PAK FA Vs F-35

>>33212882
The one with S-ducts

File: download.jpg (6KB, 251x201px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 251x201px

>>33212882
f22. the end

>>33213042
Best plane of all time
/thread

File: Su-35S-vs-JSF-Engage-1.png (78KB, 768x1024px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 768x1024px

The one actually designed for leaving the hangar.

>>33213182
>>33213174
>>33213166
RIP F-35, what a fucking waste of money...

Russia has shown to the world that it has declared war against international law, against vulnerable communities, and against US allies, values, and the very institutions of democracy enshrined in the blood of heroes.

The tools used by the Russians to achieve their dark goals of evil must not be praised or venerated. If you have to post it, keep the focus on their flaws, and of the abuses they will be used to accomplish.

>>33213182
>>33213174
>>33213166

when will ameriburgers admit their air industry is complete garbage before the glory of Putin aka Jesus' air might?

>>33212882
The one with a functioning radar, in-production engines and actual stealth coating.

>>33212882
f-35

>superior weapon
>AMRAAM
>AIM-9X block 2

>more stealthy both in radar and IR
>superior LPI radar , EA/ESM/ECCM tech, tactical data-link, passive sensor(ex.EOTS)
>superior logistics, maintenance, operational capability (search Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS) )

R.I.P under semi-stealth shitty PAK-FA and all F-35 pessimist faggots

>>33213049
t.Lockmart employee of the month

>>33212882
>F-35 vs glorified 4.5gen

wew

File: er5896b77f.jpg (31KB, 600x344px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 600x344px

FATNIKS BTFO

HOW CAN THEY EVER RECOVER?

File: Screenshot_2016-12-29-03-22-27-1.png (74KB, 1069x558px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 1069x558px

>>33212882
Why do Russians always think their jets are somehow superior to everything?

EVERYTIME Russia claims to have the superior jet, it gets its ass kicked by US fighters.

Russia hypes up their unbeatable jet
Turns out it's just a body kit on a 20yr old airframe.

>>33212900
>One who losses half of engine power for outdated engineering designs.

>>33214831
>Why do Russians always think their jets are somehow superior to everything?
Because every time when their jets are piloted by Russian (1992) or just proper (India, 2005) crew, American pilots begin to eat dirt.
Russian jets are superior to everything, but US information system and organization wins. AWACSes and stuff.

>>33214916
>Russian jets are superior
Ha ha ha ha oh wow you serious? Even if it is true (not), American plane win because Russia plane is not mass produced because of lack of money. Russia is broke, joke and coked. No future, forgotten past. Only illusions and day dreamers. Sleep well Russia.

>>33214936
You're talking about American economy being better than Russian, not about planes.

File: 14558591054810.jpg (134KB, 1500x1013px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 1500x1013px

>>33212882

> pak-fa isn't even finished
> f-35 is already an overpriced failure which was obviously only ever meant to steal tax shekels and funnel them into Lockmart's pockets

I like how slavshits approached 5th gen much more than fatniks

also pak-fa looks WAY better, then again slavshit planes always do

File: 14600398350330.jpg (188KB, 800x1084px) Image search: [Google]

188KB, 800x1084px

>>33213182

AYO HOL UP!

SO U B SAYIN

HOL UP HOL HOL UP

SO UB SAYING THAT THE F35 IS A LEMON???

>>33213174
How is it a good thing to have a variety of more or less bad missiles?

>>33215004
Russian missiles tech is undeniable better than usa missiles, mostly cuz Americans want 1 for all jets while russians have specialist missiles
Same with the f 35 one in all jet vs whole list of Su 35 and 27 variants

>>33214916
What happened in 1992 and 2005?

>>33215004
>>33215019
My understanding is that it's mostly to do with doctrinal difference.

Where The US might use a single or pair of AMRAAMS to engage a target, it's Russian doctrine to fire several missiles of different types in a volley.

Russian planes carry much larger A2A loads because of this.
The logic of this being that it's much harder to have to avoid something that's chasing your active radar seeker, your radar return and your heat signature.

