Page 432 of 477 FirstFirst ... 332382422424425426427428429430431432433434435436437438439440442 ... LastLast
Results 6,466 to 6,480 of 7142

Thread: Sukhoi T-50 PAK FA

  1. #6466
    Banned user
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    728

    Default

    with todays weapons is any of this stuff even relevant? Does anyone really expect an F-35 or T-50 to be dog fighting? One of them is going down long before they close enough for that

  2. #6467
    How's that Hopey Changey thing workin'? C.Puffs's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Don't know, don't care.
    Posts
    27,910

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Amur_Tiger View Post
    link?

    I don't discount 'professionals' being able to make a better assessment then myself but I do question whether who they're working for affects what the public hears about it. If an F-35 test pilot found the F-35 to be a turtle I'm not certain that this would reach the public, which is why I like more scientific measurements particularly since there won't be many pilots out there that can compare a TVC Flanker, F-22, F-35 and Eurofighter all in one go.
    Occam's Razor. If it were a dog the USAF, USN, and USMC wouldn't be clamoring for it.

  3. #6468
    Junior Member duf1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    17

    Default

    @tokengator
    Really, and what makes you think that way?

  4. #6469
    How's that Hopey Changey thing workin'? C.Puffs's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Don't know, don't care.
    Posts
    27,910

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tokengator View Post
    with todays weapons is any of this stuff even relevant? Does anyone really expect an F-35 or T-50 to be dog fighting? One of them is going down long before they close enough for that
    *ding* *ding* *ding* we have a winner. Add stealth into the equation and that only makes the dogfight that much less relevant.

  5. #6470
    How's that Hopey Changey thing workin'? C.Puffs's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Don't know, don't care.
    Posts
    27,910

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by duf1 View Post
    Really, and what makes you think that way?

  6. #6471
    Banned user
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    728

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by C.Puffs View Post
    *ding* *ding* *ding* we have a winner. Add stealth into the equation and that only makes the dogfight that much less relevant.

    that was my next question. What good are any of these specs if one or the other plane is incapable of seeing its foe?...or when he does see his foe it is already too late

  7. #6472
    Senior Member artjomh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    5,147

    Default

    PAK-FA has a slightly different role than F-22 or F-35.

    It is more of a combination of F-22 and F-15E, in that it is expected to sometimes get down and dirty. I think I read Pogo specifically say that it sacrifices some low observability in exchange for being more maneuverable in visual range because it is supposed to provide air support in addition to basic air dominance.

  8. #6473
    Banned user
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    728

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by artjomh View Post
    PAK-FA has a slightly different role than F-22 or F-35.

    It is more of a combination of F-22 and F-15E, in that it is expected to sometimes get down and dirty. I think I read Pogo specifically say that it sacrifices some low observability in exchange for being more maneuverable in visual range because it is supposed to provide air support in addition to basic air dominance.
    but the discussion was slamming F-35 for its supposed w/t and other specs in comparison to the T-50...I think the natural and correct assumption on the direction of the discussion was how these two would perform when facing each other. I understand lack of logic and over all disdain for platform vs platform but the topic was humored...so in that respect I do wonder its relevance of these specs?

    to take your point. What is the relevance of the specs in question to the F-35 role? I ask because I don't know, not rhetorical

  9. #6474
    Making Canadians look bad sepheronx's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Age
    25
    Posts
    10,478

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tokengator View Post
    that was my next question. What good are any of these specs if one or the other plane is incapable of seeing its foe?...or when he does see his foe it is already too late
    It depends on the radar used and the weapons. Since PAK FA uses an AESA xband radar and AESA L-Band Radar, then it acts as mini-awacs with the ability to help spot LO aircrafts, and that specifications are important.

  10. #6475
    Banned user
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    728

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sepheronx View Post
    It depends on the radar used and the weapons. Since PAK FA uses an AESA xband radar and AESA L-Band Radar, then it acts as mini-awacs with the ability to help spot LO aircrafts, and that specifications are important.
    I think you are taking my specs aren't important out of context. Sure you want the plane with the ability to achieve its role/mission.

    but in these platform vs platform discussion I fail to see the relevance. These planes are not going to be dog fighting. Todays technology has basically boiled it down to who sees who first.

  11. #6476
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,488

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tokengator View Post
    but the discussion was slamming F-35 for its supposed w/t and other specs in comparison to the T-50...I think the natural and correct assumption on the direction of the discussion was how these two would perform when facing each other. I understand lack of logic and over all disdain for platform vs platform but the topic was humored...so in that respect I do wonder its relevance of these specs?

    to take your point. What is the relevance of the specs in question to the F-35 role? I ask because I don't know, not rhetorical
    Some dude brought up the F-35 foolishly in the PAK FA thread and said bad things about it, C.Puffs couldn't leave that alone of course and said something along the lines of 'show me proof' with such a gauntlet thrown down some proof was offered by myself and artjomh and then the discussion boiled down to the cavats and exceptions to the more scientific measurements of performance. None of this really affects the F-35's role as a Strike Fighter but may have some relevance for air superiority, depending on what you think the role of the F-35 is. Incidentally there was little direct comparison between the F-35 and the T-50 on maneuverability because I think that result at least is pretty clear which makes the entire discussion rather misplaced in the Pak Fa thread.

  12. #6477
    Senior Member artjomh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    5,147

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tokengator View Post
    so in that respect I do wonder its relevance of these specs?
    Well, if two fighters are never meant to get within visual range of each other, then yes, maneuverability doesn't mean much.

    But if one fighter is meant for stand-off operations and the other is meant for dogfighting, then yes, things like speed and turn rate and bank angle start to matter.

  13. #6478
    Banned user
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    728

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Amur_Tiger View Post
    Some dude brought up the F-35 foolishly in the PAK FA thread and said bad things about it, C.Puffs couldn't leave that alone of course and said something along the lines of 'show me proof' with such a gauntlet thrown down some proof was offered by myself and artjomh and then the discussion boiled down to the cavats and exceptions to the more scientific measurements of performance. None of this really affects the F-35's role as a Strike Fighter but may have some relevance for air superiority, depending on what you think the role of the F-35 is. Incidentally there was little direct comparison between the F-35 and the T-50 on maneuverability because I think that result at least is pretty clear which makes the entire discussion rather misplaced in the Pak Fa thread.

    Fair enough.

  14. #6479
    Banned user
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    728

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by artjomh View Post
    Well, if two fighters are never meant to get within visual range of each other, then yes, maneuverability doesn't mean much.

    But if one fighter is meant for stand-off operations and the other is meant for dogfighting, then yes, things like speed and turn rate and bank angle start to matter.

    but in this case hasn't the latter lost the battle before it even began?

    I guess the better question would be...does dogfighting have its place on a modern battlefield?

  15. #6480
    Banned user
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    728

    Default

    sorry if I am hijacking your Pak-50 thread. Not my intention. I will start another thread posing that question if you guys deem it necessary

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •