5th Gen Russian Jet

[Shmack]

Pavel Felgengauer, analyst, huh?
Well, he is surely not the person one should listen to when he wants some facts.

Anyway, that's not a humbag, T-50 is somewhat.. premature. It doesn't lack engines and radars. It's just the aircraft itself was ready earlier than engines and a radar. T-50's 'native' engine is now being tested on Su-35, same with a radar. Those aircrafts that are to join Air Force in 2015 will be equipped with that.

 

[Chukpike]

Pavel Felgengauer, analyst, huh?
Well, he is surely not the person one should listen to when he wants some facts.

Anyway, that's not a humbag, T-50 is somewhat.. premature. It doesn't lack engines and radars. It's just the aircraft itself was ready earlier than engines and a radar. T-50's 'native' engine is now being tested on Su-35, same with a radar. Those aircrafts that are to join Air Force in 2015 will be equipped with that.

So you have a 5th generation fighter with old engines and radar, sounds exactly like what Pavel Felgengauer said, " It takes new materials to build a fifth-generation fighter."

 

[Shmack]

So you have a 5th generation fighter with old engines and radar, sounds exactly like what Pavel Felgengauer said, " It takes new materials to build a fifth-generation fighter."

I don't have a 5th generation fighter, there is only 1 aircraft built and it is a proptotype, yes, which is being tested right now. I just don't understand what does just aprototype mean. Every aircraft begins from a prototype.

AL-41F1 is not an old engine. It came into service in 2008 and was constructed precisely for T-50. But by the time T-50 performed its maden flight, they began working on modernization of that engine which they decided to use after 2015. But the engine as well as a radar exist anyway. They are just not put into service yet, as well as T-50 itself. I'm sorry but if to compare with Su-27 which made its first flight as a prototype in 1977 and came into service only in 1984, T-50 is doing pretty well.

 

[AVON]

Like any new fighter, there are bunches of changes between the prototype and the production product. At this point we will have to wait to see what the production T-50 is like before any real comparison can be made.

 

[Korean Seaboy]

I was bored one day, so I watched History Channel so I could watch videos of disaster (History Channel always talks about Earth's doomsday, so I get to watch plenty of videos of people getting crushed, die, kill, melt, etc....) What I instead watched was some program called Dogfights of the future or something. It had 4 F-22s against some 16 Mig-29s or something. It said that the F-22s would beat the Migs, something which I find a little exaggerated. Anyway, is there someone who has a sensible perception of military aircraft explain to me how this comes to be?

 

[Korean Seaboy]

Oh, and also I know that the F-22 rule the skies as an air superiority fighter, but does anybody has a hint about another aircraft capable of competing it? I'm so tired of the F-22 talk, so it would be nice for a change. From what I see, I'd prefer the F-35s as they're basically the same with the F-22s, but much cheaper

 

[Korean Seaboy]

In addition, judging from what Korean newspapers tell, the F-15s are aging and unreliable nowadays, as there were many accidents. Shame the Korean air force is such underequipped. Our army is very good, the navy is just good, but the air force sucks

 

[Shmack]

If you put an Iraqi fighter pilot into F-22 and an American pilot into MiG-29, i have no doubt about the outcome of such fighting. Equipment is just one side of it, skill is the other.

 

[AVON]

It had 4 F-22s against some 16 Mig-29s or something. It said that the F-22s would beat the Migs, something which I find a little exaggerated.

No it is not an exaggeration. A single F-22A constantly goes up again five or six F-15Cs and shots them down and they never even see the F-22A! Several F-16s equipt with HOB missiles and HMDS went up against the F-22 in a IR missile/ guns environment dogfight. The F-22 bounced the F-16s shot down the first two F-16s and the third F-16C with a HMDS fired at the same time the F-22 did, therefore, it was judged that all four planes were shot down.
When the F-22 is at 60,000ft (18,300m) or higher at speeds of Mach 1.5 or greater, the missile envelope of the F-15, F-16, Su-27 or Mig-29 (the USAF owns these Russian fighters) is very small and because the F-22's they are firing at is target several thousand feet higher than they are, with speed and altitude is so high that the F-22's missile range is increased by 50%!
The F-22 can fight in a manor of which other fighters can not. Yet the F-22 can fight better than any fourth generation fighter in their domain (lower speeds and altitude).

