Russia to launch new F/A-22 competetor

Originally posted by Odessit
Pak-fa will be better, do you know why? well because it is common sense that Russians would try to counter F-22 that is why Pak-Fa is made, otherwise , there is not sense in making the plane if it wouldn't be better than F-22, that's the whole idea about it.

No, the "whole idea" is "to not fall to far behind". If the US were to go on, make a 5th gen fighter, while russia did absolutely nothing, how long would it take for the russians to overcome the technological gap that would proceed in regards to "it" versus American fighters?

Another thing, the Raptor is actual reality, this "PAK FA" fighter hasnt even been made yet. we haven't even seen a detailed drawing...So lets let the "speculation" of capabilities die.

I will be surprised if this fighter is anywhere near "production" in the next 10 years. By that time, the F22 will have received or will be receiving various upgrades.

Regardless, Russia will not be able to afford to provide this pak fa in any substantial numbers.



[edit on 13-2-2008 by West Coast]

Originally posted by Odessit
Pak-fa will be better, do you know why? well because it is common sense that Russians would try to counter F-22 that is why Pak-Fa is made, otherwise , there is not sense in making the plane if it wouldn't be better than F-22, that's the whole idea about it.

Originally posted by waynos

Originally posted by topsecretombomb
Yea in my point of view there is no way the Russians can all of a sudden create a fighter that can take down the raptor much less keep up with it. No matter how much their economy is doing good lol!

I remember exactly the same being said about the teen series when we were all relieved to find out that the MiG 23 wasn't really all that good.

the image linked to above is nothing to do with Pak Fa as the Russians have already ditched FSW. It is a very nice looking creation though, it looks part Flanker, part F-22 and part Su-47/S-37 (or whatever its called this week). I could see how it might fool a lot of people who wouldn't know any better.

From MiG-23 to Su-27 we can see how far that Russia jetfighter can jump. When MiG-23 was revealed, nobody think it is a menace to F-4 phantom2, even MiG-25 was considered made by potboiler even if its profile looks great

MiG-25 commonly was thought imitated from NA Vigilanter, at that time we all contemn such copy thing, but since Su-27 took off to the air, the story changed. Yes Su-27 was desgined to counter-F-15, please notice that doesn't matter you or me or anyone think what the PAKFA will counter to, it is just depends on what the goal the PAKFA should approachs.

Originally posted by topsecretombomb
Yea in my point of view there is no way the Russians can all of a sudden create a fighter that can take down the raptor much less keep up with it. No matter how much their economy is doing good lol!

I not mean a strong country on economic aspect must can product a superior jetfighter, I just want to say the economy won't be a serious problem to the PAKFA.

Originally posted by Canada_EH
reply to post by emile

 

At this point emile the jet fighter you talk about hasn't been built its specs are speculation and the F-22 is flying and the pilots are becoming more practiced in its operation daily. Yes you have some point with strength in number etc but alot of that is just guess work in how it would play out. For me in the present and looking at the fact that the USAF and its fighter development never stands still technologically then at this point Russia is playing catch up to North America in that regard. Have they been in the lead before? YES. Could they Again? Yes. But it all remains to be seen.

back to korea war, USAF was beaten by migs, to Vietnam war, USAF was beaten by migs again, I think you don't need me reminds you of that situation in which USAF took the superior on tech and vantage on amount to both.
Yes USAF won the gulf war, so get much complacent which in our words, your tail up to sky!
Yes, F-22 is present, PAKFA is potential, but I still remember a great man said this likely:
A threaten to real is not present but potential

Originally posted by Canada_EH
reply to post by emile

 

We haven't heard any more news on development which makes sense if its being guarded like it should but leaks will happen and its my opinion that if it doesn't fly by the end of 2009 it will be the next program to run into cost overruns and get cut for not moving forward enough.

The time when PAKFA should get fly but factually not will really come, I invite you travel to China and I will accompany you with Champagne, then what do you say if it is adversed?

[edit on 14-2-2008 by emile]

[edit on 14-2-2008 by emile]

[edit on 14-2-2008 by emile]

Originally posted by BlueRaja

Originally posted by Odessit
Pak-fa will be better, do you know why? well because it is common sense that Russians would try to counter F-22 that is why Pak-Fa is made, otherwise , there is not sense in making the plane if it wouldn't be better than F-22, that's the whole idea about it.

