Sukhoi and her stunts

[Kapitan]

Taken from an airshow in russia i think it was and now availble to see via this link.

http://www.flightlevel350.com/video_streaming.php?id=2738

this is unedited fotage this is from a real airshow in real time.

[Konovalov]

Oh so impressive. I'm taking time out in the office to watch this now. :|\

[JJ]

Awesome stunts by awesome aircraft.. :up:

Didn't spot them doing Pugachev's Cobra, tho.. that's a classic :cool:

[STEED]

WAS THAT THE COBRA MOVMENT I SAW OUT OF THIS WORLD

Nice one kap great stuff. :up: :up: :up: :up: :up:

[JJ]

Hu.. there was a cobra? :-?

Maybe I missed it.. I had some weird trouble with the clip. First it was all white. When I finally got it showing it kept flickering at random.. :down:

I did spot couple of "cobra attempts" tho, but what I could tell from the background clouds, they ended up being just loops.

Maybe I should view it again..

[Type941]

there was a cobra, even commentator said so towards the end, but it was there more than once, plus the 'bell' or whatever it's called, when the plane stops in the air and sars falling back on its tail than switching around and getting away.

Great to watch those pilents who are probably having some good fun too, the plane looks like its good handling one. With those badass red stars on the fins and all that. :) :|\

[Konovalov]

I think quite a few people view all this as "eye-candy" and ask the following question. Are any of these fancy moves of any use in a real modern day air combat environment? I'm guessing that the F-22 crowd would probably say no. The video was excellent in anycase. :up:

[TLAM Strike]

I think quite a few people view all this as "eye-candy" and ask the following question. Are any of these fancy moves of any use in a real modern day air combat environment? I'm guessing that the F-22 crowd would probably say no. The video was excellent in anycase. :up:Right because with all these fancy Buck Rodgers like missiles there’s never going to be a dogfight! Like what everyone said when we designed the F-4 Phantom! :roll:

[PeriscopeDepth]

I don't think floating in mid air is good for anything but airshows. I know someone's going to say, "But what about making the other guy overshoot???" Yeah, he'll overshoot alright. But you'll be flaming debris by then.

PD

[Konovalov]

I think quite a few people view all this as "eye-candy" and ask the following question. Are any of these fancy moves of any use in a real modern day air combat environment? I'm guessing that the F-22 crowd would probably say no. The video was excellent in anycase. :up:Right because with all these fancy Buck Rodgers like missiles there’s never going to be a dogfight! Like what everyone said when we designed the F-4 Phantom! :roll:

And you have just demonstrated the counter argument to that. Of course from all of this came Tom Cruise and Top Gun. :-j

[Sea Demon]

Well, the F-22 does have TVC in 2-D. So I do think it was designed to see maneuvering WVR combat also. But it really depends on ROE.

But any rate, nice video. I've always been awestruck with the maneuvering capabilities of Sukhoi jets. :up:

[bradclark1]

Right because with all these fancy Buck Rodgers like missiles there’s never going to be a dogfight! Like what everyone said when we designed the F-4 Phantom! :roll:

You are wrong. Thursdays are no missile days. Guns only.

[SUBMAN1]

Well, the F-22 does have TVC in 2-D. So I do think it was designed to see maneuvering WVR combat also. But it really depends on ROE.

But any rate, nice video. I've always been awestruck with the maneuvering capabilities of Sukhoi jets. :up:

The SU-30 with TV is close to an SU-35, but not quite. The SU-35 is what they built the F-22 to fight, and it really isn't a fair fight. Of course, the SU-35 can kick the butts of the majority of the US forces as you can see by this graph.

-S

http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/2936/f227by.gif

[GunnersMate]

Well, the F-22 does have TVC in 2-D. So I do think it was designed to see maneuvering WVR combat also. But it really depends on ROE.

