is this accurate? Su beat F-22/35?

**~~Belisarius~~** · 17 Nov 08,, 05:11

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5N0iXFN37iU

shocking if its true...

during the pacific vision excercise.

the video claimed the F-18s, F-22s and F-35s were beaten badly by Sukhois.

**Knaur Amarsh** · 17 Nov 08,, 05:55

Originally Posted by Belisarius

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5N0iXFN37iU

shocking if its true...

during the pacific vision excercise.

the video claimed the F-18s, F-22s and F-35s were beaten badly by Sukhois.

What does "doubly inferior" mean?

Listen around 1.40, the Dennis Jensen is talking about within visual range combat.

Then the "results are classified but, obtained by the source in an e-mail from an RAAF flt. engr. who was briefed on the exercise" thingy is highly suspect..

And then towards 3.00 they are cleverly including the F22s in the assessment of F-35s and Super Hornets based on some e-mail evidence..

Followed by facts

by someone named Power Russia.

**~~Belisarius~~** · 17 Nov 08,, 06:13

Originally Posted by Knaur Amarsh

What does "doubly inferior" mean?

Listen around 1.40, the Dennis Jensen is talking about within visual range combat.

Then the "results are classified but, obtained by the source in an e-mail from an RAAF flt. engr. who was briefed on the exercise" thingy is highly suspect..

And then towards 3.00 they are cleverly including the F22s in the assessment of F-35s and Super Hornets based on some e-mail evidence..

Followed by facts

by someone named Power Russia.

any counter points u can provide so i can argue them? i dont like to have a video that lies and still receives 5 stars >.>

**Knaur Amarsh** · 17 Nov 08,, 06:23

Originally Posted by Belisarius

any counter points u can provide so i can argue them?

Counter point against what?

Listen around 1.40, the Dennis Jensen is talking about within visual range combat.

Then the "results are classified but, obtained by the source in an e-mail from an RAAF flt. engr. who was briefed on the exercise" thingy is highly suspect..

And then towards 3.00 they are cleverly including the F22s in the assessment of F-35s and Super Hornets based on some e-mail evidence..

Followed by facts by someone named Power Russia.

i dont like to have a video that lies and still receives 5 stars >.>

Its youtube, if you type in "illuminati", "conspiracy", and "New World Order", you ll find plenty of well viewed, 5 star rated videos :P

**~~Disclosed~~** · 17 Nov 08,, 08:13

"The JSF cant turn, cant climb, cant run" hilarious. Maybe someone can clarify but i thought the Pratt and Whitney engine in the JSF was the most powerful single engine in a jet fighter (25,000- [after burner] - 40,000) I don't know of any su's or migs that can match that in a power-to-weight ratio.

**Ironduke** · 17 Nov 08,, 08:25

Originally Posted by Belisarius

any counter points u can provide so i can argue them? i dont like to have a video that lies and still receives 5 stars >.>

Please refrain from using chatspeak on the forum.

**VarSity** · 17 Nov 08,, 08:57

There seems to be alot of those sorts of videos coming online recently, penis envy anyone?

**GGTharos** · 17 Nov 08,, 13:50

It's 48000lbs in reheat (afterburner).

Originally Posted by Disclosed

"The JSF cant turn, cant climb, cant run" hilarious. Maybe someone can clarify but i thought the Pratt and Whitney engine in the JSF was the most powerful single engine in a jet fighter (25,000- [after burner] - 40,000) I don't know of any su's or migs that can match that in a power-to-weight ratio.

**zraver** · 17 Nov 08,, 14:05

Originally Posted by Knaur Amarsh

What does "doubly inferior" mean?

Listen around 1.40, the Dennis Jensen is talking about within visual range combat.

Then the "results are classified but, obtained by the source in an e-mail from an RAAF flt. engr. who was briefed on the exercise" thingy is highly suspect..

And then towards 3.00 they are cleverly including the F22s in the assessment of F-35s and Super Hornets based on some e-mail evidence..

Followed by facts

by someone named Power Russia.

That video is a hoax as in not a real defense brief. The SU has not even a single advantage over the F-22. It's slower, less maneuverable, shorter ranged, less powerful/capable radar, non stealth, its WVR missiles have less of an off boresight ability, its BVR missiles can't see the target, its IRST is limited even by Russian claims to 10km. Most of that also applies vs the F-35.

**Jimmy** · 17 Nov 08,, 14:17

Originally Posted by Belisarius

any counter points u can provide so i can argue them? i dont like to have a video that lies and still receives 5 stars >.>

Ok, they use Carlo Kopp as a source.

The Rand "study" was not a comparison to see which aircraft was better, but the media continues to ignore the fact that everyone involved has been saying "stop quoting this" for weeks.

The F-35 has a very powerful engine, as mentioned.

I stopped watching the video about a minute in, please let me know if there's anything actually worth seeing later on.

**oguzhanTR** · 17 Nov 08,, 15:50

that vid looks like a fake

Thrust/weight (ratios)(4.5th or 5th generation fighters only)

F15E Strike Eagle: 1.23 (%100 fuel + no missile)
EF2000: 1.22 (%100 fuel + no missile)
F16 Block 50+:1.18 (%100 fuel + no missile + F110-229 engine)
Su37: 1.14 (%100 fuel + no missile)
F35A: 1.14 (%50 fuel + 2 BVR)
Rafale: 1.13 (%100 fuel + no missile)
F22A Raptor: 1.08 (%100 fuel + no missile)
Su-30MKI: 1.12 (%100 fuel + no missile)
Su-35: 1.1 (%100 fuel + no missile)
F35B: 1.1 (%50 fuel + 2 BVR)
Su30: 1.0 (%100 fuel + no missile)
F35C: 1.02 (%50 fuel + 2 BVR)
Su30MKK: 1.0 (%100 fuel + no missile)
F18E/F superhornet: 0.99 (%100 fuel + no missile)
Mitsubishi F2: 0.98 (%100 fuel + no missile)
J10: 0.98 (%100 fuel + no missile)
jas39: 0.97 (%100 fuel + no missile)

**gunnut** · 17 Nov 08,, 18:04

Sure, the Su beats F-22 and F-35, badly. Keep believing that. The more the world believes, the better we look the next time we drop a few dozen Sukhois.

**wrightwing** · 17 Nov 08,, 18:26

Originally Posted by GGTharos

It's 48000lbs in reheat (afterburner).

Which gives a T/W ratio of (F-35A) of at least-

1.08:1 with 100% fuel and A/A load
1.25:1 with 12000lb fuel and A/A load
1.31:1 with 50% fuel and A/A load

**omon** · 17 Nov 08,, 19:57

lol, someone needs to sell more su's. that video looks like a commercial.

edit. my bad, i meant, someone wants to sell more su's

**KenMac** · 17 Nov 08,, 21:46

Originally Posted by zraver

That video is a hoax as in not a real defense brief. The SU has not even a single advantage over the F-22. It's slower, less maneuverable, shorter ranged, less powerful/capable radar, non stealth, its WVR missiles have less of an off boresight ability, its BVR missiles can't see the target, its IRST is limited even by Russian claims to 10km. Most of that also applies vs the F-35.

I thought the SU-35 atleast matched the F-22 in pretty much everything but low observability & electronics.
Admittedly that is 2 of the biggest points, & I don't see the SU-35 topping the F-22 in the majority of prospective engagements because of it...