View Full Version : REQUEST: 5th generation aircraft
pls post some photos of any 5th generation aircraft from everywhere.
there is only one 5th generation fighter on the market an that is the F22A :)
there is only one 5th generation fighter on the market an that is the F22A :)
and what is about F-35, Eurofighter, Rafale?
and what is about F-35, Eurofighter, Rafale?
aint that 4.5th generation :)
maybe, i don`t know that for sure
Ratamacue
10-09-2006, 01:05 PM
Generations are a rather arbitrary and superficial designation, as aircraft designs tend to evolve fluidly rather than there being distinct lines of seperation. The F-35 is typically considered a fifth generation aircraft, but has not even made its first flight yet. The Typhoon and Rafale are generally grouped into a "generation 4.5," since they have a reduced RCS but are not entirely stealth aircraft.
Gurdil
10-09-2006, 02:31 PM
and what is about F-35, Eurofighter, Rafale?
like Ratamacue said Eurofighter and Rafale are not 100% stealth. The f-22 and the f-35 have many qualities. The air forces has to change their fighting techniques and that's why I would put them to the 5th generationn.
Rafale and typhoon are just the best plane of the 4 th generation.
corran.pl
10-09-2006, 02:36 PM
and what is about F-35, Eurofighter, Rafale?
I don't know how about Eurofighter and Rafale (I would rather call them gen 4,5) but F-35 is a 5 gen to me.
F-22 and F-35 are both 5 gen US fighters in very same way like F-15 and F-16 are both 4 gen.
Andrew116
10-09-2006, 03:55 PM
Aside from the talk of if its on the market or not :roll: here are some:
The S-47 Berkut "Golden Eagle"
http://www.suchoj.com/ab1953/Su-47/riss/Su-47_03.jpg
This was Sukhoi's design for a 5th gen fighter for russia, this will never see combat though. Only one was built and flys at airshows.
Next Up the MiG 1.42
http://richard.ferriere.free.fr/3vues/mig142mfi_3v.jpg
This was MiG's design, but this design was rejected too.
Most recently the MiG I-2000
http://www.aviation.ru/MiG/MiG-I-2000.jpg
This is just a or and as far as I know there is no test bed for it.
For America our 5th Gen is the F-22A "Raptor"
http://home.pon.net/hunnicutt/images/F22.jpg
The F-22A went in service in 2005 and has been appearing at airshows around the US.
Hope that helps somewhat.
corran.pl
10-09-2006, 04:17 PM
The S-47 Berkut "Golden Eagle"
http://www.suchoj.com/ab1953/Su-47/riss/Su-47_03.jpg
This was Sukhoi's design for a 5th gen fighter for russia, this will never see combat though. Only one was built and flys at airshows.
It was only a prototype to test this unusual aerodynamic concept. It was never to be a full production, combat aircraft.
Next Up the MiG 1.42
http://richard.ferriere.free.fr/3vues/mig142mfi_3v.jpg
This was MiG's design, but this design was rejected too.
I really like this design, beautiful plane, if it would come to production most probably it would be on similar level as Eurofighter/Rafale so it would be gen 4,5.
Most recently the MiG I-2000
http://www.aviation.ru/MiG/MiG-I-2000.jpg
This is just a or and as far as I know there is no test bed for it.
Strange, i found this pic signed PAK-FA T-50. If it comes true most likely it will be Russian 5 gen fighter, but i wouldn't expect it anytime soon.
http://warfare.ru/?catid=255&linkid=2280
corran.pl
10-09-2006, 04:44 PM
http://img232.imageshack.us/img232/7161/mig142yycf7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
http://img159.imageshack.us/img159/6227/14402fk2.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
http://img232.imageshack.us/img232/9770/ima2fht9.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
http://img232.imageshack.us/img232/7320/ima1fpc0.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
http://img225.imageshack.us/img225/8765/mig1447rc8.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
http://img232.imageshack.us/img232/2585/mig14204yy5.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
I relay do not understand Russians. Stealth is good for attack planes (F-35) but it is not so useful on air defense fighter (Eurofighter) and a air deface fighter is what Russians need the most at the moment to replace aging fleet of MiG-29 and Su-27. I'm sure that MiG MFI would be ready much sooner then PAK-FA and probably it would be cheaper to buy and operate then advanced Su-27 (it smaller then Su-27). Huh... dame shame we will never see a full prodaction MFIs.
