Zaphael

I prefer to see an F-22 vs Su-37 competition not as a head on fight between the 2 fighters, but the 2 fighters carrying out the same mission profile using similar or almost equivalent weapons.

Basically, pit an F-22 against 4 Eagles, what is the outcome, vs
and SU-37 vs 4 Eagles, what is the outcome.

Or

A first day of war scenario, and F-22 against and penetrating an IADS, tasked to take out a critical node, vs an SU-37, penetrating an IADS, taking out a critical node.


Then see who comes out alive more often, and there u have a winner! =)

HistoricalDavid

Lots of military equipment in the world was designed 20 years ago, for the simple reason that it takes a minimum amount of time to design.

I'm no aerodynamicist, but we're not talking about large cargo planes, here.

...No fighter today has any serious chance of dodging the best missiles in most flight profiles. And the F-22A can pull 11 Gs, if you didn't know already. Damn good.

Is your Su-37 good enough to outmanoeuvre today's US missiles such as the AIM-120C/D and AIM-9X, capable of pulling between 50 and 90 Gs?

I would NOT like to be the pilot in that!

1) Lovely use of the past tense?
2) It hasn't entered combat yet, though it has defeated F-15s while being ridiculously outnumbered (5:1 and 33:8, if I remember correctly) without any losses in those two training engagements.

11 Gs, Mach 1.8 supercruise, Mach 2.4+ top speed... not bad.

AWACS? How will that always be there for the Su-37's user?

The Raptor's engines probably produce in excess of 80,000 lbs of thrust.

As for a gun - I'll take that literally - it's true that Russian aircraft cannons are generally higher-calibre, but also have much smaller magazines.

As for missiles... well you have to detect the Raptor, won't you?

Name a better one and why.

Very true, even lurker says there will never be an Su-37.

_Lynx

Even then there is an air disturbance. Do you feel an air wave as the truck passes by you at a high speed?

Capability of handling high G's and manuverablity are two different things. Russian planes are the only ones capable of performing such maneuver as Cobra.

And what's without the AWACS? AWACS seems to be the weak point of the whole thing. These will be the primary targets in a real combat situation.

Su30 and his successors, including Su37 are the only planes in the world, capable of taking of the sea carrier without any boosters or catapults.

Ahem, ain't Mig 21 in Serbia detected F117?

http://aeroweb.lucia.it/~junap95/fighters/su37.htm
http://www.airforce-technology.com/p...u37/su372.html
Ain't it the one in the flesh?

HistoricalDavid

...Enough to be detected by radar?

A truck is also a lot less aerodynamic than a fighter plane.

That's not manoeuverability, that's an airshow trick.

I didn't understand what he meant by 'radar support'.

Excuse me, ever heard of the Harrier, or even the Yak-38?

But that's understandable, Russia can't really afford carriers with catapults...

I don't know about detection by -21s but the F-117 was shot down by at SA-3 - fourteenth time lucky - after having overflown the same spot several nights in a row.

Only a Prototype?

Tronic

well... sure a truck might not be aerodynamic but do you think airplanes fly at the same speed a truck drives??? aircraft fly much faster and hence the air disturbance is far greater...


Airshow tricks like that can only be carried out by planes that have good manuverability...

I think he was talking about non-VTOL/STOL aircraft...
yes, a very stupid error...

__________________
Nabha Sparasham Deeptam
-Touch The Sky With Glory

HistoricalDavid

And enough to be detected by radar? In any event the 'truck' comparison is poor. Just because I can feel it in my face, doesn't mean it'll be detected on radar.

No, airshow tricks like that can be performed with jets with the suitable aerodynamic characteristics, which may or not also give manoeuverability.

When talking about fighter jets and their combat performance, talking about airshow tricks is childish to say the least.

If you can turn tighter than the other guy, then I'll be interested.

I don't think he specified that.

And the Admiral Kuznetsov still has a ramp.

It's indicative of the state of Russian aviation when people refer to airshow tricks and ability to take off a crap carrier, and people don't talk about combat capabilities, logistics, quantities, etc.

How many Sukhois are flying off Russian carriers? Sorry, their one carrier which is afraid to go beyond the Barents Sea?

resiak

Id have to give it to the one and only...

