Future Dogfights

@GarryB

The inclusion of ADVANCED MEDIUM-RANGE AIR-TO-AIR MISSILE along with Helmet Mounted Cueing systems & AIRBORNE WARNING AND CONTROL SYSTEM; West is of the view that dogfights will be nonexistent in the coming future so the agility much proclaimed by Sukhois will be of no use!!

What your point of view is!!

Of course it will matter. US overcalculated itself with F-22 price and now when is stuck with F-35 is saying sensors matters and thats it.

Well I thing in such technology war everything matters and slightest thing you can exploit in your advantage can easily change the outcome.

In 90ies MIG-29 proved to be outstanding in comparison with US fighters because of HMS/R-73 combo. Now its race on multiple fiels.

Radar range and capability and sensors in general, speed, maneuverability, missiles, stealth etc etc ....

My opinion is that before it was known about Soviet helmet mounted sights and the R-73 I think the west had little faith in the BVR missile and wanted close in knife fights because of their belief in better training and higher pilot skill leading to an advantage in close in fights that would give them a victory in the air.
Testing Mig-29s with R-73s was a real kick in the balls for them, though they would never admit that in combat even with a lower standard of training eastern AF pilots would have been able to do to NATO pilots what British Harrier pilots did to the Argentine pilots in the Falklands war. Basically shoot first and kill first before the other guy could line you up for a shot that had a chance to kill you.

Now that the west has weapons comparable to the R-73 they realise that WVR combat comes down to having to kill the other guy before he even sees you. The thing is that if you see the other guy and fire a missile he can still kill you as long as he sees you and fires before your missile hits him... WVR has become too dangerous in big expensive western fighters.

Now the focus is long range missiles, but while previously the problem has been reliability, it is currently more a case of kill zones and correctly identifying the target. There is an enormous amount of incoming and outgoing traffic in a war zone and things like cruise missiles and helos and all sorts of military aircraft flying around mistakes can be made... BVR air combat makes that even more likely.

Does history channel does any research or not i came across this video , where 2 raptors destroy 14 mig29

then the suckers also mention Su30MKI  

plz watch

Code:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KpjgHYjcA4

part 2

Code:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=zMrAYSxYjbg&NR=1

F-22 has neither helmet mounted sight nor AIM-9X.

Good luck beating a pair of MiG-29s in a dogfight, let alone 14.

watch part 3

Code:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=aY2KkvD4dSY

it is funny how the F22 uses cobra move to destroy rafeal

watch part 4 here

Code:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=6VpAQhYhlxU

i used to respect history channel but after watching this

i watched all the parts of this series . F22 and F35 are able to destroy everything, including sams ,Su35.Su30mki ,rafeals . which i think is totally rubbish,

i think Su30mki will be a good opponent for F22

At long range the F-22 will be a very dangerous opponent, but in close combat... well lets just say the F-22 will at all times try to avoid close combat whenever they can.

Most History Channel programs about modern military material are more like infomercials.

The topic of the infomercial is the best in the world period.

I love to listen to how they carefully choose their words in their programs about Helicopters, especially when talking about the biggest helicopter in the western world... the Super Stallion, or one of the biggest lifting helos in the world... the Chinook.

They will go on about how wonderful these helos are and how big they are and their lifting performance... if it was your only source of information you'd think they had the best big helos.

Just like landing hovercraft... it seems that the LCAC pilots think the LCAC is the best and most powerful hovercraft in the world... they tell us that the British invented them and the Americans perfected them with the LCAC...

Hilarious!!

According to someone who flies Flanker in IAF(Courtesy George J BR forum) :

"HMS+ R-73-Sura + TVC" combo of the MKI literally makes it invincible in dogfights.


And Su-35S and Mig-35 should be even better than MKI in dogfights(fully operation 3D TVC).


F-22 can enjoy the BVR domain, but in an merge the TVC equipped Russian Flankers and Super Fulcrums will toast it 10 out of 10 times with guns or with HOBS

The Russians make the best dogfighters period(much to the dismay of the haughty Americans).