Ratamacue
10-09-2006, 04:48 PM
Stealth is good for attack planes (F-35) but it is not so useful on air defense fighter (Eurofighter)I'm not really sure how you've come to this conclusion. Care to explain?
corran.pl
10-09-2006, 05:11 PM
I'm not really sure how you've come to this conclusion. Care to explain?
Stealth is good when you must penetrate enemy air defenses to destroy them but on CAP missions when you are flashing your radar hear or there or on typical attack missions when you carry loads of external load it is useless. Electronic countermeasures have proved to be much more useful on those kind of missions (look at EA-18G or F-16 bl 50 performing Wild Weasel missions).
Remember that modern radars (the ones that were designed to do it) have no problem to see Stealth planes.
sferrin
10-09-2006, 07:37 PM
Stealth is good when you must penetrate enemy air defenses to destroy them but on CAP missions when you are flashing your radar hear or there or on typical attack missions when you carry loads of external load it is useless. Electronic countermeasures have proved to be much more useful on those kind of missions (look at EA-18G or F-16 bl 50 performing Wild Weasel missions).
Remember that modern radars (the ones that were designed to do it) have no problem to see Stealth planes.
According to those who would know (F-22 pilots) stealth for air to air is the sh!t.
There are two 5th generation fighter aircraft today: The F-22 and the F-35.
Mig 1.42, S-37/Su-47, Rafale, Typhoon are all 4.5 gen.
Flamming_Python
10-09-2006, 08:26 PM
Russia is busy uniting many of its main aircraft companies (including military aircraft corporations) into the United Aircraft Corportation. There have been quite a few hickups on the way, but it looks like it's finally happening by the end of the year, finishing up sometime in 2007.
It is hard to find information about what the Russian 5th Generation fighter will be, but it may well have been put on hold for a while.
The MiG 1.42 was produced as a tender for that contract, but won't be the actual 5th Fighter from what I read. Rather it will combine aspects from both Sukhoi's and MiG's designs.
Stealth is important for air defence fighters too I would assume, as it not only makes it harder for Ground Radars to detect the aircraft, but also enemy Airplane Radars.
Andrew116
10-09-2006, 08:41 PM
Did the MiG 1.42 fly? I cant remember..
sferrin
10-09-2006, 09:13 PM
Did the MiG 1.42 fly? I cant remember..
I've heard it flew twice. I've got a video somewhere from one of it's flights. You could probably find it on youtube.
Grach
10-10-2006, 05:09 AM
As it's been clearly stated here already, generations are quite subjective and superficial. In terms of capabilities the latest upgrades for MiGs and Sukhoy aircraft are at lest at the same level as the so called 5th generation fighter, while aerodynamically there are no analogies to those planes at all! In terms of maneuverability those jets are still years ahead of their time.
In terms of stealth, it's even more superficial. There is no such thing as stealth for modern radars. Not with the current US concept of stealth design. It's just an excuse to drain own budget. A fantasy at best. There is no such thing as invisibility, unless you absorb 100% of received energy, which only black holes are capable of. Why the hell do you think USSR never adopted that concept!?
Laibach
10-10-2006, 05:47 AM
[COLOR=black]In terms of capabilities the latest upgrades for MiGs and Sukhoy aircraft are at lest at the same level as the so called 5th generation fighter,
Sorry but they are actually ABOVE them (especially f22) in some respects, just compare any newest sukhoi ATG capabilities to f22 and laugh.
corran.pl
10-10-2006, 06:08 AM
- Does Su-27/MiG-29 can super cruse? - No.
- Are Su-27/MiG-29 fully multi role. - Only Su-30MKI is a fully multi role aircraft that is in service (and it has a mix of Russian, Israeli, French and Indian avionics)
- Does Su-27/MiG-29 have a stealth abilities (at least limited like on EF-2000/Rafale/F/A-18E/F) - No
F-22 can do all of that + it have thrust vectoring and AESA Radar.
US have all features of Mig-31 and Su-27 in newest variants in one plane plus Stealth.
Advanced F-16C/D/E/F, F-15E/K and F/A-18E/F are the aircrafts that modernized Su-27 and MiG-29 should be compared with. F-22 and F-35 are beyond their range.
caridon
10-10-2006, 06:55 AM
According to those who would know (F-22 pilots) stealth for air to air is the sh!t.
