How PAK-FA would counter F-22 in future aerial warfare

The side panel arrays are full standard X band AESA radars and can do more than just listen for enemy radar.

It can do pretty much anything the front facing X band radar can do...

The fact that they are angled slightly down they would be useful as side looking radar for flying down a border and looking inside the enemy territory but Assuming 120 degree angle coverage they should allow monitoring of an attack without having to continue closing with the target.

GarryB wrote:PAK FA will have 5 large AESA radars in its front (nose and wings) which should provide enough radar energy to burn the little brain out of any ARH missile.

DIRCMs should deal with all optically guided missiles like ASRAAM and AIM-9X etc.

This suggests it will turn into a gun fight.

Who was saying that manouverability wont be important... ohh that is right... the people with the less manouverable aircraft F-35 and F-22...

Why don't I believe them?

lol
t-50 has 6 radars !!, 3 in nose , 2 in levcons ,1 in rear tail.

GarryB wrote:The side panel arrays are full standard X band AESA radars and can do more than just listen for enemy radar.

It can do pretty much anything the front facing X band radar can do...

The fact that they are angled slightly down they would be useful as side looking radar for flying down a border and looking inside the enemy territory but Assuming 120 degree angle coverage they should allow monitoring of an attack without having to continue closing with the target.

yes side radars and rear one  (they are same size) have 40% range of main radar , main radar has 400km range on 3 m2, so they will be able to launch r-77 to its full range easy -160-km.

Big_Gazza wrote:

moskit wrote:F-22 has an edge over pak fa in beam and aft sector RCS .The frontal vlo performance is equally great for both these majestic aircrafts . It was supposed that sensor fusion would be an arena where Sukhoi would find it rather difficult to come up with a relavant mature solution. With the introduction of IMA BK mission computer and fire control complex developed in house, the critics may have been silenced. There is still some time to go. And the rear fuselage shaping will be refined, those cylindrical unstealthy nacelles will give way to faceted ones once Izdeliye 30 appears. then the rear and beam signatures will be as good as the F-35 if not better. Hope the prototypes coming out would carry these features.. expecting replays dear admins,,

Does the F-35 have a facetted engine nacelle?  Does it has a concealed engine nozzle ala F-22?  Nope, yet both of these ommissions are routinely held up as "weaknesses" in the "non-stealthy" T-50 design.....

Don't bother with the fuktardishness of HATOstani zealots.  They will inflate F-22/35 until they are godlike machines, while sledging the T-50 as a "primitive failure".....  stupid is as stupid does...

there is ways to keep stealth approach https://public.bn1303.livefilestore.com/y3pMEglM8eNbbjhMJYiNOHR4zp3UgdaIh9THwXFu3ptbJ6sVJ0jOyQHNfLLX9daVm6-QkMzjtGduaQ0SFJyosZc9Y4-fV0FLc8hdtNifEw09go/F-22A%2015%20Intake.jpg?psid=1&rdrts=115256625


,sides of  intakes can be covered in very small holes like on f-117 which wont let radar go trough , you can treat ramps ,bleed air  ,ducts same way.
rear nozzle there will be another layer of petals above those heat resistant ones, they will be able to curve as nozzle twists , maybe look similar to pangolin
http://r.ddmcdn.com/s_f/o_1/APL/uploads/2015/11/pangolin-ARTICLE-PAGE.jpg

GarryB wrote:The side panel arrays are full standard X band AESA radars and can do more than just listen for enemy radar.

It can do pretty much anything the front facing X band radar can do...

The fact that they are angled slightly down they would be useful as side looking radar for flying down a border and looking inside the enemy territory but Assuming 120 degree angle coverage they should allow monitoring of an attack without having to continue closing with the target.

They are small for anz usefull purposes than missile warning and observations.

Oh, they can be used as communication channel as well.

Oh, they can be used as communication channel as well.

They are full AESA radars... you could use them for ground mapping on either side of the aircraft with the lower elements and scanning or listening for emissions from aircraft with the middle and upper elements... you could use them to direct a radar beam of high intensity at an incoming radar guided missile like an AMRAAM to damage the seeker... or just listen to plot out enemy ground radar installations.

The shoulder mounted L band radar antenna could be used to scan for stealthy targets or to listen for communications in the link12 datalink used by NATO.

It could even detect course corrections sent to an AMRAAM missile in flight by the aircraft that launched it...

The fan topic has been beaten to death.   The NATO fanbois claim it is an epic fail.   But then they do not have the IQ capacity
to decide anyway.   Any ground to air view of the Su-57 will not see the fan blades since there is an intake lip that effectively
blocks such lines of sight.   The only way to see deep into the intake is from a position above the intake (for a steady flight orientation
of the Su-57, nobody cares what can be seen when it is parked, and not much will be seen during aerial maneuvers).

There is no direct sight to fan , There is a Radar Blocker a dynamic one.

Austin wrote:There is no direct sight to fan , There is a Radar Blocker a dynamic one.

