Move over, F-22 Raptor !

[OrionHunter]

F-22 was conceived 25-30 years ago. Awesome job Russia, beating a plane that is flying for last 8 years.

And that's why it's technology is a couple of decades behind the T-50! By the way, the F-22 was introduced in Dec 2005, ie, 6 years ago.

 

[Zabaniyah]

6th and 7th generation? Now what does this mean? Can you specify the likely technologies that would be incorporated into these so called 6th or 7th generation aircraft?

The Sixth Generation Fighter
Weapon and Technology: 6th Generation Fighter : Boeing F/A-XX on Display
Sixth generation jet fighter - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Vibs]

The Sixth Generation Fighter
Weapon and Technology: 6th Generation Fighter : Boeing F/A-XX on Display
Sixth generation jet fighter - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I've read about this. But this one's kind of confusing. When the F-22 and subsequently the F-35 were conceptualized,they were hailed as the last manned combat aircraft by the USA. Now suddenly this one comes up when the F-35 is being trashed for cost overruns and F-22 was stopped at 180 planes because it was too expensive. Wonder if they will manage to put this together.

 

[gambit]

Flaky and gobbledygook were not the answers I expected!!! Lol..

What do you expect? For what tthe Russians wrote, you can write the same thing for the Goodyear blimp.

 

[silko]

@gambit, there was a documentary type of thing in history channel in the dogfights show. maybe you can show them that so they can understand?

 

[nightcrawler]

The majority of US air losses in Vietnam came from ground defense, not air-air combat.

With you sir I have to be very careful with my english words...
I thus used 'in conjunction'

Wonder why everyone avoid the facts of Operation Bolo in front of them.

Operation Bolo was devised to lure MiGs in areas where enemy radar coverage is close to nil & MiG can be hunted down; & thus US devised successful plan; plan that was not fulfilled till 1968 even my using ARM missiles & wild weasels combo against SA-2

During 1968, MiGs accounted for 22 percent of the 184 American aircraft (75 Air Force, 59 Navy, and five Marine Corps) lost over the north.

Pardon me if you are comparing MiG-21 with F-4; because its a clear mismatch; but yes you can compare it with MiG-23 or -25

 

[gambit]

With you sir I have to be very careful with my english words...
I thus used 'in conjunction'

You can...But the lie was in misusing figures to hide that fact.

Operation Bolo was devised to lure MiGs in areas where enemy radar coverage is close to nil & MiG can be hunted down; & thus US devised successful plan; plan that was not fulfilled till 1968 even my using ARM missiles & wild weasels combo against SA-2

But then the F-4 never had ground support either. Operation Bolo pitted aircraft against aircraft, pilot against pilot, training against training, tactic against tactic. The Soviets/Chinese versions of that list failed spectacularly. Am not talking about Soviet/Chinese pilots flying at that time. Am talking about pilots who were trained under the Soviets/Chinese system.

Pardon me if you are comparing MiG-21 with F-4; because its a clear mismatch; but yes you can compare it with MiG-23 or -25

In many ways, the MIG-21 was superior, and in many other ways, the F-4 was superior. I have said it before and will repeat: In a fight, you win NOT by fighting under your opponent's rules but by forcing your opponent to fight under yours. And cheating is allowed.

Any advantage is a rule and each aircraft has strengths and weaknesses. What happened in Operation Bolo was that the Americans forced the North Vietnamese to fight under the F-4's strengths. Notice I said 'North Vietnamese' and not 'MIG-21'. In WW II, the Japanese often forced the Americans to fight under the Zero's strengths. Notice I said 'Americans' and not 'P-40' or 'P-39'. When the P-38 Lightning came to the fight, the Americans often forced the Japanese to fight under the P-38's strengths. We know that through Viktor Belenko, Soviet doctrines shackled the pilot, meaning putting the pilot's typical Type A personality, his aggressiveness, his instincts, and even his training as secondary importance. The result was that when the two aircrafts met, each with strengths and weaknesses, the North Vietnamese lost badly.

 

[fast]

Move over, F-22? The Russians have some big words. When did Indians' blinding overconfidence start infecting Russians?

T-50 so far has demonstrated it's far from a 5th gen fighter. At best it's a major upgrade of SU30. It can't super-cruise, engine far from ready. It is not stealth, at most it trimming some of SU30's gigantic RCS. Russian advance avionics? LOL. It has ok super maneuverability, it better since it's a souped up SU30. But can you outmaneuver a BVR missile?