Minor point.
"I Drive a <insert car here> it is the best car in the world." syndrome ?
/C
is F-117 5th generation plane? are any 5th generation bombers exist?
JVeld
10-10-2006, 10:00 AM
is F-117 5th generation plane? are any 5th generation bombers exist?
B-2 .........?
Andrew116
10-10-2006, 10:06 AM
is F-117 5th generation plane? are any 5th generation bombers exist?
X-43?
Idk I think its not 5th gen cause the B-2 came after, and its not a technical fighter, though Idk maybe. Now Boeings X-43 UAV I would consider a 5th Gen Bomber
Gluten
10-10-2006, 10:46 AM
if the euro fighter and the typhoon are 4.5, isnt gripn a "4.5" generation too?
Ratamacue
10-10-2006, 10:55 AM
Idk I think its not 5th gen cause the B-2 came after, and its not a technical fighter, though Idk maybe. Now Boeings X-43 UAV I would consider a 5th Gen BomberI think you mean the X-45. The X-43 is a 12 foot long scramjet test platform.
Gurdil
10-10-2006, 12:10 PM
Stealth is good when you must penetrate enemy air defenses to destroy them but on CAP missions when you are flashing your radar hear or there or on typical attack missions when you carry loads of external load it is useless. Electronic countermeasures have proved to be much more useful on those kind of missions (look at EA-18G or F-16 bl 50 performing Wild Weasel missions).
Remember that modern radars (the ones that were designed to do it) have no problem to see Stealth planes.
Actually the f-22 can carry bombs and missile inside the plane. So it is still stealth in enemy teritory. Moreover the f-22 is the fastest plane.
And pilots can fly without radar.
Russia is busy uniting many of its main aircraft companies (including military aircraft corporations) into the United Aircraft Corportation. There have been quite a few hickups on the way, but it looks like it's finally happening by the end of the year, finishing up sometime in 2007.
It is hard to find information about what the Russian 5th Generation fighter will be, but it may well have been put on hold for a while.
The MiG 1.42 was produced as a tender for that contract, but won't be the actual 5th Fighter from what I read. Rather it will combine aspects from both Sukhoi's and MiG's designs.
Stealth is important for air defence fighters too I would assume, as it not only makes it harder for Ground Radars to detect the aircraft, but also enemy Airplane Radars.
By uniting their aircarft companies, they will reduce competitivity. The USA have boeing, lockheed martin and Northdrop Grumman. That's why they have very good planes.
As it's been clearly stated here already, generations are quite subjective and superficial. In terms of capabilities the latest upgrades for MiGs and Sukhoy aircraft are at lest at the same level as the so called 5th generation fighter, while aerodynamically there are no analogies to those planes at all! In terms of maneuverability those jets are still years ahead of their time.
In terms of stealth, it's even more superficial. There is no such thing as stealth for modern radars. Not with the current US concept of stealth design. It's just an excuse to drain own budget. A fantasy at best. There is no such thing as invisibility, unless you absorb 100% of received energy, which only black holes are capable of. Why the hell do you think USSR never adopted that concept!?
The plane that has the best maneuverability is the typhoon. The f-22 is also very good at it. But as a 5th generation fighter it doesn't have to have that much maneuvrability. You can't compare any plane with the f-22 (exept for the f-35).
is F-117 5th generation plane? are any 5th generation bombers exist?
F-117 is stealth but not a very good plane.
B-2 is a bomber, don't know what generation, but it is the only one of his generation.
All that aside, the f-22 has been designed to be an air-dominance fighter. With the actual technology I don't think it would be possible to make a better plane than this one. And no country is ready to have a plane that could competite with it (and not in a close future either).
corran.pl
10-10-2006, 02:24 PM
is F-117 5th generation plane?
I think it is not. F-117 is a very specialized plane - and all planes that are considered to be 5 gen or 4,5 gen are fully multi role (F-22, F-35, EF-2000, Rafale, F/A-18E/F).
are any 5th generation bombers exist?
If any it should be B-2.
if the euro fighter and the typhoon are 4.5, isnt gripn a "4.5" generation too?
Good question. When I'm talking about Eurofighter being gen 4,5 I'm thinking about what Tranche 3 planes should be (thrust vectoring, AESA, super cruse), does Gripen has all of this features?
