Is The S-37 Fighter Up There With The F-22 ?!?!

Originally posted by sovietman
Whatever about stealth (discussing it completely would last weeks), the question was if su-47 is up there with f-22. And it HAS stealth capability, so f-22 isn't better. And BTW, I stick to my word, that the best (and definitely the cheapest

) technique to avoid radar detection is to fly low.

Your right discussing stealth would take more then weeks to discuss the idea but the idea has been continually discussed by the regular members here as it is is constantly in question like you brought up now.

If the question is the Su-47 up there with the F-22 it is not in the aspect of steath. The new demonstrator that was displayed in 97 was in essance a new plane but its aerodyanmics and stealth signature was still very similar. The aircraft's design incorporated stealth-technology elements. The forward-swept wing has a lower radar signature from the front hemisphere(not taking into account side or rear like the F-22). The extensive use of composite materials and installation of air intakes with curved air ducts. These are mounted under and curved like the F/A-18A-D and this design was moved away from for lack of stealth reason on the SH version and the F-22. In the future "flat" nozzles is to "contribute" to reduction of the aircraft's radar signature.

To sum up the Su-47 (2002 name) is designed with stealth issues in mind and reduction (Typhoon) put in place but it is not designed for the start to be a true stealthy airplane like the F-22.

Your right though the safest defense is testicular fortitude while you hedge hop at 150 ft off the deck at mach 1.5 lol.

Originally posted by sovietman
Well I still think maneuvrability is more important in combat, than very high speed. If most of combat is BVR, why U.S. doesn't have BVR missiles like MBDA Meteor?

United States used to use the AIM-54, a huge long-ranged missile. That was retired due to AIM-120. The current AIM-120C has a range of about 100km, and the AIM-120D is generally accepted to be greater than 150km range. That's BVR enough for me .

Is it really so important to get in the combat zone so quickly? Maybe, but as I wrote operational version of su-47 (if it will ever exist) will have supercruise, so Raptor isn't better there.

Supercruise is actually a really big deal. In fact, in the Indian MMRCA competition, supercruise is one of the main selling points for the F-16IN, Lockheed Martin's entry.

OK about IR. I'm really not sure about the range of IR. I just heard it, but didn't check. It seamed possible to me. Can you post any sources?

Range 10 to 18 miles depending on altitude

Source

That's information on the AIM-9, an IR-guided missile.

Also, the MiG-35 is reputed to have the best current optical/IR detector, known as the OLS. Stats follow:

In air combat, the electronics suite allows:

* Detection of non-afterburning targets at 45 km range and more;
* Identification of those targets at 8 to 10 km range; and
* Estimates of aerial target range at up to 15 km.

Source

Wikipedia's not all bad.

Exhaust: in the exhaust of any jet aircraft there is water vapour, that's true. I don't know the ratio, possible that there is mostly water vapour. BUT the fuel doesn't burn perfectly, so there are many small particles (sorry I'm not native speaker: soot?, those small black particles

). And, as I wrote, they can't be removed (well maybe but the technology isn't affordable or at least not used in raptor.

The soot (yes, that's the right word) is in jet exhaust, yes, but the problem is that the particles are so small that it doesn't give enough surface area to bounce radar waves off of. Even MiG-29's smokey engines couldn't put out enough ash to give off a lasting radar signal. It'd be the bane of all aircraft if that did work though

Whatever about stealth (discussing it completely would last weeks), the question was if su-47 is up there with f-22. And it HAS stealth capability, so f-22 isn't better.

Actually, it doesn't quite work that way. F-22 was designed from the ground up to be made with stealth. The innards were even designed with honeycombs to trap radar waves if memory serves me. Su-47 had an eye to stealth, but it also had to deal with making the FSW stable. Now, you can fly without stealth, but not without wings. Thus, the Su-47 had to put stealth in as a secondary, although important feature.

And BTW, I stick to my word, that the best (and definitely the cheapest

) technique to avoid radar detection is to fly low.

It stops being cheap the second the pilot doesn't see that particularly tall tree

Su-47 AS IT EXISTS NOW will never be produced. Russia has a plan to make a 5th plus generation fighter. Sukhoi was chosen. India was also negotiating with Sukhoi about their new 5th gen fighter and about su-47 as an option. We don't know yet what will the final aircraft look like, but it might have some su-47's techniques.