Raptor

JCSVT

Wrong. The F-22 has already shown that it can perform this maneuver. It has also been rumored that the teen fighters can preform this move with modification to their FCS.

Wrong again.


Yes, but that doesn't mean it's still flying or operational.

urmomma158

F/A 22 hands down.

END OF DISCUSSION

Tronic

well, I was just trying to elaborate his point... I don't have much knowledge of radars which track air disturbance ...

the one anti-stealth radar made or claimed to be made is that the radar emits rays against a background and whichever rays get absorbed or deflected means you have a black area in your map and that is where to look for the stealth aircraft such a radar would be too costly for many nations to develop as it would probably require sattelite assistance to map the "background" for the Radar...


no myfriend... An airplane capable of doing a 90 degree turn in a split second is manuverability... an aircraft capable of turning 360 degrees on a 0 radius is manuverability... and like you said... "If you can turn tighter than the other guy," well my friend, read about the Sukhoi planes especially the Su-30... they are all about "turning tighter then the other guy"... but then again i'm not saying that the F22 can't do a 360 degrees on a 0 radius but i'm not saying it can either... we still have to see such a move from the F22... but then again, Sukhoi was the first one to introduce TVC and the F22 is the first American plane I know of that has TVC... the Su-30 outmanuvers all American planes that are in service right now... maybe the F22 can change that...

canoe

This has to be one of the dumbest thread I've ever posted in.

The SU-37 is a tech demonstrator, the same deal as the U.S X series planes.
Even hypothetically if the SU-37 was put into service its a product of 3rd and 4th generation fighter development goals.

Against an F-22 there simply would be no competition. The F-22 has far superior radar and weapon systems. It also is extremely difficult to detect on radar giving it air dominance for all air to air engagements. Being able to perform fancy turns and rolls won't help you when your engaging a stealthed 5th gen fighter that specificly designed to indentify, engage and rapidly kill multiple airborne targets BVR.

The Russians bet on super maneuverability as the key acheivement for the current generation of fighters. And guess what they bet wrong, and much to their credit they've realised it and have moved on. There working on the PAK-FA and other westernized design types now that incorperate cost effective stealth and put more emphesis on more modern avionics.

The Su-37 is not nore will it likely ever be a produced fighter.

Tronic

canoe, you have not read the previous posts have you... the importance of stealth and manuverability have already been discussed before... and I would also like to ask you, what radar and weapon systems does the Su-37 use... I mean you are claiming that the F22 outshines the Su-37 in this field, but could you please enlighten me on the radar and weapon systems of the Su-37... and also what attributes make you think that the Su-37 is a 3rd or 4th gen. fighter??? you have merely posted your opinion rather then statistics...

JCSVT

The Su-37 is what I would call a 4.5 generation fighter. Since it doesn't exist anymore, I'll just use the Su-30MKI because they share most of the same technology. The Su-xx series of fighters are based on the design of an airframe that was designed in the 1970's. They were not designed from the outset with TVC, RCS reduction, or sensor and electronic fusion. I would put the Super Hornet in this category too. The F-22 on the other hand was designed with all of those features from the outset as because of that, it is the most advanced fighter yet.

Also, the Su-xx is not yet equipped with an LPI AESA radar and has nowhere near the computing power of the F-22's CIPs.

Tronic

ok, thank you for some statistics JCSVT...

and I don't think you should count Su-30MKI because the only thing the MKI shares common with the other Sukhoi's is the airframe, the MKI has Israeli, French and Indian electronic systems...

but then the Su-37 was designed most recently... but I guess it won't be entering service... maybe in like 10-20 years the Russians will re-open the project and develop it later on, something they have a tendency to do..

Puressence

The Superbug Block III would be a formidable plane. Increased thrust of 25% to 55,000 pounds, more low observable tech, AESA, and some other stuff. And still around 55 million a copy.

Even Block II with AESA meant for India would be the premier strike fighter in Asia, with perhaps only the F-15SG superior (but more expensive).

Now if only they could redesign for the Superbug a more swept, bigger, more delta-ish wing (quite impossible with current budget I know) for higher speed, more range, and even better nose turning ability in one circle fight than it can now, and also modify the LERX in relation to reduce drag. It would be very dangerous.

But then the USN chose the simplest cheapest option for the Superbug to save money.