56 replies to this topic

[Heh]

Crag_r, on 19 June 2012 - 11:52 AM, said:

Missile range has to do with the missiles armed, not the Airframe???

Just saying, the SU-35BM can use the R-37, which is a Phoenix missile on steroids with up to 150 km of range on a stationary chassis and can possibly even 350 km of range. The PAK FA can use that too, but the 35BM at least passed prototype stages. MiG-31Ms used it first tho, but they use the R-33 most of the time.

The Raptor is armed with the AIM-120, which has a range of 180 km if you consider the AIM-120D. If it wasn't for the F-22's high stealth, it would be fodder to the SU-35BM's R-37s. Not to mention how unreliable Russian aircraft are compared to US ones and how the Raptor can actually keep its max speed.

If we took the R-37 away tho, we'd settle with a fight involving amraamskis (Russian's AIM-120s) and AIM-120s. Raptor wins at that point since it would get detected much much later.

[Apothecary117]

Pablo237, on 28 December 2011 - 05:25 PM, said:

F-22 and F-35 sucks. Nuff said.

OHHH SU-35!! Epicness! Russian aircraft are so unique and awesome.

[Apothecary117]

Now, one aircraft to put into the game in the future updates once WoWp is released, is the Sukhoi PAK-FA!!!!! It would be epic if that thing would be in the game! Wouldn't you all agree?

[Heh]

Call_me_THE_EPIC_MAN, on 19 June 2012 - 06:50 PM, said:

Now, one aircraft to put into the game in the future updates once WoWp is released, is the Sukhoi PAK-FA!!!!! It would be epic if that thing would be in the game! Wouldn't you all agree?

>wants the PAK FA, a 5th gen fighter with the R-37, a missile that has a range of >300 km in a WWII-based flight sim arcade game to fight planes like the F-86 and Bf-109 that had no guided munitions yet



Not to be mad or anything, I love the PAK FA and the Su-35BM. They're even THE two aircraft I love the most along with the Su-37. But we have to keep the game balanced you see, so we can't get it in.

Although, I still wonder why Bandai Namco didn't include it in Assault Horizon and instead put up that horrendous, idiotic, and easy mode new stunt system. It was bad enough that high-G turns prevented the use of smart yaw-turning skills, but now they made it a full-on combo game, not an arcade-style flight sim game.

[xthetenth]

Crag_r, on 19 June 2012 - 11:52 AM, said:

Missile range has to do with the missiles armed, not the Airframe???

Actually incorrect. The missile range has to do with the total energy available to the missile. Starting higher than the target and going very fast towards it both help considerably. For a very dramatic example, the AGM-69 SRAM has a maximum range of 169 km, which I'm assuming is from a B-52 (1047 kph@15000 m). Launch it from a B-71 (3530 kph@ 24000 m) and that range gets boosted to 951 km. Similarly a missile fired by a faster flying, higher plane has more energy and gets its range boosted, sometimes significantly. The F-22 can supercruise, while the Su-35 is flying around subsonic, so if the F-22 is bouncing the Su-35 (entirely likely given the stealth capabilities of the former) it would likely have a significant boost to its missile range. But then again nobody cares how the fighters fight on their own, it's all about the integrated air defense systems. The F-22 is amazing because of its capabilities as part of a greater whole.

[Ghoni98]

nice

[WulfeHound]

Heh, on 19 June 2012 - 11:23 AM, said:

Actually, the SU-35BM also has supermaneuverability since the original SU-35 has it. And please, you're stating the Cobra tactic, something the SU-27 could do and that the Eagle could not. The reason the Raptor can outdo the SU-27 is the high stealth (50% radar visibility, although the F-19 completely owns it in that perspective with lower radar cross-section than a DUCK and the same heat level as the background. Good thing it's hopefully slower).

But yeah, the Raptor is a viable competitor to the SU-35 atm, since one has stealth, reliability and medium range missiles and being stupidly expensive to make while one has very long range missiles, faster sprints, while keeping the same maneuverability and a cheaper cost but also losing stealth and reliability.

The Pugachev's Cobra is where a plane points the nose up and slides forward, while losing very little airspeed. What I'm talking about is the Raptor with the nose pointed straight up, with 0 airspeed, in a hover. The aircraft is not moving at all. None of the Sukhois can do this, with the possibility of the Su-47.

The F-19 doesn't exist. Models of it have been produced by Revel and other companies, but it doesn't exist even as a blueprint.

Also, the Su-35 is fairly maneuverable. Even more so than the MiG-29. The Sukhoi has a reduced radar cross-section compared to early gen IV and gen III fighters, but not as much as gen V.

[kmen117]

the US is getting a New Variant of the F-15 aka the Boeing F-15SE Silent Eagle Could this replace the F-22 as a cheaper to be built warplane

[Crag_r]

kmen117, on 07 August 2012 - 08:30 AM, said:

the US is getting a New Variant of the F-15 aka the Boeing F-15SE Silent Eagle Could this replace the F-22 as a cheaper to be built warplane

Replace? you know the US already has 14 squadrons of F-22s not too mention that the F-15SE has not even made a flight yet...

[kmen117]

I know but it could save the USAF quite a bit and help upgrade aging planes

[Crag_r]

kmen117, on 09 August 2012 - 09:25 PM, said:

I know but it could save the USAF quite a bit and help upgrade aging planes

How can it save? the USAF already has most of its F-22s, and the F-15s and F-16s are no longer in production it would cost allot more and only take away the aging planes spare parts...

[kmen117]

so were just saying it would be simpler to scrap the old planes and get all new planes

[Heh]

kmen117, on 11 August 2012 - 02:18 AM, said:

so were just saying it would be simpler to scrap the old planes and get all new planes

Some of the equip used in today's modern fighters come from earlier fighters. For example, the Raptor has the F-15's front wheel.

[WulfeHound]

And besides, the F-15SE isn't a major improvement over the standard F-15E Strike Eagle. On another point, with sharing components, the X-29 wins at that. The forward fuselage and nose wheel are from an F-5, control actuators and main landing gear from an F-16, and the engine from an F-18.

[NebukadnezarII]

Considering the amount of problems with the f22 and f35 right now, i really dont know hat their capabilities are... i wont believe in that tv propaganda for american planes just as i dont believe internet gossip about russian fighters.
all i know is that airforces besides northern vietnam in the last 4 years using obsolete or "export"-quality fighters to counter american ones, and we all know what happened to them.
i just wait for the day , a real opponent meets the us airforce ^^ or the whole military itself, until now its alway been a turkey shoot since after WW2 basically

[percatroid]

Pablo237, on 28 December 2011 - 05:25 PM, said:

F-22 and F-35 sucks. Nuff said.

Sure there is some debate about the F-35....And aircraft development doesn't happen over night...The F-22 is no wood duck, It's a killer....The F-15 is at current the top fighter....
Sorry, your video is nice, but thats it....Cheerin...

[Bandet]

Obviously the F-35 isn't going to do well matched up against jets that are built for air-to-air combat... Because it ISN'T built for air-to-air combat.

It is built to operate everywhere those jets can't, because it is VTOL. In places it would be operating, the enemy wouldn't have air power. If they did, they wouldn't be using it.

Edited by Bandet, 19 August 2012 - 09:55 PM.