Skip to comments.Forget The F-22 And F-35, Russia's New Su-35 Fighter Jet Blows Them Away
Posted on 06/18/2013 1:50:57 PM PDT by Carbonsteel
The Su-35 (NATO designation Flanker E), Russias latest version of the famous super-maneuverable multirole fighter jet has demonstrated its stunning capabilities during the first day of the 50th Paris Air Show at Le Bourget.
During its display, the 4++ generation aircraft has showcased some almost impossible manoeuvres, demonstrating unbelievable low-speed handling authority.
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
I actually like the blue/gray splinter myself.
“lol...they thought the same thing during Vietnam...didn’t even put guns on our best fighter the F4...had to hang pods out in airstream to compensate and loose some of the muscle...
Stealth is history repeating itself.”
If stealth is history repeating itself, then why does the F-22 have a gun, and why do their pilots train to dogfight with said gun?
I couldn’t agree with you more, but I sure don’t see us turning around any time soon.
Check, check, check, and Check !
The demo plane is sort of like a pretty model strutting the runway.
To be of any value, the model must also be able to be a great lover, have kids, clean the house, cook, hunt, and raise the kids to be wise and productive.
Speed, weapons capacity, sensors, stealth, maintainability, are all equally important for a fighter plane.
Notice also in the video that the demo plane is dumping tons of fuel into the engines in order to keep up thrust for all of the cute maneuvers.
“The only close-in dogfights that occurred in Iraq were between an A-10 and a helicopter.”
Not entirely correct. There were a few post-merge kills.
That’s more for a ground-support role, really.
I work for an Israeli defense contractor and train US pilots on certain equipment (heads up displays and certain ground targeting equipment).
All that is cool and useful, but air-to-air, it’s actually pretty simple if your mission (like a Russian mission would be) is to “kill everythng in the air.”
To me, it seems only the West gives a hoot about not shooting the wrong thing.
thye most certainly can . I had to study Russian tactics and weapons and Russia in the military when I was up in the Arctic with NATO deployments and they can afford it and they now have massive oil and gas fields.
The days of poor Russia are over
“geez...the 22 and 35 are in full operation and when was the last time a Russian plane was in combat?”
An actual Soviet Air Force plane? Or a soviet built plane?
I know Soviet pilots flew in both Korea and Vietnam, they’ve probably flown “off the record” in some of the African “brush wars” over the past 30 years.
As far as the planes, the last outing of a Soviet outfitted airforce (Iraq) didn’t fare too well with most of them tucking tail and running, or being buried in the desert.
The Russians have almost given up on producing stealthy engines, it seems to me. (At least until GE sells it to them)
They can get the body down, but have been having a heck of a time with the exhaust, in particular.
Their attempts have resulted in very short engine life and really spectacular fires.
That said, I think they can create a plane that is stealthy from the target side vantage, right here and now.
Leaving downtown, however, is another matter.
Right now, in in the foreseeable future, no UAV can outperform a jet flown by a fighter-pilot.
Besides, there are many external environmental factors that the pilot experiences when engaged that help him max perform the platform, not the least of which is 360 deg situational awareness, airspeed (energy level), G-loading, weapon envelopes, thinking ahead from where you are to where you are going (or want to be), all these come together to give a complete picture.
Until UAVs can provide that seat-of-the-pants total environment feel and sensory input, there is no way a UAV can even come close to a manned fighter.
How about we field an unmanned tank on the battlefield, first, after all, it is a 2-G, 30-kt, two-dimensional maneuvering platform so it should be easier.
Learn to walk first, then fly.
I think Spanish with a Russian accent.
Going for guns is a planned last resort.
Because you are a (former) WSO, you know all plans turn brown when the switch is thrown and you fly an intercept.
Plan for the best, expect the worst, train for all situations.
geez...the 22 and 35 are in full operation and when was the last time a Russian plane was in combat?
Korea,Vietnam,Iraq. Everytime the U.S. Navy and Air Force face an enemy that enemy is usually flying Russian Aircraft.Either Migs or Sukois.
The Russian’s make great planes but its not the planes that matter.Its the Capability of the pilot.
That cammo would be effective if you crash in a forest. Nobody would find you.
I believe it is the '4+' that confused you and probably made you think it means gen 5. What it means is better than gen 4, but not gen 5. Some say gen 4.5, while others use 4+ and 4++.
Last time Russian planes were in combat? The best example of equal combat (as opposed to the USAF killing Iraqi MiGs that didn’t even have radar warning receivers) was the Eritrea-Ethiopia war. Ethiopian Sukhoi SU-29s, flown by Russian mercenaries, decimated Eritrean MiG-29s, flown by Ukranian mercenaries.
Su-29 should be SU-27
We have network-centric technology that apply in an A/A environment, really.
From air-battle awareness, targeting, coordinated employment, WEZ SA, “stealth” weapons launch, etc. . .
We agree your last statement is a truism, for sure.
Clicked on your link, so where is the story?