Gripen is very close in terms of capability with advanced F-16 bl 50+/52+/60, the advanced 4 gen fighter – and I would also call Gripen an 4 gen fighter (I'm referring here to current Gripens that are in use in Sweden/Hungary or Czech Republic) not the Future Gripen.
considered to be 5 gen or 4,5 gen are fully multi role (F-22, F-35, EF-2000, Rafale, F/A-18E/F).
If any it should be B-2.
so B-2 is multi role plane?
and anything besides B-2? are there any transport planes of 5th generation? any more 5th generation planes exists?
sferrin
10-10-2006, 08:28 PM
As it's been clearly stated here already, generations are quite subjective and superficial.
Well maybe someday everybody will have a clue. Generations are fairly well defined which you would discover if you did even the most rudimentary study of the subject.
In terms of capabilities the latest upgrades for MiGs and Sukhoy aircraft are at lest at the same level as the so called 5th generation fighter
rofl rofl rofl Which Flanker has all aspect stealth? Which one can supercruise at Mach 1.7+? Which one has an AESA? Which one has an ESM system so sophisticated that it can fire and direct a medium range AAM without even having to turn on it's friggin' radar?
while aerodynamically there are no analogies to those planes at all! In terms of maneuverability those jets are still years ahead of their time.
Hardly. An F-22 can do anything either one of those can do. But can either the latest Flanker or Fulcrum fly at Mach 1.7+ with 8 AAMs and not using afterburners? The F-22 can. Can a Flanker do those fancy manuevers with a full internal fuel load? (that would be HELL no) The F-22 can. In fact here's a manuever I'd wager NEITHER of them could do:
http://rapidshare.de/files/36282756/F22slowpasstovertica.avi.html
In terms of stealth, it's even more superficial. There is no such thing as stealth for modern radars.
rofl
Not with the current US concept of stealth design. It's just an excuse to drain own budget. A fantasy at best. There is no such thing as invisibility, unless you absorb 100% of received energy, which only black holes are capable of. Why the hell do you think USSR never adopted that concept!?
Because they don't have the $$$$ to do the necessary R&D. And what makes you think you need to absorb 100% of received energy to be effective? All I need to absorb/deflect away so the radar in question doesn't have enough signal to work with.
sferrin
10-10-2006, 08:31 PM
Minor point.
"I Drive a <insert car here> it is the best car in the world." syndrome ?
/C
If you think the F-22 pilots are impressed with air to air stealth you should hear what opposing pilots think of it. So no it's not simply "my ride's the best" :roll:
sferrin
10-10-2006, 08:32 PM
X-43?
Idk I think its not 5th gen cause the B-2 came after, and its not a technical fighter, though Idk maybe. Now Boeings X-43 UAV I would consider a 5th Gen Bomber
Do you even know what an X-43 is?
eric_from_texas
10-10-2006, 09:23 PM
Because they don't have the $$$$ to do the necessary R&D. And what makes you think you need to absorb 100% of received energy to be effective? All I need to absorb/deflect away so the radar in question doesn't have enough signal to work with.
exactly, you dont have to be a "hole in the sky" for stealth characteristics to be advantageous. i've read that the f-22 has the radar cross section of a bird (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/f-22-stealth.htm).
also, ive read that in mock dogfights, f-15 pilots have been unable to detect f-22s on radar at all, the only way they know its there is to close to visual range. and in a real fight, an f-22 will never get w/in visual range of an enemy and even if they do, how can you lock a radar-guided missile onto a plane that doesnt even show up on your radar?
no way are the eurofigher or anything the russians make on par with the f-22. the US built the f-22 to be the next generation, to stay one step ahead of the rest of the military aero-space industry. the unit cost of the f-22 is approx $300 million. you dont pay that much for an aircraft that that can be matched by a $50 million plane (eurofighter). my grandfather (an engineer) worked on the project before he retired and the old man won't shut up about how this plane is "decades ahead of anything that flies".
rarely am i the guy that sits there and argues that whatever the US built is the best (like some people seem to do with the Abrams). but in this case i would be willing to say that the f-22 is vastly superior (in all aspects but maybe pure manuverability) to any fighter aircraft currently in existence (and still superior to the f-35). sorry europe, sorry russia, the US has you beat on this one.