But any rate, nice video. I've always been awestruck with the maneuvering capabilities of Sukhoi jets. :up:

The SU-30 with TV is close to an SU-35, but not quite. The SU-35 is what they built the F-22 to fight, and it really isn't a fair fight. Of course, the SU-35 can kick the butts of the majority of the US forces as you can see by this graph.

Have you heard of AIM-120 or AIM-54 ( I saw F-14 wasnt on the list)? Also how does the Flanker track the Lightning 2? The craptacular Scarab?

[DeepSix]

...Of course, the SU-35 can kick the butts of the majority of the US forces as you can see by this graph.

-S

[img]

No offense - all I can see is a short list of unexplained and unsubstantiated ratios that don't mean anything to me. I'm wary of statistics. What's the source?

[PeriscopeDepth]

Not to mention the fact there aren't any Su-35s in service anywhere. I believe there's a half dozen or so in Russia used for testing.

PD

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

No offense - all I can see is a short list of unexplained and unsubstantiated ratios that don't mean anything to me. I'm wary of statistics. What's the source?

I've seen them before. Some defense research agency called DERA IIRC did them. Of course, no one knows exaclty what assumptions they used.

Have you heard of AIM-120 or AIM-54 ( I saw F-14 wasnt on the list)? Also how does the Flanker track the Lightning 2? The craptacular Scarab?

I'm pretty sure the AIM-120 is factored in. But the Russians presumably are calculated to have their R-77 and R-37 weapons as well, so that evens out.

The fact they can't see it well probably contributed to the 10:1 ratio they estimated - probably they calculated the Americans getting the first shot and assumed a high hit rate. However, presumably they will use IRST tracking.

Supercruise actually becomes a MINUS in a stealth plane going against someone with an IRST. You can try and intermix the exhaust to reduce the temperature differential, but the engine exhaust is still quite hot, and missiles and IRSTs these days track from the front as well. Supercruise increases frictional heating, which shows up on the IRST as a target. Once the F-22 gets detected, it loses its stealth advantage and the fight gets decided on much different terms.

[TLAM Strike]

Have you heard of AIM-120 or AIM-54 ( I saw F-14 wasnt on the list)? Also how does the Flanker track the Lightning 2? The craptacular Scarab?

I'm pretty sure the AIM-120 is factored in. But the Russians presumably are calculated to have their R-77 and R-37 weapons as well, so that evens out. Oh how I long for the days of the R-40 (AA-6 Acrid) and R-33 (AA-9 Amos)... :roll:

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

Oh how I long for the days of the R-40 (AA-6 Acrid) and R-33 (AA-9 Amos)... :roll:

Actually, you may not want that. Sure, American weapons tended to be better than their Soviet counterparts, but before AMRAAM, long range BVR missiles generally have pretty low hit percentages (IIRC, some reports suggest even the AMRAAM hit rate fell by the time of Kosovo, which suggests people have started thinking how to defeat it) all around.

The day of the Acrid is also the day of the pre-L versions of the Sidewinder, when all missile hit percentages were poor.

[Kapitan]

SU 35's are used by the russian airforce and are in service but they have been super seeded by the more advance and monoverable SU37 and that will be out done again very soon with the SU42 if its ever built.

[SUBMAN1]

Well, the F-22 does have TVC in 2-D. So I do think it was designed to see maneuvering WVR combat also. But it really depends on ROE.

But any rate, nice video. I've always been awestruck with the maneuvering capabilities of Sukhoi jets. :up:

The SU-30 with TV is close to an SU-35, but not quite. The SU-35 is what they built the F-22 to fight, and it really isn't a fair fight. Of course, the SU-35 can kick the butts of the majority of the US forces as you can see by this graph.

Have you heard of AIM-120 or AIM-54 ( I saw F-14 wasnt on the list)? Also how does the Flanker track the Lightning 2? The craptacular Scarab?

The AIM-54 along with its F-14 counterpart are being phased out by the US Navy in favor of the much more versatile F-18E (WHich is actually a new plane and only resembles the older F/A-18C).