In theory, you only have to defeat/jam/hide from the radar seeker in the AMRAAM and no amount of them can hit you.

In the reading I've done, this tactic seems to offer about equal or in some cases better hit percentages than American doctrine, despite the individual missiles being out performed by American designs on a side by side basis.

>>33215004

when your jets fire off a salvo with 2 different seekers, it hightens PK chance you fucking imbecile

> russian missiles are bad

no they really aren't

>>33215118
So why not fire all of your missiles at just one target?

>n-n-no our missiles aren't inferior despite a major lag in avionics tech

>>33215087
It's partly also to do with just the sheer size of the Flanker family; a MiG-29 for example carries no more missiles than an F-16.

A Su-27/30/35 is comparable to an F-15, but Flankers are a few meters wider and longer (they're massive), which allows them to throw a few more missiles on (8 vs 12-14). The F-15C's 2040C upgrade will see that increase to 12.

File: 1487063782679.png (375KB, 763x960px) Image search: [Google]

375KB, 763x960px

>>33215128

> why not fire your missiles at just one target

let me get this straight

in one comment you've tried to put down russian missiles because of their "bad avionics", then you're asking why russians don't fire all the missiles at one target

>>33215163
You're saying that Russian fighters launch more missiles to have a better pK. But at what point is the pK acceptable?

Why does Russia feel that it's necessary to fire multiple missiles per target while the US doesn't?

File: 1372122830220.png (120KB, 401x338px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 401x338px

>>33213174
>all these "ready any day now, promise!" missiles
wew lad

>>33215163
>Fire 2 heat seeking missles.
>drop flares to counter both missles

>Fire 1 Radar guided and 1 Heat seeker
>dropping flares only counters the heat seeker, you must take additional action to counter the second kind of missle

The real tipping point would be if Russian missiles could datalink to each other and share their sensor data independent of the Aircraft that launched it. Even for part of the flight path. A big downside of IR based missiles is their range head on is a significant factor less than it is from the rear, allowing an IR based missile to 'piggyback' the data from the radar guided missile it was launched along side until it's own seeker was in range would be a huge advantage. Same theory applies in reverse if the radar seeker was jammed, it could use the IR data to stay on target until it was able to 'burn through' the jamming.

Like building a missile with 2 full sized seekers for the weight and size of 1.

>>33214985
>pak-fa looks WAY better
That's because it's a propaganda tool to fool russians that they are not backwards savages.
>we iz 5th gen n' sheeit

The PAK-FA will have about ten finished air frames, hidden in some fuckoff airbase in the middle of siberia, only to be wheeled out to fly over parades when the savages need calming.

>>33215211

> The mathematics of multiple round missile engagements are unambiguous - the size of a missile salvo launched is a stronger driver of success than the actual kill probability of the individual missiles. If the missiles are wholly identical by type, then the following curves may be optimistic, insofar as a factor degrading the kill probability of one missile is apt to have a similar effect on its siblings in a salvo. However, where the missiles differ by seeker type and guidance control laws, then the assumption of statistically independent missile shots is very much stronger

This is for you. And by the way, burgerboi pilots definitely fire at least 2 missiles always.

>>33215231

I already heard something about datalinks on their newest cruise missile, would be pretty crazy to have data-linked BVR for fighters

File: 14792120046130.jpg (268KB, 1280x850px) Image search: [Google]

268KB, 1280x850px

>>33215232

russians build nuclear reactors and still fly you to space on rockets they made in the 60s

somehow it seems if anyone's ever overcompensating, they're most probably western and definitely american

File: 14842607052101.jpg (90KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 1000x667px

>>33215232

russians can make propaganda for muh dik any day of the week

besides, it's not like they've not BTFO their fair share of sandniggers, so I really think you're just asshurt about them

>>33215211
Well I'd think that it follows the old adage of "shoot to kill". You're not firing a volley of AMRAAMs at someone as a greeting. And anyone you shoot at is going to shoot back, if they can.
So logically 100% is ideal.

