Aviapedia

F-22 video

By Pavel | October 15, 2005 on 3:06 pm | In Aviation Video, F-22 Raptor |

Click to download F-22 music video 2004
7,5 Mb, 3:03, 320 x 240, wmv.

Very nice art-video about F-22

63 Comments »

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Cool Video, bad ass Jet. Who do you think would own the Sky between the Raptor (F-22) and the Super Flanker (Su-37) both starting from nuetral advantages, say 200 miles apart in the air?

Comment by Conan — April 15, 2006 #
The F-22 would beat the Su-37 hands down even if you gave the su-37 the advantage. A pair of F-22 were placed into combat against 16 F-15 Eagles at the same time, all the F-15’s were beat hands down by the F-22’s. The F-22 has stealth, fires missles at mock speeds and maunevers better and more effeciantly then any plane in the sky, including attacking at a 90 degree angle. Sorry friend but a neutral playing ground for the Su-37 and the F-22 just wouldn’t be fair for the Su-37.

Comment by Sims — May 4, 2006 #
are there any comparisons between f22 and su47berkut

Comment by goxi — May 25, 2006 #
and one more thing. stealth technology is not really the greatest advantage for any airplane. the truth is that f117 had bean shooted down in serbia with out dated radar system

Comment by goxi — May 25, 2006 #
1 on 1 combat between a Su-37 and an F-22 isn’t easily decided. Sukhoi claims Su-37 has enough radar power to burn thru F-22’s stealth, which is entirely possible, russians know stealth technology really well, at least as well the americans (if not better, after all american stealth tech was based in part on russian research by this man “Pyotr Ufimtsev”. Google that name to learn.

Anyway, as far one on one combat chances are in Su-37’s favour as it is equpied with the thrust vectored off-boresight capable R-73 vs unproven (and not in service) AIM-9X. In addition Su-37 provides superior agility to the F22.

Comment by facts — June 28, 2006 #
There is a rumour that 2 more F 117 were shot down and a B 2. The radar used was he tesla radar that was designed by the soviets in the late 80’s early 90’s as a defence against stealth planes and yuguslavia proved that it worked.
Another thing i find funny is that despite all the money the US put into stealth, the f 117 and B 2 have been picked up and tracked by civilian radars lots of times.
Another good story is the during an air show in australia, the US secretly launched a F 117 as a surprise but not only did our old radars pick up the F 117 but we launched 2 fighters to intercept it.
So after that it is easy to beleive that a brand new top of the range fighter radar could pick up the F 22 and even if the F 22 launched a missile the SU 37 should be able to out manouver it and there is no dout that the Su 47 could.

Comment by Munzy — June 28, 2006 #
it’s very good this video, i think f22 it’s most agile what f 15 , f 22 can to do putgatchev cobra manouver, but i see in this manouver lost power ,
just whent this one finish the manouver wacht the video in normal speed

Comment by ugo — July 9, 2006 #
“The F-22 would beat the Su-37 hands down even if you gave the su-37 the advantage. A pair of F-22 were placed into combat against 16 F-15 Eagles at the same time, all the F-15’s were beat hands down by the F-22’s.”
So maybe the f15 isnt that good after all huh 16?and i’ve heard that US air force had did some exesercises with the su 30 of indias air force and they got panic
of the fact that radars mounted on su 30 was far more eficciant and got the us planes on sight sooner that the one on the us planes oh and why always usa attacks countries like vietnam panama afganistan oh yeah and why the didnt use the allmighty apachee in yougoslavia i think it will be same with the raptor too just too much propaganda.

Comment by anakin — July 16, 2006 #
The point of a stealth fighter is not to be completely invisible, but to stay hidden long enough to get the first shot. You know what, maybe the SU-37 radar could eventually “burn through” the stealth, assuming it knew where to look. In fact it would’t burn through at all, it might just see it a little bit sooner than the next guy does. What if it thought, for example it was after the easily seen F15’s sent on a mock attack, only to find out too late it was designed as a ploy to distract from the stalking F22? Never forget the value of either tactics or combined arms. If an enemy has SU37’s, wouldn’t job #1 be to take them out? They wouldn’t just be up against the F22, they’re up against the USAF.

Furthermore, it was once thought a gun wasn’t nesessary because made it obsolete. Well they found out the hard way that the early radar guided Sparrows achieved a kill 30% of the time. Guess what, that was then, this is now. Tha Amraam, in combat, has achieved around a 90% success rate. The day of the missle has arrived. He who shoots first, almost always wins.

The US airforce isn’t infallible, but I think time has shown it’s pretty darn good at what it does. Consider this, as they have. First the enemy’s ground radar or Mainstay has to see the F22 in time to react. (is 50-100 miles in supercruise enough?) Maybe the SU-37 sees the F22, maybe it avoids Amraam it wasn’t expecting, maybe it avoids the F22 altogether. Then it turns to attack??? What??? Where??? Time to reaquire supercruise stealth fighter again. Don’t forget radar guided missles may loose track very easily as well.