THe AIM-54 has for the first time been fired in combat in the Gulf War. It currently holds a 100% miss rate. Not a very viable missile in todays fight. It was designed to shoot down bombers which is why. Fighters just dodge it.

-S

[SUBMAN1]

Not to mention the fact there aren't any Su-35s in service anywhere. I believe there's a half dozen or so in Russia used for testing.

PD

That is about right. SU-35 was supposed to be built for full scale service, but they have yet to do that. So the US built a Super Plane that is designed to defeat a ghost plane made by the Russians.

Something about the above story reminds me of what the US did to the Russians back in the 1970's with the XB-70. We built 3 prototypes, and the Russians dumped hordes of money into designing the MiG-25 Foxbat to shoot it down, and then we go ahead and cancel the XB-70! SOund familiar?

-S

[SUBMAN1]

No offense - all I can see is a short list of unexplained and unsubstantiated ratios that don't mean anything to me. I'm wary of statistics. What's the source?

I've seen them before. Some defense research agency called DERA IIRC did them. Of course, no one knows exaclty what assumptions they used.

Have you heard of AIM-120 or AIM-54 ( I saw F-14 wasnt on the list)? Also how does the Flanker track the Lightning 2? The craptacular Scarab?

I'm pretty sure the AIM-120 is factored in. But the Russians presumably are calculated to have their R-77 and R-37 weapons as well, so that evens out.

The fact they can't see it well probably contributed to the 10:1 ratio they estimated - probably they calculated the Americans getting the first shot and assumed a high hit rate. However, presumably they will use IRST tracking.

Supercruise actually becomes a MINUS in a stealth plane going against someone with an IRST. You can try and intermix the exhaust to reduce the temperature differential, but the engine exhaust is still quite hot, and missiles and IRSTs these days track from the front as well. Supercruise increases frictional heating, which shows up on the IRST as a target. Once the F-22 gets detected, it loses its stealth advantage and the fight gets decided on much different terms.

IRST is of limited usefulness. Very short ranged and not capable of counting compressor blades to determine aircraft type. ALl it does is let you know that someone is there and also let you know that there is nothing you can do about it! :) That is of course if you fall into the IRST's cone of vision.

-S

[TLAM Strike]

THe AIM-54 has for the first time been fired in combat in the Gulf War. It currently holds a 100% miss rate. Not a very viable missile in todays fight. It was designed to shoot down bombers which is why. Fighters just dodge it.

-S

Your forgetting the Iran-Iraq war. Some sources say that Iranian F-14s using AIM-54s scored some 60-70 kills according to some (probably exaggerating) sources. But some were shot down.

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/planes/q0077.shtml

[SUBMAN1]

THe AIM-54 has for the first time been fired in combat in the Gulf War. It currently holds a 100% miss rate. Not a very viable missile in todays fight. It was designed to shoot down bombers which is why. Fighters just dodge it.

-S

Your forgetting the Iran-Iraq war. Some sources say that Iranian F-14s using AIM-54s scored some 60-70 kills according to some (probably exaggerating) sources. But some were shot down.

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/planes/q0077.shtml

From that article - here is what the US estimates:

Western estimates for the true kill-loss ratio attained by the F-14 during the conflict credit 4 kills against 4 or 5 losses.

-S

PS. They go on further to say that the AIM-54 may not even be operational due to sabotage. Also, they do not say what missile was used to shoot down the aircraft, so it could even be an AIM-7 or AIM-9 was used.

[TLAM Strike]

While Iran has managed to keep at least a portion of its Western aircraft in service, the status of the vaunted Phoenix missile is still debated. Most sources indicate that none were used during the Iran-Iraq War owing to their supposed sabotage while others claim that up to 25 Iraqi planes were downed by AIM-54s before Iran exhasuted its supply in 1986.

Until the current government of Iran changes I doubt we will ever know the truth.

[SUBMAN1]

While Iran has managed to keep at least a portion of its Western aircraft in service, the status of the vaunted Phoenix missile is still debated. Most sources indicate that none were used during the Iran-Iraq War owing to their supposed sabotage while others claim that up to 25 Iraqi planes were downed by AIM-54s before Iran exhasuted its supply in 1986.

