New fighter aircraft

Discussion in 'Modern' started by Torch, Mar 28, 2006.

  1. Torch

    Torch Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2006
    Messages:
    2,289
    Likes Received:
    218
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Colorado
    There's been a bunch of new fighters coming out ex:Grippen,Rafael,Typhoon,F-22,SU-27,Migs etc. Is there anyplace to look up on how they would match up against each other? Or does anyone know if there's been joint excersises matching these planes up. I know India was bragging that they "defeated" a US "attack" with their Migs against F15's but that was a bit staged..
     
  2. FLYBOYJ

    FLYBOYJ "THE GREAT GAZOO"
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2005
    Messages:
    23,205
    Likes Received:
    787
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Aircraft Maintenance Manager/ Flight Instructor
    Location:
    Colorado, USA
    This was in some earlier posts....

    The IAF defeated the USAF in Cope India excersizes - the F-15s could take on the 3 and 4 to 1 odds they normally defeat in these excersizes.

    2 to 1 is a different story.
     
  3. R988

    R988 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2005
    Messages:
    608
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Occupation:
    Office Gimp
    Location:
    Londonium
    I vaguely remember a study against an Su-35

    F-22 would get 10 kills for every loss
    Typhoon would get 5 kills for every loss
    Rafale/Gripen would get 1 kill for every loss
    F-15C/F/A-18E would get 0.75 kills for every loss.

    This is from memory though so those figures probably aren't exact, but the order is pretty much the same I think. I can't remember any other determining factors either so it could be way off as it's hard to know what scenarios they are considering and all that.

    So for current generation you can probably assume F-22 is best
    Typhoon next best
    Su-35/Rafale/Gripen roughly equal
     
  4. Torch

    Torch Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2006
    Messages:
    2,289
    Likes Received:
    218
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Colorado
    Thanks. I was just curious besides the IAF/USAF shindig if anybody had gone head to head yet. Know f-18's went up against Luftwaffe M-29s but they were a little vague on the results(military channel). Appreciate the feed back.
     
  5. Nonskimmer

    Nonskimmer Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2004
    Messages:
    8,848
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Occupation:
    Naval Electronics Technician
    Location:
    Halifax, Nova Scotia
    Didn't the US purchase something like a dozen or so Mig-29's from Moldova a bunch of years back? No need to paint F-5's and F-16's to look like Russian planes when you've got the real thing. :cool:
     
  6. FLYBOYJ

    FLYBOYJ "THE GREAT GAZOO"
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2005
    Messages:
    23,205
    Likes Received:
    787
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Aircraft Maintenance Manager/ Flight Instructor
    Location:
    Colorado, USA
    They did - one's sitting at Wright Patterson AFB...
     
  7. davparlr

    davparlr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2006
    Messages:
    2,934
    Likes Received:
    105
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Occupation:
    retired avionics engineer
    Location:
    Southern California
    I read about them using the vectored thrust to manuever to defeat the F-15 pulse doppler (an old technique red flag has used). This can be made to become trivial. I suspect the AF used this to promote F-22. I think the F-15, with updated avionics and concepts and, maybe new long range missiles, could easily handle any projected threat for 20 years. The F-22 would not need the long range missiles.
     
  8. the lancaster kicks ass

    the lancaster kicks ass Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2003
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    38
    well this tread isn't going anywhere and it's remotely related to my question, which i didn't really think was worthy of it's own thread, so here i am, i was just reading about the Eurofighter and it mentioned 'wet' hard points, and i was wondering what the hell they are :lol: it's not a hard point for the plumbing to add a drop tank is it?
     
  9. davparlr

    davparlr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2006
    Messages:
    2,934
    Likes Received:
    105
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Occupation:
    retired avionics engineer
    Location:
    Southern California
    I don't think I have heard that terminology. I suspect your answer is correct. The station is plumbed for fuel tanks.
     
  10. Aggie08

    Aggie08 Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,012
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    Texas
    I read about them using the vectored thrust to manuever to defeat the F-15 pulse doppler (an old technique red flag has used).

    How would that work?? How would it mess with radar?
     