Actually, there are a couple good hints as to what PAK-FA might look like. This is the one I currently buy into. It's a concept photo done by NPO Saturn, the company responsible for doing PAK-FA's engines.




Personally, I don't see much of a stretch to believing this will be like the eventual outcome. There are also a couple other documents out there agreeing with this concept, including an RCS map and a 3-View picture. Darned if I can find them, though =/.

[edit on 1/27/2008 by Darkpr0]

Right 150km is more than enough, but missiles can be detected by rear looking radar (which su-47 has, but I think f-22 doesn't). In such situation maneuvrability helps a lot.

OK let's say supercruise is really so important. Probably you are right. But hey, su-47 is expected to have supercruise too and I'm sure the final version of pak-fa will have. I know about F-16IN, but F-18 doesn't have supercruise, but is one of the competitors.

Thanks for that I really didn't go to wikipedia.

Well about the soot. I have to say that Wikipedia is really not so bad, because I think it was written on wikipedia about that. It was in the article about SR-71, that it was clearly seen because of the soot in exhaust (even though it used special fuel wich had less soot). I looked for it now but can't find it. But it wasn't only on Wikipedia, I looked on other sites and learned a lot (I didn't check all those sites now). I think that the point is, that the soot makes clouds and those clouds can be visible on radar. Well I think it is the bane of all aircraft.

Yeah, that's true about the stealth. Russia doesn't have any history of stealth like the U.S. But su-47 is just a prototype. I feel sure, that Pak-fa (final version) will have better stealth.

I think both sides (U.S. and Russia) choose only best pilots for such a plane, so I think the tall tree theory is disproved

I don't think Pak-fa will look like this in the picture. It's almost perfect copy of f-22 with a red star on the wings isn't it? Just look at that IMAGE
The picture you posted is only the often displayed as Pak-fa. I think Russia (and probably India together) will make a better plane (also better than f-22).

Oh I have another question

Why some F-22s have pitot boom and some don't?
I read on Wikipedia that some people believe that only YF-22s have pitot boom, but I think it's not true, because Raptor01 (the first Raptor to be delivered to USAF as operational) also has pitot boom.

Any ideas??

reply to post by sovietman


The first EMD F-22, Raptor 01 pitot and flight data system was for the first couple or just 01 I can't recall for operational testing and data as the changes from the YF-22 to F-22 where large and substantial the testing program extended into the first couple of "test" production models much like is happening with the F-35 program.

i have to disagree with 'american mad man' the raptor does have the massive advantage of its stealth but you said it had better manouvarability (forgive my terrible spelling) the typhoon is designed to be 'unstable' thus making it one of the most agile and mavouvarable planes in the world (again forgive my bad spelling)

reply to post by infinite8
buy two high kv motors and the f22 will climb straight up you can squeeze 64mm duct fan with 3s batt and 5916 kv motor your going straight up and over 200 mph cheep and amazing

reply to post by Anonymous ATS


Like the Typhoon, and perhaps every single other fighter aircraft in the past thirty years, the F-22 is also unstable. Regardless, they are both extremely maneuverable.

***SIGH.....***

The S-37 is the SU-47.

The 47 is a good and capable AC wich if it would be succesfully marketed, would sell like ice cream in the summer at a school.

But the truth is that the AC is not good enough to beat the F-22.

Iff it did, then why go on with the PAK FA???

Reason is that the 22 is better then the 47 and the 47 is now forfilling a new role besides being a prototype and a test plane for front swept wing design.

That role is being a test bed for the PAK FA/T-50.

Its the PAK FA/T-50 that is intended to face the 22 instead off the 47.

Conclusion:

the 47 is a good plane but not the best AC in todays world. That title goes to the 22 today but the 47 is helping Sukhoi to create a figher wich will give the 22 a run for its money.