And before I end, can't help but to say that even the days of F-22s' BVR domination are coming to an end very quickly. Need hint: PAK-FA says hi to F-22

Indian Flanker wrote:According to someone who flies Flanker in IAF(Courtesy George J BR forum) :

"HMS+ R-73-Sura + TVC" combo of the MKI literally  makes it invincible in dogfights.


And Su-35S and Mig-35 should be even better than MKI in dogfights(fully operation 3D TVC).


F-22 can enjoy the BVR domain, but in an merge the TVC equipped Russian Flankers and Super Fulcrums will toast it 10 out of 10 times with guns or with HOBS

The Russians make the best dogfighters period(much to the dismay of the haughty Americans).

And before I end, can't help but to say that even the days of F-22s' BVR domination are coming to an end very quickly. Need hint: PAK-FA says hi to F-22

Pak-Fa will also have the Morfei short-range defensive missile to also engage in dog fights, with a range of 3km so the missile will be small and compact and I suspect the final T-50 air-frame will have small compartments around the plane where the Morfei missile will be held and I hope the T-50 will hold 10 Morfei missiles internally which I think should be sufficient enough. I could see 1 compartment on each side behind the nose, 1 compartment near the base of each wing, one compartment on each side near the base of the rear fins, and 1 compartment in the center of the chassis probably in front of the main missile bays, and hopefully the compartments will hold 2 Morfei's each and the missiles pointing in different directions covering 360 degrees and hopefully there will be a internal mechanisms within the compartment to allow it rotate the Morfei missile in the direction of the missile threat.

Also when the Mig-41 is ready it should be the new king of BVR, the BVR missiles will have unparalleled range because Mig-41 will be flying high at Mach 4.3, carrying hypersonic BVR missiles which would be capable of engaging ballistic missiles, unfortunately that's 8-10 years away  .

Su-35S does not have full 3d TVC like MiG-29OVT has. 2.5D is a good name for it.

TR1 wrote:Su-35S does not have full 3d TVC like MiG-29OVT has. 2.5D is a good name for it.

So 2.5 TVC at a slant angle? What about the Pak-Fa and the Mig-35? Is it the same or are they full 3D TVC?

So far PAK-FA seems to use an identical TVC arrangement to Su-35...2D at a slant.

MiG-35 can use the Klimov nozzle with all aspect TVC..assuming the RuAF orders it.

The Saturn KLIVT nozzle for the Al-31 is all aspect 3d, so it is not unfeasible for PAK-FA.

TR1 wrote:So far PAK-FA seems to use an identical TVC arrangement to Su-35...2D at a slant.

MiG-35 can use the Klimov nozzle with all aspect TVC..assuming the RuAF orders it.

The Saturn KLIVT nozzle for the Al-31 is all aspect 3d, so it is not unfeasible for PAK-FA.

I'm guessing modernization of Su-35's and Pak-Fa's will allow 3D nozzles for later variants? BTW isn't true that with every batch of new planes there's slight differences in design, with kinks being worked on and all?

TR1 wrote:Su-35S does not have full 3d TVC like MiG-29OVT has. 2.5D is a good name for it.

Can you explain(if possible with pictures) the difference between MKI's and Su-35's and Mig-29OVT'S TVC systems?

Earlier a lot of the reports suggested that MKI has virtual 3D TVC, that is even more advanced than that of Su-37 Terminator's 2D TVC?

It seems that Su-35S and MKI have identical TVC....2D, up and down, though they are on a tilted axis which allows for some nice tricks unlike say the Raptor's simpler vertical TVC.



OVT has fully articulated TVC- it can deflect in any direction.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BdVJPZAKAQE

@ the 1 minute mark you can see the 3d TVC in action.

The original Su-37 (really just the old Su-35 with TVC) I think had normal 2D TVC, on the vertical axis.

