F-18 E/FSuper Hornet Vs Sukhoi Su-35

F-22 is a big mistake?
May 20, 2006 on 6:30 pm
F-22 is a big mistake?Leading US experts have an opinion that F-22 project is a critical Pentagon mistake.
Fifth-generation fighters should have very low radars visibility level, supersonic course speed, ability to spot enemy planes on very big destinations and very high manoeuvrability. By the F-22 Raptor developers words their aircraft overcame all other planes, both already created and only planned, by all that points.
But not all the people in US military environment have the same confidence. In April 2006 two leading US aviatoin experts - Pierre Sprey (his slideshow here 0.5Mb) and James Stevenson (his slideshow here 11 Mb) have reported that F-22A development is a critical Pentagon mistake and in case of full-scale war will cost America defeat in almost all air combats.
We need to mention that Sprey is established authority in US military aviation. He is very active member of the group called ?oFighter mafiâ?. This group consist of ex-fighter jet pilots. They act as experts and analytics, having great influence on modern US aviation development process - they helped to push F-15, F-16 and A-10 programs. Stevenson is well-known too - he was leading Topgun Journal, US NAVY aviation magazine.
It is necessary to say F-22 project had opponents before this case too. But their arguments were not about bad things in this plane, but about strong sides - that this plane is too good for modern combat. They were telling in future USA will not be involved into full-scale conflict, when Raptor could find a match.
Meanwhile, planned price of the fighter (in case of 750 aircrafts contract) is 149 million dollars, and it is too high to put it into service only for US territory protection. During discussion in Pentagon it was decided to buy F-22 in limited amount. From the beginning contract value was cut to the 381 planes, afterwards - to 183. As the result aircraft price became 355 million dollars per tail. Now it is the most expensive fighter in the world.
In Sprey and Stevenson?Ts opinion Raptor?Ts designer made the same mistake as their German colleagues during WWII did, when they built jet fighter Me-262. At that time ?oMesserschmitt?, which meant to be the edge of aviation industry, didn?Tt save ?oLuftwaffê? to be defeated by numerous ?oYaks?, ?oMustangs? and ?oSpitfires? - Germans weren?Tt able to build enough amount of jet aircrafts to stand against prop fighters. US experts predict the same future for the F-22.
In his report Sprey says that every fighter should be measured by 4 points which guarantee air combat victory:
# To spot enemy first. By the experts information, from the first world war till the Vietnam from 65% to 95% of all shoot down planes were destroyed as a result of unexpected attack.
# To have bigger amount of aircrafts. The most modern planes weren?Tt able to help ?oLuftwaffê? stand out against much bigger amount of allied aircrafts.
# To have better manoeuvrability. Not by only hardware, but by pilots professional level too.
# Ability to strike enemy fast. The more aircrafts are involved into air combat, the higher probability for the pilot to became a target for the enemy, while aiming other plane.
As experts state, by all 4 points Raptor cedes to potential enemies.
First of all, ?oinvisibility? or ?ostealth? ability of F-22 is a complete myth. To detect enemy plane should use radar what immediately will expose its position. Besides, together with ?oStealth? technology were developed air defence technologies and today radars can ?oseê? much better and further then before. The Yugoslavia case of 1999, when Serbian air defence shoot down stealth aircraft F-117, is proving it. Aviation radars, including modern airborne early warning systems, can detect ?ostealth? objects much better then old Soviet systems, as surface-to-air missile system S-125, which shoot down F-117 fighter in Yugoslavia.
Besides, today planes have much more effective missiles, guided by radio emission. ?oWhom you would like to be - a cop with a light on a dark alley, or hidden criminal with a gun to shoot bullets auto-targeting the light source??. - says the expert.
Air advantage in numbers will not be achieved too because of high aircraft price. USA will not be able to build the same amount of Raptors, as the amount of built F-14, F-16, F-15 and F-18. 183 ordered aircrafts will cost about 65 billion dollars.
But US military programs have the ability to become more expansive, so final price may be ten times bigger. USA will never be able to gain air advantage in numbers with such airfleet. By the Sprey calculations since F-86 ?ocombat effectiveness? of every dollar in aviation projects lowered down four times.
Manoeuvrability of new plane is under big question too. By their opinion constructors paid much more attention to the speed rather then manoeuvrability, and now if Raptor meets enemy in close air combat (especially if there will be more of them) it will have no chances *****rvive. Still Sprey and Stivenson think dogfights will be the main type of combat contact in case of full-sclaed war.
And in this case the air gun may become the main weapon. In comparison with 12mm guns, R-51 missiles with infra-red homing became twice less-effective. And again, radar homing missiles are twice less effective then infra-red homing ones.
Also, analytics mention that due to huge project budget Air Forces had to cut pilots educational programs, and it will affect on their abilities to fight maneuver combat. Sprey and Stivenson think that in future fighters will use only passive detection systems, not turning on their active radars.
In this case F-22 with modern radar will lose it?Ts priority and ability to strike first. In general, comparing modern US fighters characteristics with aircrafts and air defence of other countries, experts think since F-86 US fighter aviation has greatly lowered down the ability to strike first.
?oThe only thing which can help US stand out in this situation is big amount of F-16 on active duty by today. The day they will be retired will be the start of the Air Forces transformation into the Not-So-Air Forces.? - says Sprey.
It?Ts hard to argue with experts. For a very long time already it was no massive air combats between fighters. And statistical data, provided by Sprey shows that F-86 really was much more effective then its followers.
Every author?Ts point is very sensitive for arguments - for example, the point that Raptor can be easily hit by radar-homing missile lays down in contrary to his opinion that such missiles are not effective. Besides, modern fighters are working very close with airborne early warning systems, it allows them not use own radars at all.
The main Sprey?Ts thesis is that aircraft effectiveness can be measured only by its combat usage and new aircrafts evaluation criteria should be created basing on real combat experience. Very often in the past wars much more modern and advanced weapon was defeated by more simple and reliable.
And usually the main reason for it was not some designer defects, but the lack of application technology. USA and other countries are building new fighters not in a hurry. Together with aircrafts it is beeing developed supporting hardware. At the same time pilots professionalism is growing too. So all these analytics reports can be checked only in real combat environment.