Until the current government of Iran changes I doubt we will ever know the truth.

No doubt! There media hype is remarkably similar to chomical allie!

-S

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

IRST is of limited usefulness. Very short ranged and not capable of counting compressor blades to determine aircraft type. ALl it does is let you know that someone is there and also let you know that there is nothing you can do about it! :) That is of course if you fall into the IRST's cone of vision.

If you can pick it up on IR, it moves fast at about Mach 1.5, and not on radar when you do a fast check, well sheesh, that means either an American F-22 or maybe a Eurofighter - enemy.

These days, IRSTs are up to 40km vs fighters inbound, 90 out, non afterburning. I'd guess with all the extra heat supercruise will cause, it may go up to 60 in or so. Still not enough to give you first shot (at high altitude - missile ranges plummet like a stone from their brochure propaganda at lower altitude fights), but enough to set up some patrol zones. Once you see it, you can fire IR guided missiles.

The FOV. IIRC the total cone of vision is 120x75, comparable to a radar, of which 60x10 is scanned at one time, which is quite comparable to radar.

[SUBMAN1]

IRST is of limited usefulness. Very short ranged and not capable of counting compressor blades to determine aircraft type. ALl it does is let you know that someone is there and also let you know that there is nothing you can do about it! :) That is of course if you fall into the IRST's cone of vision.

If you can pick it up on IR, it moves fast at about Mach 1.5, and not on radar when you do a fast check, well sheesh, that means either an American F-22 or maybe a Eurofighter - enemy.

These days, IRSTs are up to 40km vs fighters inbound, 90 out, non afterburning. I'd guess with all the extra heat supercruise will cause, it may go up to 60 in or so. Still not enough to give you first shot (at high altitude - missile ranges plummet like a stone from their brochure propaganda at lower altitude fights), but enough to set up some patrol zones. Once you see it, you can fire IR guided missiles.

The FOV. IIRC the total cone of vision is 120x75, comparable to a radar, of which 60x10 is scanned at one time, which is quite comparable to radar.

You are assuming a fighter or bomber without reduced IR signature. Your effective range of IRST against this thing is most like about the same time a slammer lights up your aircraft as it just turns on its radar on its final terminal guidance envelope.

IRST is pointless and almost useless at 40 km too on something that travels about a mile every 2.5 seconds in Supercruise. If you have it on IRST, and it has you as its next victim, and you are probably traveling directly at it to be in the IRST cone and probably at about Mach .9 in your SU, that would give you about 30 to 40 seconds warning before this thing flies right by you, and probably only about 15 seconds warning before a slammer lights you up by turning on its internal radar for its final terminal guidance. Hope you're not sleeping in that 15 seconds because you have little time to think of a game plan to live for an extra second or two, or die instantly.

Starting to see the reason the US doesn't care too much about IRST? Its almost pointless. This F-22 is a killing machine and it does its job well.

-S

PS. The five F-15's couldn't even begin to fight only one of these things and the F-15 pilot that lived longer than 2 minutes, didn't live longer than that by much. They gave up even trying to take on the 1 F-22 and all of them together just concentrated on living as long as possible. These were experienced pilots all trying to coordinate on only 1 plane. THey had no chance. The F-22 is a very unfair fighting machine and I pity anyone that wants to even think about trying to do anything against it. Trust me on this one - future wars against this aircraft will be relagated to using SAM warfare only until someone can build a better plane at some point.

MiG Mapo 1.42 is the only aircraft that may have a chance. Russia abandoned this project due to costs however.

[Kapitan]

In a few years a weekness will be spotted by some nation then a missile or gun developed and were back to square one so heres a premature hello to the YF24.

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

You are assuming a fighter or bomber without reduced IR signature. Your effective range of IRST against this thing is most like about the same time a slammer lights up your aircraft as it just turns on its radar on its final terminal guidance envelope.