The fact that the SU37 or whatever else may possibly outmaneuver an F22 would only matter in visual range. That is very easily defeated- don’t dog fight, don’t go close. Shoot your missles and go home. I’d put my money on the F22 every time. Shoot and go home, shoot and go home. The SU37 can use that vaunted maneuverability to dodge all the missles sent towards the big fat radar target it makes.

Comment by bf-fly — July 20, 2006 #
Never forget that it is the human body that limits maneuverability, not the machine.

Comment by bf-fly — July 20, 2006 #
By the way, pertaining to the comment about the airbattles with India, keep a few things in mind.

First off, no AWACS, no support for the F-15’s. Further don’t discount the Air Forces desire to show just how much we need the F-22.

Secondly, when did the F-15 first fly? 1972??? The MIG29, SU 27, 37 etc., were the Soviet answers to US fighters than existed for 10-15 years before they even flew. Anything that comes along that much later ought to be a little better. If the F15 first flew in 10 years later, how much better do you think it would have been???

Third, If the US chose to, they could equipt F15’s with canards and the F22’s radar, thrust vectoring and engines to keep pace with the latest russian a/c, but why bother? It would still be a souped up F15, just like the SU37/47 is a souped up SU27. Each is a neon sign on radar.

Fourth.The only reason why the F15 remains our front line fighter is because the cold war is over. If it still existed, the F22 would have been fielded years ago.

Comment by bf-fly — July 21, 2006 #
“Third, If the US chose to, they could equipt F15’s with canards and the F22’s radar, thrust vectoring and engines to keep pace with the latest russian a/c, but why bother? It would still be a souped up F15, just like the SU37/47 is a souped up SU27. Each is a neon sign on radar.”

They will not, because it would be much expensive to upgrade old aircraft, then build new(or , maybe i am mistaking).

“Fourth.The only reason why the F15 remains our front line fighter is because the cold war is over. If it still existed, the F22 would have been fielded years ago.”

Yes…that way you will exchange three squadrons of F-15 for one squadron of F-22.Smart move for such “small” country.

Comment by Azagtoth — October 25, 2006 #
f-22 would win due to the fact the su-37 is not in production even if it was russian aircraft are overated. What major air battles have the Russians won lately????? none.

Comment by usplanefan — October 31, 2006 #
dude, russia hasnt won any major air battles lately because they have enough of thier own oil, they dont need to steal it from anyone, hence no land battle, no air battle required. since the second line of attack after recon is usualy one from the air to disable air and ground defence com. and power, have you ever wondered why the U.S
bombs the crap out of the likes of iraq and afganistan but when it comes to korea, russia and china thier sack is only big enough the strongly protest, with the best intentions of coarse.
lets not forget veitnam.. they got beat after killing millions by people using ox and carts and a larger scrotum..

Comment by jimi — November 19, 2006 #
good web site

Comment by Adel — November 27, 2006 #
Hi!

I hope the sukhoi T-50 will be much better..then the F-22.

Comment by Exception — December 3, 2006 #
In comparison to the F-22, the Su-47 Berkut dominates. But, keep in mind the amount of computing power it needs to even stay flying with its reversed wing arangement. Too many things can go wrong with the Berkut. It has proven itself to be one of thee most manuverable aircrafts of the century but overall, it cost too much to maintain and operate compared to the F-22. Id stick to the Su-37, much easier to keep in the air and also has demonstrated excellent performance even enough to challenge the praised F-22 Raptor.

Comment by Desolate — December 30, 2006 #
In comparison to the F-22, the Su-47 Berkut is much more manuverable no doubt. On the other hand, the Su-47 takes a massive amout of computing power just to keep it in the air with its reverse wing design. I think it uses around 4 computers just for this purpose. The russians will not produce this aircraft because the cost to operate and maintain it is too much. In my opinion the Berkut is an extremely unpredictable and unstable aircraft and it too far ahead of its time.
Id fly a Su-37 over an F-22 or Su-47 anyday.
Su-37: http://www.aviapedia.com/fighters/su-37-video

Comment by DeSoLaTe — December 30, 2006 #
the f22 and su 37 super flanker or simply terminator are pretty evenly matched. they were both built around the same year and have suprisingly similar air to air capabilities, but the f22 does have an advantage when it comes to stealth, but i wouldnt be suprised if the russian surface to air radar burned through the stealth, considering how advanced theirs is. just a question, but why does everyone compare the f22 to the su 37 instead of the TYPHOON, or GREIPEN, or, RAPHIEL?

Comment by flyboy — January 11, 2007 #
Actually everyone does On Aviapedia forum, all the time.

Like here: Best Fighter???

Comment by Pavel — January 12, 2007 #
It dependes if there are AWACs involved because with a bit of AWACs asistance the Su 37 can lauch an “alamo” missile 40km this far beats the american missiles at max 20km.

Comment by arc — January 31, 2007 #
That goes vis versa too Arc. The F-22 has enormous capabilities with an AWAC at its side.