[edit on 13-2-2008 by Odessit]

You're using a flawed paradigm here. It's true that the Russians would want to meet or exceed the Raptor's capabilities when designing a new aircraft. Having said that, it remains to be seen how good the PAK-FA is in reality, once it becomes operational. I seriously doubt it will exceed the Raptor's avionics capabilities, even if it's raw performance is equivalent.

There is no logic in your opinion. If it wouldn't be better, then there is no point in making it, that's a common sense. Russia purposely making this plane to counter F-22, therefore it will be better, just like when americans made F-15, Russians countered it with Su-27.

[edit on 14-2-2008 by Odessit]

How do you make a plane better when you have NEVER built a stealth airframe and are 30 years behind, and you don't know the capabilities of the one you're trying to top? You can make it better than you THINK the other aircraft is, but there's no way to say "This airframe is better!" until you put them head to head and prove it.

The Pak-Fa is going to be a very good aircraft I'm sure, but everyone saying it's automatically going to be better than the F-22 just because it's newer is making a major assumption.

Yes, the F-4s and other US aircraft were beaten by MiGs in Vietnam, but a MiG-21 which was one of the most feared aircraft in the war was shot down by a pair of A-1 Skyraiders. Does that mean the propeller driven Skyraiders were better? You have to look at ALL of the factors of the fights, like the fact that the US missiles fell off the airplanes more often than they actually fired.

The russians never may have build a stealth plane before but that doesnt mean they dont know anything about it. We cant say anything about this PAKFA till we know more...

Knowing something, and having experience with something are completely different from each other. I know how a car works, but if I had to take one apart, I'd end up with extra parts and things not fitting right when I put it back together, because I don't the experience with it. (I know because I did it before. ) Just because you KNOW how something works doesn't mean you're going to build it perfectly on the first try.

Originally posted by emile

The time when PAKFA should get fly but factually not will really come, I invite you travel to China and I will accompany you with Champagne, then what do you say if it is adversed?

I sorta want you to clear up what you meant here emile. I like the sound of champagne but what is it that your asking? The first part about when PAKFA will fly and the facts there is no real indication when that will be is pretty common considering the secrecy on the development process. The best info I have at this point is wiki.

That estimate has now been superseded by the statement of Sukhoi CEO Mikhail Pogosyan, who stated at the Langkawi International Maritime and Aerospace (LIMA) 2007 exhibition in Malaysia on December 6 that the prototype will not fly until 2009....

Pogosyan said mass production of the future fighter could begin by 2015.

en.rian.ru...

Originally posted by Odessit

Originally posted by BlueRaja

Originally posted by Odessit
Pak-fa will be better, do you know why? well because it is common sense that Russians would try to counter F-22 that is why Pak-Fa is made, otherwise , there is not sense in making the plane if it wouldn't be better than F-22, that's the whole idea about it.

[edit on 13-2-2008 by Odessit]

You're using a flawed paradigm here. It's true that the Russians would want to meet or exceed the Raptor's capabilities when designing a new aircraft. Having said that, it remains to be seen how good the PAK-FA is in reality, once it becomes operational. I seriously doubt it will exceed the Raptor's avionics capabilities, even if it's raw performance is equivalent.

There is no logic in your opinion. If it wouldn't be better, then there is no point in making it, that's a common sense. Russia purposely making this plane to counter F-22, therefore it will be better, just like when americans made F-15, Russians countered it with Su-27.

[edit on 14-2-2008 by Odessit]

There's a lot of logic in my statement. If you haven't built the plane you can't say it's better. Until it goes through flight tests to see what it's capable of aerodynamically, and it's avionics are validated, you simply can't say X is better than Y. Are you saying it will be better at everything than the F-22? Better manueverability, stealth, sensor fusion, avionics abilities? Better than the current capabilities of the F-22 or the capabilities it has by the time the PAK-FA becomes operational? Do the Russians know the exact capabilities of the F-22, so they can ensure they meet or exceed the them? To simply say, well why would they build it if it wasn't better, is flawed logic at best.

reply to post by BlueRaja


you don't get it do you? That is exactly same thing as with Su-27 and F-15, you would think Russians somehow would figure out how to counter the F-15 without knowing the full capability of it, yes they did it, and you obviously forgot about Plasma stealth and that the stealth technology is developed by RUssians in the first place, and plasma stealth have been tested , just not officially. And it is a joke Russia is 30 years behind USA? haha , that is really ignorant and stupid opinion. Because that's a same thing as saying US is 30 years behind in missile technology , because we know it is true.