I have added in the attempts at thermal suppression. You can suppress the engine some, but your frictional heating, work heating of the atmosphere as you plow into it at Mach 1.5, all that cannot be readily suppressed and IR can see quite far against those things even at subsonic.

Also, remember that the F-22 engine is actually runs hotter than most in an attempt to get better performance. To make it worse, normally a turbofan has some unheated air that's made into useful thrust in the fan portion and incidentally helps cool the plume coming out the rear somewhat. Because the F-22 is a low-bypass turbofan, that airflow is reduced, so you have more to compensate with your heat suppression system.

IRST is pointless and almost useless at 40 km too on something that travels about a mile every 2.5 seconds in Supercruise.

The supercruise speed is only about Mach 1.5. Even at sea level a Mach is only 330m/s, so we are talking 475m/s, more like 400-450 at the altitude the plane will actually be able to supercruise. That's more like a mile every 3.5 to 4 seconds.

If you have it on IRST, and it has you as its next victim, and you are probably traveling directly at it to be in the IRST cone

Not quite. The scan arc is 60 degrees out of a total possible of 120. Plus if you have a wingman, you can tell him to cover -60 to 0 and you can cover 0-60, so you can have 120 degree coverage, as good as a radar, though shorter range.

and probably at about Mach .9 in your SU, that would give you about 30 to 40 seconds warning before this thing flies right by you, and probably only about 15 seconds warning before a slammer lights you up by turning on its internal radar for its final terminal guidance.

I see you also bought into the American story that no one will actually hear the APG-77 because of its "LPI", despite the fact the darn radar is supposed to emit 20kW at peak.

LPI is only a game. In very crude terms, it turns a narrowband signal into a broadband one. The enemy's RWR is a broadband receiver. The problem is at worst one of processing, since radar vs RWR tends to have the radar at a disadvantage.

More cynically, I won't be shocked if I hear that the F-22s were detected by old SPO-15 systems, ambushed, and destroyed in thier first mission. A modern American system attempts to classify a radar by type (F-15, F-16, SA-8...etc), and the SPO-15 lacks this sophistication (there are 6 little lamps on the bottom for six broad types of radar, like "fighter" and so on), but that may also mean it'd look at the whole spectrum for a radar source instead of splitting it up. Once they do that, they'd catch on that there is really a darn bright, non-coherent, broadband source out there.

Hope you're not sleeping in that 15 seconds because you have little time to think of a game plan to live for an extra second or two, or die instantly.

Actually, the F-22 is in real trouble now. He's basking in his "stealth", but I got him. I can snapshot a mix of active radar homing and IR missiles back at him and send his position to my entire air defense network via datalink.

In air combat, 15 seconds is eternity. Not to mention if you think that's not enough time for me to do much, as I counterfire there won't be much time for the American to do much as well.

I'm probably dead (unless I evade your AMRAAM, which is still possible), but when one considers the massive cost of your F-22, it is probably worth it.

PS. The five F-15's couldn't even begin to fight only one of these things and the F-15 pilot that lived longer than 2 minutes, didn't live longer than that by much.

I'd skip "What was the setup?" and get right to it.

The problem is that they fought like Americans and "died" as predicted by American predictions formulated on American theories of air combat.

F-22 advances in high-alt BVR fight. Many American F-15s, stunningly, have no datalink, a fact that's changing only recently, and the one they do get may or may not support air-to-air work. Using American RWR, they can't hear the enemy's radar emissions. Even if they could hear it, their RWR is not designed to make any fire control solutions and they have no weapons to exploit this. If they have no datalink, even if one guy gets lucky with his radar, he can't really help anyone set up shots. F-22 fires AMRAAM, very high hit rate is assumed. All F-15s killed by second wave at most. How could it not have ended within three minutes?

Suppose we go to a low-altitude BVR fight. Sometimes that happens too. Lower alt = less range. So, effective missile range will fall <40km. If they have a IRST, they might (I'd grant you it is only a might) actually detect before missiles are launched. But no, they lack this function. Radar and visual only. F-22 gets into missile range. Fires. Kills.