In order for the PAK-FA design to fulfill its role as an air superiority fighter defending against F-22:

1- Stage II Engine
2- Better radars that can see F-22 from 40-50 Km ~ or the distance at which an F-22 can spot Pak-FA-
3- Serial production and additional testing

It is not realistic to assume that PAK-FA will operate with the luxury of continual ground radar coverage.

william.boutros wrote:

Austin wrote:There is no direct sight to fan , There is a Radar Blocker a dynamic one.

In order for the PAK-FA design to fulfill its role as an air superiority fighter defending against F-22:

1- Stage II Engine
2- Better radars that can see F-22 from 40-50 Km ~ or the distance at which an F-22 can spot Pak-FA-
3- Serial production and additional testing

It is not realistic to assume that PAK-FA will operate with the luxury of continual ground radar coverage.

It's not realistic to think airports where those f-22 will be parked will survive to future iskanders with more than 2000km range.

thegopnik wrote:

1. What about the 1st engine?
2. Infrared detection claims by the Chinese and French suggest they can possibly see the F-22 further than this. Not one knows the RCS measures for the front of the SU-57. There are other considerations to take which is EW. Technically the SU-57 has a total of 2,238 T/R modules + L band radars and the Himalayas utilizes these features. Although a lot of rage-tards get mad at me when I bring up the 2014 rostec pdf that suggest a GaN AESA replacements for Krasukha, tarantula, khlibiny and Himalayas. 2014 Himalayas was put in the SU-57. 2016 new khlibiny for su-35 was tested in Syria than shown in the 2017 MAKs airshow, 2018 su-34s begin receiving tarantula systems. than there is the orlan-10 drone that had its range increased 3.5 times more than the last time when it was used in Ukraine where there were a lot NATO military officers being shocked at their capabilities.... KRET's 2018 book talks about photonic radars being used in EW and they said they cannot showcase certain equipment at this maks 2019 airshow than later on said they have a fundamentally new EW system about a week ago. EW helps suppress radar detection and I would not by any means underestimate the means of how the SU-57 can be used. Also there can be radar replacements.

3. fair point.

1- 1st stage engine under perform stated targets in super cruise, thrust to weight, stealth, fuel efficiency and other more advanced features. It is still a good plane.
2- I agree there are advancements in radar capabilities and I'm saying the radar suite needs to be more advanced than the current one. PAK-FA is a less stealthy platform than F-22 and with a weaker radar. It can be less stealthy if it has a stronger radar but not both. All the IRST, additional band radars are designed to overcome main radar shortcomings in detection range. That doesn;t mean they will work at adequate ranges.

F-22 can hide from, shoot first and outrun existing PAK-FA production models hence the need for stage II engine and radars.

BenVaserlan wrote:

That image of the Su-57 showing its fan-blades has been debunked long ago as a fan-boi fake. The blades have been photoshopped from a museum display unit and pasted onto the Su-57. Hilariously it still shows the exact same pattern of marks and dents...

This is a great example of how stupid and venal these pre-pubescent soi-boy NATOists truly are!!

Isos wrote:

It's not realistic to think airports where those f-22 will be parked will survive to future iskanders with more than 2000km range.

The other side has even more missiles...
The Russian military will loose any conventional war against NATO.

PAK-FA is an anti F-22 platform and to succeed in its stated role it needs engine and radar improvement.

A conventional war between NATO and Russia is some stupid NATO wet dream.

1) Russia has already made part of its war doctrine to use tactical nukes to remove conventional advantages of NATO
such as more troops and associated equipment.

2) NATO's extreme paranoia means that it will respond with nuclear weapons and thus spiral any conflict into a full blown
nuclear war. NATO simply has no sane command and control that would stop it from trying to nuke Russia if it feels
that it cannot cake walk over Russia with a conventional war.

3) NATO's numerical advantages are at this stage nothing to brag about. Russian forces are in much better shape
than the bulk of NATO which has only seen "action" as reserve forces in 3rd world toilet battles.

4) The lifeblood of conventional war is the economy away from the front. Unlike, WWII, we now live in the missile era
(V2 was not a game changer) where this economy can be glassed in 30 minutes. So conventional war like WWII
is no longer possible. It may start as such, but will quickly go nuclear once one side feels that it is not winning.

william.boutros wrote:.

PAK-FA is an anti F-22 platform and to succeed in its stated role it needs engine and radar improvement.

Why ? You have the results of the tests ?

The engine is in test and its just a matter of time before it i comes in production.

400km aesa x band radar that is better than any other on the market. Additional L band to see stealth. OLS that sees at 100km. It has everything it needs to detect anything on the air.

Its stealth reduces the range at which other aircraft can see him. Frontal rcs of 0.01 means no nato fighter will detect it above 50km. With EW like the new himalaya it reduces this by a great factor.

3) NATO's numerical advantages are at this stage nothing to brag about. Russian forces are in much better shape
than the bulk of NATO which has only seen "action" as reserve forces in 3rd world toilet battles.