Comment by DeSoLaTe — February 6, 2007 #
I just checked my many books again and I found the Su 35 will have a radar range of 400km and can lanche a missile called KS-174 with a range between 300-400km(Russia hasent specified yet)it is very advaced and can probably get the first shoot at 200km (beacause of the F-22’s stealf can probably be pierce by that radar at that range)and win the battel bofore it begins.So the 37 would carry more and a bigger radar.So sorry to all you F-22 fans but it’s way too outclassed with the four volitile weapons of the su 37:
the short range R-73(Max:8km) ,the medium range R-77(max:15km),the long range “Alamo” missiles(max: 40km), and as mentioned above the ultra long range KS-172(Max:400-300km).Wich two of each can be caried at the same time. And don’t forget the Cobra manuever and tail drop two things the F-22 can’t do.

P.S.:this is all accomplised WITHOUT AWAC asistance sorry about the earlier post

Comment by arc — February 7, 2007 #
A few things:
The incident in testing against Indian planes where the F-15s took high losses was this: The F-15s had no AWACS and the Indians did, but the USAF expected and still expects us to win all battles that are stacked against us (hence why we train F-22s 4,6,8, or 16 on 2)

NO American serviceman is allowed to do maneuvers such as the Pugachev Cobra (very simple for F-15s and 16s and ultra simple for F-22s (thrust vectoring)) or the tail slide (drop) because we dont want to crash planes like the Russians do at air shows rather frequently.

I am beyond tired of people using the term “burn through” or “pierce” for getting a contact on a stealthy target. Radar works like this: stealthy targets give smaller (not no, but smaller) returns, and will not register as AIRCRAFT by the radar or by the human (unless he is expecting it i guess and is willing to waste a missle) until much later in the engagement.

On stealthy planes: only 1 F-117 has been shot down. It was in Serbia, we know why (it was in a turn, the largest return on an F-117 is the bottom, as it has fewer faceted surfaces) and it is an old plane that is to be phased out. If a B-2 was shot down, we would know it, because we only have 20. Seriously. The reason why civilian radars can pick up an F-117, B-2 or F-22 is because they have structures on them designed to increase radar returns for when flying in civilian airspace. We are not trying to crash into one another. FAA practically owns US airspace below 40,000 feet.

Russians cannot afford field the Su-47, and none of the countries that are a threat to us could afford to. Including China. This is because it is unproven, and has not been built into a platform for war. It is a DEMONSTATOR.

All aspect stealth is HUGE. The F-22 has a small thermal signature (all the russian planes have HUGE signatures, even larger than our beloved F-15), it has a small radar signature (good enough to sneak up on many an AWACs radar, so it can definitely get close enough to rock some fighters world (considering despite the band and sophistication a fighter uses, it simply does not have the power to put out serious energy), it even has a low probability of intercept (LPI) radar, making it likely that an enemy may not even know if he’s being scanned! The AIM-120 has sufficient range to get close enough without even some of the strongest radars returning a signature large enough to get it. It can Track on Scan (home in on radar), track on an AWACs data link, track on the F-22s radar, and track the initial off of the huge thermal signature of the plane which will first show up identifiable at 50 miles (80km).

The russians might have good technology, but it is still archaic, the F-22 will still win BVR (Beyond Visual Range), and this state of affairs will hold for quite some time. The only thing comparable but still inferior by quite a bit is the Rafale, due to its stealth and the quality of aircraft produced by Dassault. Nothing else comes close.

Comment by Craig — February 15, 2007 #
Still if a target can be asesed as a treat no matter how small a lock on can probably be achieved if you look at the facts an F-22 looks 60% it size on radar due to stealf and can still be determined to be an aircraft by calculating speed and even thougth looking smaller on radar it’s still the size of a small aircraft or cruise missile therfore it can be labeled a hostile to spite the small size. this can all be determaned at about 200km after detection at least wich is wath I ment by peirce. So 400km radar range minus 200km wich is well in range off the lock on distance of the KS-172 missile (400km-300km max)wich can be shot at short distaces as well.
F-22 is built to not be asesed as a treat go in fast and get out before it can be Identified hostile. It is not ment to come into an air battel at short range beacause it can be identified visualy or by radar (birds don’t fly at mach 1.8). Ithere way the Cobra maneuover and tail drop (not slide sorry) are extremely safe when preformed at hy level Russian arebatics teams preform this at low level wich is quite a feet. Need I remined U of the many low level accident other contries have had dowing the simplest maneuvers such as formation (Ferce Tricolori in Germanie or the XB-70 incident)or for a low level pass (the B-52 or the time that thunderbird had to eject before his plane crashed or the time a F-117 Crashed itno a CIVILIAN house). So give them some credit they make amasing manoeuvers and accidents do hapen but U can’t say they have more accidents for anyother contry concidering wath they do. (to all dose how have lost their lives in these accidents I meen NO OFFENCE).

Comment by arc — February 19, 2007 #
THanks for getting that out Craig. Someone had to The F-22 is WAY too expensive to play with ^^. Seriously, how dumb would it sound? “An F-22 that cost $90,000,000 of U.S. tax payers money crashed today when the pilot tried to make a 10g maneuver” Im not saying we have bad pilots, just planes DO crash and we want to limit the amount. Its not worth risking a crash just for a kool show.

