Russian Fighters for American Airforce/Navy: The only prudent solution!

Unless congress decides to chill out with the F-18 for the next decade waiting for the JSF, while Russia asks China to help it finance the planes i posted in post 50.

Then we will be facing a threatening china with their indigenous J-10s, and the Sino-Russian Berkerut and Mig1.42(see post 50 for pictures); as well as a bristling air defence system with Sa-500s and radars that can 'paint' stealth aircraft.

Then when young pilots in F-18s start getting shot by stealth Chinese fighters derived from the Berkerut, or even by RAM coated Su-30s (some Indian versions were upgraded with an RAM coating from Russia that reduced their radar signature by 70%) armed with R-77 AA missiles (that are more advanced than the US AMRAAM) then i wonder what the Senators who killed off the f-14 Tomcat will say.

Remember the reason our planes were so effective in Iraq was due to several reasons. 1) We had better trained pilots. 2) We had better planes (the mig -29s Russia had sold to Iraq had been 'dumbed' down by Russia to protect certain vital technologies). 3) We had destroyed all their radar systems. 4) We had a better cordinated attack thanks to AWACS and Orion planes. 5) We saturated them.

However think of an enemy employing upgraded russian fighters (not the dumbed down versions sold to Iraq), with well trained pilots (in a German 'test' well trained pilots in F-15s could not beat well trained pilots in Su-27s), having good ground defence (Sa-500s coupled with radar grid linkage that can minimize the effectiveness of stealth) and jets carrying 'long stick' weapons (the Rateka-77 AMRAAM-ski).

What happens then when our valiant lads fly into the heat of battle against such odds, 7000 miles away in the straits of Taiwan or against Aircraft carriers that the chinese bought Sunburn missiles to defend against (the sunburn was designed to beat Phalanx ship defenses and fly in a 'ripple' fashion where several missiles come in at different altitudes at the same time at mach speeds, and in the terminal stage zigzag...each carrying a potentially crippling warhead).

Chances are such a scenario may not happen. However hoping for daisies and daffodils in the next decade until the JSFs and Raptors start rolling up is risky. Especially for those guys strapped to F-18s.

And if the Australians found it judicious to change their F-18s for sukhois and upgraded migs, then the least the brass can do is consider this (wait a moment. Wasn't the article written by a retired American Rear Admiral, and a former worker at Grumman? The only problem seems to be congress being more intrested in funds for their state getting defense projects than for the lads who will use them)

Well, i have to concur that you were right in both cases. That the YF-17 was the USAF competition for the YF-16; and that the article was written some time ago.

However if you look at it, the YF-16 concept became the F-16; and the YF-17 concept became the F-18. And it actually was 'pushed' to the navy after the YF-16 won the contract since the navy was in need of a twin engined aircraft, and the people behind the YF-17 pressured the powers that be to 'persuade' the navy to take a rehashed YF-17, hence the F-18.

And as for the article i do not think the fact that it was not composed last month takes away from its significance. Actually it might even be of more impact today since the F-14s are closer to being totally replaced by SuperHornets than they were when this article initially hit the press!

It is still a viable topic that would be quite feasible if certain politics were put aside for the wellbeing of American pilots.

Folks, the Russian Flanker series is the same generation as the F-15. While the top of the line Su-30/35/37XXX is still being developed by the Russians, we have been fielding the F-15E for quite a few years. Its even been through combat action. Wrt the F-18, yes its not the best replacement for the Tomcat. But this doesn't mean that it is a slouch...with top notch weapons, highly trained pilots and available force multipliers, it can match up with the planes we are likely to come across over the next decade. After that, the JSF should be ready to take over.

Pratt & Whitney F119-PW-100 Bump!!!!

Nice to see that the child of the engine I helped FSE is doing well.

Not greater stealth than the F22. The 37 is a spin off of the X29 but far less advanced than even that was, and the F22 surpassed the 29, although the SFWF16 is beyond their 37 already.

USA has air superiority in their sleep. =)

Nice airplanes.

I can't handle all this stupidity any longer! A stripped down Su costs 8 mill - don't y'all realize the cost of a modern fighter comes from its avionics? A 15/16 would run under 8 million if all you wanted were engines and wings!

And this, "The Su manuevers well at airshows" analysis is c$%p! If I had to bet my life on a plane, I'd bet on the 15. Simulated dogfights show you whatever the rule-makers want it to show. When I flew F-4s, we regularly beat F-15s - during the one year where I kept track, I had a 3:1 kill ratio against them. The F-15 was a better plane, but we were using better tactics.

And dogfighting is disappearing. Yeah, I know those predictions were around before Vietnam - but they are coming true. Airpower made a lot of boasts about bombing, but it took PGMs to make them come true. The missiles & systems being worked today mean traditional dogfighting is over. I miss it - but I'll face the facts. No one gives a tinker's damn how fast you can move the plane's nose - with helmet mounted sights, and the ability in the very near future to use off-board systems for missile cueing - dogfights are over!

And let's talk a little about stealth. One thing that can keep you in the fight is being small enough radar wise to make it difficult - the Su (like the 15) is a flying tennis court! You might as well strap neon signs to your plane saying "SHOOT ME!"