EDIT: ok, after doing some research for my next post, i discovered that the F-22 is, in fact, inferior to the Su-37 in payload capacity - just trying to be fair
eric_from_texas
10-10-2006, 10:06 PM
Sorry but they are actually ABOVE them (especially f22) in some respects, just compare any newest sukhoi ATG capabilities to f22 and laugh.
sorry for the double post but i couldnt help but address Laibach's post.
Laibach, when you say "newest sukhoi ATG capabilities" i assume you mean the air-to-ground capabilities of the latest sukhoi aircraft, the Su-37 and that you mean that the Su-37 can outperform the F-22 in an air-to-ground role. If this is not what you meant, then please disregard my following post and explain what you did mean.
But if my assumption is correct, there is a huge logical flaw in your comparison of the ATG capabilities of the F-22 and the Su-37, that being that the F-22 is a designated air-superiority fighter, not a ground-attack fighter. Thus, to evaluate the F-22 on the basis of its ATG capabilities is like trash-talking the B-2 because it isnt manuverable. The F-22 is designed to kill enemy aircraft, not drop bombs. Essentially, you are comparing apples to oranges.
But for the sake of argument, we can go ahead and evaluate the F-22 for its ATG capabilities as compared to that of the Su-37. In such a comparison, you are correct that the Su-37 surpasses the F-22 in its payload capacity; the Su-37 can carry more weight in bombs (approx 18,500 lbs) than the F-22 which can carry only 2000 lbs in its internal storage bays and an additional 5000 lbs on external hardpoints. (according to estimates - the real statistics are still classified). I would assume the F-22 would almost never carry external ordinance as that would sacrifice its stealthy characteristics. So if the F-22 wants to stay stealthy, it can only carry 2000 lbs of ordinance as compared to the Su-37's 18,500 lbs. Send my congratulations to Mother Russia. Unfortunately, the Su-37 is neither stealthy (no where NEAR the level of the F-22) and even if it was, it cannot carry ANY of its ordinance internally (so as long as its carrying ordinance, it will be lit up on radar).
By your logic, the WW2 P-38 is a better ATG aircraft than the F-22 as the P-38 could carry TWICE the bomb load that the F-22 can!
So in the end, the "latest Sukhoi" can carry more bombs than the F-22. If this is what you mean by "comparing the latest Sukhoi ATG characteristics to the F-22 and laughing" then by all means, have a good chuckle.
:bash:
Statistics cited from the following sources:
http://www.globalaircraft.org/planes/su-37_flanker.pl
http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/su37/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-22_Raptor#Weapons
http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/military/f22/index.html
http://www.milnet.com/pentagon/usaf/F-22.htm
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/su-37.htm
http://home.att.net/~ww2aviation/P-38-3.html (http://home.att.net/%7Eww2aviation/P-38-3.html)
EDIT: for advantages of the F-22 in the ATG role, consider the following from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-22_Raptor
"one key aspect of the Raptor must be kept in mind. Its very high sustained cruise speeds, and operational altitude (something that is often ignored), add tremendously to the effective range of both air to air and air to ground munitions...This speed and altitude characteristic also helps improve the range of air to ground ordnance. While specific figures remain classified, it is expected that JDAMs employed by F-22s will have twice or more the effective range of munitions dropped by legacy platforms"
sferrin
10-10-2006, 11:05 PM
sorry for the double post but i couldnt help but address Laibach's post.
Laibach, when you say "newest sukhoi ATG capabilities" i assume you mean the air-to-ground capabilities of the latest sukhoi aircraft, the Su-37 and that you mean that the Su-37 can outperform the F-22 in an air-to-ground role. If this is not what you meant, then please disregard my following post and explain what you did mean.
But if my assumption is correct, there is a huge logical flaw in your comparison of the ATG capabilities of the F-22 and the Su-37, that being that the F-22 is a designated air-superiority fighter, not a ground-attack fighter. Thus, to evaluate the F-22 on the basis of its ATG capabilities is like trash-talking the B-2 because it isnt manuverable. The F-22 is designed to kill enemy aircraft, not drop bombs. Essentially, you are comparing apples to oranges.
But for the sake of argument, we can go ahead and evaluate the F-22 for its ATG capabilities as compared to that of the Su-37. In such a comparison, you are correct that the Su-37 surpasses the F-22 in its payload capacity; the Su-37 can carry more weight in bombs (approx 18,500 lbs) than the F-22 which can carry only 2000 lbs in its internal storage bays and an additional 5000 lbs on external hardpoints. [/URL]
And that would be 5000lbs on EACH of it's four hardpoints ;)
corran.pl
10-11-2006, 05:52 AM
exactly, you dont have to be a "hole in the sky" for stealth characteristics to be advantageous. i've read that the f-22 has the radar cross section of a bird (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/f-22-stealth.htm).
