Go Back   DefenceTalk Forum - Military & Defense Forums > Global Defense & Military > Air Force & Aviation

Defense News
Land, Air & Naval Forces






Military Photos
Latest Military Pictures
Defense Reports
Aerospace & Defence


Combat Aircraft Comparison stats

This is a discussion on Combat Aircraft Comparison stats within the Air Force & Aviation forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; Originally Posted by Awang se Anyone know about MIG-31 FOXHOUND? i don't really give any attention to it until recently ...


Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old June 29th, 2006   #16
Banned Member
Major General
No Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,045
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Awang se
Anyone know about MIG-31 FOXHOUND? i don't really give any attention to it until recently and i'm quite impress. i believe it's among the most capable long range interceptor in the world. Long range radar, long range missile, this aircraft could've launch it's missile long before it's opponent can.
Mig-31 is improved version of Mig-25, that is all. Nothing revolutionary here.
Big-E is offline  
Old June 29th, 2006   #17
Banned Member
Major General
No Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,045
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by itanium7000
Everybody can compare MiG-31 with F22 Raptor? Which combat powerful for attact? And if them join to dog-fight...?
There is no comaparison... F-22 outclasses her in everything except maximum speed but she still has greater sustainable speeds.
Big-E is offline  
Old June 29th, 2006
itanium7000
This message has been deleted by OPSSG. Reason: One-liner
Old June 29th, 2006   #18
Banned Member
Major General
No Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,045
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by itanium7000
Oh sorry, thanks! And about Su 30 MKK? Is it powerful than F22? thanks again.

Su-30MKI is the best Russian/Indian designed aircraft ever produced IMO. She is a much better strike aircraft than F-22 so in this regard she is more powerful. But nothing takes F-22 in Air-to-air combat... nothing!

Last edited by Big-E; September 21st, 2006 at 06:59 PM.
Big-E is offline  
Old June 29th, 2006
rattmuff
This message has been deleted by OPSSG. Reason: One-liner
Old July 13th, 2006   #19
Defense Professional / Analyst
Sergeant
No Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 288
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by gf0012-aust
Feedback has been welcomed!
How much confidence does your source have in its F-22A fuel numbers? I've seen as little as 18klbs up to around the number in your chart. Seems to be a fairly closely held piece of info.

A fella named Brad over on acig.org posted some estimates of the F-22As range & fuel based on open information here.

http://www.acig.org/forum/viewtopic....ght=f22a#86222

He came to the conclusion that 20,650 lbs of fuel seems like a reasonable number based on other data out there.
B.Smitty is offline  
Old July 13th, 2006   #20
Defense Professional / Analyst
Sergeant
No Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 288
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big-E
Su-30MKK is best Russian/Indian designed aircraft ever produced IMO. She is a much better strike aircraft than F-22 so in this regard she is more powerful. But nothing takes F-22 in Air-to-air combat... nothing!
How do you figure? Granted, the current block of F-22s aren't the strikers they could be, but they're still all-aspects stealthy and have an extremely advanced avionics suite.
B.Smitty is offline  
Old September 21st, 2006   #21
New Member
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 38
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pursuit Curve
You put a bad pilot in a good airplane, and he or she fights a good pilot in a less capable or equivelant aircraft.....The good pilot wins every time.

Airframes and the systems are just tools, they don't mean a damn thing if you have more money than brains and experience.
Well said..(Kinda getting off topic a little, but heres something for ya'll to take a look at.)
For those interested heres a link showing what the Pilots of the RNZAF Air combat wing(R.I.P.) were capable of, Flying A-4k Skyhawks in Air-Air exercises Vs. the best aircraft several nations in the Asia pacific reigon had to offer..including Malaysian Mig-29's +Aussie F/A-18's

