What's new

Russia’s Stealth Fighter Could Outfly, Outshoot American Jets

DrSomnath999

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Sep 1, 2011
Messages
2,428
Reaction score
4
Country
India
Location
India
David Axe in War is Boring

0*E6GFcVqORqOcsoOv.jpeg



T-50 is fast, long-ranged and has fearsome new weapons

Since its public debut four years ago, Russia’s first stealth fighter has quietly undergone diligent testing, slowly expanding its flight envelope and steadily working out technical kinks. But for all this hard work there have been precious few indications just how many copies of the Sukhoi T-50 Moscow plans to build … and how it means to use them.

Until now.

Fresh reporting from Aviation Week’s Bill Sweetman, one of the world’s top aerospace writers, offers tantalizing hints regarding Moscow’s intentions for the big, twin-engine T-50, an answer to America’s F-22 stealth fighter.

If Sweetman is correct—and he usually is—the angular warplane with the 50-foot wingspan could be bought in small numbers and used as a sort of airborne sniper, elusively flying high and fast to take down enemy radars and support planes using powerful, long-range missiles.

The T-50's design and apparent weapons options seem to lend themselves to this niche role, which could exploit critical vulnerabilities in U.S. and allied forces and level the air power playing field for the first time in a generation.

Especially considering the Chinese are apparently taking the same approach with their own new stealth fighter.

0*8ElqbX4Yo4yHZrjp.jpeg

Kh-58. Via Testpilot.ru

Missile clues
At the MAKS air show near Moscow this week, some of the five T-50 test models possessed by Sukhoi made appearances—and manufacturers also showed off missiles that could be fitted into the T-50's voluminous weapons bays or under its wings and fuselage.

But Sweetman, wandering the show, detected restraint on the part of the stealth fighter’s boosters. He declared the T-50 exhibits “tamer than some people hoped.”

“I suspect that the fighter won’t be in service for some years, except possibly in the form of a small test squadron,” Sweetman noted. Indeed, Moscow recently pushed back the T-50's first frontline use from 2015 to 2016.

But when it does enter service, even in limited numbers the T-50 could have a big impact on rival forces. Scanning the missiles on display at MAKS, Sweetman concluded that the T-50 could be armed with two powerful main weapons: a version of the Kh-58UShE anti-radar missile and the new RVV-BD air-to-air missile.

Both nearly 15 feet long, the Kh-58UShE and RVV-BD can hit targets 120 miles away or farther. The Kh-58UShE homes in on enemy radars; the RVV-BD is for destroying other warplanes.

The smaller AGM-88 anti-radar missile and AIM-120 air-to-air missile are the American analogues of the new Russian weapons. Both several feet shorter and hundreds of pounds lighter than their Russian counterparts, the U.S. munitions reflect a specifically American air-warfare philosophy. American stealth jets including the B-2 bomber, the F-22 and the still-in-development F-35 carry relatively small, lightweight weapons with short ranges.

The B-2's main munition is a 2,000-pound, satellite-guided gravity bomb. For attacking ground targets the F-22 and F-35 rely on a 500-pound, winged guided bomb that can glide up to 60 miles under optimal conditions.

And the F-22 and F-35's AIM-120 air-to-air missile, 12 feet from tip to tail, has a range of probably only 50 miles or so, although the precise distance is classified. Remarkably, no American stealth jets can carry anti-radar missiles like the T-50 probably can.

0*skK1yO6qpRPo8OGp.jpeg


Air war philosophies
The differences in weapons-loadouts point to opposing U.S. and Russian concepts for using stealth planes. With the exception of the F-22, American radar-evading jets are not particularly fast and must constantly sneak around in order to use their lighter, shorter-range weapons—therefore they need all-around stealth that makes them hard to detect from any angle.

The B-2 can fly thousands of miles but the F-22 and F-35 have modest fuel loads, forcing them to frequently refuel from aerial tankers.

The T-50, on the other hand, is apparently being designed to blast through defenses in a fairly straight line, relying on front-only stealth features, high altitude, sustained speed and long range to swiftly fire long-reaching missiles at vulnerable targets deep behind enemy lines—without the help of aerial tankers, of which Russia possesses few.

Which is not to say the T-50 isn’t also highly maneuverable when it needs to be.

The Russian fighter’s preferred targets might include spy planes, Airborne Warning and Control System/Airborne Early Warning and Command (AWACS/AEW&C) aircraft, tankers and ground-based radars—in other words, all those vital systems that comprise the pricey, high-tech back-end in any U.S.-led air campaign.

