F/A-22 can go at least mach 2.5

Oh, and i fyou did not know the Mig-25 is a piece of #. The only good fighters they made were the Mig-29s and the Su-27 to Su-37 class.

Originally posted by SectorGaza
the russian 5th gen AL-40F engines also can supercruise and feature low-heat/exhaust thrust vectoring etc
they were in development since 1985

Have they actually pu them into anything except one Su-37. I dont think so.

Oh and Fulcrum please do not fight with me. You know I am right and you are wrong.

Originally posted by jetsetter


Have they actually pu them into anything except one Su-37. I dont think so.

Wrong mister military master it was on a specially-modified MiG-25 fighter, mig 1.44,, s-32 su-47 and the new su-34 will have AL-41F with FADEC and TVC
the new russian 5th gen aircraft will have upgraded al-41f

Originally posted by SectorGaza

Originally posted by jetsetter


Have they actually pu them into anything except one Su-37. I dont think so.

Wrong mister military master

it was on a specially-modified MiG-25 fighter, mig 1.44,, s-32 su-47 and the new su-34 will have AL-41F with FADEC and TVC
the new russian 5th gen aircraft will have upgraded al-41f

Read my sentence carefully. Have they put them in anything except the one Su-37 YET.

Originally posted by jetsetter
Oh, and if you did not know the Mig-25 is a piece of #. The only good fighters they made were the Mig-29s and the Su-27 to Su-37 class.

mig-25 is a piece of #? why do you think so?

and what about all the other sukhois and migs? like the mig-29SMT su-30mki su-35 etc..

Link!

THINK BEFORE YOU SAY SOMETHING STUPID!



Russian aviation FAQ!

This a/c once held 16 aviation world records and four specifically female world records. Some still stand unbeaten.

I think it is reasonable to assume that an aircraft strong like a boxcar (steel, titanium plus the shape of a soap-box) and powerful enough to fly at M 2.83 with full external stores load, can perfectly reach M 3+ in a clean reconnaissance configuration. That was what the Israelis clocked a few times as reported by Aviation Week years ago. In this respect, the USAF was not wrong, and IMHO, they were correct in the evaluation of this aircraft as an interceptor/recce aircraft, never considering it a fighter or dogfighter, which it never was intended to be.

The MiG-25 that was clocked at Mach 3.2 by the Israelis achieved this speed while running from an intercepting F-4 (which can barely manage Mach 2 on a good day--before running out of fuel). Upon landing, both engines in the MiG had to be replaced.

Thomas said that the Foxbat can carry its full weapons load to Mach 2.8, while a clean recon version can do Mach 3+. Actually, the recon versions have the same limit as the interceptors: Mach 2.83. This is not a thrust limit. You might note that the RB versions of the Foxbat can carry four bombs(!) to Mach 2.83. The Mach 2.83 is a theoretical stability limit on the airframe (which has been safely exceeded on numerous occasions by test pilots). At speeds greater than Mach 2.6 however, throttle control must be precise to keep the engines from overspeeding.

Lest you think that I am implying that the Foxbat is not a capable aircraft, especially in performance, you might consider the abilities of Western fighters. The F-16 can just barely squeak past Mach 2.0 with a pair of tip 'winders. The F-14 can only manage Mach 1.81. And the mighty Eagle is only good for Mach 1.78. The Foxbat can outclimb all of these fighters by a healthy margin, and has a mauch better supersonic endurance than the best Western fighter. Furthermore, the Foxbat has demonstrated the ability to outrun all U.S. frontline fighters at _low_ altitude. The Foxbat is hardly a dud.

Did you know that a MiG-25PD recorded the only Iraqi air-to-air kill of the Gulf War? It dropped an F-18C on the first night of the war--then went on to fire another missile at an A-6 and buzz an A-7, all while avoiding escorting F-14s and F-15s.
An isolated incident? How about the single Iraqi Foxbat-E that eluded eight sweeping F-15s then tangled with two EF-111As, firing three missiles at the Ravens and chasing them off station. Unfortunately, the Ravens were supporting an F-15E strike, and the EF-111's retreat led to the loss of one of the Strike Eagles to a SAM. Oh BTW, the Foxbat easily avoided interception and returned safely to base.

There's more. When F-15 pilots were fighting for the chance to fly sweeps east of Baghdad late in the war, itching for a chance to get a shot at an Iraqi running for Iran, they weren't expecting the fight that a pair of Foxbats put up. Two Foxbats approached a pair of F-15s, fired missiles before the Eagles could get off shots (the missiles were evaded by the Eagles), then outran those two Eagles, four Sparrows and two Sidewinders fired back at them. Two more Eagles maneuvered to cut the Foxbat's off from their base (four more Eagles tried, but were unable to effect an intercept), and four more Sparrows were expended in vain trying to drop the Foxbats.