http://www.gibstuff.net/a4_alley/index.html and then goto 'Kiwi A-4's in flight' and check out the vids ATA 1-4.
To Quote Ross Ewing, Author of 'Requiem for the Skyhawk'-"the RNZAF Kahu Pilots were experts at 'Knife-fighting in a PhoneBooth' "
Boolag is offline  
Old September 21st, 2006   #22
New Member
Private
Apocalypse's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 18
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big-E
Su-30MKK is best Russian/Indian designed aircraft ever produced IMO. She is a much better strike aircraft than F-22 so in this regard she is more powerful. But nothing takes F-22 in Air-to-air combat... nothing!
I think you mean Su-30 MKI. MKK is the Chinese variant which was built primarily for ground attack and close air support. You're right about F22 being the best A2A fighter, its because of stealth and other factors.
Apocalypse is offline  
Old September 21st, 2006   #23
Banned Member
Major General
No Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,045
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apocalypse
I think you mean Su-30 MKI. MKK is the Chinese variant which was built primarily for ground attack and close air support. You're right about F22 being the best A2A fighter, its because of stealth and other factors.
Yeah, everyone jumped on me 3 months ago when I mistyped that. Why am I still hearing about it?
Big-E is offline  
Old September 21st, 2006   #24
Defense Enthusiast
Lieutenant
kams's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 647
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big-E
Yeah, everyone jumped on me 3 months ago when I mistyped that. Why am I still hearing about it?
Just edit the typo in your post...or you may hear it again after 6 months
kams is offline  
Old September 25th, 2006   #25
Banned Member
Colonel
No Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Singapore
Posts: 1,452
Threads:
"The F-22: not what we were hoping for"

I note with interest in the Military Aviation section the very high pedestal the F-22 is placed upon when compared to European / Russian combat aircraft in service, or about to enter service.

Of interest, and offering a less than flattering overview, is an article in this weeks Janes Defense Weekly, Opinion Section titled; “The F-22: not what we were hoping for" written by Pierre Sprey, one of the three designers of the F-16, and James Stevenson, former editor of the USN Navy Fighter Weapons School’s Topgun Journal.

In a nutshell they claim the overemphasis on stealth and reliance on Beyond Visual Range (BVR) kills is not a watertight solution, providing the following examples (quotes from article):

“Billions of dollars were spent trying to perfect long-range radar missiles to achieve BVR kills, kill rates as high as 80 to 90 per cent were promised when projects were sold. Success rates in actual combat were below 10 per cent. Simple more agile, shorter-range infra-red missiles and guns were far more successful and effective.”

“Stealth harms the F-22’s quick firing ability. To retain stealth, the gun and missiles must be buried behind doors that take too long to open to exploit instantaneous opportunities. The air-force will argue we are wrong and the F-22 has excelled in air-to-air exercises against all comers. However our information is that these are a ‘canned’ engagements in which the F-22 is pitted against opponents in joust-like scenarios set to exploit the F-22’s theoretical advantages and exclude real world vulnerabilities.”

These views clearly represent the ‘opinions’ of the two authors concerned, but do open up the possibility that the expense, over emphasis on stealth and reliance on BVR and associated radar technology may have been too great a sacrifice when cheaper and quite capable alternatives are on the market (Typhoon fro example).

Alas I do not have the time to type in the full article, but should you have cahnce it makes for interesting reading.
riksavage is offline  
Old September 25th, 2006
Big-E
This message has been deleted by OPSSG. Reason: One-liner
Old September 25th, 2006   #26
Defense Professional / Analyst
Sergeant
No Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 288
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by riksavage
Of interest, and offering a less than flattering overview, is an article in this weeks Janes Defense Weekly, Opinion Section titled; “The F-22: not what we were hoping for" written by Pierre Sprey, one of the three designers of the F-16, and James Stevenson, former editor of the USN Navy Fighter Weapons School’s Topgun Journal.

In a nutshell they claim the overemphasis on stealth and reliance on Beyond Visual Range (BVR) kills is not a watertight solution, providing the following examples (quotes from article):

“Billions of dollars were spent trying to perfect long-range radar missiles to achieve BVR kills, kill rates as high as 80 to 90 per cent were promised when projects were sold. Success rates in actual combat were below 10 per cent. Simple more agile, shorter-range infra-red missiles and guns were far more successful and effective.”
I don't think they do justice to their cause by including at historical BVR statistics dating back to Vietnam.

