.Typhoon
7.Su-35BM
8.Su-37
9.Su-35
10.Su-27SK
11.Su-30MKI
12.F-15
13.J-12
14.Su-30MKK
15.MiG-29M
16.MiG-29SMT
17.F-16
18.F-18
19.F-14
20.LCA

in the future, most countries will stop buying aircraft from other countries, take South Korea for example, in the future, they are developing their own planes, the same with India and their LCA, and even Brazil is making a new fighter, something X, forgot now

not many people brag about the quadruplex redundant fly-by-wire system of the F-22, well the MiG-29M also has it, in fact the MiG has a fourfold redundant, three channel, fly-by-wire system
i'll start from the top down

F-22: nothing to say, we know for a fact that it will be the superior aircraft in the future, yet, by not as much as everyone states that it will, its superiority in computing technology, its supercruising ability, and its stealth characteristics naturally make it impregnable to ECM attacks and AAM attacks

T-50: based on the info that the russian government has given us, it can already be desrcibed as being superior to the F-22 in performance, yet the real question remains about its electronics which comprise an extremely crucial part of the aircraft now a days and the limits of its stealth technology, this aircraft may even become more superior to the F-22, not a high possibility, but a possibility noetheless

F-35: an absolutely incredible plane, although its stats are rather inferior to the F-35, it also utilizes stealth technology and has a high computing power, and much cheaper

Russian MFI: pretty much no info on this as the Su-47 has been put up for export, but no sales have occurred, and the MiG corporation are restarting the MFI project, the 1.42/44 which might mean that the future heavy fighter will be created by MiG, almost no info, but we already know that it will be an incredible aircraft

*my opinion right here, i'm not sure that russia will opt for a heavy fighter because the T-50 weighs close to the F-22 and far more than the F-35, the T-50 will have a normal take-off weight of 24000kg and max of 33000 kg, the F-22 has a max take-off of 27000, and the F-35 has a max take-off of about 22700

Rafale: France broke away from the Typhoon project and developed the Rafale which has strikingly similar resemblances to the Typhoon, yet, France is known for making rather effective aircraft, a lot better than the Brits and Germans or Italians and Spanish for that matter

Typhoon: basically the same as the Rafale, except for a few differnces, th two aircraft are practically the same

Su-35BM:brand new aircraft, the russians have just developed it as an upgrade for the Su-35, many say that it will make this already formidable aircraft even better, it performs better than the Su-30 variants and costs less, and the only difference between it and the Su-37, is that the Su-37 has two dimensional thrust-vectoring engines

Su-37:absolutely spectacular aircraft incredible range, price, weapons, mobility, speed, and ceiling, what else am i to say?

Su-35: just short of the Su-37 in mobility, but other than that, practically the same, yet it costs even cheaper than the 37m for a Su-37!

Su-27SK: was designed to be even more efficient than the Su-30MKI's and MKK's, but i think it falls short of th performance of the Su-35, because the Su-35 has canards and more advanced avionics

Su-30MKI:a true adversary, equal to or superior to the F-15 in combat performance, COPE India good example, although its rather expensive compared to the other Su-27 variants because it has indian and french avionics which cost more

F-15: truely, america's most versatile aircraft, has held its ground countless times, combat-proven, with many downed MiGs attributed, maneuverable, advanced avionics, incredible speed

J-12: i don't think there is any info on this project as it will be in the future, but there are some rumors circulating that it will be an advanced aircraft with canards, even thogh the J-10, is kinda crappy, we can say that the J-12 will not suffer the same fate because of the knowledge that chinese engineers will gain from the russians in the future

Su-30MKK: not as capable as the Su-30MKI because of different avionics and different needs for each aircraft, subtle and slight differences, but the Su-30MKK is cheaper

MiG-29M and MiG-29SMT: wow incredibly close, very similar to each other, except the MiG-29M has superior avionics, and that is crucial nowadays, its fourfold redundant quadruplex fly-by-wire system is equal to that of the F-22's, but not as sophisticated or advanced, other than that, both upgrades sport increased range, the cockpit has the HOTAS concept, all-weather, maintainability, reliability, and safety all excellent, low operating costs, in-flight refueling, incredible new radar ZHUK-ME which enables a feature of long detection range, multi-channel firing, air-to-surface firings modes, IR search and track system and helmet-mounted designation system, the ability to carry foreign equipment, and a few more impressive features

F-18:an awesome aircraft with good capabilities based on what i've heard, yet it lacks a lot, the only reason whhy it ranks higher than the F-16 is because its slightly more advanced, its radar is awesome though, its mobility is incredible, but thats pretty much it

F-16: combat proven, and, i think, even though i'm a major supporter of russian equipment, slightly more efficient than the MiG-29, there was that German incident, where they faced off, it was about equal, yet flicking 11 switches to fire one AA-11 is just too much, its combat-proven, reliable, low cost(not as low as the MiG-29 though) an overall amazing concept

F-14:high initial cost, and high maintenance costs, yet, when you get this sob in the air, your smoking, the sweeping wings configuration is awesome, it allows for a plane with high speed and relatively average maneuverability, yet, the cost drives this plane to the ground, and its moderate maneuverbility is a killer in real combat

LCA: indians are working on a replacement for the MiG-21BIS's which posed very well against the F-15's at Cope India (considering that they are 21 years older) its suppsoed to be in delta winged configuration but other than that, not a lot of info, don't know when its coming out, there was one pic, maybe a few more, i'm sure that it will have moderate capabilities for a super-low price

^^^ Good info but military annalists and hardcore combat aviation enthusiast point more towards my list in the 2010-2020 timeframe...

