SU-35 vs F-22 RAPTOR Fighters Battle

And still, I was referring to Iraq today, or even Iraq of 2003

 

You know the USAF and U.S. Navy have both been testing the new Gen. 7 Robotic Self Autonomous Stealth Drone Fighter/Attack aircraft and of what I have heard so far this thing is a KILLING MACHINE!!

It can out fly anything currently existing and has a Radar Signature supposedly 50 times smaller than an F-22 and an IR-Signature that is so slight that even U.S. Satellites can't track it.

It does not carry the extra mass required for a Pilot's Life Support system and ejection seat as it has no cockpit.

It can take off and land on U.S. Navy Nimitz Class Carriers and can carry enough fuel to fly on station and look for targets of opportunity for 24 to 72 hours at a time before having to be refueled and they are building a Robotic Stealth Tanker to allow this thing to fly continuously for up to a week without having to land.

This mean's this things engines are capable for 7 days of continuous operation.

It cannot be hacked and I keep thinking about the Terminator Movie and so I hear someone else has as well as someone has named it...."ARNOLD".

AboveAlpha

 

Consider that Disney is currently developing a project, using electric robotic drones, where each drone carries just one pixel in an aerial image display. This will result in an aerial picture that changes several times in the charge life of the batteries in each drone, and each picture will require MILLIONS of such drones.
Now, let's imagine these very same drones being used as the next gen in evasive chaff. Each one broadcasts the signal that a missile or plane would use to identify a target. A single pod could launch thousands of these things, and cause the enemy missile or plane to pursue an area that our real predator robotic drone has already targeted. Not a happy day for the enemy.
Now, as for numbers. As happens in war, it becomes a matter of economic attrition. If Russia decided to get squirrely with us, how many of their top echelon fighters could they afford to field if every NATO power became dedicated to building our best war junk? Sorry to wreck your dream.

 

The Drones are extremely inexpensive.

They intend to build Missile Carriers as well and right now we are converting a few B-1B's to become B-1MC's.

Lockheed Martin is developing the CUDA....which is a small length and small diameter Hypersonic Kinetic Kill Air to Air Missile and Raytheon is developing their own version.

The F-35's will be able to carry between 12 to 16 of these internally and the F-22's will be capable of carrying between 18 to 24 of them.

The Drones which will exist in both Air Supremacy roles and Fighter/Attack roles will carry 18 to 24 and in Fighter/Attack 12 to 16 respectively.

The KEY is that both the Piloted F-22 and F-35 as well as the Drones will be able to not only fire their Kinetic Kill small diameter/small length missiles but as well the F-35 and the Drones will be able to use their highly advanced avionics, networked tracking and fire control systems which link up with AWAC's, F-22's and Satellite's....as the CUDA and the Raytheon version are using the same tracking and missile guidance as the existing SM-3's.....and then launch Kinetic Kill Hypersonic Air to Air Missiles from the B-1MC's as well as a new DRONE Missile Carrier.

Missile Carriers are the way of the future and a group of only 6 F-35's and a single B-1MC is capable of launching approx. 300 Lockheed Martin CUDA's or the Raytheon version.

AboveAlpha

 

That's all good, but I think that a definition of "kinetic kill" should be added here. It's a missile that carries no explosive warhead. The reason is that an explosive payload would be both counterproductive, and late to the table.
These missiles are traveling so fast that kinetic energy exceeds the power that could be carried by explosives.
TNT burns at a rate of 41,000 fps, and the fastest burning military explosive ever developed burns at about 70,000 fps. I think that's RDX.
In testing of rail guns, we found that the kinetic energy carried by those projectiles (at a velocity of roughly 14,000 fps) exceeded the energy that could be produced by a similar 14 Kg. payload of any kind.
This is silly, ridiculous, incomprehensible stuff, but this is what we're playing with.
The Chinese have hypersonic missiles, but they can't hit anything, and we know how to stop them, anyway.
I actually find zero solace in knowing that no-one can counter, let alone challenge the American arsenal, because our arsenal is in the possession of entirely the WRONG people.