Snipe the support systems and their crews and you hobble the enemy’s aerial war effort.

Moscow is not alone if indeed that is its approach to defeating its rivals in technological battle. China, too, has a new stealth fighter, the J-20. It’s big, heavy and potentially fast like the T-50, likewise concentrates its stealth features up front and also has apparent new weapons.

According to the Air Power Australia think tank, the J-20 could be “employed offensively, to punch holes through opposing air defenses by engaging and destroying defending fighter combat air patrols, AWACS/AEW&C aircraft and supporting aerial refueling tankers.”

It’s a sound strategy. A 2008 war game conducted by the U.S. Air Force-sponsored think tank RAND pitted F-22s against older Chinese Su-27-style fighters in a hypothetical air battle over Taiwan. After Chinese bombardment of American airfields, just six F-22s were available to fight 72 Chinese jets.

Backed by support planes, the defending F-22s got in close and shot down 48 Su-27s, but the remaining Chinese planes managed to power through and destroy six tankers, two AWACS, four P-3 patrol planes and two Global Hawk spy drones, effectively crippling the U.S. force. With no tankers to refuel them, the F-22s crashed for lack of gas despite surviving the missile exchanges.

If older Su-27s firing older weapons could do that, newer and better T-50s and J-20s with longer-range missiles might inflict even more devastating losses with fewer casualties of their own.

With these methods, it wouldn’t take many of the new Russian or Chinese jets to make a huge difference in any future air war. So Sweetman’s prediction that the T-50 won’t be built in large numbers any time soon is cold comfort. With its powerful performance and weapons, Russia’s new warplane could tip the balance of power in the air.

SOURCE

https://medium.com/war-is-boring/9edbae7da1ee

War News Updates: Is Russia's T-50 The Jet That Will Outfly And Outshoot American Jets
 
.
David Axe in War is Boring

0*E6GFcVqORqOcsoOv.jpeg



T-50 is fast, long-ranged and has fearsome new weapons

Since its public debut four years ago, Russia’s first stealth fighter has quietly undergone diligent testing, slowly expanding its flight envelope and steadily working out technical kinks. But for all this hard work there have been precious few indications just how many copies of the Sukhoi T-50 Moscow plans to build … and how it means to use them.

Until now.

Fresh reporting from Aviation Week’s Bill Sweetman, one of the world’s top aerospace writers, offers tantalizing hints regarding Moscow’s intentions for the big, twin-engine T-50, an answer to America’s F-22 stealth fighter.

If Sweetman is correct—and he usually is—the angular warplane with the 50-foot wingspan could be bought in small numbers and used as a sort of airborne sniper, elusively flying high and fast to take down enemy radars and support planes using powerful, long-range missiles.

The T-50's design and apparent weapons options seem to lend themselves to this niche role, which could exploit critical vulnerabilities in U.S. and allied forces and level the air power playing field for the first time in a generation.

Especially considering the Chinese are apparently taking the same approach with their own new stealth fighter.

0*8ElqbX4Yo4yHZrjp.jpeg

Kh-58. Via Testpilot.ru

Missile clues
At the MAKS air show near Moscow this week, some of the five T-50 test models possessed by Sukhoi made appearances—and manufacturers also showed off missiles that could be fitted into the T-50's voluminous weapons bays or under its wings and fuselage.

But Sweetman, wandering the show, detected restraint on the part of the stealth fighter’s boosters. He declared the T-50 exhibits “tamer than some people hoped.”

“I suspect that the fighter won’t be in service for some years, except possibly in the form of a small test squadron,” Sweetman noted. Indeed, Moscow recently pushed back the T-50's first frontline use from 2015 to 2016.

But when it does enter service, even in limited numbers the T-50 could have a big impact on rival forces. Scanning the missiles on display at MAKS, Sweetman concluded that the T-50 could be armed with two powerful main weapons: a version of the Kh-58UShE anti-radar missile and the new RVV-BD air-to-air missile.

Both nearly 15 feet long, the Kh-58UShE and RVV-BD can hit targets 120 miles away or farther. The Kh-58UShE homes in on enemy radars; the RVV-BD is for destroying other warplanes.

The smaller AGM-88 anti-radar missile and AIM-120 air-to-air missile are the American analogues of the new Russian weapons. Both several feet shorter and hundreds of pounds lighter than their Russian counterparts, the U.S. munitions reflect a specifically American air-warfare philosophy. American stealth jets including the B-2 bomber, the F-22 and the still-in-development F-35 carry relatively small, lightweight weapons with short ranges.