I'm trying to stay out of nationalistic shit posting but if you're argument is that Americans shoot exactly the right amount of missiles and Russians wastes missiles on overkilling targets then you don't have a very good grasp on modern air combat.

The 'p' in pK is refers to percentages and no missile, plane or combat system will ever reach 100%.

To put it in another meme-freindly format you might be familiar with:
Is the Mozambique drill overkill and a waste of bullets? For every person that you kill outright on the first round, yes. But not everyone dies to the first round. It's not just your life, but a multi million dollar force multiplier you're risking too.

File: 14424893657512.jpg (286KB, 2560x1600px) Image search: [Google]

286KB, 2560x1600px

> pak fa vs f 35

neither

>>33212900
fpbp

>>33212900
Do you even know what an S-Duct does?

>>33215254
>russians build nuclear reactors and still fly you to space on rockets they made in the 60s

That's because russia peaked in the 60s only to be in a downward spiral ever since.
Gorbachev and Yeltsin gave you a chance to become a civilized democracy and regain dignity but no, you chose barbarity, savagery and oppression, dooming you to forever be decade behind the west and poor, both economically, military and culturally.

>>33215081
In 1992, i read that there was some sort of combat training that happened between Russian Su-27's and USAF F-15's, in which, the Su-27 won. The only other thing i remember is that it "gets even better" because the Su-27UB, which was said to be "sluggish" won against the single seat F-15C. Oh, and in 2005, there was this joint training with USAF F-15's and Indian Su-30MKI's, which the Indians won in close combat engagement against the F-15's.

>>33215240
>And by the way, burgerboi pilots definitely fire at least 2 missiles always.

27 December 1992; an F-16 fires a single AMRAAM and kills a MiG-25.

17 January 1993, an F-16 fires a single AMRAAM and kills a MiG-23.

>>33215263
>if you're argument is that Americans shoot exactly the right amount of missiles
My argument is that the US is comfortable (and effective) in using single missiles like as shown above to get kills. Russia does not seem comfortable.

>But not everyone dies to the first round.
What if you have a single magazine and are expecting more hostiles?

File: f-35-inlet-again-x-band.png (31KB, 603x394px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 603x394px

>>33215291
Defeat X-band radars by coating the insides with RAM tailored against short wave threats.
X-band threats such as the russian IBRIS-E radar.

>>33215307
>in 2005, there was this joint training with USAF F-15's and Indian Su-30MKI's, which the Indians won in close combat engagement against the F-15's
The engagements india demanded 2:1 superiority and that no AIM-120s on american planes? Yeah, that was a good one.

File: 1488735037386.jpg (752KB, 3300x2550px) Image search: [Google]

752KB, 3300x2550px

>>33212882

Nothing has changed in the meantime.

>>33215475
Who are they?

>>33212882
>Since you faggots will argue about anything
More true words have never been spoken

>>33215608
I think it's John Boyd and Artem Mikoyan

>>33213166
>Implying the F-35 and his three buddies aren't using the Su-35's radar to hunt and kill him at their leisure

>>33213174
>Russia has 25 different mediocre missiles
>US has a couple series of really good missiles in service

>>33213182
>Complete bullshit subjective chart

>>33214897
>A single F135 has more dry thrust than both engines in a Mig-29 at full afterburner
Good thing US engines aren't garbage, then.

>>33214831
With Russia's new longwave radar, the f-35 can possibly be detected from 90km away.

>>33214936
>Russia is broke, joke and coked. No future, forgotten past. Only illusions and day dreamers. Sleep well Russia.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QrU1hZxSEXQ

>>33214969
Our planes are 30 years ahead of yours and we can build more as a slow start than you can build as an entire fleet.

File: 34663587805795.jpg (134KB, 964x538px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 964x538px

>>33215475
>F-15 undefeated

Yeah, but no

>>33214985
>I like how slavshits approached 5th gen much more than fatniks
PAK-FA isn't 5th Gen, no matter how much your professional trolling guide tells you it is.

>>33214998
It's not.

>>33213219

>gtfo kebab

>>33215475
Embarrassing

>>33215858
F-15 A/C is undefeated in air to air.