[edit on 14-2-2008 by Odessit]


Excessive Quoting – Please Review This Link

[edit on 14-2-2008 by Jbird]

Where's the proof plasma stealth is operational in any way?

We didn't say the Russians were 30 years behind. We said the Russians were 30 years behind on STEALTH because their military forces have a different philosophy than the US military.

Originally posted by American Mad Man
Am I the only one that wonders how they can claim it will be the Raptors equal?

All they know is that it can cruise over Mach 1 and it is stealthy. How in the world can they be taken seriously when they say they can produce a plane that will match the Raptor in every aspect?!

They don't even know half of what the Raptor can do.

This is Russian bravado at it's finest. It will take 10 years to develope an aircraft which will not be as good as the Raptor. Even more likely they scrap it after spending billions on it because they realise that UCAVs are the wave of the future.

Silly Russians

Thats true how can they know the full capability of the Raptor. I might be labeled paranoid for this but I suspect espionage. If no spying went on they are bluffing. Oh and I'll take a F/A 18 over the F/A 22 any day.

Originally posted by Odessit
And it is a joke Russia is 30 years behind USA? haha , that is really ignorant and stupid opinion. Because that's a same thing as saying US is 30 years behind in missile technology , because we know it is true.

Well thats contradictory statement if Ive ever seen one.. Is it just me, or does anyone else feel a bit "dumbed down" after having read any of Odessit's post's?

[edit on 14-2-2008 by West Coast]

Originally posted by West Coast

Originally posted by Odessit
And it is a joke Russia is 30 years behind USA? haha , that is really ignorant and stupid opinion. Because that's a same thing as saying US is 30 years behind in missile technology , because we know it is true.

Well thats contradictory statement if Ive ever seen one..

Is it just me, or does anyone else feel a bit "dumbed down" after having read any of Odessit's post's?

[edit on 14-2-2008 by West Coast]

wow now the insulting, haha, aren't we a little bit emotional, sad and pathetic,shows how can't really take a debate and starting calling on crowd for help "by slandering" haha, that's shows real maturity, not.

Originally posted by Odessit
wow now the insulting, haha, aren't we a little bit emotional, sad and pathetic,shows how can't really take a debate and starting calling on crowd for help "by slandering" haha, that's shows real maturity, not.

No, I was pointing out your contradictory view, I can see the obvious still eludes you.

Originally posted by West Coast

Originally posted by Odessit
wow now the insulting, haha, aren't we a little bit emotional, sad and pathetic,shows how can't really take a debate and starting calling on crowd for help "by slandering" haha, that's shows real maturity, not.

No, I was pointing out your contradictory view, I can see the obvious still eludes you.

so you telling me that Russia is 30 years behind in aviation technology is that it?

Originally posted by Odessit
so you telling me that Russia is 30 years behind in aviation technology is that it?

Allow me to dumb it down for you.

This is what you said.

"And it is a joke Russia is 30 years behind USA? haha , that is really ignorant and stupid opinion. "

It seems as if it is an 'ignorant' and 'stupid' opinion if no one is in agreement with you. But that is beside the point. You then go on to say the following.

"Because that's a same thing as saying US is 30 years behind in missile technology , "

And then...

"because we know it is true."

Do you know what a contradiction is? Because you just defined it. .

So, you chose a poor example for a comparison if your intent was to just piss on the US...


[edit on 14-2-2008 by West Coast]

reply to post by West Coast


you serious? haha, one of the posters said that Russia is 30 years behind US in avionics .
therefore I have said, that it is a joke, and pretty much putting words in my mouth that I have said it? let me see, may be I am not as good at english but I know that english is my 3rd language to learn, and I speak 5 of them and besides, I may have misunderstood something, but throwing personal attacks that's just childish from your part.

[edit on 14-2-2008 by Odessit]

Originally posted by Zaphod58
How do you make a plane better when you have NEVER built a stealth airframe and are 30 years behind, and you don't know the capabilities of the one you're trying to top?