The B-2's main munition is a 2,000-pound, satellite-guided gravity bomb. For attacking ground targets the F-22 and F-35 rely on a 500-pound, winged guided bomb that can glide up to 60 miles under optimal conditions.

And the F-22 and F-35's AIM-120 air-to-air missile, 12 feet from tip to tail, has a range of probably only 50 miles or so, although the precise distance is classified. Remarkably, no American stealth jets can carry anti-radar missiles like the T-50 probably can.

0*skK1yO6qpRPo8OGp.jpeg


Air war philosophies
The differences in weapons-loadouts point to opposing U.S. and Russian concepts for using stealth planes. With the exception of the F-22, American radar-evading jets are not particularly fast and must constantly sneak around in order to use their lighter, shorter-range weapons—therefore they need all-around stealth that makes them hard to detect from any angle.

The B-2 can fly thousands of miles but the F-22 and F-35 have modest fuel loads, forcing them to frequently refuel from aerial tankers.

The T-50, on the other hand, is apparently being designed to blast through defenses in a fairly straight line, relying on front-only stealth features, high altitude, sustained speed and long range to swiftly fire long-reaching missiles at vulnerable targets deep behind enemy lines—without the help of aerial tankers, of which Russia possesses few.

Which is not to say the T-50 isn’t also highly maneuverable when it needs to be.

The Russian fighter’s preferred targets might include spy planes, Airborne Warning and Control System/Airborne Early Warning and Command (AWACS/AEW&C) aircraft, tankers and ground-based radars—in other words, all those vital systems that comprise the pricey, high-tech back-end in any U.S.-led air campaign.

Snipe the support systems and their crews and you hobble the enemy’s aerial war effort.

Moscow is not alone if indeed that is its approach to defeating its rivals in technological battle. China, too, has a new stealth fighter, the J-20. It’s big, heavy and potentially fast like the T-50, likewise concentrates its stealth features up front and also has apparent new weapons.

According to the Air Power Australia think tank, the J-20 could be “employed offensively, to punch holes through opposing air defenses by engaging and destroying defending fighter combat air patrols, AWACS/AEW&C aircraft and supporting aerial refueling tankers.”

It’s a sound strategy. A 2008 war game conducted by the U.S. Air Force-sponsored think tank RAND pitted F-22s against older Chinese Su-27-style fighters in a hypothetical air battle over Taiwan. After Chinese bombardment of American airfields, just six F-22s were available to fight 72 Chinese jets.

Backed by support planes, the defending F-22s got in close and shot down 48 Su-27s, but the remaining Chinese planes managed to power through and destroy six tankers, two AWACS, four P-3 patrol planes and two Global Hawk spy drones, effectively crippling the U.S. force. With no tankers to refuel them, the F-22s crashed for lack of gas despite surviving the missile exchanges.

If older Su-27s firing older weapons could do that, newer and better T-50s and J-20s with longer-range missiles might inflict even more devastating losses with fewer casualties of their own.

With these methods, it wouldn’t take many of the new Russian or Chinese jets to make a huge difference in any future air war. So Sweetman’s prediction that the T-50 won’t be built in large numbers any time soon is cold comfort. With its powerful performance and weapons, Russia’s new warplane could tip the balance of power in the air.

SOURCE

https://medium.com/war-is-boring/9edbae7da1ee

War News Updates: Is Russia's T-50 The Jet That Will Outfly And Outshoot American Jets


sir kabhi humaare thread pe bhi comment kijiye??

humne ne bhi badi mehnet ki hai

http://www.defence.pk/forums/indian-defence/275107-happy-times-iaf-ahead-options-galore.html
@DrSomnath999

i want to ask u specifically for ur take on the targeting pod(eots) of pakfa ie 101-ks-n??
 
Last edited by a moderator:
. .
Seems that this is the same sort of perspective as the Aus Air power article a while back ie to scare policy makers in the West into some sort of action.

Considering the two main operators of this plane (RuAF and IAF) project induvidual fleet figures in excess of figures the F-22s will ever reach (~200 apeice) I do suppose that this has got to worry some.


But then the US has some 1000+ F-35s on order and are working on 6th gen designs so its not all doom and gloom.
 
. .
Bhai no answer on my question of pod??

i am talking about this
T-50_MAKS-2013_135.JPG
 
.
Same type of article Which said Pakistan Has better under water arm than India
They are saying to americans that solve the Problems in F-35 & F-22 fast & Europeans to start a 5th gen plane program

hello girl,,,,wassup?