TR1 wrote:It seems that Su-35S and MKI have identical TVC....2D, up and down, though they are on a tilted axis which allows for some nice tricks unlike say the Raptor's simpler vertical TVC.



OVT has fully articulated TVC- it can deflect in any direction.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BdVJPZAKAQE

@ the 1 minute mark you can see the 3d TVC in action.

The original Su-37 (really just the old Su-35 with TVC) I think had normal 2D TVC, on the vertical axis.

Thanks TR1

Will the production variant of Mig-35 have this 3D TVC? Or is this only for export customers?

AFAIK the RD-33 engine only has 3D TVC, and there is no 2D TVC version available.

It is almost certain they will include 3D TVC on the Mig-35... in comparison with the AESA radar it will be carrying that will be very cheap.

The real question is... how much will they alter the design for the Russian AF?


Canards?

Bigger wing?

Wing mounted long band AESA arrays?

More powerful engines?

Probably don't want to change too much regarding the Mig-29M2 airframe, but all the electronics will likely be the basis for the new light 5th gen stealth fighter which will fast track integration and development of those systems to speed up development of the new 5th gen light fighter and allow practical in service testing of interfaces and technologies.

GarryB wrote:AFAIK the RD-33 engine only has 3D TVC, and there is no 2D TVC version available.

It is almost certain they will include 3D TVC on the Mig-35... in comparison with the AESA radar it will be carrying that will be very cheap.

The real question is... how much will they alter the design for the Russian AF?


Canards?

Bigger wing?

Wing mounted long band AESA arrays?

More powerful engines?

Probably don't want to change too much regarding the Mig-29M2 airframe, but all the electronics will likely be the basis for the new light 5th gen stealth fighter which will fast track integration and development of those systems to speed up development of the new 5th gen light fighter and allow practical in service testing of interfaces and technologies.

AS of now MiG-29OVT is the benchmark for super-manoeuvrability. Do you think stage 2 T-50 with flat nozzles like F-22(the Indian version will sure shot have it), can surpass Mig-29OVT aka MiG-35 in manoeuvrability(post-stall)?

In the transonic plus the supersonic flight regime though, none can touch the T-50 me thinks

Indian Flanker wrote:

GarryB wrote:AFAIK the RD-33 engine only has 3D TVC, and there is no 2D TVC version available.

It is almost certain they will include 3D TVC on the Mig-35... in comparison with the AESA radar it will be carrying that will be very cheap.

The real question is... how much will they alter the design for the Russian AF?


Canards?

Bigger wing?

Wing mounted long band AESA arrays?

More powerful engines?

Probably don't want to change too much regarding the Mig-29M2 airframe, but all the electronics will likely be the basis for the new light 5th gen stealth fighter which will fast track integration and development of those systems to speed up development of the new 5th gen light fighter and allow practical in service testing of interfaces and technologies.

AS of now MiG-29OVT is the benchmark for super-manoeuvrability. Do you think stage 2 T-50 with flat nozzles like F-22(the Indian version will sure shot have it), can surpass Mig-29OVT aka MiG-35 in manoeuvrability(post-stall)?

In the transonic plus the  supersonic flight regime though,  none can touch the T-50 me thinks

I don't see why it couldn't, the FGFA will probably be the T-50 Pak-Fa on steroids  ! BTW I'm no expert on the FGFA program, and outside the tandem seat configuration, what else will the IAF require that will differ from the vanilla T-50?

magnumcromagnon wrote:
I don't see why it couldn't, the FGFA will probably be the T-50 Pak-Fa on steroids  ! BTW I'm no expert on the FGFA program, and outside the tandem seat configuration, what else will the IAF require that will differ from the vanilla T-50?

FGFA is more like F-22 anyway- all around stealth for molesting enemy IADs. perhaps the russkies let the indians first foot the bill with the advanced new features and then grab them later - Su-30SM style.