Find me a bird flying supersonic.
also, ive read that in mock dogfights, f-15 pilots have been unable to detect f-22s on radar at all,
rofl
no way are the eurofigher or anything the russians make on par with the f-22. the US built the f-22 to be the next generation, to stay one step ahead of the rest of the military aero-space industry. the unit cost of the f-22 is approx $300 million. you dont pay that much for an aircraft that that can be matched by a $50 million plane (eurofighter).
Any source on this prices?
my grandfather (an engineer) worked on the project before he retired and the old man won't shut up about how this plane is "decades ahead of anything that flies".
Yeah, whatever. My **** is bigger.
rarely am i the guy that sits there and argues that whatever the US built is the best (like some people seem to do with the Abrams). but in this case i would be willing to say that the f-22 is vastly superior (in all aspects but maybe pure manuverability) to any fighter aircraft currently in existence (and still superior to the f-35). sorry europe, sorry russia, the US has you beat on this one.
F-22 is the best fighter but saying that it is decades ahead of anything, and nothing can touch it is going to far. You are only showing your ignorance. Stealth is good, and can be very useful on some situations but it is not a ultimate solution to everything.
corran.pl
10-11-2006, 06:10 AM
so B-2 is multi role plane?
In fact (unlike most of Russian bombers) B-2 is a multi role bomber - it can perform strategic attack with nuclear weapons, it can penetrate and disable enemy air defenses (like during war on Balkans) or even be used as a simple bomb truck and perform CAS missions. Russian bomber main task is attack with nuclear weapons and they have very limited capabilities to use conventional weapons - I know you have some other planes for that but this are the facts.
and anything besides B-2? are there any transport planes of 5th generation? any more 5th generation planes exists?
We are referring here to 5 gen fighters.
Tupolev TU160 is a multirole bomber
corran.pl
10-11-2006, 06:40 AM
Tupolev TU160 is a multirole bomber
No it is not. Only las variant (Tu-160M - how many of them is in line, one? two?), can carry arms other then strategic, self-guided missiles (with nuclear or conventional warheads). Iron bombs does not count (we have 21st century you know).
pretty sure tu160 can carry up to 44.000 lbs worth of bombs, 16 are in service afaik
but I don't know the type of bombs so you may well be right
Russian bomber main task is attack with nuclear weapons and they have very limited capabilities to use conventional weapons
about what bomber exactly are you talking?
We are referring here to 5 gen fighters.
i asked about any type of 5th generation plane
caridon
10-11-2006, 07:40 AM
If you think the F-22 pilots are impressed with air to air stealth you should hear what opposing pilots think of it. So no it's not simply "my ride's the best" :roll:
I did not claim that it was not the truth. i just pointed out that the source was VERY biased.
If you have other sources that praice the f-22 pleace share. I meen with that pricetag it have to be good (or else you should shoot half ot the USAF procurement team)
And as a sidnote to those that claim invisibility to radar for the F-22. The f22 achives this by reflecting the radiation in other directions than back att the emitter, so it only works against a single emitter-receiver. A LOT of work is being spent on systems using separate emiters and receivers that cooperate (think first plane radiates, second plane receives, or ground radar radiates, all planes receive.) . This will most probably defeat the whole concept. And when you factor in the f-22 pricetag it will suck to not get your moneys worth :)
/C
sferrin
10-11-2006, 07:44 AM
I did not claim that it was not the truth. i just pointed out that the source was VERY biased.
If you have other sources that praice the f-22 pleace share. I meen with that pricetag it have to be good (or else you should shoot half ot the USAF procurement team)
/C
Check out the forums on f-16.net. There are numerous first hand accounts both of F-22 pilots who have fought -teens and -teen pilots who have fought the F-22. Or tried to anyway ;)
Andrew116
10-11-2006, 09:02 AM
I think you mean the X-45. The X-43 is a 12 foot long scramjet test platform.
whoops my bad :roll::)
post pls some photos of x-45
Gurdil
10-11-2006, 03:30 PM
Find me a bird flying supersonic.
rofl
Any source on this prices?
Yeah, whatever. My **** is bigger.