If you look at Gulf War and beyond (with the advent of AMRAAM), you'll see a far higher BVR kill rate and far fewer WVR kills (and no gun kills outside the occasional A-10 vs helo).

Quote:
Originally Posted by riksavage
These views clearly represent the ‘opinions’ of the two authors concerned, but do open up the possibility that the expense, over emphasis on stealth and reliance on BVR and associated radar technology may have been too great a sacrifice when cheaper and quite capable alternatives are on the market (Typhoon fro example).
At $100-120-ish million each, Typhoon really isn't that much cheaper. We might as well stick with the F-35, which may end up in this price range, when all's said and done.

The authors are right in that numbers matter in a fight. And it doesn't look like we're going to have large numbers of F-22s. However it's unclear we'll ever really be able to use large numbers of fighters in likely future scenarios, given increasingly limited basing options around the world.

IMHO, if we really want cheaper, we need to look at upgraded F-16s. At $30-ish million flyaway, you can't beat 'em.

Either that or A2A capable UCAVs.
B.Smitty is offline  
Old September 25th, 2006   #27
Banned Member
Colonel
No Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Singapore
Posts: 1,452
Threads:
Link

Big-E - Unfortunately I read a hard-copy version of the article. You have to subscribe to read the online copy.
riksavage is offline  
Old September 25th, 2006   #28
Entertainer
General
Grand Danois's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: CPH
Posts: 3,297
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by B.Smitty
I don't think they do justice to their cause by including at historical BVR statistics dating back to Vietnam.
Sounds like the "lightweight fighter mafia" taking a pot shot at BVR and the F-22. Think I have heard about using data that doesn't apply from these guys before...
Grand Danois is offline  
Old September 25th, 2006   #29
Defense Professional / Analyst
Sergeant
No Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 288
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grand Danois
Sounds like the "lightweight fighter mafia" taking a pot shot at BVR and the F-22. Think I have heard about using data that doesn't apply from these guys before...
Up until ODS, I would've agreed with them. But the advent of ARH missiles seem to have turned the tides towards BVR (for the moment). Perhaps when stealth is widely available to all sides, or some other asymmetric response is developed, things will be different.

HOBS WVR missiles make the close range fight basically a crapshoot, so we should hope that BVR becomes the norm, IMHO.

If it ever comes to pass that BVR is invalidated, I have a feeling we'll have to shift to 100% A2A UCAVs or MALI-style hunting munitions because we just can't accept anywhere close to a 1:1 loss ratio of F-22s to Flanker/Fulcrum/Fishbed/whatever.
B.Smitty is offline  
Old September 25th, 2006   #30
Entertainer
General
Grand Danois's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: CPH
Posts: 3,297
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by B.Smitty
Up until ODS, I would've agreed with them. But the advent of ARH missiles seem to have turned the tides towards BVR (for the moment). Perhaps when stealth is widely available to all sides, or some other asymmetric response is developed, things will be different.

HOBS WVR missiles make the close range fight basically a crapshoot, so we should hope that BVR becomes the norm, IMHO.

If it ever comes to pass that BVR is invalidated, I have a feeling we'll have to shift to 100% A2A UCAVs or MALI-style hunting munitions because we just can't accept anywhere close to a 1:1 loss ratio of F-22s to Flanker/Fulcrum/Fishbed/whatever.
I have thought a stealthy F-5/F-20 type fighter with IR sensors and IR HOBS WVR/HMCS could be an interesting option.

However, IMHO it'll be a long time before any OPFOR figures out to deal with the stealth/BVR combo on a 1:1 basis. And a lightweight fighter is still poor choice for the expeditionary type of missions of the USAF does.

UCAVs will probably be it in the end.

It's not that I am very knowledgeable on fighters and their tactics. I just happen to be wary when data is being cooked.
Grand Danois is offline  
Old September 25th, 2006
Apocalypse
This message has been deleted by OPSSG. Reason: One-liner
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:50 PM.