Comment by Desolate — February 20, 2007 #
Desolate is rigth you can probably buy 2-4 Su 37 for the price of 1 F-22 thats a factor that can tip the battel not spoken of yet NUMDERS 2-4 agaist one is a big difference

Comment by arc — February 24, 2007 #
Gives good odds with more aircraft, but the point isnt production, its about manueverability. We know what the Su-37 is capable of because they cost less and russians can afford to make videos of them. I really want to see an F-22 video with its full potential. Same with the SU-47. They both cost too much to show off but they should hurry it up…

Comment by DeSoLaTe — February 28, 2007 #
So what if the F-22 did beat 16 F-15. First of all F-15 is a piece of shit jet. Second of all, it matters really much if the fight was put on by the same team, all American. The advertisment of being able to say that F-22 did this is good enough reasons to put the lousiest pilots with hangovers on the F-15 against the F-22. It is psycolocical warfare.
Besides all that a radar can detect stealth, people don´t need to argue about this anymore, Siemens a German company has designed a new way of detecting stealth, go google it if you want. This technology is going to be good for the U.S to have in their pockets in the future. But the F-22 is way to expensive that any general would recommended it, except a British one, they have no self esteem but put blind faith in everything the Americans do.
I like the Eurofighter very much though. I am not familiar with the Sukhoi.

Comment by Jon Gunnar — February 28, 2007 #
Addressing droves of misinformation….

Arc, all of the crashes you mentioned (the ‘52 in low level, the ‘16 in maneuver, the 117 at low level) were due to pilot error from a pilot with a record of rules violations, an altimiter set to Above sea level instead of above ground level while flying in an elevated area, and an engine flame out, respectively. It is simple, and true, THE UNITED STATES HAS MUCH GREATER SAFETY PROCEDURES. Consequently we crash fewer planes. Please do not even mention the XB-70 Valkyrie, that was because of the MASSIVE wing vortex that sucked in an F-104, ripping off the vertical stabilizers.

I am not saying a Pugachev cobra isnt an incredible maneuver, because it is (a tail slide, drop, whatever you want to call it, is not.) All I am saying is that nearly every high performance plane made by the russians AND the US could do the maneuver, since the Mig 29 and F-16 onward. It is really nothing special for either country, but more of a novelty to the CIVILIANS watching the airshows.

On the F-22s capabilities being known, the Air Force really couldnt care less if people in the public think we’re the best. The governments know very well that if we make a claim, its fairly well substantiated.

Gunnar.
F-22s beating massive numbers of F-15s is a huge feat. The F-15 was never meant to be a weaker aircraft deployed in hordes like the Migs or the Sukhois. It is an Air Superiority fighter in every meaning of the word, with the BEST COMBAT RECORD OF ALL MODERN FIGHTER AIRCRAFT. It has never been defeated in a REAL air to air. (this is different than the made up scenarios for exercises, where the enemy is ALWAYS given the tactical advantage against american forces, simply because we have an equipment advantage.)

ARC. Please cite your sources on how exactly you’re going to get a 60% radar return from an F-22.

Comment by Craig — March 2, 2007 #
You are rigth that the U.S. has better safty regulations and as for that reference it’s 50% radar output sorry from : “Aviation Factfiles Concept aircraft” Page 199 articule of comparison between YF-22 and YF-23 in stealthiness the point is quiet well made with the 23 at 40% and 22 at 50% radar return this can still be identified as a cruise missile EZ

Comment by arc — March 10, 2007 #
Hey Arc, the F-22 could do a cobra …and more..here is a link to the video
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4306529957288052978&q=label%3Acobra
….also the F-15 could do it too….Arc must be a russian fanboy.
look here,you can argue all you want, and “win” any arguement, the truth of the fact is that none of this plane is proven in combat except the F-15 and F-16 which is combat proven.

Arc, pray for a war then you will see the raptor in action.

Comment by metalsyren — March 22, 2007 #
So wath if the F-22 is as manueverable than the Su-37. If the Su-37 can get the first shot it’s game over and thats wath i’m talking about . And metalsyren i’m not a “russian fanboy” or wathever you meen by that the F-22 is just overpriced for it’s capabilities as I said earlier 4 agaist one is no figth. And wach wath your saying I’m sure NOWONE here including me wishes for a war. There are many american planes wich could probably put up a good figth or win against the Su-37 but all considered the F-22 is not one of them!!

Comment by arc — March 25, 2007 #
Nice video metalsyren! Arc…good luck getting your “first shot” against an F-22. HA doubt it! VIVA LA TECH DE AMERICA!!!