Đúng rồi, nhưng em còn nghi lắm.
Rõ ràng là cái air intake và cái kiểu mang vũ khí trong bụng máy bay
( giữa hai air intake đã được tách rời). F-14 là máy bay đầu tiên có hình dáng kiểu này

Cho mình hỏi về cái IRST (Infra Red Searrch and Track)
Các máy bay Nga (Su27, su 30, su..., mig 29) đều có. Nó nằm ở trước mũi máy bay. Đay là một hệ thống rất hiện đại, là ưu thế lớn của máy bay Nga trong dogfight. Vậy IRST của máy bay US đâu. Chỉ thấy có F14D là có, ở dưới ****pit, và ở F15E là hệ thống LANTIRN. Còn các máy bay khác, không thấy đau cả.Không biết là có hay không. Vậy các biết thì chỉ giúp hộ.
thanks

Móc lên mời bác Ăn diu và Bác sĩ nào

Móc lên mời bác Ăn diu và Bác sĩ nào

Các bác ơi, cho em hỏi một tí.
Tại sao trước cái IRST của con Mig-29UB này lại bị che thế nhỉ, che thế thì hoạt động thế quái noà được, Các bác để ý thấy cái miếng này bị bác rất nhiều (do cọ sát với không khí ở tốc độ cao) chứng tỏ lúc bay nó cũng không tháo ra.
Em thấy Mig-29UB nào cũng bị cái miếng này che, trong khi các Mig-29 1 người lái khác thì không bị như vậy.
Các bác giải thích cho em nhé
Em không up ảnh lên đuoc, em sẽ up lên sau

Phiền bác cho em cái ví dụ.

@doctor: có nhiều lý do:
- thêm 1 hệ thống phát hiện, theo dõi mục tiêu
- đối phương có thể gây nhiễu, di chuyển kiểu beaming khiến radar không bắt được tín hiệu mục tiêu, nhưng khó gây nhiễu hồng ngoại
- dò tìm thụ động khiến đối phương không phát hiện là đang bị theo dõi

IRST các nước áp rụng từ lâu rồi, hình như mấy chú Hoa Cầy mới là bọn đưa IRST vào trước: hình như con F-101 với F-102 đó. Sau này thấy có thêm con F-8:
http://www3.ttvnol.com/quansu/397671/trang-1.ttvn
Nhưng sao ko thấy nó nổi tiếng nhỉ ? chắc ko có thành tích gì đáng kể

Được omega45 sửa chữa / chuyển vào 23:27 ngày 12/06/2007