E's have been shot down by SAMs.

>>33215254
>still fly you to space on rockets they made in the 60s
While we get to take our time to build a proper next-gen capsule.

>>33215843
Not really. They can't ID or track with that.

And it's just giving your position away to a stealth plane with an advanced passive EWO system.

>>33215882
Don't forget that an E has an Air-to-Air kill too; a Hind with a 2000lb laser-guided bomb.

>>33215392
I'm always cynical when there are gotcha headlines regarding training engagements and stuff like Red Flag, its presented as unequivocal proof something is superior but we're never given the particular rules for the engagement. Like a 5th gen losing to a 4th gen, I guess we're supposed to believe all the 5th gens are a lemon but we didn't know the rules of the engagement stipulated a no BVR and a stealth defeating beacon be used on the 5th gens.

>>33215475
Holy fucking shit this is amazing, I had no idea Russian planes were so bad at air to air

>>33216034
The only Russian plane to have a better than 1:1 ratio is the Flanker. Which has 6 Mig-29 kills in the Ethiopa-Eritrea conflict.

>>33212882
Well the Russians are only building 12 of them, and the PAKFA lacks ducted fans.

I think it's obvious.

>>33216107

It's like the French laws of warfare.

France wins when fighting other French

Russian fighters win win fighting other Russian fighters.

>>33215475
Man, I love having a competent air force.

File: 1488773537918.jpg (244KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

244KB, 500x500px

>>33216107
>>33216133

in before the inevitable deluge of excuses from slavaboos

File: IMG_20170306_071135.jpg (38KB, 394x394px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 394x394px

Antov-40 would beat both

>>33215307
>WVR only exercises

opinion discarded, try again

File: F-35_Real_Cockpit.jpg (224KB, 1200x801px) Image search: [Google]

224KB, 1200x801px

I'll pick the one with orders on the books and is actually in production.

The PAK-FA is just more slav vaporware that sucks shit when used in the real world.

I'll be impressed if there are more than 50 PAK FA's by 2025.

There are already 300 F-35s, lol.

>muh R-27ET
>muh IRBIS-E

I love these threads so much.

>>33215959
As you should be.
You get far more clicks (and thus ad revenue) from a headline like "F-22 killed by MiG-21*" than "single F-22 kills fifty MiG-29's for no losses"

"*-When restricted to WVR, no radar, no missiles, no AWACS support, in ambush against 70-1 odds and the pilot has a bad case of the runs"

Same thing goes for "MUH [insert country] SUBMARINE GOT CLOSE TO A CARRIER. USN BTFO"

>>33217249
Which one is the flight stick?

>>33215882
2 F-15's were shot down by AAA and SAM's during Desert Storm, and one with the JASDF accidentally chucked an AIM-9 at his wingman. The one in >>33215858 crashed in Libya due to a computer error or something.

>>33217369
Always the right side.

>>33217638
Yes.
And that's still not air-to-air

File: 1452156829862.png (453KB, 803x688px) Image search: [Google]

453KB, 803x688px

>>33213219
t. falesflagging vatnik

File: proofs.png (2MB, 2473x4847px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2473x4847px

>>33215475
Vatniks gonna vatnik.

>>33213042
>can't carry anything but SDBs or 2 1000 lbs JDAMs
>outdated communications and detection suites

It's a great air superiority fighter, but that's it, needs to be supported by other platforms better suited for other jobs.

File: tmp_21879-depicting-f-35-eodas324171871.jpg (34KB, 639x405px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 639x405px

>>33213182
>F-35 doesn't have IRST

huh

File: tmp_21879-PAK-FA-3-1934392722.jpg (734KB, 1280x853px) Image search: [Google]

734KB, 1280x853px

>>33214985
>pancake pencil plane looks good

>>33218555
How they try everything not to show the air intakes from a low angle.

>>33218533
Both 360 spherical and long-range.

File: 1487243863004.jpg (32KB, 557x612px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 557x612px

>>33213182
>Aim-9x not mentioned at all

Sergei come on, are you even trying? It's one thing to be subjective, let alone just lying. Was this made for the X-35 or something?