Comment by DeSoLaTe — March 27, 2007 #
Wow there are alot of brain dead idiots posting here. Of course Stealth aircraft are picked up on civilian radar! They have transponders on at all times in civilian air space! HELLO! McFLY!What do you expect for the internet? NEWS FLASH for you guys. The Su-47 is not even a production aircraft! Besides being perhaps the ugliest thing ever to digrace the skies, it was only a technology demonstrator(and it didn’t demonstrate anything new at that). Just like the old American X-31; which, by the way, was far superior in manuverability to any Flanker. And about that wonderful Su-37, which was also only an experimental aircraft, they lost 2 out of 2 prototypes, thats a 100% loss rate before it ever saw combat! Yeah, I’ve heard all this BS about russia wanting to build the PAK-FA a supposedly 5th gen fighter, too bad they don’t have the money or the technology to do so. I’ll believe russia is advanced when they manage to build a submarine that doesn’t kill it’s crew and stop running to the British for help whenever their subs are in trouble. For now the F-22A Raptor is the King of the skies by a large margin. Get used to it, and get over it.

Comment by Russia Sucks — March 31, 2007 #
Thank you good sir, for educating the people on their ridiculous claim that “civilian radar can pick up a raptor”. As you said so succinctly, all military aircraft use transponders in FAA airspace. F-117s and B-2s use both transponders *AND* radar reflectors that are retractable, because they are so small or deceptive in their returns that even with the transponders, the ATCs wouldnt know what it was, because the transponder code wouldnt correspond to their radar return.

There are significant gaps in radar coverage over many countries, including the US. Even in a civilian plane, unless you are near a major city, if you turn off your transponder, it is possible to disappear.

Read books people, or ask someone knowledgable. THEN AND ONLY THEN should you speak.

Comment by Craig — April 4, 2007 #
I have, did you check out my source yet it’s posted sevral comments above and turning of your transponder dose note reduce your radar singnature it just stop your aircraft from skwaking (the proper term for transmiting I.D. signals)that it is military and please read all the poste before commenting ive alredy explaid most of your comments above! And about the comment from march 31,2007 your name is very imature and prototypes crash beacause they are push to the max and are first to be produced they do not represent operetional aircraft wich have the bugs ironed out. I know wath i’m talking about!!

Comment by arc — April 11, 2007 #
…way to be immature man. Like arc said, it is almost a good thing that they crashed their prototypes. It gives them A LOT of information on how to fix the problem IF they decide the program is worth continueing based on the prototype results. There are plenty of other ways to express your anger then posting immature comments, try to beat a russian in Lock On or even BF2 (you WILL lose….EVERY time)

-If its wet, and its not yours, DONT TOUCH IT!!!

Comment by desolate — April 26, 2007 #
HAHAHA. Hardly. Once again, I must educate the masses.

Arc, never did I ever say that turning your transponder off reduces your radar signiture. I said turning your transponder off (aka as not squawking) makes it so that you cannot be seen in many places. Why? Because many countries, including much of the United States, have no Air Defense Identification Zone for the interior. We assume no threats are coming from inside (this is changing for obvious reasons). Its kinda lika donut of radar coverage.

Your reference of “Aviation Factfiles” is from the same source of speculation as the information from Aircraft of the World. As in ***people who do not have access to recent data on returns.*** Do you not see this? The YF-22 and YF-23 have not been compared in YEARS. The radar return of the F-22 is entirely different, because the shape is different (return bigger in some ways, smaller in others). This does not even address the issues of radar absorbency which would have decreased the return of both fighters even further.

Air Force, has time and again concluded that Raptor has a return in “the birds and the bees class” meaning much less than a 60% return.

You have clearly not read up on how we identify planes in our airspace, you have clearly not actually found out why planes have crashed in US airspace, which ALWAYS results in an investigation by the NTSB (National Transit Safety Bureau). We dont screw around with crazy ass maneuvers, its why the Thunderbirds dont do alot of stuff that they CAN do (I’ve spoken to the major who as of last year was the #4, “The Slot”

In the US, we dont crash planes. We have the best safety record of ANY Air Force in the world (relative to size). The YF-22 for example, was provided with a spin parachute to help it recover from a spin during maneuverability tests. This is so that we do not crash a 100 million dollar plane. Once again, SAFETY PROCEDURES. We dont learn from crashes, we learn from MORE FLIGHT.

And Desolate. Dont insult the intelligence of people like me with comments about GAMES like Lock On and Battlefield 2. I dont care at all what those games have to say about much of anything. Lock On might be reasonable, but the Aerodynamic model is still too simplified. They’re all GAMES, so treat them as such. Dont imagine yourself knowledgable, EVER until you’ve done REAL research.

Comment by Craig — May 2, 2007 #
Very well put Craig.

Comment by Jon — July 11, 2007 #
>russian aircraft are overated. What major air battles have the Russians won lately????? none.

Maybe because they haven’t participated? Thanks Russia doesn’t attack other countries as USA does. For the most part F-15 shoot down 2nd, 3rd generation planes, and a few old downgraded export variants of MiG-29 to boost it’s overated record and fanboys on internet braging about it all the way.
If you want to talk about Russian planes recently victories then check out battles on African continent, plenty victories by Su-27 over MiG-29. http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_192.shtml

So again, what so cool about F-15C wins over old downgraded MiGs that have never even been in service in Russian air forces? Just don’t forget that F-15 has never faced a mordern up to date plane in a real battle.

As for F-22 vs Su-37. Depends on which territory these battles can take place. On Russia’s territory F-22 would face not only Su but also a bunch of MiG-31 and C-300 from which it would receive information on tageting. Ground PVO certainly would track stealth with ease.

