5th generation jet fighters

[Targan]

The Sukhoi T-50, is it a true 5th gen 'stealth' fighter Could it go toe-to-toe with the F-22 Raptor

[Mohoender]

My answer would be yes. Still I'm not convinced it can fully challenge the F22 Raptor which might remain the best fighter of that generation. The future F35 Lightning (also a 5th generation fighter) might still be inferior to the F22.

Mig29 hardly compare with F15 while being of the same generation.

Moreover, according to the US DoD, it seems that they are more concerned about the Chengdu J20.

I don't know if that site is fully reliable but it gives some interesting insights:

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-NOTAM-081109-1.html

[95th Rifleman]

With the current economic mess the Americans could find themselves dropping behind. Take the "new" technology for the F22 that allows a pilot to aim a missle wherver he looks, the Russians have had this technology for a while now and use it in their MIG 29's.

I have to disagree with Mohoender, the export MIG 29's are no comparison to the F15 but the Russian model (along with the SU 37's) can compete with the F15.

[ShadoWarrior]

With the current economic mess the Americans could find themselves dropping behind. Take the "new" technology for the F22 that allows a pilot to aim a missile wherever he looks, the Russians have had this technology for a while now and use it in their MIG 29's.

Which is a further development of older technology from the AH-64 Apache.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Just as an aside, the site that Mohoender has linked to is essentially a series of articles by military science analysts and researchers.
Both the men who founded the site have careers relating to or directly involved with the defence forces.

Dr Carlo Kopp is a qualified pilot and has written for many defence publications including Jane's Missiles and Rockets and Air International. http://www.ausairpower.net/editor.html
Mr Peter Goon is a qualified pilot and has served in the RAAF and graduated from the USN's Test Pilot School. http://www.ausairpower.net/CV-PAG-2007.html

Is it reliable Yes but it must be pointed out that these two men have a particular aim and that is to promote a better air power capacity for Australia and their collection of articles is meant to support that idea.

http://www.ausairpower.net/index.html

[Raellus]

The Su-50 airframe might end up being as stealthy as the F22 (although I doubt that it will be) and, if the MiG-29 and SU-27 series are any indication of a trend in this direction, it will probably be more manouverable. But the Russians are still a bit behind the west in terms of avionics. So, I'll have to give the edge to the Raptor.

[Panther Al]

With the current economic mess the Americans could find themselves dropping behind. Take the "new" technology for the F22 that allows a pilot to aim a missle wherver he looks, the Russians have had this technology for a while now and use it in their MIG 29's.

I have to disagree with Mohoender, the export MIG 29's are no comparison to the F15 but the Russian model (along with the SU 37's) can compete with the F15.

For what its worth: The MiG29 was never meant to square up against the F15- it was designed more as a counter to the F16. The SU27 on the other hand, thats aimed right at the F15.

[Legbreaker]

When you consider that over the last fifty years or so, many of the worlds conflicts haven't really involved East vs West technology (Iraq being one exception to the general rule), and with many of the worlds more unstable and warlike nations/regions fielding essentially the same equipment as each other....

It seems unreasonable to assume Russian built planes will need to go up against Western airframes. A more reasonable approach may be to compare the sale price - a $2 million plane is much more likely to see combat against a similar value, unless the poorer force does something REALLY STUPID and pisses off a wealthier country (or one with a higher amount of it's GDP spent on the military).

Even if similar technology is pitted against each other, the quality of the pilot will have a LOT to do with the outcome. A novice in the seat of the most advanced machine conceived by man is almost guaranteed to loose against a highly trained pilot in a machine 30 years old.

[95th Rifleman]

The Su-50 airframe might end up being as stealthy as the F22 (although I doubt that it will be) and, if the MiG-29 and SU-27 series are any indication of a trend in this direction, it will probably be more manouverable. But the Russians are still a bit behind the west in terms of avionics. So, I'll have to give the edge to the Raptor.

Dunno about that, the Russians have been ahead of the curve with thrust vectoring. I think the SU-50 and Raptor will end up more balanced than people think. The Raptor will have a tech advantage with avionics and perhaps better stealth but the Su-50 is likely to be far more manouverable. In a one on one fight the Raptor will need to get the first strike kill because I think the Su-50 will turn out to be the superior dogfighter.