Cheers

reply to post by Laxpla


Hey! you all look like Pro's in here! 40 my ass! when economy of USA comes down to nothing! who is going to build thise planes! Russian Plane construction buroes survived every crap that gov put on them! and they do not buy off russian smart asses like America's flight buroe does all the time, cus of the brain luck in USA! so stop being soooo smart about dogfights and other things! yaall watching way too much movies guys! really@ stop it!

reply to post by James R. Hawkwood


THat is true! America had always spent way tooooooooo much mone on planes and other things like dat! Russia on the other hand spends a lot less and usually does better job for cheaper! its just they do not wear those cool looking googles and dont call themselves Eagles or whatever American pilots call themselves

I don't know. It still has that "garbage can" look that is typical of Russian fighter aircraft.

I don't think it's truly clear cut as to which aircraft is the best, although i believe that without a doubt, the PAK FA will probably be unrivalled when it enters service.

You can't argue that outside of Russia, the two best aircraft around are the Typhoon and the Raptor. The F22 has a clear advantage at BVR, it has better stealth technologies, but it's disadvantaged at close air combat. The while both are unstable the Typhoon is suicidally unstable, £60M of it's £68M price tag is it's 11 on board computers, these are the only thing that keep it from dropping like a rock, if any one of them failed, it would do just that - although don't think that's too much of a draw back, it can cope with 3 (or 5, i forget) degrees of failure, which isn't bad considering that an aircraft controlled purely by a man has can't even withstand 1 degree of failure - but this ridiculous instability gives it ridiculous manoeuvrability, i've seen a Typhoon pivoting about it's wing tips at very low altitude, just flipping over itself on the spot in mid air. While the Raptor has a lot of thrust and high climb rate, the typhoon can actually climb faster, and the typhoon has unique systems and also unique countermeasures designed just for it. As someone else mentioned, it can also fly very low, and much faster, i've seen a Luftwaffe typhoon flying low enough for sheep to be a hazard. There's also special G suits allowing 7G to be pulled for an unlimited time, and special control systems, with features such as the ability to voice control the aircraft, or slave, lock and launch missiles with the pilot's eyes (the fastest muscles in your body, and connected directly to the brain), aaaaand there's also the fact that the Raptor's internally mounted weapons cannot be launched as quickly as the typhoon's exterior mounted weapons (a fraction of a second difference, but it all counts)
I summarise, Typhoons can quickly and easily close the gap of ranges, and have superior dogfighting abilities, while the Raptor has a clear stealth and BVR advantage. I won't promote the Raptor because it's every feature has been shouted about 3 times by our patriotic American friends.

Now here's the deal with the PAK FA. We'll address the Raptor's qualities first. The PAK FA has the same high grade stealth as the Raptor, plus the advantage of range. Russia has about 8 different missiles which can far out shoot any NATO missiles, nearly all in fact have a range 150% of that of the AIM120C, and that's not the end of it, Russia has developed an entirely new generation of "sensors" and missiles specially for the PAK FA, their age old missile advantage just got an update, joy. For close air combat, we're talking about an aircraft developed from the Su-47, which itself was pretty damn unstable, but here's the thing, the Raptor gets it's manoeuvrability from it's thrust vectoring, the typhoon and Su-47 from their instability, 2+2=4 as they say, and with instability and thrust vectoring, who knows, the PAK FA may even fly backwards! (exaggeration, but it'll have no trouble with pugachev's cobra, be awesome to watch). The Russians boast that they have all kinds of advanced systems, and there are rumours about speed, so again, who knows, we really have to wait for the maiden flight at the beginning of 2009, i've heard the date was set for march. Here's my clincher though, the manufacturer. The PAK FA is being produced by "a coalition" of all of Russia's best fighter manufacturers, like the PAK DA, which is being worked on by companies like Tupolev. The leader of the PAK FA project is Sukhoi, who are without a doubt, one of the best aircraft manufacturers there are. Their aircraft are often amongst the best of their generation, and can often perform like the next gen. even with older technologies (Su-37, Su-47), Sukhoi practically invented the use of instability for manoeuvrability and did invent the manoeuvre, Pugachev's Cobra, which revolves around an aircraft flying partially backwards

reply to post by khruschev

Well as allway's since the 70's. The rest of the world needs to catch up to the American's Air craft. 27,28,29,33,35...none is even close to the "22". Allthough they did catch up to the 30yr old 15. Good job...lol...lol

As posted before I think it's more along the lines of the x29