>F-22s beating massive numbers of F-15s is a huge feat.

We don’t know the details, what was the tactic of F-15 if at all? Maybe all 16 F-15 were shining as christmas trees trying to search F-22 with their radars on.

>It is an Air Superiority fighter in every meaning of the word, with the BEST COMBAT RECORD OF ALL MODERN FIGHTER AIRCRAFT. It has never been defeated in a REAL air to air.

It has never faced up to date 4th generation plane. 95% of it’s wins over 2nd and 3rd generation planes, not to mention quantity and Awacs advantage.

>this is dfferent than the made up scenarios for exercises, where the enemy is ALWAYS given the tactical advantage against american forces

The irony, so if the sides reversed F-15 isn’t looking so cool? Then why fanboys bash old MiGs who always had huge tactical disadvantage? BTW we still don’t know the whole truth of what was at the exercises in India.

>the truth of the fact is that none of this plane is proven in combat except the F-15 and F-16 which is combat proven.

You are wrong, Su-27 has lots of real combat victories over MiG-29 WITHOUT Awacs and other support as usually F-15 do have. Read: http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_192.shtml

Now tell me why these Su-27 victories over MiG-27 any worse than F-15 victories over MiG-29?

Comment by America rules — July 25, 2007 #
Sorry misspelled: Now tell me why these Su-27 victories over MiG-29 any worse than F-15 victories over MiG-29?

BTW Su-27 also has never been defeated in a REAL air to air.

Comment by America rules — July 25, 2007 #
Imaging Montreal Canadiens going against junior teams of OHL. Canadiens would smoke them to dust every time they meet, but would you call it the best club in the world even it would had a record 300 wins 0 loses vs OHL? There is Canadiens, but there is Anaheim, Detroit etc.

Or another analogy, Klichko vs some lightweighter. But would you call him the best when you know that there is Lennox Lewis? So as long as you know that there is Su-27/30 you cannot call F-15 the best, because it is not proven vs stronger competition.

Comment by America rules — July 25, 2007 #
Great discussion. Don’t you want to move to the Field trials forum section?

Thank you.

Comment by Pavel — August 2, 2007 #
Look, despite what all of you people are saying, it is simply a FACT that the F-15 as well as the United States in general has the best fighting and kill record of any plane in the air. It is built the right way to get the kills it needs.

*It has a lower wing loading than that of the Su-27
*It has a higher thrust to weight ratio than the Su-27
*And it can easily achieve the angles of attack necessary to beat it’s opponents (because it was designed that way from the beginning
*It has the best view for the pilot of any 4th generation fighter.

The Su-27 may (and I repeat MAY) have better maneuverability, but as absolutely MUST be the case if you look at the aerodynamic data, it cannot possibly be that much, and would have to be only evident at lower speeds

(***for those of you who are not trained in Aerospace engineering, the explaination is simple. If your wing loading is greater, you turn much slower than something with a lower wing loading and the difference only increases the faster you go (due to momentum being equal to the product of the mass and velocity). Essentially AT HIGH SPEEDS THE F-15 AND SU-27 WILL BE AT LEAST EQUAL, WITH A MOST LIKELY ADVANTAGE TO THE F-15 IN HIGH POWER MANEUVERS.

This is not hearsay. I did not decide this based off of some ridiculous story. This is the only conclusion on can come to because THESE FIGHTERS HAVE NEVER FOUGHT ONE ANOTHER. The F-22 beats both these planes on ALL PERFORMANCE STATS. It should be expected to beat an F-15 or Su-27 as easily as an F-15 beats an F-16 or a Su-27 beats a MiG-29.

Perhaps even easier.

Comment by Craig — August 6, 2007 #
I wonder what will happen if the f-22 attacks along with the US’s radar jamming capabilities and unmanned fighters? What will happen to tactics, you can’t possibly imagine that the US won’t be using tactics only available with stealth? Do the Russian pilots even get enough time in the air? I remember that under the USSR they had to train in simulators because they couldn’t afford to fly. What about the economic factors regarding production? Russia has a smaller GDP than Canada or Italy! I think the main consideration is that with unmanned stealth vehicles any russian planes would be destroyed on the ground.

Comment by =) — August 22, 2007 #
Seems every body is pro F22 ,But the truth be known the F22 has nearly the same radar image as a F15 ,also the MIG-29 ovt is more likley to kill a F22 than a SU-30 or even SU-33 type B (which has thrust vectoring nozzels) but thats all a none factor , most of our enemies use older air craft ,take it from someone who has flown both sides of the fence , so quit fussing about it ,all aircraft can be shot down if the pilots GOOD ………..