You can make it better than you THINK the other aircraft is, but there's no way to say "This airframe is better!" until you put them head to head and prove it.

So the problem is back, I have to ask again, what the stealth based on? or What the principle of stealth US jet used is? No one answer this key question but just say this is stealth or that is stealth. So "stealth" be said make stealth to be true.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
The Pak-Fa is going to be a very good aircraft I'm sure, but everyone saying it's automatically going to be better than the F-22 just because it's newer is making a major assumption.

Yes, the F-4s and other US aircraft were beaten by MiGs in Vietnam, but a MiG-21 which was one of the most feared aircraft in the war was shot down by a pair of A-1 Skyraiders. Does that mean the propeller driven Skyraiders were better? You have to look at ALL of the factors of the fights, like the fact that the US missiles fell off the airplanes more often than they actually fired.

This is a question concerning the quality and the quantity. Even searchlight shot down USAF jetfighter in Korea War, so all of aircraft are garbage? I think nobody get conclude by accident. I also don't think fishbed realy threat phantom2, but if we foresee the future only accordant with historical accident, then we will make a mistake of experimentalism.
So the quantity is, not only once twice or thrice, but more time, Soviet's aircraft did beat USAF. Although sad thing like thus happened, we still think jetfighter of USAF are superior more than Soviet. Which mean quantity changing not necessarily cause quality changing. BUT

The quality is that keypoint happen subtilly will make quality changed casually from quantity changing. which means sometimes story is really different when we are facing it, even we don't know what keypoint is and when it appeared. This is dangerous, as we meet it when we have to be in scale. The deployment of Su-27 NEVER go ahead of F-15, but F-15 will not has any advantage when it have to combat with Su-27. Who can tell me HOW soviet take such ability? I didn't see any possibe evolement from Su-15 to Su-27.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Knowing something, and having experience with something are completely different from each other. I know how a car works, but if I had to take one apart, I'd end up with extra parts and things not fitting right when I put it back together, because I don't the experience with it. (I know because I did it before.

) Just because you KNOW how something works doesn't mean you're going to build it perfectly on the first try.

Regarding experience, you have yours, others have others own, please don't make yourself to be Boris who are in Goldeneye played I am invincible.

Originally posted by Canada_EH

Originally posted by emile

The time when PAKFA should get fly but factually not will really come, I invite you travel to China and I will accompany you with Champagne, then what do you say if it is adversed?

I sorta want you to clear up what you meant here emile. I like the sound of champagne but what is it that your asking? The first part about when PAKFA will fly and the facts there is no real indication when that will be is pretty common considering the secrecy on the development process. The best info I have at this point is wiki.

That estimate has now been superseded by the statement of Sukhoi CEO Mikhail Pogosyan, who stated at the Langkawi International Maritime and Aerospace (LIMA) 2007 exhibition in Malaysia on December 6 that the prototype will not fly until 2009....

Pogosyan said mass production of the future fighter could begin by 2015.

en.rian.ru...

Well, it is better that PAKFA won't fly for ever! Cheers

reply to post by BlueRaja


When we are here to say A will be better than B, we are saying generally, just like when we say Su-27 is better than F-15 we not mean everything on Su-27 are advance.

Wow! Those guys are really enjoying there new economic seccesses. This is expensive technologyand with all of that new oil money they got..hmmmm.
The Russians have always built strange and wonderful planes, ships and subs. They are no slouches. The Sukhoi bureau is better than MIG (in my opinion) and the SU-27's are a deadly advasary to the best we've got.
My point is that if Sukhoi is building it, watch out. It's going be hot!

Most comparisons with today and Vietnam are complete carbage, as the missiles then were absolutely horrible. Kill probability for Aim-7 was less than 10%.

Are they going to build a 5TH gen fighter? No doubt. SU-27 came years after F-15 and did so for specific reason. SU-27 simply outclasses the F-15, and it has been shown in exercises over and over again.

No, that's complete crap and you know it.

Any exercises involving F-15C versus Su-27S? Thought not. Or are you going to use skewed facts involving the newer, upgraded SU-27 which any plane can be upgraded with?

Continue.

[edit on 15/2/2008 by C0bzz]