AS of now MiG-29OVT is the benchmark for super-manoeuvrability. Do you think stage 2 T-50 with flat nozzles like F-22(the Indian version will sure shot have it), can surpass Mig-29OVT aka MiG-35 in manoeuvrability(post-stall)?

No.

Once you leave controlled flight there is only the engine nozzles and the thrust of the engines controlling the aircraft.

this means with two engines you can point both nozzles down to push the nose of the aircraft down, you can push both nozzles up and push the nose of the aircraft up and you can point one nozzle down and one up and vice versa to roll the aircraft left or right... with a combination of those nozzle settings you can pretty much point the nose of the aircraft at anything you like and keep it there.

What 3D engine thrust adds is the ability to yaw the nose left and right including during rolls or pullups or pull downs which makes the nose easier to point where you want it to point.

With flat nozzles the aircraft will almost certainly have only 2D TVC.

I would expect the Mig-35 will be lighter than the FFGA, but the extra power of the latter aircraft might not make that so important.

More important for the FFGA if a target is detected behind the aircraft thrust vectoring can be used to flip the aircraft so the lowest RCS aspect of the aircraft is pointing at the threat...

perhaps the russkies let the indians first foot the bill with the advanced new features and then grab them later - Su-30SM style.

Russia can't and wont develop all the new technologies itself... Indian funding can be used to develop the areas India is interested in that may be adopted by the Russians at some stage too... it is joint development of course.

magnumcromagnon wrote:I don't see why it couldn't, the FGFA will probably be the T-50 Pak-Fa on steroids  ! BTW I'm no expert on the FGFA program, and outside the tandem seat configuration, what else will the IAF require that will differ from the vanilla T-50?

There is a difference between Su-30MKI program and FGFA program. Su-30MKI was a customized version of Su-30 with hi-tech features like TVC, better radars, canards etc. And Russians later used the same concept to export it to Malaysia, Algeria and even ordered over 100 units for themselves.


Where the FGFA differs is that it is not a customized T-50 based on Indian needs. It is rather a JOINT-VENTURE, where India and Russia are paying equal amount of money for complete R&D.


Current T-50 as per Sukhoi themselves is a 5(-) fighter, but FGFA is going to be a true 5+ gen fighter and Stage 2 variant of the vanilla T-50.

I don't expect the final Indian and the final Russian variant of the T-50 to be that different. Perhaps the Russian variant may have slightly better avionics and missiles, but even that has to be seen!

All in all we must wait for India to first sign the final R&D contract, only then full details would come out.

collegeboy16 wrote:
FGFA is more like F-22 anyway- all around stealth for molesting enemy IADs. perhaps the russkies let the indians first foot the bill with the advanced new features and then grab them later - Su-30SM style.

This time it's going to be different. Both India and Russia are paying equal amount of money for the development of Stage 2 T-50 aka FGFA. India is developing the software side while Russians are developing the new Type-30 engine that is going to be a gem trust me, even better than F-119 and everything else

Garry,

even Su-30MKI, Su-35S, and even stage 1 T-50 all have 2D TVC that is mounted in a ---\ /--- V-axis and can generate both vertical as well as lateral force, and can provide thrust even in the yaw plane(apart from the usual pitch axis thrust).

Hence some people call this kind of canted TVC as "virtual 3D "TVC, some prefer to call it 2.5D TVC.


So, even though this kind of TVC can articulate only in one axis, yet because it is mounted in a canted manner it can generate thrust in all three planes i.e., pitch, yaw and roll and can do the same job as REAL 3D TVC of MiG-29OVT/MiG-35.

So, what I 've read about FGFA is that the Russian engineers are trying to develop a flat nozzle engine(Type-30) which will have assymetric V-axis TVC and would do the same job as the one on the MKI. And the power loss also would be only 2-3%, when compared with F-22's thrust( around 8% loss of thrust).

Lets see whether they can develop something like that. Cause if they can, it would mean all aspect stealth like F-22 along with post-stall manoeuvring of the super-flankers(if not like that of Mig-29OVT)