  11. davparlr

    davparlr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2006
    Messages:
    2,934
    Likes Received:
    105
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Occupation:
    retired avionics engineer
    Location:
    Southern California
    Fighter planes use pulse doppler radar for air-to-air detection. Pulse doppler radar detects radial velocity of a target, i.e. how fast a target is closing or leaving your aircraft along a radial line using doppler shift (frequency shift like a train or car going by). When an aircraft detects a lock-on by such a radar, the pilot can alter course perpendicular to the direction of the emiter. This makes the radial velocity zero and breaks the lock. By complex maneuvering and controlling the radial velocity, an aircraft can sneak up on a searching aircraft. A note here, the emiting aircraft has a beacon (the radar) so the first aircraft only needs to home in on the emitting aircraft with out turning on its radar transmitter. There are ways to defeat this but I don't know enough to discuss.
     
  12. lesofprimus

    lesofprimus Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2004
    Messages:
    19,162
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Communications
    Location:
    Long Island Native in Mississippi
    Home Page:
    Sounds like there would be too many G's for the human pilot to handle, pulling a perpendicular move like that, to show a radial velocity of zero....
     
  13. davparlr

    davparlr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2006
    Messages:
    2,934
    Likes Received:
    105
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Occupation:
    retired avionics engineer
    Location:
    Southern California
    No. It is not a perpendicular turn, but a turn to the perpendicular. If you were flying south and a detected radar was due south, you would want to turn either east or west in order to reduce the closure speed. Rate of turn would not necessarily be important, depending on range. This is simplistic and the maneuvers are undoubtably difficult to maintain. The object is to keep the closure speed to the detecting aircraft at a minimum. Hope this helps.
     
  14. Bullockracing

    Bullockracing Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    316
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Occupation:
    United States Air Force
    Location:
    Vivian, Louisiana
    I'm not sure I believe the radar wouldn't pick up a turn, no matter how sharp. I'll have to agree with lesofprimus on this one. The doppler effect when used on moving objects as it relates to tracking based on radar involves wavelengths that cannot be just "turned in between to show a radial velocity of zero". Once you turned, you would have to turn again, otherwise you would be "caught", so you would be in a vicious cycle of turns...
     
  15. davparlr

    davparlr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2006
    Messages:
    2,934
    Likes Received:
    105
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Occupation:
    retired avionics engineer
    Location:
    Southern California
    Airbore doppler has a window of radial velocities that it accepts for tracking. Otherwise, there would be too many targets to track. Depending on range, the radar may not pick up the turn and no matter if it did, as soon as the radial velocity falls out of the window, the target is rejected and not tracked and is not reported as a detection until the window of velocity is entered again. A spiraling approach to the emitter may never be seen. I did say this could be defeated, and I also said this would be a difficult maneuver but I understand that the F-5s in red flag used this effectively against F-4s, most likely to break lock since the F-4 uses sparrows which require constant illumination for missile track. New radars are much more powerful with much better processing so I suspect this has been reduced somewhat. Also, the AMRAAM does not need constant illumination in order to fly to the target.
     
  16. Bullockracing

    Bullockracing Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    316
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Occupation:
    United States Air Force
    Location:
    Vivian, Louisiana
    Pulse-doppler radar is based on the fact that targets moving with a nonzero radial velocity will introduce a phase-shift between successive pulses for the sample volume containing the target. Target velocity can therefore be estimated by determining the average phase-shift between successive pulses within a pulse packet. Real characteristics of a returned signal from a target may vary due to: wind shear, turbulence, differential fall velocity (particularly at high angles of attack), antenna rotation, and variation in refraction of microwave fronts. The generation of radar used in F-4s could be tricked into not seeing an approaching aircraft due to this differential fall velocity. All this being said, considering our thread, the radar in the current-generation of US fighter aircraft is more than capable of tracking an incoming adversary, regardless of thrust-vectoring, jinking, etc.
     
  17. davparlr

    davparlr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2006
    Messages:
    2,934
    Likes Received:
    105
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Occupation:
    retired avionics engineer
    Location:
    Southern California
    I think we are saying the same thing. If we go back to my original comment which was based on the Indian claim of defeating the F-15 in simulated combat. I did some internet research that indicated that the Indians had use thrust vectoring to defeat the F-15 radar. I said, roughly, that that was strange because breaking doppler lock techniques are not new and can be defeated easily. I said that I suspect the AF may have been playing a "we have to have the F-22" game.
     
Loading...

Share This Page