Even if they assumed a WVR engagement, here's where I'd have to disagree with Riccioni - techniques for optimizing the use of the wing for creating lift have improved greatly over 30 years, so the same wing loading does not mean no edge to the F-22. So it is not too shocking it won. Especially if the F-22 was armed with a JHMCS. Even a MiG-29 with AA-11 Archers and a helmet sight can kill F-15s armed with AIM-9Ms easily, at least according to an American simulation.

Unfortunately, the rest of the world does not necessarily follow the same rules. This is something Riccioni noticed, but is not often mentioned.

We already mentioned IR. Now, unlike American RWRs, modern Russian RWRs like the SPO-32 Pastel can process an attack. And we've also mentioned how LPI is really a game. So it has either already been defeated (perhaps even by accident as the result of a different design philosophy) or will be defeated. So, if the APG-77 gets detected, a valid attack can be made on the American fighter using a mix of IR and Passive Radar Homers, perhaps with some actives as a 2nd echelon. The worst part for the American is that any fighter hunting for a F-22 knows it might get ambushed in turn. The American thinks that he's definitely the ambusher.

The enemy has IR for medium-low alts so he is not a total sitting duck. He also has datalink - so for example two can act as sacrifices but link data back for shots from a 2nd echelon flying 30km back. For close he also has thrust vectoring and he has not been forced to make any aerodynamic compromises for stealth.

It doesn't mean, of course, that Su-37 is a match for a F-22. But things are not necessary as lopsided, and to that one factors in the massive cost and rarity of the F-22.

[Wim Libaers]

The F-22 would have a bigger advantage if it didn't have to use its radar. Just serving as a missile delivery platform, shooting targets linked to it by AWACS aircraft.

[TLAM Strike]

The F-22 would have a bigger advantage if it didn't have to use its radar. Just serving as a missile delivery platform, shooting targets linked to it by AWACS aircraft.
IIRC the Radar on the AWACS cant target with sufficient accuracy for missile launches, it needs to be handed off to another radar to localize the target.

More cynically, I won't be shocked if I hear that the F-22s were detected by old SPO-15 systems, ambushed, and destroyed in thier first mission. A modern American system attempts to classify a radar by type (F-15, F-16, SA-8...etc), and the SPO-15 lacks this sophistication (there are 6 little lamps on the bottom for six broad types of radar, like "fighter" and so on), but that may also mean it'd look at the whole spectrum for a radar source instead of splitting it up. Once they do that, they'd catch on that there is really a darn bright, non-coherent, broadband source out there. What aircraft carry the SPO-15?

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

IIRC the Radar on the AWACS cant target with sufficient accuracy for missile launches, it needs to be handed off to another radar to localize the target.

Its accuracy isn't too good and it has no CW linking function. Still, if you are guiding an AMRAAM shot, I see no reason why an attempt can't be made to shoot on the solution and let the missile do the work. The hit rate won't be very good, but...

Besides, it does allow the APG-77 to only be turned on at the last second before launch to verify coordinates.

The only problem being that the Russians also have long-range weapons designed to help them kill AWACS.

What aircraft carry the SPO-15?

Planes like the early MiG-29s, Su-27s ... basically all the 80s Soviet aircraft, maybe later MiG-23s too. The next generation switches to the fully digital SPO-32.

Before that, it was IIRC the SPO-10. If the broadband stuff I'm talking about works on the -15, it'd work on the even more primitive (thus less classification) -10, but the -10 provides only quadrant (90 degree - there are these four little lamps on the thing) warning and won't be very useful for situational awareness.

[TteFAboB]

Kazuaki Shimazaki II,

It seems you've given the enemy a wingman.

Then you added a 2nd echelon.

And always consider the enemy to fire over half or all it's load, of course, since it's a big prize.