I know that the F-22 rule the skies as an air superiority fighter, but does anybody has a hint about another aircraft capable of competing it?

Maybe, the new Sukhoi T-50 "IF", its engines are good enough or, its avionics being up to the best the west has to offer. Right now the T-50 is far closer to the Su-27 than it is to the F-22.
A statement by the Typhoon marketing director David R. Hamilton, "that the F-22 and Eurofighter were not in the same league... Any further discussion on this subject is waste of time.... F-22 will always be the better fighter but Eurofighter will be the better multi-role aircraft and will always be cheaper.

I'm so tired of the F-22 talk, so it would be nice for a change.

I would advise you not to read anything about the F-22. The F-22 has a greater technical edge over its competitors than the F-15A had over its competitors and, look at the F-15's combat record!

From what I see, I'd prefer the F-35s as they're basically the same with the F-22s, but much cheaper

The F-35 is a fighter-bomber, it has some fighter capability (it is no F-22) but, the F-35's real assets are the ability to attack targets protected by S-300 and S-400 SAM sites. By the way, the last block of F-22As completed cost $90M each to manufacture. The F-35 benefited from technology from the F-22 program, without the F-22 program the cost of the F-35 would be a lot higher.

In addition, judging from what Korean newspapers tell, the F-15s are aging and unreliable nowadays, as there were many accidents.

The F-15s are aging but, with the proper maintenance they were have many thousand flight hours remaining in their frames. Hey remember the DC-3, C-130 or, the B-52!

If you put an Iraqi fighter pilot into F-22 and an American pilot into MiG-29, i have no doubt about the outcome of such fighting.

If the Iraqi pilot knows the real advantage of the F-22 to initiate or decline aerial combat, the American pilot in the MiG-29 would be in real trouble. F-22 pilots with less than 100 hours in the plane routinely shoot down F-15s whos pilots have several thousand hours in the F-15!

 

[Shmack]

If the Iraqi pilot knows the real advantage of the F-22 to initiate or decline aerial combat, the American pilot in the MiG-29 would be in real trouble. F-22 pilots with less than 100 hours in the plane routinely shoot down F-15s whos pilots have several thousand hours in the F-15!

The main word in your phrase is If. To use an advanced weapon effectively you must have an advanced school, instructors with experience and so on. No one has more experience in operating US-made aircrafts than the US, same with Russia or any one else. So, the Iraqi pilot doesn't know the real advantage of the F-22 and will be shot down.

I'm just trying to say that the only way to compare F-22 and T-50 is using them in similar combat missions.

 

[Shmack]

OK, for any one who is interested in design details...

First of all in order to disregard any speculations one should remember that most of information concerning the aircraft is still secret. From what we are sure in by now is: it can reach supersonic speed without afterburning, its short take-off distance and powerful main landing gear (wheels diameter is about 1 meter) makes it easy to convert T-50 into a carrier-based aircraft (by the way, T-50's MTOW is 2 tons bigger than one of Su-33), and it can handle 11g load. Also, it might be interesting that T-50 is assembled of 4 times fewer details than Su-27.

'First stage' engines are AL-41F1 introduced in 2008 with 15000 kgf thrust. This engine features 16-20 degrees 3d thrust vectoring. Also, it features plasma ignition (instead of traditional oxygen infeed). 'Second stage' engine is being developed under 'item 127' codename and its possible charachteristics are unknown.

Combat load of T-50 is 10 tons. As for weaponary, AA missiles are located in two similar 5m x 1.3m modules between the engines. Most probably each of these modules can house up to 8 K-77 missiles whos specifications are classified as well. Also, no less than 8 missiles can be installed under the wings. Beside K-77, R-73 AA missiles, KS-172 long range AA missiles, and KAB-500 smart bombs can be used. There is also a gun for close fighting.

Radar installed on T-50 is N050 introduced in 2008. Most of its specifications are classified but we know that it is X-band, it is equipped with AESA which consists of 1526 transceiver modules. N050 is believed to be able to find targets with 3 sq m RCS on range of 400 km, and with .01 sq m RCS on range of 90 km. At least 4 additional L-band radars will be placed inside slats. Optical detection pod is named OLS-50M, we don't know anything about it as well.