The 1.42/1.44 and the SU-47 are test platforms. The PAK-AT won't start entering Russian squadrons until 2011-2012. By that time, the F-35 Lightning should be at full production.

 

OK, according to a manual I have here written by Winchester in 2006, the SU-47 is a test model only, and the Su-MK models have primarily been procured by China. In fact, the manual references the fact that Sukhoi's products have been almost exclusively exports.

 

It claims that 3,002 JSF (in either models B, C, or D) have already been ordered by the US and UK, and that they are expected to be in-squadron by the Spring of 2008.

I really want to get this for you, but I'm having a very hard time pulling it up. The MiG-29 is a contemporary design of the F-16, but the F-16 went through several remodels that the MiG never got. The Sukhoi was designed to counter the problems Russian aircraft had always had dogfighting doing high-speed, high-G turns, and the Su is very effective at that. The Fulcrum was supposedly a multi-function fighter and attack aircraft, but it never got the upgrades to compete with the F-16 in avionics and weapons systems, which is why the F-16 has been the top all time seller worldwide. One of the reasons that comes to me is that the top engineer for Mikoyan-Gurevich was murdered.

 

What Russia is not close to developing is a multi-task air support fighter like the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, which is expected to surpass all prior fighter aircraft in sales.

 

 

Fair enough. For some reason when I read that, upgrades didn't come to mind. I don't know why considering all the letter designations that follow most aircraft numbers.

 

If you do end up finding it though I'd like to see it. :thumb:

I'm not sure what role that would play in an air assault/battle, but I think that video demonstrated the skill of the pilot a lot more than the ability of the aircraft. I don't exactly have a trained eye when it comes to military aviation, so I'm sure someone may correct me, but I only saw a few manuevers there that seemed like they would be effective in a combat situation.

 

 

Our aircraft would not have been able to recover from many of those manuvers.

The Raptor contracts were canceled due to massive cost overrides. The JSF combines the thrust vectoring and the stealth capability, and also has the tractable engine that can due direct takeoff and landing like the old Harrier models, to satisfy the Marines.

 

 

I was under the impression that the F-22 was still coming into service, albiet in much smaller numbers.

I guess you haven't seen the SU-30MK.

 

Video

 

 

Interesting. The addition of the canards are clearly helpful in its manuvering and stability. I do wonder though if it has any thrust vectoring. The engine nozzles looked completely circular, but some of those manuvers look like it would have been necessary.

Our aircraft would not have been able to recover from many of those manuvers.

 

Yes, but I'm more concerned with the necessity of those manuevers in combat.

Yes, but I'm more concerned with the necessity of those manuevers in combat.

 

Good point. The only purpose behind some of them would be to break a radar lock. If you are in gun range however then you're in trouble if you try some of those.

I can't add anything to the engineering/capability aspects of the fighters, but find it interesting reading.

 

I do have a comment about naming Russia the "Evil Empire" (a term I know HHSDad did not come up with) and others natoins a part of the "Asis of Evil". I understand that these nations are political rivals, but to name them as evil seems a bit over the top. If I'm a politician in these nations, it defines for me pretty quickly who my enemy is and who I'm going to define as "evil". There seems no room for compromise with "evil", whereas political rivals can find some common ground.

Relevant article I read earlier today...

 

http://www.economist.com/world/international/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8703054