Comment by MERC_1 — September 26, 2007 #
first of all the F-15 is an incredible aircraft. Ithas a 33-0 kill to loss ratio in real conflicts, and until recently a 179-15 simulated. Two years ago the F-22 was inserted into operation red flag, a massive simulated air war with particapants from 12 countries. Four F-22s killed 88 enemy aircraft without even being even being targeted ONCE. THere were eurofighters, Su-37s, F-15s, F-16s, and F-18s. Meanwhile the F-15 got plenty of kills before then at the same simulation which takes place evrey year. It doesn’t matter wheter the enemy aircrafts missiles can go further, they can’t olock on from that distance. And no one has mentioned supercruise yet. Our birds can fight a battle over our airspacem, kick ass and chase/kill them all the way back to their bases as they flee too slowly and with less fuel. The last part of the F-22’s dominance is still in development. The engineers at Lockheed MArtin are designing a laser to specificallly fit the F-22

Comment by USAF kicks ass — October 5, 2007 #
Ya the F-22s came in and blew the hell out of everything in its path

Comment by Ace — November 21, 2007 #
And the laser (I saw it on futureweapons on the military channel) will hav a range of 300 miles and willbe able to rip through an A-10 in 0.83 seconds and tanks in 0.32 seconds

Comment by Ace — November 21, 2007 #
I would be more afraid of the Russian Ground based Air Defense (S-300 and 400)systems than
than their fighters.

Comment by Kobussie — November 30, 2007 #
the soviets did not invest in thrust vectoring because it was a propaganda scheme, it was a viable advanced techonologoy that is proven. The untied states did not invest countless billions into stealth technology and build their 21st century fighter around it so that a civilian can pick it up wiht ground based radar, they invested in a technology that the soviets did not and it paid off. Stealth is by no means easy or cheap, no country possses the stealth technologies of u.s. aircraft because of its difficulties, The u.s. did not devote the next 25 years of air power to a fighter that carries its weapons internally because it was easy, they did it because they figured out how, its stealth…….its radar is beyond soviet abilities and its speed and manuverability are unrivaled. Call it what it is,,,,,perfect

Comment by william — February 11, 2008 #
F-22 is a transformers!!! hahaha its only american propaganda. i think f-22 cannot even beat su-30mkm rmaf.

Comment by kill_raptors — February 23, 2008 #
From what I’ve read, the smaller radarcrossection of the F-22, among other planes, is achieved through the combination of geometry, materials and that radar-absorbing paint.
The radarcrossection of JAS 39 Gripen is eledged to have been reduced by 10dB (to 10% of what it’s normaly) by the use of this ram-paint. SAAB tried it but I’m not sure if the airforce have used it.
And I also read in a book by Yefim Gordon that the Mig29M achieved similar results with such paints.

The Swedish navy had a ship with stealth features, a tech-demonstrator, that was reqired to have a radar-reflector (the kind you get at yachtsupply stores) so that civilian traffic (and other of the navys ships) could see it, for the same reasons the stealth aircraft uses radarreflectors.

Doesn’t the F-22 have thrustvectoring just like the russian tech-demonstrators.

The Mig29 that shot down an F-117 over Serbia probably didn’t use its radar to attack as the pilot of the F-117 would have been warned.

And a point to consider; No-one in their right mind would use the full potential of their radars in excercises with other nations, unless ofcourcse they are using identical equipment. You never know who or what will be “listening” on your radars signature (for making up ways to defeat it) The same goes for the ECM-stuff. Why reveal the secrets of the F-15 (or any other plane) by winning all mock combats. Maybe the “loosing” side got exactly what they came for, the chance to improve their radar/ECM-equipment.

The Mig29 has had many upgrades since it first came into service and it’s safe to say the same about the Su27. The F-14 was at it’s best when it was withdrawn from service as far as capability is concerned. The same goes for every type of aircraft.

Is the fact that the Su27 is of an integral design (like the F-14 and Mig29) and the F-15 a more convetional design a factor when calculating the wingloading, not to mention airfoils…?

And who excaclty says that the russians can’t make as good airborne intercept radars as the americans? Did that person at some point work with radardesign in Russia. Or was it a spy or two thinking they are smarter than every one else who came to that conclution?

Someone onece said that a weapon is only as good as the users aim, the planes will never be any better than the pilots flying them. How many flighthours does a pilot in the USAF/USN/USMC vs any other pilot get per year…

You keep guessing who will win… I know that USA will never attack unless they know for sure that they will win. It’s a policy they have adopted since the war in Vietnam. They will also make the enemy out to be realy dangerous/evil as well or they won’t get any support from the people. Remember how dangerous the Iragi army was before the first Gulfwar… the same army that couldn’t even defeat Iran, during a US-lead embargo againts Iran…

Have I missed anything that has been speculated about in this thread…

Comment by freddan — March 3, 2008 #
O rite if u guys went to the field trials section u probably saw the article about the soviet PAK FA or T50 and there’s 2 things i want u to kno
- This “PAK FA” will not be mass produced like F15 or F22
-And also Russia will (if history repeats itself) most likely crash their only 2 prototypes and subject themselves to further dept

Comment by Ace — April 10, 2008 #
O i forgot , the T50 wont pose a threat either because of the fact that it would be completely outnumbered by F22 because U.S. has 438 F22 in air fleet and will be up to 452 by end of 2007.