Arabs were 2 times more than israeli in Yom kipur, yet they lost. Nato is like 20 or more different languages that can't coordinate their actions. And frankly speaking no western society is stupid enough to fight for those baltics, Poland, romania or Ukraine. They are satelitte countries.

Guys chill! this is not a contest.
Su-57 is still in development and in its conception it was envisaged with a more powerful engine Stage II. This will be solved beyond 2023.
Radar needs improvement and they are working on that too but no idea on introduction.

F-22 can hide from, shoot first and outrun existing PAK-FA production models hence the need for stage II engine and radars.

PAK FA has L band radars that the F-22 can't even detect, that should be able to detect the presence and general location of stealth aircraft, whose location can then be scrutinised by IR and rather power nose mounted radar.

Most importantly shoot first... who cares... what with? AMRAAM? Sidewinder? How effective will they even be against an Su-30MKI let alone a MiG-35 or Su-35 or Su-57?

Which pretty much means it is going to come down to a gun fight and now where would your money be in a gun fight between east and west?

My money is on 30mm all the way.

But as previously mentioned... Russia has no interest in invading or occupying the EU... they are interested in self defence... preserving their own existence... so building up an enormous fleet of stealth fighters says I want to do what you do and invade people and steal their shit.

What they should be doing is mass producing a mix of hypersonic missiles and cruise missiles to obliterate any enemy that threatens them, and say, look, we have 25,000 tactical nuclear weapons mounted on missiles... if we feel threatened by you in any way we are going to destroy you. You might destroy us in return, but our message to you is that we are not going to steal your countries but we will eliminate you from the gene pool if you make us.

PAK-FA is an anti F-22 platform and to succeed in its stated role it needs engine and radar improvement.

Why?

The PAK FA is to defend Russian airspace and for that role it is fine... it can kill AWACS and JSTARS and refuelling tanker aircraft, which will render F-22s and F-35s short ranged and vulnerable and its radar and sensor suite are optimised to defeat low radar cross section aircraft and their support aircraft.

Deep strike missions to destroy NATO airbases will be performed by hypersonic missiles in large numbers... remember western air power is impressive and powerful but is needed to perform both attack and defence duties because they really don't have any significant land based air defence capability outside of their aircraft. Third world countries can't really exploit that because they are generally already broken regional powers that everyone has ganged up on... not really the same situation for the west against Russia is it?

GarryB wrote:

F-22 can hide from, shoot first and outrun existing PAK-FA production models hence the need for stage II engine and radars.

PAK FA has L band radars that the F-22 can't even detect, that should be able to detect the presence and general location of stealth aircraft, whose location can then be scrutinised by IR and rather power nose mounted radar.

Most importantly shoot first... who cares... what with? AMRAAM? Sidewinder? How effective will they even be against an Su-30MKI let alone a MiG-35 or Su-35 or Su-57?

Which pretty much means it is going to come down to a gun fight and now where would your money be in a gun fight between east and west?

My money is on 30mm all the way.

With stage I engine, F-22 has an edge in dog fighting.

william.boutros wrote:

GarryB wrote:

F-22 can hide from, shoot first and outrun existing PAK-FA production models hence the need for stage II engine and radars.

PAK FA has L band radars that the F-22 can't even detect, that should be able to detect the presence and general location of stealth aircraft, whose location can then be scrutinised by IR and rather power nose mounted radar.

Most importantly shoot first... who cares... what with? AMRAAM? Sidewinder? How effective will they even be against an Su-30MKI let alone a MiG-35 or Su-35 or Su-57?

Which pretty much means it is going to come down to a gun fight and now where would your money be in a gun fight between east and west?

My money is on 30mm all the way.

With stage I engine, F-22 has an edge in dog fighting.

LOL!

1.) F-22 with 2D thrust vector engines was beaten by the Rafale (no thrust vectoring) in dog-fighting exercises.



2.) Whats this nonsense about the F-22 having a more powerful radar? The F-22's AN/APG-77 radar has a max range of 160 km, compare that to the PAK-FA's N036 Byelka radar's 400km range which is designed to be used with the 400km range R-37M BVR missile. Some people probably just read the F-22's wikipedia entry and saw the range of its RWR (which is 463km) and confused that with it's nose-mounted radar which has 1/4th range.

3.) The idea of which aircraft has the advantage engine power is a misleading argument. 2D vector thrust nozzles shave 15% off the thrust off a plane, so the full thrust of the F-22's Pratt & Whitney F119-PW-100 is 35,000lbs (with afterburner) which losses 5250lbs of thrust because of 2D nozzles, making it a 29,750lb thrust engine.

Guys, you just murdered William. It's hilarious

Yeah, F-22 radar isn't even close to same performance as N036, which is larger and has about 15kw of power to back it up.

william.boutros wrote:With stage I engine, F-22 has an edge in dog fighting.

OK, now you've shown yer hand as an empty know-nothing...

Su-57 will cream an F-22 in close combat, let alone the flying brick aka F-35.

meh... why bother wasting the effort to punch keys. NATOists gonna tard hard.