F-22 is the best fighter but saying that it is decades ahead of anything, and nothing can touch it is going to far. You are only showing your ignorance. Stealth is good, and can be very useful on some situations but it is not a ultimate solution to everything.
Sorry but What eric said is true about the f-15 who didn't see the f22 coming, You can find the intervieaw on wikipedia.
eric_from_texas
10-11-2006, 06:05 PM
Find me a bird flying supersonic.
the point is the f-22 has a very low radar signature rather than no radar signature, not that it looks just like a bird on radar. :roll:
Any source on this prices?
yeah, google "unit price f-22" and "unit price eurofighter" and tell me what you find. do i have to cite everything for you? from most of the posts on this site i would think that making unsubstantiated and undocumented claims is the norm.
Yeah, whatever. My **** is bigger.
any source to back that up? sorry, your sister doesnt count as a source
F-22 is the best fighter but saying that it is decades ahead of anything, and nothing can touch it is going to far. You are only showing your ignorance. Stealth is good, and can be very useful on some situations but it is not a ultimate solution to everything.
i never said that "nothing can touch it", read my post before you misquote me. i did say it was decades ahead of anything flying, and i guess you disagree with my opinion. but anything that flies can be shot down. to shoot down an F-22, just close w/in visual and take it out with guns (or missiles if you can get a lock). its possible, just extremely difficult.
by the way, by making references to your **** and talking about supersonic birds you are only showing your ignorance. it would seem the size of your **** is only surpassed by that of your ego.
Grach
10-13-2006, 12:22 AM
any source to back that up? sorry, your sister doesnt count as a source
....
by the way, by making references to your **** and talking about supersonic birds you are only showing your ignorance. it would seem the size of your **** is only surpassed by that of your ego.
You seem to be fixated on **** remarks...I bet you've got the biggest gun around to compensate. rofl
corran.pl
10-13-2006, 03:01 AM
Sorry but What eric said is true about the f-15 who didn't see the f22 coming, You can find the intervieaw on wikipedia.
US generals do everything, and I mean this - everything to show how incapable F-15 is. Remember fights with Indian Su-30MKI that everybody is jerking about? But not everybody knows that F-15s were forbidden to use their greatest weapon - AIM-120. All comparison F-22 vs something, F-15 vs something and especially F-15 vs F-22 must show how old and incapable the F-15 is (and that it need to replaced fast) and that how F-22 is ahead of everything - in other words: "Congress. Give us more money for Raptors!".
US generals do everything, and I mean this - everything to show how incapable F-15 is. Remember fights with Indian Su-30MKI that everybody is jerking about? But not everybody knows that F-15s were forbidden to use their greatest weapon - AIM-120. All comparison F-22 vs something, F-15 vs something and especially F-15 vs F-22 must show how old and incapable the F-15 is (and that it need to replaced fast) and that how F-22 is ahead of everything - in other words: "Congress. Give us more money for Raptors!".
They might highlight the disadvantages of the F-15 but they do have a point. Our F-15s are old. Most of the F-15Cs are from the mid 70s to early 80s. They have lived some pretty hard lives. While they are not completely obsolete the F-22 offers many advantages over the F-15.
Now the F-22 is being used as a SEAD striker, electronic warfare, medium-range ground attack, and air superiority fighter. It can do many things that no other fighter can do. There is a reason why it's price tag is above every other fighter's.
Stealth is just another advantage the F-22 has over other fighters. It is rumored to be pretty much the equal of the B-2 in terms of pure RCS in most aspects. However, it doesn't rely solely on that advantage. It's computing power and situational awareness in far beyond any Russian fighter operational today and probably on the drawing boards and it still has a lot of room for upgrades.
eric_from_texas
10-13-2006, 02:24 PM
Ditto, JSAF. Most if not all of US military doctrine of fighting conventional warfare relies upon the US having air-dominance, or air-superiority at the least. Modern Russian fighters (and the Eurofighter) are at least as good (most would argue better) than US 4th generation fighters like the F-15 and F-16. To have air-superiority/air-dominance, you want to have fighters (and pilots) that are superior (preferably vastly superior) to anything the enemy can throw at you. Enter the F-22. The point is to stay a step ahead of everyone else. To do so cost money. But even the US, with its gargantuan defense budget, is still only buying a few hundred F-22s.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.10 Copyright © 2012 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.