Comment by Ace — April 10, 2008 #
“The engineers at Lockheed MArtin are designing a laser to specificallly fit the F-22″ + “And the laser (I saw it on futureweapons on the military channel) will hav a range of 300 miles and willbe able to rip through an A-10 in 0.83 seconds and tanks in 0.32 seconds”
I wonder if US Dod knows about that laser weapon yet, Janes defence weekly said this¨about a US DoD report;

The report argued that the need for cost-benefit analyses was made all the more urgent since DE had long suffered from a history of overly optimistic expectations. In the 1970s, for example, a US Air Force (USAF) decision to cancel a short-range air-to-air missile programme was strongly influenced by the prediction that, with increased focus and funding, the requirement could be met in the near term by a laser weapon integrated on a fighter aircraft.

“Almost 30 years later, there is little prospect of achieving such a capability. More recent examples … are the multiple years of delay on the well-funded ABL [Airborne Laser] programme and the demise of the otherwise successful THEL [Tactical High Energy Laser] programme for programmatic issues, including logistical complexity on the battlefield.”

Further, the report argued that a second issue was that for many of the DE systems in development, a competing conventional approach already existed and, given the “history of high-energy laser programmes, these conventional approaches are more credible to warfighters and force providers”

Thus it seams reasonable to beleive that if they can’t integrate a reliable laser in a Boeing 747 yet, they are even furhter from integrating such weapons on an F-22.

One other thing about “F-22 vs any other fighter”-argument and the “Russians can’t build good fighters”-angle;
Have any other government than the US ordered a fighter with the capabilities of the F-22? Does any other nation stand idely by when it’s government buy such rediculously expensive aircraft instead of improving education and healthcare?
Does Mikoyan and Sukhoi build aircraft that there is no market for or do they actually sell airplanes to other nations?
There is no other market for planes like the F-22 than the US, not at that price!!! If Sweden could afford to buy and operate much better planes than the F-22, the choice would still be JAS 39 Gripen since money will be better spent on more important things. This just proves that americans realy like to opress others in one way or another.

Comment by freddan — April 18, 2008 #
The US Airforce has 438 F-22’s??? Maybe you should tell them that because as it is now they think they have 91 F-22’s. I doubt Loockheed has delivered 347 of them during the last few days or even since december 2005, when the F-22 became operational.

Comment by freddan — April 23, 2008 #
Give the Israeli Air Force the F-22 or F-15 they would destroy any Russian made fighter plane …history(6 days war,yom kippur ,etc) can confirm that to you

Comment by LEVANI — May 13, 2008 #
Sorry, that “really advanced” russian radar is jast a big weather radar. It detects atmospheric changes not stealth. It also can’t que a missile it can only que a normal radar which fires a normal missile, which, durring terminal phase goes active and still won’t see stealth. The “ONLY” stealth shot down was in this fashion using almost 40 very advanced russian missiles. They could only get a general location and lob everything they had and got a lucky near miss that damaged a control surface on the F-117. I’ve listened to the radio calls from the F-117.

Also the F-15 has shot down in actual combat every single Russian fighter in service, except SU-30 (which its done in practice, 2008 Red Flag). The F-22 can spank the F-15. If you really think a plane with a RCS the size of a B-52 has any chance whatsoever, see a psychiatrist. Also if the the SU-37 - 47 turn on their radar its like a lighthouse on a foggy night, and an AMRAAM is on its way right up that radar beam.

Comment by tank-top — September 13, 2008 #
To ace, are you from America??? are you that big patriot???? USA has 438 F-22 in service??? that is the stupidest thing i ever read. USA reduced amount of planes to be produced several times, and will reduce more.
come on people be realistic!!!
F-22 IS BETTER then SU-37, but compare the price!!! If someone buys f-22, another country will buy more then 3 SU-37’s for the same amount of money. And be sure f-22 cant stand against more then 2 SU family fighters, even if its SU-30. that British research that f-22 can beat 10 su-37’s is impossible, even American experts say that. Su planes are simple and reliable just like Kalashnikov (world best assault rifle).

Comment by NoVoice — November 11, 2008 #
O i forgot , the T50 wont pose a threat either because of the fact that it would be completely outnumbered by F22 because U.S. has 438 F22 in air fleet and will be up to 452 by end of 2007.

posted by ACE- in april, 2008

Ace, how old are you????? seven????? you posted your comment in 2008 and you are saying there will be 452 f-22 in service by the end of 2007????? WTF?????? why dont you give us 2008 numbers???? are you 1st grader or something??? posting 2007 numbers in 2008 year is what????? Another thing that makes me REALLY surprised is that the numbers are &^cking WRONG.

Comment by NoVoice — November 11, 2008 #
Sorry guys i am away from the topic, i was just ^&cking surprised by ACE.

Coming back to the video. The video is really good, good editing, seriously very good editing, but all it shows is how pretty is f-22. All that missle shooting and flying in a straight line. why dont they show us how good is the maneuverability??? any plane can shoot a missle, any plane can fly. the video does not show anything special except of VERY pretty plane.
comparing to SU-37 video. have you seen that one? it got a speaker and the video shows characteristics which other planes dont have.

Comment by NoVoice — November 11, 2008 #