Can I just point ut that most of the ramblings in this thread have been about aeroplanes which are either still at the experimental or prototype stage (S-37) or haven't yet reached operational units (F/A-22 & Typhoon)?

If we're going to talk about REAL aeroplanes, please limited yourselves to MiG-29 or SU-27 (and derivatives) vs. F-15, F-16, F/A-18.

The real answer is (as always) it all depends on the cicumstances. A real clown of a pilot in a bloody flying saucer could could out worse against a Sopwith Camel if the Camel pilot got lucky.

There's a story (maybe it's an urban myth and maybe someone can help me out) that British Aerospace matched an RAF Lightning (and you thought all along that the F-16 was the first fighter that could unstick straight into a vertical climb!) against an old Spitfire when it was thought that the RAF might come up against Indonesian F-51Ds in the 1960s and rumour has it that the Spitfire won a few rounds.

As Vietnam proved, an untrained grunt with an assault rifle can beat several million dollars' worth of hardware if it's not flying straight and level at 50,000 feet!

Originally posted by Torus

Sorry, I just really hate american planes. If you can build an aircraft carrier cheaper than you can build one single bomber... i mean come on.

But theres not even a single bomber on the planet that can even come close to the B-2. If we are talking about bombers of each country its not even a competition.

It cost alot to be the best

Originally posted by grumpyoldman
Can I just point ut that most of the ramblings in this thread have been about aeroplanes which are either still at the experimental or prototype stage (S-37) or haven't yet reached operational units (F/A-22 & Typhoon)?

uhh so the 2 squadrons already in service in the RAF are what? test planes? seriosly they are in active military units mabye not in combat but are part of our active fleet.

If we're going to talk about REAL aeroplanes, please limited yourselves to MiG-29 or SU-27 (and derivatives) vs. F-15, F-16, F/A-18.

so the rafale isnt a real plane? or the tornado?

As Vietnam proved, an untrained grunt with an assault rifle can beat several million dollars' worth of hardware if it's not flying straight and level at 50,000 feet!

umm i dont think jets got shot down with assualt rifles.

you also need to consider the Gripen as a `real` aircraft as well

Originally posted by Harlequin
you also need to consider the Gripen as a `real` aircraft as well

i would rate that very high in tech standards you not agree? is a very nice aircraft.

..and Yak-141, as well as Yugoslav Galeb G-2, Super Galeb G-4, and Orao J-22

Su 47 is also a stealth aircraft did you know that? They are using radar abosorbant materials on the outer structures, how much it would reduce the radar reflection by, I am not sure but they wouldn't call it RADAR ABSORBANT material if it only decreases the signal by one of two percent,,,,

The f-22 has better electronics systems, it can engage multiple targets at once which is one of it's strongest characteristics. ALso, it is semi-stealth.

Originally posted by omega1
The f-22 has better electronics systems, it can engage multiple targets at once which is one of it's strongest characteristics. ALso, it is semi-stealth.

So according to you it's the only plane which can engage multiple targets??? You're saying it's semi-stealth, which means Su-47 is better

Originally posted by Laxpla

what one actually looks technology advanced?

Honestly? Su-47 looks much more technology advanced, but you can't really judge from the outside looks... So let's use the facts, to find out Su-47 is really beter

Notice you see no weapons, thats what makes the stealth so good.

Originally posted by khruschev

Originally posted by Laxpla

what one actually looks technology advanced?

Honestly? Su-47 looks much more technology advanced, but you can't really judge from the outside looks... So let's use the facts, to find out Su-47 is really beter

heh, actually the raptor looks more advanced. With there EMP radar (or something around that area) The su-47 will not even be able to use their radars

Thats why I used the Adverb "Actually", Like the saying dont judge the book by the cover, but hey, Russia currently has how many Su-47's hahaha


Read my post above the raptor picture.

In Ace Combat 4 the SU-37 and S-37 are both rated as being better than the F-22. It's a Japanese game so they probably aren't that biased. Radar is getting better and better so the radar on more advanced planes would probably pick up the F-22 pretty well negating that advantage. From the info i have read about it, the F-22 isn't very stealth when compared to the B-2. Since it has to maintain manoverability as well so they just added as much radar reduction as they could rather than basing the whole design around radar reduction like the F-117 and B-2.

Originally posted by Tolwyn
In Ace Combat 4 the SU-37 and S-37 are both rated as being better than the F-22.

That is a video game and while it may seems realistic (I have never seen it), one can hardly base opinion on it. I kick but on Gran turismo 3 but, Im not ready to race eh? That being said, the bigger issue is this: THe Raptor is entering inital low rate production. The S-37 and the SU-47 are not.

Originally posted by omega1
The f-22 has better electronics systems, it can engage multiple targets at once which is one of it's strongest characteristics. ALso, it is semi-stealth.

the F22 uses sytems it says are state of the art but have been in the gryphen for years.

Originally posted by Laxpla


heh, actually the raptor looks more advanced. With there EMP radar (or something around that area) The su-47 will not even be able to use their radars

uhhh EMP radar , thier going to first invent this tech then first work it to the size less than a 747, if your tlking radar jamming then i understand but still radar jamming can be broken it just takes some time. BUT this means that any friendly jet that isnt the f22 cant use thier radar.

Thats why I used the Adverb "Actually", Like the saying dont judge the book by the cover, but hey, Russia currently has how many Su-47's hahaha

currently how many f22's does the US have? 24 mabye?

Read my post above the raptor picture.

how about i tell you all about the gear on the thyphoon is actually more advanced than the F22 in some aspects. like the auto pilot. and the avionics.

how about i tell you all about the gear on the thyphoon is actually more advanced than the F22 in some aspects. like the auto pilot. and the avionics.

NOOOO!!!! Don't tell them that! They hate it and can't accept it!

Actually, between the two types the thread is about, the F/A-22 is clearly more technologically adavanced in its basic design and construction, anyone who can look at photo's of both types and think differently clearly knows nothing about the evolution of aircraft design and construction over time and therefore cannot be argued with anyway. Typhoon has SOME more advanced features that Raptor, but not too many and not enough to make it the 'better' overall fighter, BTW I'm sure that 29Sqn and 17Sqn RAF would be most perturbed to find that their aircraft don't actually exist as someone commented higher up the thread!

In reality these 'best fighter' discussions are puerile and childish because they appeal to the most simplistic schoolboy sentiments. Three aircraft mentioned quite a bit in this thread, F/A-22, Typhoon and Gripen (the correct spelling - I wish people would learn!) can hardly be compared anyway as the requirements that led to their developments were all so completely different. Fair do's the original theme of the thread was limited to just two planes but even here we are comparing a new and soon to be deployed fighter with an inferior one off demonstrator What is the point?
The Berkut is NOT the Su-47, it is the S-37, that designation being an internal company one, IF an Su-47 does emerge it MIGHT be comparable to or better than the Raptor but as Sukhoi hasn't actually designed it yet what are you all arguing about?