Now, I didn't knew the F-22 was desgined to take on 2 echelons alone flying solo. Thanks for pointing that out for me, I never knew the rare and expensive plane would be sent alone to knock down an entire enemy Air Force, the plane is quite impressive indeed then, isn't it?

[TLAM Strike]

Maybe he was giving the OPFOR the equivalent number of aircraft in relation to the cost of the F-22. That’s something like 14 Su-27s to 1 F-22A. ;)

EDIT: Hay now that would be a study to see! 1 F-22A vs. as many of another fighter that could be purchased for its cost. :hmm: :lol:

[DeepSix]

...EDIT: Hay now that would be a study to see! 1 F-22A vs. as many of another fighter that could be purchased for its cost. :hmm: :lol:

Reminds me of a favorite joke, the punch line of which is, "It's a trick, General! There's two of 'em!" :lol:

[TLAM Strike]

...EDIT: Hay now that would be a study to see! 1 F-22A vs. as many of another fighter that could be purchased for its cost. :hmm: :lol:

Reminds me of a favorite joke, the punch line of which is, "It's a trick, General! There's two of 'em!" :lol:Never heard that one. Care to recite it?

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

It seems you've given the enemy a wingman.

Real air forces (as in real life) use wingmen. It'd be stupid not to consider all the extra options a wingman gives you.

Then you added a 2nd echelon.

I added the 2nd echelon as a odds-improving option and a factor in real life - because real air defenses tend to have depth.

Besides, as a commander, if I can come up with tactics that can put my forces equal to a F-22 squadron with only a 2:1 (1st and 2nd echelon) numerical superiority, I'd be patting myself on my back.

And always consider the enemy to fire over half or all it's load, of course, since it's a big prize.

Depends, though expending your whole missile load ain't bad if you got the F-22. Besides, if you assume like SUBMAN1 that the plane's dead anyway - well, the weapons aren't doing any good hanging on a dead crashing plane, no?

The active weapons are optional. The passive weapons you definitely want. You want the anti-radiation weapons because it forces the American plane into a dilemma. If you force him to shut down his radar, you become a de facto stealth aircraft - he has no other sensor capable of seeing you except his eyes! You want the infrared homers too because IR suppression is not as efficient as radar suppression.

The ARHs are really supportive. Let's not get too optimistic about them managing to acquire the stealth aircraft. Still, the idea is to scare the F-22 into hitting burners to evade - which makes it easy for the IR to track.

So, how many weapons do you need? You don't want your attack decoyed by some stupid ALQ-50 towed Nixie, so you'd probably use two of each type of weapon. So that means at least 4, more like 6 weapons.

Now, I didn't knew the F-22 was desgined to take on 2 echelons alone flying solo. Thanks for pointing that out for me, I never knew the rare and expensive plane would be sent alone to knock down an entire enemy Air Force, the plane is quite impressive indeed then, isn't it?

It is definitely intended to fight outnumbered. At least I hope so, I'd hate to think that it costs as much as 10 other fighters and could be defeated with 4. If it can be defeated with one even semi-regularly, a purge of the USAF High Command is in order.

[DeepSix]

...EDIT: Hay now that would be a study to see! 1 F-22A vs. as many of another fighter that could be purchased for its cost. :hmm: :lol:

Reminds me of a favorite joke, the punch line of which is, "It's a trick, General! There's two of 'em!" :lol:Never heard that one. Care to recite it?

Ok, but two disclaimers first. One, please excuse the fact that it's totally off topic. Two, "Yankees" might not like it (this can be corrected by making substitutions where appropriate). Alrighty then....

Sherman begins his famous "March to the Sea" and heads out of Atlanta. About the time he reaches Stone Mountain, a scout rides up and says that he's spotted a Reb up on the ridge. Sherman orders one of his best riflemen to go after him. After a while, when the man fails to return, he sends a team of skirmishers. Later still, when they fail to return, he sends a whole platoon. After several hours, one man, badly wounded, staggers back down and falls to the ground at Sherman's feet, gasping for air. "It's a trick, General!" he says. "There's two of 'em!"