The Iraqis had a total of twelve MiG-25PDs at the beginning of the war, of which maybe half were operational at any given time. Imagine what trouble they would have caused if there had been more. The Foxbats, when well flown, proved capable of engaging allied fighters and avoiding them at will. Only the limitations of their weapons proved a problem.

Yes, the Foxbat would have better performance if it were made of Ti. At high Mach, however, the difference would be minor. A Ti Foxbat would perhaps have a ceiling a few thousand feet higher. You could also probably tack another couple thousand feet onto its already amazing climb rate. Lest we forget however, nothing made of Ti has come anywhere close to the Ye-266's absolute altitude record. You might also consider that the Ti F-12B was limited to 1.5g at high Mach, while the steel MiG-25P is cleared for 4.5g maneuvers at high Mach.

Piece of shyte?

Hardly so..



Jetsetter,

DENY IGNORANCE!

And think before posting, thanks..

And F-22 is to be Mach 2 AC at Mach 1-1,5 supercruise.

Originally posted by Russian

Originally posted by THENEO
Where's fulcrum?

Hey I know nothing about planes, it better be the best or the commies will win.

Sorry Neo but a Russian SU-47 is BETTER!

WAY BETTER!

On the contrary Russian......it is impressive but FAR from being WAY better.....lets start with a few confirmed facts:

1) The Su-47 is still labeled a "paper airplane". Why? Cause there are only 1-2 built.
2) Its not on a assemply line being produced as the RAPTOR is!
3) Anything looks good on paper.
4) The Russians do not have the money available to pursue this program.
5) They have joined projects with the Indian's --PakFa-- and that project is lacking funds.....
"f-22 raptor vs pak-fa......the first shot is fired"
Link:
pub137.ezboard.com...

"Su-47 "Berkut" Technical Data."
Link:
www.flymig.com...

Excerpt:
"Still, the low budgets of the Russian military and the aircraft's high price tag make it unlikely that the Su-47 will be purchased any time in the near future."

"Cash-Strapped Russia holds Military Fire Sale"
Link:
www.clw.org...

Excerpt:
"He says the Russian air force probably won't be able to make any new acquisitions until at least 2006."

Another informative site:
"S-37/Su-41 �Berkut� Advanced Tactical Fighter"
Link:
www.geocities.com...

Your opinion is noted...but till any type hard data on testings, etc....as compared to the Raptor...the Su-47 is a flying "paper airplane" and is worthy only of mention but doesn't impact the world aero industries or military strategies at all!


regards
seekerof

[Edited on 16-11-2003 by Seekerof]

Originally posted by SectorGaza

Originally posted by jetsetter
Oh, and if you did not know the Mig-25 is a piece of #. The only good fighters they made were the Mig-29s and the Su-27 to Su-37 class.

mig-25 is a piece of #?

why do you think so?

and what about all the other sukhois and migs? like the mig-29SMT su-30mki su-35 etc..

I said that the Mi-29s and Su-27 through Su-37 were good aircraft. Those planes really made the Russian airfroce. Before those planes came out the United States was not really worried about the Russian fighters. And FULCRUM I think that you should try to DENY IGNORANCE and admit to the fact that any plane that the Russians produced before the Mig-29 and Su-27 through 37 was crap. You know that I am telling the truth. Just admit it.

The Mig-25 and its counter parts were overgrown pieces of garbage. The Mig-25 was HUGE. It was even bigger that the F-14.

Just check it out. Nice.

Originally posted by Seekerof

Originally posted by Russian

Originally posted by THENEO
Where's fulcrum?

Hey I know nothing about planes, it better be the best or the commies will win.

Sorry Neo but a Russian SU-47 is BETTER!

WAY BETTER!

On the contrary Russian......it is impressive but FAR from being WAY better.....lets start with a few confirmed facts:

1) The Su-47 is still labeled a "paper airplane". Why? Cause there are only 1-2 built.
2) Its not on a assemply line being produced as the RAPTOR is!
3) Anything looks good on paper.
4) The Russians do not have the money available to pursue this program.
5) They have joined projects with the Indian's --PakFa-- and that project is lacking funds.....
"f-22 raptor vs pak-fa......the first shot is fired"
Link:
pub137.ezboard.com...