I wish the people on this forum would realize that at least some of us working acquisition & test don't give a damn about contractors or their profits - we only care about winning the next war, and we know a hell of a lot more about what it takes than these bozos.

Honestly i have to agree with you that seeing a Mig 29 landing at Edwards, and then hearing the sounds of American Pratt and Whitneys being emitted by the Mig, and then taking a closer look at seeing the insignia of the 'USAF' seems like something out of the twilight zone! Even if the Cold war is over it is still mighty strange.

Anyway the reason the sukhoi/mig thing is warranted is because in the US there has been a tendency to field aircraft that is ten years before the rest, and then ten years later the Russians introduce the 'competition' that is obviously more advanced than the decade old American fighter.

For example the su-27 (first rolled out in the mid eighties)was the Soviet answer for the F-15 (first rolled out in the seventies). Thus these aircraft have technologies that were not present when the American stuff rolled out.

A good example is the F-16 and the Mig-29 (i emphasize the upgraded Russian version not the monkey models sold to Iraq). The Mig came out almost a decade after the Falcon, and it had integrated etch like the helmet mounted missile targeting system that can shoot off a missile from any angle etc.

Another example is comparing the AMRAAM and the AMRAAM-ski (R77).

So the fear is that ten years from now the F22 Raptors and the JSFs are going to getting churned out at full blast. And they shall be great planes and stuff. Great planes, but possibly obsolete!

However at that moment the Russians and Chinese shall be sending remote controlled drones with slaved AA missiles and possibly some A2G ordnance, and with combat suites to protect them from EMP waves that can fry their circuitry.

Thus when we are flying our Raptors they shall be messing around with stealth drones that can do a 30g turn that would separate human hemoglobin from blood plasma! And our raptors will not be able to pull 9gs without the pilot blacking out. How are they going to defend against a future hypersonic ASRAAM that can turn faster than the devil?

Actually i 'read' an article that stated China was working on some type of stealth concept (and the artist depiction of the manned plane looked 'too much' like an F-22). India is also working on a hypersonic plane (which would be a complement to its LCA lightweight fighter program).

Yet we are just trying to develop todays stealth tech for tomorrows air environment! Actually if some stealth fielded by certain countries can 'paint' stealth, such as the Czech radar that shot down that F-117A in Yugoslavia; or the Australian one that was tracking a B-2 Spirit a couple of years ago at a British airshow; i wonder.... will stealth be obsolete in the future (well, not technically obsolete but only to be used against 'banana republics).

Everyone in the know is saying that UCAVs are the future, drones flitting around at 30+gs and packing AMRAAMS and JDAMS, but strangely we are working on an expensive manned design that is set to come out when other nations are bringing out stealthy drones.

When we could get some Sukhois, amp them up, and use them until our own UCAVs are up and running.

However this argument will meet the same fate of the Israeli Python AA missile (which is the most advanced of its kind) that was shot down for an American version that was not as good. By the way the no 2 happens to be Russian, FYI. IMO i think we should have bought the Python, reverse enginered the sucker, and built our own ASRAAM that was better. And do the same with the SUs, except this time we just give them American engines, and our weapons (possibly that American Python), and use the SUs until our UCAVS are ready.

Then we will continuosly be ahead of the Chinese. And with the rise of Assymetric warfare, when relatively poor nations spend their defense budgets on just a few combat etchs, but techs so advanced that they can counter the most advanced American hardware (eg the sunburn anti-ship missiles by china to use on American aircraft carriers, or the inquiry by Iraq about radar grids that might even threaten stealth craft), this is a real threat. What if some nation purchased the Swedish Stealth Frigates (you should see a picture of them, they are COOL), and armed them with some stand-off surface to surface missiles that have enough manouevrability to beat the Phalanx defense system? Bringing down just carrier would be a great blow!

Thus my reasoning for focussing on what is needed both now, and what is needed in the future. Instead of fielding tech that would be super today, but will be used by everyone and their uncle ten years from now.

And yes, i know that was rife with hyperbole... but the crux of the argument still stands! We need to stop going after weapons systems just to please certain states by giving them defense contracts. Otherwise one day a squadron of F-18E SuperHornets shall try to prevent China from attacking Taipei, and find themselves facing Drones flown by 18yr old Chinese nerds thinking its some videogame. (Again i know that is hyperbole, but i just wanted to drive my point home).

And i have a feeling the 'powers that be' know this, after all it has been happening for sometime now. However with the risk of some carzy kook in some crazier republic with a suicide wish (thus eliminating the deterrence of our Tridents and Peacemakers) getting the handle on the notion of assymetrical warfare, and spending 8% of his nations crude oil income to purchase some Chinese stealth anti-shipping missiles to get at our destroyers, or maybe some hypercavitating rocket torpedoes anchored to the ocean floor near his harbor with advanced acoustic capabilities chilling for our subs. What then. We will still kick their collective a$$e$ since the US will obviously have more combat assets, but they will hurt us and hurt us bad!

And if you think other nations do not think of how to neutralize American military projection you must be dreaming.