Yeah, I know, it's not very funny ;) (it's Lewis Grizzard's, not mine). But you asked. :P

Cheers :D

[TLAM Strike]

...EDIT: Hay now that would be a study to see! 1 F-22A vs. as many of another fighter that could be purchased for its cost. :hmm: :lol:

Reminds me of a favorite joke, the punch line of which is, "It's a trick, General! There's two of 'em!" :lol:Never heard that one. Care to recite it?

Ok, but two disclaimers first. One, please excuse the fact that it's totally off topic. Two, "Yankees" might not like it (this can be corrected by making substitutions where appropriate). Alrighty then....

Sherman begins his famous "March to the Sea" and heads out of Atlanta. About the time he reaches Stone Mountain, a scout rides up and says that he's spotted a Reb up on the ridge. Sherman orders one of his best riflemen to go after him. After a while, when the man fails to return, he sends a team of skirmishers. Later still, when they fail to return, he sends a whole platoon. After several hours, one man, badly wounded, staggers back down and falls to the ground at Sherman's feet, gasping for air. "It's a trick, General!" he says. "There's two of 'em!"

Yeah, I know, it's not very funny ;) (it's Lewis Grizzard's, not mine). But you asked. :P

Cheers :D

hehe. I think I have heard that one before but I think it had to do with an Army ranger going aganst wave after wave of Marines... or maybe it was the other way around. :lol:

EDIT: Found them here:
http://www.military-quotes.com/jokes/index.htm

But my favorite has to be the one with the Navy Admiral, the Air Force, Army and Marine Generals on the repelling wall trying to figure out whose men are the bravest. ;)
That one can be found here:
http://www.military-quotes.com/jokes/military-jokes-2.htm (center of the page) incase you never heard it.

[DeepSix]

:rotfl: The marine disappearing in the cloud of grenade explosions - funny stereotypes all in that joke.

While on maneuvers, a colonel and his jeep driver got stuck along a muddy road. Two privates were lounging in the shade a few yards away. "You two - on your feet and come help free this vehicle."

"Sorry sir," said one of the grunts, suppressing a smile, "but we're dead. The umpire said we are not to take part in any more of the exercise."

"Sergeant," said the colonel to his driver, "go over there and get those two stiffs and throw them under the wheels so we can get some traction."

[sonar732]

Something else to think about is that these test pilots main job is to put the plane in "above and beyond" manuevers. The "average"...if there is an "average" fighter pilot won't be using these manuevers.

[Abraham]

...EDIT: Hay now that would be a study to see! 1 F-22A vs. as many of another fighter that could be purchased for its cost. :hmm: :lol:

Reminds me of a favorite joke, the punch line of which is, "It's a trick, General! There's two of 'em!" :lol:Never heard that one. Care to recite it?

Ok, but two disclaimers first. One, please excuse the fact that it's totally off topic. Two, "Yankees" might not like it (this can be corrected by making substitutions where appropriate). Alrighty then....

Sherman begins his famous "March to the Sea" and heads out of Atlanta. About the time he reaches Stone Mountain, a scout rides up and says that he's spotted a Reb up on the ridge. Sherman orders one of his best riflemen to go after him. After a while, when the man fails to return, he sends a team of skirmishers. Later still, when they fail to return, he sends a whole platoon. After several hours, one man, badly wounded, staggers back down and falls to the ground at Sherman's feet, gasping for air. "It's a trick, General!" he says. "There's two of 'em!"

Yeah, I know, it's not very funny ;) (it's Lewis Grizzard's, not mine). But you asked. :P

Cheers :D
This reminds me of another stupid joke that I somehow always remembered (don't know the source):
During the hight of the Battle of Britain a new CO takes over a depleted squadron. He goes to the mess to be introduced to the pilots but there's just a sergeant major and two pilots. The sergeant major salutes and tells the new CO: ""Sir, meet the pilots of squadron XXX, both of them!"