"Su-47 "Berkut" Technical Data."
Link:
www.flymig.com...

Excerpt:
"Still, the low budgets of the Russian military and the aircraft's high price tag make it unlikely that the Su-47 will be purchased any time in the near future."

"Cash-Strapped Russia holds Military Fire Sale"
Link:
www.clw.org...

Excerpt:
"He says the Russian air force probably won't be able to make any new acquisitions until at least 2006."

Another informative site:
"S-37/Su-41 �Berkut� Advanced Tactical Fighter"
Link:
www.geocities.com...

Your opinion is noted...but till any type hard data on testings, etc....as compared to the Raptor...the Su-47 is a flying "paper airplane" and is worthy only of mention but doesn't impact the world aero industries or military strategies at all!

regards
seekerof

[Edited on 16-11-2003 by Seekerof]

Su-47 is a paper air plane.

So is F-22.

F-22 was not tested in battle.

F-22 has only perdictions on it.

So F-22 didnt prove anything until it will go to battle and show what it got.

For right know F-22 is not in service and wont be for sometime.

Kano,

since you are the moderator of this forum,

then tell me which posting on mine that you have a problem with.

I think that this should be standard procedure.

I would like to know which one it is.

thank you.

Originally posted by jetsetter
I herd that the F/A-22 can go at least mach 2.5 from Popular Science article. That talked to a test operator and he said that the F/A-22 can "Walk away from F-15s and F-16s during flight". I have been hearing reports of mach 1.8 for the F-22 but now we know for sure. The F/A-22 is hell of fast. Pretty cool ehh?

I think your right because i had red in a website the top 50 aircraft global and the raptor in speed was in the mid 30's at about 1.8 mach

Russian:
You said:
"Su-47 is a paper air plane.

So is F-22.

F-22 was not tested in battle.

F-22 has only perdictions on it.

So F-22 didnt prove anything until it will go to battle and show what it got.

For right know F-22 is not in service and wont be for sometime."


Your correct...The Berkut is a prototype with only two built. Its still a "paper airplane" because it is not a production aircraft and with the continued lack of funding, which is virtually leading the "Berkut" to extinction, it will remain a "paper airplane." Even "if" built here is what an official Russian military website had to say concerning the Su-37 and Berkut: (which is "fact")
"There are a bunch of "official military websites" that are less than all fact. Can you post the link to this site so we can read it ourselves. You may or may not want to believe everything you read and you will find some websites have better info than others, and therefore better reputations. Americans and other western nations have their share of bad info posted also to be fair about it. If developed, this new aircraft should be pretty good, though it will be difficult to catch up to the western nations because of the time and funding advantages they've had."
On top that, I suppose Russia is going to design a fighter to "strictly" take on the F-22, yet it cannot afford to train it's pilots more than 40 hours a year!! And then added on top of that, Russia hasnt mass produced any new aircraft for going on how many years?!?

I would say that the well-founded "F-22 predictions" are fairly solid based on testing, flight testing, etc........Far more crediable than reading about the supposed "predictions" of the Su-37 and Berkut.......

You're correct....the "proof" will come when it encounters its first "real" engagement.

The F-22 IS in service....the first aircraft have already been assigned. This is covered in a thread already........
Also.......there are more coming:


There is a thread on this (that they are on the production lines and have been) also.

Try reading this:
www.occdsb.on.ca...

First sentence that you and others need to note is this:
"As the world's only 5th generation fighter........"

The "Raptor" is the only 5th Gen fighter....not the Euro.....not the Typhoon....not the Su-37....not the Rafale......not the Su-30MKI's....getting the point yet?
Seems that the "paper-airplane" F-22 Raptor is becoming a serious reality...can you or any one else say that about the Pak-Fa or Mig1.42 or Su-47 Berkut, etc.?



regards
seekerof

[Edited on 18-11-2003 by Seekerof]

I was just wondering if some of you guys inserting images in your replies could make the pictures any bigger...
1500 pixels wide just isn't big enough...

Really or are you just trying to say that we should make them smaller.

smaller would be nice - yes~

No media-use JPGs, please!

Nice pic, though jetsetter. I now have a new desktop image! But a link will do just as well.

[Edited on 19-11-2003 by Lampyridae]

Originally posted by Lampyridae

No media-use JPGs, please!

Nice pic, though jetsetter.

I now have a new desktop image! But a link will do just as well.

[Edited on 19-11-2003 by Lampyridae]

~Yes, now I also have a nice desktop wallpaper as well. Thanks Jetsetter even though i wish i knew where you obtained it from.