 

Well using the same guidance as an SM-3 the CUDA and the Raytheon version will impact any point of an aircraft we want them to hit.

The CUDA was first supposed to be just IR-Light guided but I am told they will be both radar and IR-Light guided and this would allow a CUDA and the other to flight right through the exhaust and into the jet engine.

AboveAlpha

 

Further, these rail gun projectiles and hypersonic missiles are more than capable of attaining escape velocity. In any conflict between the U.S. and anyone with the ability to use satellite for any purpose, those satellites would be the first target, and they would be gone before the enemy even knew they were being shot at. This would negate any possibility at all of even a first nuclear strike from China or Russia. Once we knew that a first strike had been attempted, their ability to launch anything whatsoever would be annihilated entirely, forever. Again, I take no comfort in this, because the people who run this stuff are not friends of the American People.

 

Since the CUDA's and the Raytheon versions are medium range they would be capable of taking out any aircraft and any air to air missile as well as any ballistic missile that was not yet in orbit as the SM-3's would be used for that as they are 3 stage and have a lot more solid rocket fuel than the small length and diameter CUDA's.....but the Rail Guns and eventually the FEL's will be able along with Networked Quantum Computing be able to take out anything.

AboveAlpha

 

Yea, see, and all of that wundercrap is being mastered by people who spin the dial to decide where we enact regime change next. Can this version of humankind ever be expected to evolve to the point where we realize that everything we have ever done in the entire history of weapons development is for nothing?
I don't think so. We'll have to test it, and in the process, we will totally annihilate the current version of humankind. It's the ultimate stupid game, and we are destined to reap the ultimate stupid prize.

 

Thanks for that. It's really meaningful to be told such stuff.

But imagine that, the US's flying bank crash known as the F35, a multirole fighter slated to replace the old ground attack Warthog. Ever been in one? I have.

Meanwhile, back to the subject in hand: can someone translate this into plain English for me please? (see below)

 

Well. First - this one - http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail-page-2.asp?aircraft_id=64

And more interesting case is reviewed in "Promise and Reality: Beyond Visual Range (BVR) Air-To-Air Combat " that I referred already.
Patrick Higby refers to :
"Wolfe, Frank, and Muradian, Vago, “DoD Not Investigating Why US Missiles Failed to Down Iraqi MiGs,” Defense Daily, Volume 201, Issue 2, Potomac MD, 6 Jan 1999. "
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-53539759.html

Six missiles were unable to down Mig-25 at 1999 !

 

So you refer to a warfare with almost none air-defence usage beside MANPAD?

 

Yeah, the majority of the warfare we engage in. Absurd to send in $85 million dollar aircraft to conduct ground attacks in an area with no air defense

 

You asked for a translation. I gave it to you.

 

Well....yes and no.

I am well aware upon levels most people could never understand exactly why certain things happen and certain things don't.

I am also keenly aware that there are people who are lacking something or some things inside themselves and the only way they feel they can fill that void of emptiness is by acquiring money and power.

And the worse part is their design to achieve money and power is not a constructive one but rather a design that creates enemies and pit's fiend's against other friend's to make them into enemies of each other while such people who are lacking something in their soul just sit back and rake in the money and acquire power as the world burns.

You might say that I exist for the sole purpose of putting out such fires.

This is why I am..."CIVILIAN"....and as I am wealthy I cannot be bought....and as I have developed many...."FRIENDS".....that along with myself have developed a Network where we watch over each other so if anyone of these Soulless SOB's tried to harm anyone of us the reprisals simply would not be worth it for them to do so because no matter how much money or power a person might acquire or steal....no one is untouchable.

Joe the single most important Military Project ever undertaken is Missile Defense.

What would happen when the day comes that North Korea or Iran is finally capable of striking target's in North America or Europe with a Ballistic or Cruise Missile?

And what if some Religious or Communist Leader who is power mad insane decides to launch one?

We are about 10 years away from being capable of protecting ourselves against a limited Nuclear Attack.

We can easily down a single ballistic missile now.