[RN7]

When you consider that over the last fifty years or so, many of the worlds conflicts haven't really involved East vs West technology (Iraq being one exception to the general rule), and with many of the worlds more unstable and warlike nations/regions fielding essentially the same equipment as each other....

It seems unreasonable to assume Russian built planes will need to go up against Western airframes. A more reasonable approach may be to compare the sale price - a $2 million plane is much more likely to see combat against a similar value, unless the poorer force does something REALLY STUPID and pisses off a wealthier country (or one with a higher amount of it's GDP spent on the military).

Even if similar technology is pitted against each other, the quality of the pilot will have a LOT to do with the outcome. A novice in the seat of the most advanced machine conceived by man is almost guaranteed to loose against a highly trained pilot in a machine 30 years old.

Vietnam War
Six Day War
Indo-Pakistani War
Yom Kippur War
Iran-Iraq War
Bekaa Valley

All proxy wars perphaps regarding US/Western vs Soviet technology, but still a lot of combat between East and Western technology.

[pmulcahy11b]

Even if similar technology is pitted against each other, the quality of the pilot will have a LOT to do with the outcome. A novice in the seat of the most advanced machine conceived by man is almost guaranteed to loose against a highly trained pilot in a machine 30 years old.

I agree -- the Russians are coming up with some great machines, but I heard somewhere that Russian pilots get as little as 12 flying hours per YEAR -- even an Air National Guard pilot in the US gets about that in 1-2 weeks.

[Raellus]

Dunno about that, the Russians have been ahead of the curve with thrust vectoring. I think the SU-50 and Raptor will end up more balanced than people think. The Raptor will have a tech advantage with avionics and perhaps better stealth but the Su-50 is likely to be far more manouverable. In a one on one fight the Raptor will need to get the first strike kill because I think the Su-50 will turn out to be the superior dogfighter.

That's pretty much exactly what I wrote. Not sure where the disagreement is.

[95th Rifleman]

That's pretty much exactly what I wrote. Not sure where the disagreement is.

I disagree the Raptor has the edge. My interpretation of the available data is that only in the event of the raptor achieving an early, surprise kill does the raptor have an advantage.

In a situation where the SU-50 has warning of the kill shot advanced countermeasures combined with the, superior, Russian thrust vectoring will give the SU-50 an above average to good cance of avoiding a kill. After that it goes to an old fashioned dogfight and I think the SU-50 will have the edge.

Allot of Western advantage is in long range, kill shots from surprise and the east is rapidly developing the technologies to reduce this element of surprise. I think it's a dangerous weakness that the west has in relying too much on stealth and a surprise kill.

[Sanjuro]

Ever since the first world war, the essence of aerial combat (especially between fighters) has been surprise- most of the Red Baron's 80 victims never saw him. Even in a dogfight, it is less often the aircraft you are manouvering to avoid who shoots you down, than his wingman who you never knew was there...

[Mohoender]

Allot of Western advantage is in long range, kill shots from surprise and the east is rapidly developing the technologies to reduce this element of surprise. I think it's a dangerous weakness that the west has in relying too much on stealth and a surprise kill.

I agree to this. I recently learned that GPS had been shot down during the Russo-Georgian conflict of 2008, not surprising and explaining part of what appeared to be weaknesses of the Russian forces (who could not use precision ammo and had to attack at shorter range than the West now do). This weakness has already been overcome by Russia (Glonass) and probably by China (Compass).

Also, I don't wish it, I would be very interested in seeing the result of a long conflict were both sides would have tremendous difficulties to maintain the actual technological level.

Another weakness in the West comes from the fact that we have not fought anything outside of petty wars since 1991 (also true for Russia and China). Over the past 20 years, all our offensive actions have been conducted using overwhelming superiority against greatly weakened foe and we, as Russia, are not always doing that well. Actually, I'm even tempted to say that Russia did slightly better than NATO over the last 10 years: the Second Chechen War can compare to the war in Iraq or Afghanistan and the South Ossetia War was won in less than ten days. Remember that the First Chechen War had been lost by Russia, they have already gone a long way.