You can tell F-22 to move over all days long. It would still shoot T-50 out of the sky like a fat turkey.

 

[fast]

Any idea about the nanotech materials spoken about in the article?

Unlike the F-22, which uses stealth technology, 85 percent of the surface of Russian T-50 is covered with unique nanotechnological materials that decrease both the visibility of the plane and the air drag.

My car also has nanotech paint painted on top. It doesn't go any faster. LOL.

It's sad to see Russians resort to marketing BS to pop up their fighter tech.

 

[Water Car Engineer]

F-22 is just more badass.

 

[Zabaniyah]

I've read about this. But this one's kind of confusing. When the F-22 and subsequently the F-35 were conceptualized,they were hailed as the last manned combat aircraft by the USA. Now suddenly this one comes up when the F-35 is being trashed for cost overruns and F-22 was stopped at 180 planes because it was too expensive. Wonder if they will manage to put this together.

The reports are confusing.

I think it's going to take some time to put the F-35s into service. We might see a mix of 4.5 generation, 5th generation and possibly very few 6th generation fighters.

Kind of like in the movie Stealth

F-22 is just more badass.

Of-course it's more badass!

The T-50 looks old

 

[Chogy]

I am going to keep saying this until all 300 internet defense forums out there have learned the truth.

"With the advent of reliable, all aspect missiles, and modern sensors, hypermaneuverability no longer means jack. All you need today is adequate maneuverability.

"A Pitts Special biplane can easily out-turn an F-22. That doesn't make it a fighter.

"Stealth, sensors, weapons >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maneuverability."


We've left WW2 behind. You don't need to maneuver into anybody's six o'clock any more. Those days ended about 1980.

Air show maneuvers are a great way to vacuum mega-$$ out of the coffers of nations seeking to buy aircraft. Other than that, they are worth nothing.

 

[fast]

I am going to keep saying this until all 300 internet defense forums out there have learned the truth.

"With the advent of reliable, all aspect missiles, and modern sensors, hypermaneuverability no longer means jack. All you need today is adequate maneuverability.

"A Pitts Special biplane can easily out-turn an F-22. That doesn't make it a fighter.

"Stealth, sensors, weapons >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maneuverability."


We've left WW2 behind. You don't need to maneuver into anybody's six o'clock any more. Those days ended about 1980.

Air show maneuvers are a great way to vacuum mega-$$ out of the coffers of nations seeking to buy aircraft. Other than that, they are worth nothing.

100% agreed. Supermaneuverability is a marketing gimmick. T-50 just inherits the maneuverability from SU-30. Nothing new. But the world has moved on since 30 years ago. They are barking up the wrong tree on concentrating on this rather than stealth. Modern missiles can just shoot them out of sky. That's why SU-30MKI is one big fat turkey in the sky waiting to be shot down.

 

[Zabaniyah]

100% agreed. Supermaneuverability is a marketing gimmick. T-50 just inherits the maneuverability from SU-30. Nothing new. But the world has moved on since 30 years ago. They are barking up the wrong tree on concentrating on this rather than stealth. Modern missiles can just shoot them out of sky. That's why SU-30MKI is one big fat turkey in the sky waiting to be shot down.

You know, that bolded part makes me so happy

Actually, the T-50's shaping is fine. The only question lies in the engines and the composite materials necessary to make it stealthy. It's still in prototype stages, I don't understand why the Russians are so upbeat already. It's too early to conclude anything about the T-50.

It's probably marketing.

 

[below_freezing]

I am going to keep saying this until all 300 internet defense forums out there have learned the truth.

"With the advent of reliable, all aspect missiles, and modern sensors, hypermaneuverability no longer means jack. All you need today is adequate maneuverability.

"A Pitts Special biplane can easily out-turn an F-22. That doesn't make it a fighter.

"Stealth, sensors, weapons >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maneuverability."


We've left WW2 behind. You don't need to maneuver into anybody's six o'clock any more. Those days ended about 1980.

Air show maneuvers are a great way to vacuum mega-$$ out of the coffers of nations seeking to buy aircraft. Other than that, they are worth nothing.

Sounds eerily like the assertion that "Dogfighting was dead!" when AA missiles were invented in the 60's by the USAF...