And we are also continuing to develop Radiation Detection Systems and as it is the U.S. has an incredible capability to detect even the smallest amount of Radiation.

Ultimately a true Missile Defense System that is multi-layered and positioned all over the world will exist.

We need it.

AboveAlpha

 

OK....you were talking about Desert Storm in 1991 not the Invasion of Iraq.

By the time of the 2003 U.S. Invasion of Iraq occurred the U.S. was flying F-15C Improved Eagles with the AMRAAM AIM-120C's.

A MiG-25 is not going to outrun a AIM-120C and certainly cannot outrun an AIM-120D.

The MiG-25 really no longer has a mission.

AboveAlpha

 

Man, i'm sure that you are very good as an advertisment evangelist. And what you need is just some chart and picture to claim that "iPhone 6s is much better that iPhone 5s" !
Same epithets you are using for A-A missile - "AIM-120 is much better than AIM-7. CUDA ( concept ) is much better than AIM-120!"


FYI - one of those six missiles that could not down MIG-25 was ... AIM-120!

During Desert Storm kill probability of AIM-7 was ... 34% ! I.e. only one of three missiles would kill the target
There is no missile in the world with 100% kill probability.

And, you should take into consideration that fact: "most Iraqi fighter pilots flew onlu nine hours a month, most of time with visual flight rules. Iraqi fighter pilots were weak on maneuver combat, disliked high-G and high-power moves, and overly depended on GCI. "
( source: "On target : organizing and executing the strategic air campaign against Iraq" Richard G. Davis )

 

F-35 is not a plane for irregular warfare - it's too expensive.
But what I'm talking about - F-35 is a new plane. A-10 is an old plane.
USAF will not design new plane like A-10.

 

You were talking about Desert Storm right?

AboveAlpha

 

Pk ( AIM-7 ) is for Desert Storm. Fail in killing Mig-25 is 1999 - far from DS.

 

Yeah...the AIM-7 Sparrow has been replaced with the AMRAAM AIM-120 series.

AboveAlpha

 

There's no reliable data of AIM-120 performance.
Let me cite Lt Col Patrick Higby, USAF, again:

Although aerial victory data is available for selected post-Desert Storm conflicts such as Operation Deny Flight, Operation Allied Force, and Operation Southern Watch, this data does not include the number of shots taken or the engagement range. During Operation Deny Flight, for example, there were four aerial victories scored by two USAF F-16Cs on February 28th, 1994: three kills were with AIM-9s and one kill with an AIM-120 AMRAAM (a much improved replacement for the AIM-7). It is unlikely the AMRAAM shot was BVR, since the four enemy aircraft were simultaneously attacked with visual-range Sidewinders. Additionally, F-16Cs are not equipped with NCTR to augment the legacy IFF system, making BVR approval from AWACS very unlikely. There were also two kills as part of Operation Southern Watch in 1992 and 1993 by F-16s using AMRAAMs. Again, what is not given is the number of shots taken or the range.

 

Why are you bothering to discuss something that happened 21 years ago?

Sure we talked about the MiG-25 for a little while but isn't it time to move on?

This topic is about the F-22 vs. Su-35....and I have yet to read a single post that would have an Su-35 overcoming an F-22.

AboveAlpha

 

It does not matter.
F-4 was claimed as a new generation of fighter with "no longer WVR engagement". And what has happened during the war in the Vietnam?

F-22 is not an ÜberWaffe
It can be downed by Super Hornet, Silent Eagle and Su-35

P.S. When you talk "This topic is about the F-22 vs. Su-35" that confirms that all your statements about Mig-25 were beaten by facts that I provided. So your statements are just statements only

 

I think everybody here is aware that the f35 is a new plane, the a10 is an old plane and the f-35 is expensive, Einstein. You look foolish trying to come up with something relevant to say. And the airforce has no other ground attack jets other than the A10. They will have no choice but to use fighters in ground attacks or the f35. Saw a live leak video the other day of a Super Hornet taking out a 2 man mortar team in mosul. Almost as much of an overkill and waste of resources as using a F35