>>33218724
I think it's one of those pure bullshit charts Carlo Kopp made up.

>>33218466
>F-5
>25-23
BASED TIGER

File: 1457440081471.png (330KB, 330x319px) Image search: [Google]

330KB, 330x319px

>2017
>"Stealth"
>No S-Ducts

you can't make this shit up

>>33214831
Category: wet fatnik dreams about golf ball units.

>>33214643
>>33213227
>>33213182
>>33213174
>>33213166

And as usual, the Russkies are back with even more shit slinging as usual. That information you have is what is publicly available. And all of your missiles are just excuses for the lack of flight time each pilot has.
Come back with proper information and not shitty infographics,

>>33212900
That's funny because neither plane has S-ducts. The F-35 does have Y-ducts, though

>>33213166
What is this even supposed to mean? Both planes can see each other the whole time (if you ignore that the Su-35 can't see shit).

ill admit the F35 is dogshit, but as time has proven slavs are god awful at air to air. then again the f35 will probably break up in flight anyways so who cares

>>33222396
fuck off pierre

>>33218334

lol, try harder traitor scum.
The russian menace has endeavored to bring harm to everything we hold dear. Our government, our institutions, our way of life, and our very children. We need to dispel with the notion that they are not trying to bring harm to America. Just like hitler, saddam Hussein, and bin laden before him, Putin has declared war on America and our brave men and women in uniform. We cannot allow this menace to go unanswered. The plague of russian aggression must be met with overwhelming response and kicking them (you) in the fucking face.

>>33222368
Somebody who doesn't know jack shit made up a stupid picture.

>>33222456
lockmart pls

File: F-35 stores.jpg (49KB, 640x482px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 640x482px

>>33212882
Can the PAK-FA even carry bombs?
>DYEL brah?

>>33222635
t. ausairpower

File: 1455017482129.png (170KB, 575x350px) Image search: [Google]

170KB, 575x350px

>>33222635

File: PAK-FA-armament-infographic.jpg (574KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

574KB, 1920x1080px

>>33222686
>The current year
>JDAM

>>33222746
>>33222700
>slaviboos are this mad
what excuses are you going to use today?

>>33222556
I know, I just want to know what they were going for.

>>33222845

> what excuses

That bombing ISIS oil trade would cause environmental damage. Wait that was Obama, after RT proved the US let ISIS to turkey oil trucks run for years.

File: is this real life.jpg (79KB, 800x564px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 800x564px

>>33222890
>Wait that was Obama
Did he actually go this retarded?

>>33222890
stay mad that your planes are shit

>>33223002
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/261283-ex-cia-chief-fear-for-environment-stays-us-hand-on-isis-oil-wells

>>33223034
Russian planes are like an AK that gets used, while your $5000 AR15 sits in the closet.

>>33223265
Except an AK actually works :^)

>>33223289

> russian air planes don't work / are junk
> waaaaah they bombed our moderate rebels

Which is it ;))

File: 1488789935254.jpg (208KB, 504x720px) Image search: [Google]

208KB, 504x720px

>>33222890

>>33223338

Trump may have reversed this policy of "accidentally" dropping supplies to ISIS, and "accidentally" bombing the SAA.

US air force helped retake palmyra
http://aranews.net/2017/02/us-led-coalition-steps-anti-isis-airstrikes-palmyra/

>>33222805
>a fucking rendering
Has the PAK FA even done drop tests for its basic armament yet?

>>33223317
I never said anything about rebels. Mabey you should focus on improving your shit planes instead of making shit up :::^^^)))

File: enthropy grows.gif (88KB, 365x361px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 365x361px

>>33223381
Oh, they retook it? Nice.
>March 2016
>March 2017
Dumbass Syrian generals will keep assigning the same SAA regiments of qualified sprinters to Palmyra and Russia will keep fixing their shit every spring until the ISIS is BTFO.

>>33223705
Can't we just go back to our old policy on bombing and dunp all this precision shit?