I just don't want the starter of this thread to get faulty information is he/she is doing a report or whatnot.

the Su-30 isn't that amazing of a plane, here's the future

Well, considering that the Su-30 is just about a production reality of the envisioned Su-35-37, it is amazing... Some models have its TVC, others have some of it's combat systems and others have its complete package refined and streamlined...
It would go above the Su-37 on you're list.


[edit on 18-12-2004 by ChrisRT]

ChrisRT
It isn’t pure invincible like the '22 but it is no lager.

no, The F-35 does show up bigger on a radar, slightly bigger then a F-117, While the F-22 is in the same category as the B-2.

Also DIMA, The F-22 is currently operational.

That is what I said. I said it isn’t full aspect stealth (radar, weapon systems, heat, radar signature, and visibility) like the F/A-22 but it is highly stealthy. Its main drawback lacking from almost full aspect stealth is its lack of infra red suppression…

Edit: Crap, I confuse myself sometimes...

What I'm trying to say is that the F/A-35 implements technology and airframe designs like its brother the F/A-22 but not nearly to its extent.
It has Reduced probability of censor and radar interception, Low visibility, Absorbs radar waves (to and extent) and its size puts it in the F-16 class furthering its stealthy ness... It fails to hide its infra red signatures at all.


[edit on 18-12-2004 by ChrisRT]

The F-35 cant be included in the list as its not going to be in service within the next 2 years.....or am I mistaken?

Anyway its classed as a multi role aircraft...jack of all trades ...master of none...although using that, it could be said that the typhoon could be placed in the multi role category, initally it was designed for air superiority, but with the diminshed threat from the soviets, it was re-tasked to perform ground attack as well.

The F-35 probably won’t be fully operational for 3 years...
It is a Fighter/Attacker but its sensors are only 2nd to the F/A-22s and it’s stealthy. You make the conclusion for yourself. It’s more advanced then any other fighter besides the F/A-22... It just hasn’t the speed or payload of the other so call air superiority fighters.

Anyway my list.....

1. F22
2. Typhoon
3. Su30
4. Rafale
5.F-18 / F-16

and as for....

Dima...
Rafale: France broke away from the Typhoon project and developed the Rafale which has strikingly similar resemblances to the Typhoon, yet, France is known for making rather effective aircraft, a lot better than the Brits and Germans or Italians and Spanish for that matter

What about the Falklands?? I seem to remember a number of french built aircraft shot down by a rather effective British aircraft - The Harrier, turned out that the Argentine Airforce wouldnt come out in their Mirage III's and Super Etendarts.

I think a new thread should be started!!!!

What is the top 5 of PROVEN Air Superiority Fighters in the World currently in service???

Spacemunkey

Just rename this thread and continue as so...

The top 5 proven are the:

1. F-4
2. F-15
3. F-16
4. F-86
5. Mig-15...
This list is of course going by A2A kills achived...

Let me post my charts again... These are against current fighters, though I wish it included the F-22 in there as well

Dima, the Rafale and Typhoon are completely different aircraft, they were designed completely separately by two different design teams.

They do not look anything alike, the wing, intakes, fuselage profile, canards etc are all different. Also the requirement was not the same, France required a smaller, lighter aircraft to allow for carrier ops whereas the British and Germans required a more capable air superiority fighter than the French imposed limit on size and weight would allow, hence two separate programmes and the fact that the Typhoon is the more capable of the two. Initially Spain went with France and the Rafale but later switched because they weren't so bothered about smallness and Lightness as they had no requirement for a carrier version but wanted the better A2A fighter, which was Typhoon.

[edit on 18-12-2004 by waynos]

Originally posted by waynos
Dima, the Rafale and Typhoon are completely different aircraft, they were designed completely separately by two different design teams.

They do not look anything alike, the wing, intakes, fuselage profile, canards etc are all different. Also the requirement was not the same, France required a smaller, lighter aircraft to allow for carrier ops whereas the British and Germans required a more capable air superiority fighter than the French imposed limit on size and weight would allow, hence two separate programmes and the fact that the Typhoon is the more capable of the two. Initially Spain went with France and the Rafale but later switched because they weren't so bothered about smallness and Lightness as they had no requirement for a carrier version but wanted the better A2A fighter, which was Typhoon.

[edit on 18-12-2004 by waynos]

When France broke out of that because of there need for it to be carrier capable they still had all the design aspects of that plane (becasue they to had spent money on it). Much of the plane is the same, France only changed what they needed to to make it a good Navy aircraft. Just because it looks a little different doesn't mean they dont come from the same aircraft design.

So do you consider the Super Hornet to be a completly different aircraft then the Hornet because they dont look the same?

Much of the hawker hurricane and the spitfire where the same yet they are two diffrent fighters, counter point. They are diffrent jets for sameish jobs but not totaly the same.