When i read this
The second thing i Looked was your Location PUNJABI

Welcome Paaji Delhi wale ho
 
.
Same type of article Which said Pakistan Has better under water arm than India
They are saying to americans that solve the Problems in F-35 & F-22 fast & Europeans to start a 5th gen plane program



When i read this
The second thing i Looked was your Location PUNJABI

Welcome Paaji Delhi wale ho

thanks yaar,,,,bas ruk nahi paaya main:P

Bhai no one is talking technical stuff??
 
.
A 2008 war game conducted by the U.S. Air Force-sponsored think tank RAND pitted F-22s against older Chinese Su-27-style fighters in a hypothetical air battle over Taiwan. After Chinese bombardment of American airfields, just six F-22s were available to fight 72 Chinese jets.

Backed by support planes, the defending F-22s got in close and shot down 48 Su-27s, but the remaining Chinese planes managed to power through and destroy six tankers, two AWACS, four P-3 patrol planes and two Global Hawk spy drones, effectively crippling the U.S. force. With no tankers to refuel them, the F-22s crashed for lack of gas despite surviving the missile exchanges.

Honestly Sir, do you think that is even a realistic scenario. I'm assuming a AC support for this air battle and F-18s should be more than match for Chinese Su 27 and hence the sort of decimation depicted looks like coming from a highly biased opinion maker.
 
.
Honestly Sir, do you think that is even a realistic scenario. I'm assuming a AC support for this air battle and F-18s should be more than match for Chinese Su 27 and hence the sort of decimation depicted looks like coming from a highly biased opinion maker.


We are underestimating the chinese so much here!!why??

They have the money,engineers and industrial base to produce the best stuff and pls its not the 90's PLA any more !!
We have no idea what jammers they use,,,,what are the radars,,,what are the sensors??

But one thing is certain,they are not using soviet era electronics
 
.
We are underestimating the chinese so much here!!why??

They have the money,engineers and industrial base to produce the best stuff and pls its not the 90's PLA any more !!
We have no idea what jammers they use,,,,what are the radars,,,what are the sensors??

But one thing is certain,they are not using soviet era electronics

I won't comment on Chinese hardware as i honestly donot have much knowledge about it. What i do know though is US fighters can't be steam rolled like the way the article says.
 
.
I won't comment on Chinese hardware as i honestly donot have much knowledge about it. What i do know though is US fighters can't be steam rolled like the way the article says.

Sure they can't but the point is we are taking chinese way way lightly and my guess is they are secretely laughing at us for that.

The success of long march rockets has already propelled them ahead of russians in the space field and only US remains ahead.........but the next round will be decided by who has got deeper pockets and chinese economy is gonna overtake USA sooner rather than later,,,,and thats a big trouble for us.

Thats why i am of the opinion of engaging with chinese directly as no one can dispute their rise in coming years and US can do nothing to safegaurd us against china
 
.
For the Russians, its always been "Bigger, faster and heavier" is always better.

One point to note in the OP is that T50 only possesses frontal stealth - the author is probably considering the exposed engines of the T50.

Dr Somnathji, is there truth in the statement that T50 only possesses frontal stealth as opposed overall stealth features on F22 and F35? and is the same applicable on FGFA? shout out to the stealth expert @gambit too.

I do realise that not much info has been released by sukhoi, but experts can only draw conclusions from pics and vid's, but the F22 and F35 does look more stealthier than the T50 - (nothing much out there to say about the J20), and most specs given on the net about RCS and design advantages on the T50 arent official figures from Sukhoi.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
@anant_s

look at this monstrosity and look on chinese face!!(maybe korean,not sure)
img_7046.jpg


I think mi-28n has better sensors than mig-35:omghaha:
@Dillinger
ur take man
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
For the Russians, its always been "Bigger, faster and heavier" is always better.

One point to note in the OP is that T50 only possesses frontal stealth - the author is probably considering the exposed engines of the T50.

Dr Somnathji, is there truth in the statement that T50 only possesses frontal stealth as opposed overall stealth features on F22 and F35? and is the same applicable on FGFA? shout out to the stealth expert @gambit too.

I do realise that not much info has been released by sukhoi, but experts can only draw conclusions from pics and vid's, but the F22 and F35 does look more stealthier than the T50 - (nothing much out there to say about the J20), and most specs given on the net about RCS and design advantages on the T50 arent official figures from Sukhoi.

Yes fgfa and pakfa will have 100% same frame........official figures are .3-.4 m2 rcs which is very depressing,,,i know.
We are just gonna add some composites,,no refinement of frame is gonna be done as design is frozen and to add to ur wows pakfa uses an external pod and not an internal EOTS,,,,,so much so for stealth!!

see post no 6 for details of pod
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom