Now there is a pilot who knows his airplane. He is an outstanding pilot and fully demonstrated the handling capabilities of the Mig 29OVT. I am very impressed... ;) p.s. Gorgeous livery too by the way...
Спасибо, вдохновляет! По твоим видео, пробую повторить на своем EDF с ОВТ. Наши ребята самые крутые. Пару раз ходил на американские шоу, такой красоты там не увидишь, групповое еще нормально, а одиночных таких крутых нет.
The MiG-29 is a smaller lighter SU-35 baseline fighter with a few differences. Combine that small light manouverable package with heavy thrust vectoring and you have a jet more manouverable than anything seen before. Bravo
Damn the Russians know how to build badass aircraft! Mind you their larger counterparts like the an225 etc are hellishly sounding machines which is music to my ears
When hi turns around his Axel while falling down ? l thought this was possible just in movies. Top Gun and shit. And we dan,t want to talk about Cobra maneuver and stuff.
I don't think the 360 degree vectored thrust jet was enough to support this performance. It must be some kind of secret anti gravity machine inserted in this amazing plane ! :)
MIG29 is still ahead of its time. Nobody not made a plane with such maneuverability capabilities. You Recall when it was made! All began from him for the Russian military aerospace industry. Pilot is an artist, only the Russians this can. What is gravity?
They were allays looking at the American pilots and saying we should be able to be that good and here they have shown that they have done so and our in there own AMAZING.
Есть у этого красавца старший брат. МиГ-31. Изначально предназначался для перехвата крылатых ракет во всём диапазоне высот и скоростей, а также низколетящих спутников. Не такой эффектный, но...
Миг25/31 это перехватчики, миг29 самолёт для завоевания господства в воздухе в близи линии фронта, предназначен завязывать маневренный бой с другими истребителями
Kramnik’s OPK source sees 20 or 24 MiG-35s being produced each year, for about 25 billion, to replace 150 or 160 MiG-29s in Russia’s inventory. He cites Konstantin Makiyenko who sees the MiG-35 as important not just as a MiG-29 replacement, but also to keep Russia in the light- to medium-, $60-million-range fighter export market and not leave this industry segment to China and its J-10.
Russian designers put all they have into their designs. American designers put new tech into theirs but don't do the very best that they can, because they want to use that in future aircraft contracts. The mindset of the two peoples are totally different. The Americans want more money, while the Russians want what is the very best for their country. Americans need to remind themselves what JFK said, 'Ask not what your country can do for you, but ask what you can do for your country. The difference can be really seen when aircraft fly almost as if they are UFOs.
Eindrucksvolle Vorführung.Ich glaube nicht,dass es in Frankreich Triebwerke mit Vektordüsen gibt,oder vIelleicht eins in Versuch.Wie gross ist aber die Lebensdauer einer solchen Düse.Ist das Fluckzeug einsatzfähig oder nur eine Experimentalmaschine ?
In terms of maneuverability this "thing" is better then any other modern aircraft, to name a few : SU35S, SU30MKI, T50-PAKFA, F22. Only other aircraft that could do all this was SU37 "terminator" (with Evgeny Frolov ofcourse). Too bad that project was canceled and the only prototype ( 711) crashed in 2002.
Great plane for an air show but let's be practical: the Dogfight Era is gone, long since replaced with today's Stealth Era. If you don't have it, then hey, you ain't got it. This jet's maneuverability is phenomenal but it's modern era fighter capability is no match for cutting edge stealth aircraft and no one even comes close to the level of US stealth technology.
There's a thing called elecronic warefare - in case the radars don't work, the maneuverability remains. Stealth is more a trademark, than a real technology - all modern missiles don't distinguish between a stealth and non-stealth target - they all reflect the radiowaves in meter range absolutely equally. You also can hit the stealth aircrafts even with very old soviet missiles from 60ies - like it happened once with the F-117.
bahnstormero It's delusional (with all due respect) to attempt to include US Stealth technology in your 'trademark' category that granted most other country's level (including Russia) appropriately do fit. The breakthrough came when the Raptor was in design mode. The Raptor wasn't shelved because it's stealth didn't work (as many jealous 'experts' love to claim) but because maintenance for it wasn't cost effective. But US stealth? In a word: 'scary'. It consistently and reliably reduces the aerodynamic footprint of any jet to the size of a small bird. Now the same 5th generation US technology has been applied to the F-15 and F/A-18 Hornet. It always comes down to the same basic equation: you simply can't kill what you can't see. In summation: the current level of US stealth technology makes every other country's 'modern' jet fleet obsolete.
Юрий См Good question. The Raptor was initially intended for stealthy air dominance but YES it is still vulnerable to detection at certain times such as when they carry external store, rejoin with tankers or talk on the radio (secure or unsecure ones). Then they DO become more vulnerable to detection. Better to have TVC (Thrust Vector Capability) and not need it then to need it and not have it.
Ognjen Davidovic Hey, like I said, it's awesome technology - but only for an airshow. It's totally useless in practical applications. Bottom line? Russia mastered thrust vectoring, the US mastered stealth. I'll take stealth over a cool airshow toy any day.
Красиво!!!!Но всё для шоу,в бою все эти выкрутасы не особо нужны,манёвр при котором самолёт резко теряет скорость не нужен.Если бы он мог бы резко её набрать это другое дело,или тоже манёвр,но без потери скорости.А для шоу конечно красиво.
Следуя пожеланиям Жириновского, нужно было назвать модель - ВПДНС (вам п*да, даже не суйтесь). И это было в 2005 уже. Ещё бы внутри страны порядок навести.
***** This assumes a few things and none of those assumptions is actually safe. Stealth is of limited value and relies too heavily on the reliability of BVR missiles. Stealth aircraft are optimised against the X-band radar used in fighters but there are plenty of others like S-band, C-band, I-band, J-band and Ku-band, most of which can see and even track a "stealth" aircraft. The second thing you need to know about stealth is that even an F-22 is only stealthy from certain angles and pilots have to be very careful with the profiles they fly in order to avoid detection. Thirdly, it relies too heavily on BVR missiles. If a force package of F-22s was flying towards an oncoming force of Su-27s at a closing speed of say, 2500 km/h, the pilots would only have a few seconds to acquire and fire on the incoming EA. This assumes a Pk of 1.0 for the AMRAAM (the only BVR missile left in the US inventory) and does not go into F-pole and A-pole tactics. Closing is the real problem. The real Pk for an AMRAAM is 0.59 which is not bad but it means that nearly half the missiles will miss their targets so there will almost certainly be some survivors. Once the surviving EA get through the fighter screen, stealth is essentially useless because we're down to guns. History shows that WVR, the F-22 is vulnerable to non-stealthy aircraft like Euro canards. The next assumption people tend to make is that the EA pilots will become totally defensive, like the Syrians at the Bekaa Valley did and obligingly get themselves shot down. Any enemy pilot worth his salt in that situation would ignore the F-22s, hit the afterburners and press on to other high value targets like AWACS and tankers. So you can see that few, if any, of the assumptions about the value of stealth are actually safe ones. And stealth has nothing whatsoever to do with what you called the "aerodynamic footprint". BTW: remember the F4 in Vietnam? A USAF-sponsored study in 2008 investigated the 588 shoot downs since 1950 and found that only 24 of them took place BVR. The era of the dogfight is not over; not by a long way.
Your points although well-intended are useful primarily only in a vacuum. You're over-thinking the 'what-ifs' and therefore missing the main concept of the Raptor's 5th gen Stealth Technology which is to avoid the typical 50km Radius (100kv diameter) dogfight engagement arena in the first place. True, any advantage stealth provides the F-22 during WVR (Within Visual Range) conditions are neutralized and then it comes down to pilot & machine close-sequence tactics such as superior Helmet Cueing, Thrust-Vectoring Control, AoA and target tracking, pilot training, etc., during which both fighters could very well end up in a never ending 'rate fight' - exactly what the designers of the F-22 built it to avoid.
***** Overthinking? Vacuum? The art of tactics is to put yourself in your opponent's shoes and assume he's not stupid and that he won't fight the way you want him to. That said, all I did was to precis the Rand report. I wouldn't call that overthinking. Any assumptions made within the 50km radius were in the F-22s favour. I did not allow for jamming or use of stealthy EA either. What I am doing is showing that the value of stealth - which was extremely effective in 1991 when used for deep penetration strike mission - is less so in air superiority missions. I also pointed out, as does the Rand report, that the AIM-120, on which so much of this depends, has not been anywhere near as effective as the "one-shot-one-kill" slogan claims. The WVR scenario is only useful if your opponent decides to engage. If he ignores the F-22 and pushes on at top speed, there's not a lot the Raptors can do about it.
TheThirdMan The Rand report? What am I missing? The Rand Report on this subject was explicitly directed to determine a 'what if' dog fight scenario that will never happen. No offense but you need to update your understanding to the correct perspective: During the Civil War the moment the two ironclads (Merrimack vs. Monitor - Battle of Hampton Roads, 1862) finished their battle every other 'Modern Navy' on earth became OBSOLETE. It no longer mattered to even discuss the 'what-ifs'. In post WWII after the Cruise Missile was developed all future Battleship vs. Battleship encounters became OBSOLETE. Discussion of which battleship would win a theoretical fight no longer had value. See where this is going? Beginning to grasp the rules of the new era? See the aforementioned 'vacuum' now? The moment 5th generation Stealth Technology was achieved (US has it, no one else does) every other jet fighter on earth became OBSOLETE. The only viable manner of thinking that matters now is to recognize and limit dependance on meaningless data and update realization instead to not only the fact that the dog fight era is dead but discussion of it (Eurofighter vs. F-22 etc., etc.) no longer even matters. I'm not suggesting you think outside the box - I'm telling you the box no longer exists. And yes, 5th Gen Stealth Technology IS that effective.
***** No offence mate but you sound like a Lockheed Martin spin doctor. If you have not read the Rand report in its entirety, it is difficult to see the implications and they are not dependent solely on the scenario they outlined. Otherwise you are just putting a telescope to a blind eye. If you don't want to offend, stop using so much invective and patronage. Otherwise, go right ahead but don't expect a polite response. The Rand report shows that in the 50 years BVR has been around it has not worked except on rare occasions. The USAF, up to 2008, had fired 17 AMRAAMs for a total of 10 aircraft destroyed, including one "own goal". Four of those targets were WVR and the others were mostly non-manoeuvring. In none of those cases did the EA have any advantages at all, including functioning coherent radar, jamming support, numerical superiority or any AWACs support. It should have been a cake walk but it wasn't. The F-22 does nothing to change that situation. The US teen series fighters are all capable of BVR combat and have been since inception. The only difference is detection. (I guess you are familiar with the Boelke Dicta). I'm interested to hear your counter-argument on the Pk of the AIM-120, the very missiles these invincible weapons depend on. The hard data is out there. I'm interested to hear why you think the Rand report is wrong. Why will that scenario never happen? Don't forget the invincible battleships Japan built in WWII or the Maginot Line. They relied on assumptions that their opponents would fight a certain way. They relied on the assumption that they would be able to bring their weapons to bear on their enemies. The F-22 makes exactly that assumption. Like the Maginot Line, it only works if your opponent takes you on in the manner you want him to. Invincible weapons have a history of turning into hyper-expensive white elephants. It has already been demonstrated that there are ways around the scenario where the F-22 shoots down an enemy before the enemy pilot knows it's there and there are even ways to defeat it, even if that goal is more difficult to achieve. The scenario proposed doesn't even allow for the possibility of a coherent enemy force with jamming and stealth of its own. It asks you to use your own imagination. That's what war planners do. I'm not actually interested in the Typhoon vs F-22 argument either because it's too much fine detail in a debate which requires a big picture view. I only mentioned it in passing. If you had read either of my previous posts you will know that. You would also know that for any incoming aggressors, the targets are not the F-22s. In short, the F-22 has been built for a fighter vs fighter scenario which is the product of a bygone era. The only difference is the standoff range but if it has to happen, at a macro level, history has already shown that dogfights are still the most common way by which these conflicts are resolved. You will doubtless argue that it will not happen because of BVR etc. In a small, localised combat, like what the USAF has been doing for the past 40 years that is true. In a larger theatre conflict, it most certainly isn't.
TheThirdMan I'm not sure why you're not understanding there simply is no such thing as a jet fighter vs jet fighter dog fight any more. 4 years ago when the Raptor was still prime time they tested the best fighter jet (the never been defeated F-15) on earth against it 5 to 1 over the desert sands of Utah in an all out 150 mile by 150 mile hard deck arena. In less then 30 minutes all 5 F-15's were 'shot down' and everyone of the pilots said the same thing: we simply couldn't see the Raptor - not on our radar screens and certainly not visibly. It didn't matter what they did. Nothing worked. It doesn't depend on what the Raptor pilots 'wanted' them to do because there isn't anything they could do. That was Stealth Gen 4 Technology. Gen 5? Even more insane. A new era. I'm not going to spend too much more time on this discussion. Some things you just can't teach. This is the stealth era. Dog fights are a by gone era. You either realize this and 'shelve' all those data oriented arguments and scenarios or get left behind. Good luck.
The best display I've ever seen. Filmed to perfection! Nice work! Must visit MAKS and Russia one day. Greetings from Canada!
Now there is a pilot who knows his airplane. He is an outstanding pilot and fully demonstrated the handling capabilities of the Mig 29OVT. I am very impressed... ;)
p.s. Gorgeous livery too by the way...
Великолепная машина и великолепное исполнение!
мои аплодисменты!
Спасибо за видео, Константин!
Wooow.....what a beautiful performance......
this MIG 29 OVT aircraft is doing impossible maneuvers . what an aWESOME ART.
Mig 29 the most awesome and manoeuvrable Fighter Jet in the world...
Когда то я эти самолёты обслуживал, миг 29 четвёртого поколения, отличные самолёты. 84по 86год в Белоруссии Гродно Россь. ❤
Stunning double somersault lukily we have 12 Mig 29SM and 18 Sukhoi SU30MKM best regards from Malaysia
Awesome display. Thanks for uploading .
Один из самых запоминающихся полетов на МАКС 2009
Это класная машина. Для свою время и сейчас она доказалась свой боевой качестве.Я лётчикам МИГ-29.
5:49-6:02, the best maneuver of them all!
Mig 29 i jego pilot po prostu PIERWSZA KLASA.
Спасибо, вдохновляет! По твоим видео, пробую повторить на своем EDF с ОВТ. Наши ребята самые крутые. Пару раз ходил на американские шоу, такой красоты там не увидишь, групповое еще нормально, а одиночных таких крутых нет.
The MiG-29 is a smaller lighter SU-35 baseline fighter with a few differences. Combine that small light manouverable package with heavy thrust vectoring and you have a jet more manouverable than anything seen before. Bravo
Exceeding all limits.Great machine coupled with amazing flying skills of the pilot.👍
absolutely no AOA limitation...
amazing...
beautiful.
Absolutely, I believe that this pilot was a player of gymnastics!!
Mig 29 the best machine!!!
Что-то запредельное. Просто слов нет. Это не самолёт, это НЛО, как говорят французы :) Наши Птицы :)
great video I want to go to MAKS 2011 so bad!!
You'll get tired of waiting for that man, MiG is standing strong and will be always.
Parabens!! Que manobras lindas digno dos Mig´s os reis dos céus.
Молодцы братья вы лучшие
Отлични видос Костя , всо красиво снято хароши ракурс .
жду новых видосов .😎
я восхищен!!! Слава Русским летчикам!Слава ВВС!!! Это достойно звания Героя России!
Niesamowity pilot i wspaniała maszyna!
wow this aircraft is amazing. I love it.
Красивая работа летчика и оператора!!!
Харошая машина миг 29 овт жаль всерию непашол .
WOW look at that on 2:56 this aircraft is amazing...I have to buy one lol
Damn the Russians know how to build badass aircraft! Mind you their larger counterparts like the an225 etc are hellishly sounding machines which is music to my ears
It's pulling 8+ G w/ Missiles on the wings...good lord....
Najlepszy akrobat na Świecie.
its so cuuuuute.
Честь и слава нашим конструкторам и пилотам!!!
When hi turns around his Axel while falling down ? l thought this was possible just in movies. Top Gun and shit. And we dan,t want to talk about Cobra maneuver and stuff.
bravo!!!! le156 c'est l'apothéose de la démonstration en vol!!!!!
I don't think the 360 degree vectored thrust jet was enough to support this performance. It must be some kind of secret anti gravity machine inserted in this amazing plane ! :)
THIS IS TRULY MASTER OF CLOSE AIR COMBAT
Amazing
!! impresionante !!
Impressionnante présentation,mais existe-t-il en France des moteurs à poussée vectorielle ?
давай россия вперед!
It takes skills and big balls to do that !
what happened to the OVT machines? Ive not seen them at a display in a long time!
BUENISIMO.
MIG29 is still ahead of its time. Nobody not made a plane with such maneuverability capabilities. You Recall when it was made!
All began from him for the Russian military aerospace industry.
Pilot is an artist, only the Russians this can. What is gravity?
Cuantas toneladas pesa el avión?
Porque para que pueda hacer esas maniobras, las turbinas deben de ser muy poderosas.
Ja eindrucksvolle Maschine die Mig 29
impresiona la estabilidad y versatilidad en las maniobras, cual es su contra parte en USAF?
YF-22
суперский клипп !!!
Amazing....
Fabulous, thanks for sharing
They were allays looking at the American pilots and saying we should be able to be that good and here they have shown that they have done so and our in there own AMAZING.
Even birds can't do this.
Yes some birds can hover like the humming bird can
Я восхищон.
класс!!!!!
Duże osiągnięcie techniczne tego samolotu, jak również wielki kunszt pilota samolotu.
technika koniec lat 90tych
нет слов.
Есть у этого красавца старший брат. МиГ-31. Изначально предназначался для перехвата крылатых ракет во всём диапазоне высот и скоростей, а также низколетящих спутников. Не такой эффектный, но...
Миг25/31 это перехватчики, миг29 самолёт для завоевания господства в воздухе в близи линии фронта, предназначен завязывать маневренный бой с другими истребителями
Kramnik’s OPK source sees 20 or 24 MiG-35s being produced each year, for about 25 billion, to replace 150 or 160 MiG-29s in Russia’s inventory.
He cites Konstantin Makiyenko who sees the MiG-35 as important not just as a MiG-29 replacement, but also to keep Russia in the light- to medium-, $60-million-range fighter export market and not leave this industry segment to China and its J-10.
Oh My God!...Russia rule!
Ну как он падает - это что-то.... :))))
C.C.C.PoweRussia
Greetings From Greece
на сегодня лучший "легкий" маневренный истребитель.
Летуны супер!!!
Geez. Dancing like an UFO!
every time i see this video i keep blaming my country officials for buying the f16 shits instead of mig-29
Love the T-50 PAK FA
Слава МИГу и его создателям.
mig that tuyet
too bad MiG bureau is nearly dead nowadays... Sukhoi took over all big jobs
The best manoeuvrable Fighter Jet in the world... MIG 29
The best display out there
Чёткий дрифт аппарат.
... and this fly is a very great russion ballett...
nice vid
eso si es un Sr. piloto
Russian designers put all they have into their designs. American designers put new tech into theirs but don't do the very best that they can, because they want to use that in future aircraft contracts. The mindset of the two peoples are totally different. The Americans want more money, while the Russians want what is the very best for their country. Americans need to remind themselves what JFK said, 'Ask not what your country can do for you, but ask what you can do for your country. The difference can be really seen when aircraft fly almost as if they are UFOs.
And this "thing" pilot vas Pavel Vlasov.
Mouch better in aerobatics than F-18 Super Hornet. Not to speak of Eurofighter or Gripen. However the MIG Industries aren't far to bankruptcy.
Beyond league!
Против такого в небе ничто не устоит!
say goodbye to western jet fighters!
BUTY & THE BEST. SUPERB.
Eindrucksvolle Vorführung.Ich glaube nicht,dass es in Frankreich Triebwerke mit Vektordüsen gibt,oder vIelleicht eins in Versuch.Wie gross ist aber die Lebensdauer einer solchen Düse.Ist das Fluckzeug einsatzfähig oder nur eine Experimentalmaschine ?
UFO mode on
Mig is a part of russian defence concern, which is founding from russian military spendings. it cant be buncrupt.
Вдох глубокий, руки шире,
не спешите три- четыре!
Sorry to say this... But the is NO NATO aircraft capable of doing stuff like this. 😮😮😮
In terms of maneuverability this "thing" is better then any other modern aircraft, to name a few : SU35S, SU30MKI, T50-PAKFA, F22. Only other aircraft that could do all this was SU37 "terminator" (with Evgeny Frolov ofcourse). Too bad that project was canceled and the only prototype ( 711) crashed in 2002.
すげぇ～！！！！
Great plane for an air show but let's be practical: the Dogfight Era is gone, long since replaced with today's Stealth Era. If you don't have it, then hey, you ain't got it. This jet's maneuverability is phenomenal but it's modern era fighter capability is no match for cutting edge stealth aircraft and no one even comes close to the level of US stealth technology.
There's a thing called elecronic warefare - in case the radars don't work, the maneuverability remains. Stealth is more a trademark, than a real technology - all modern missiles don't distinguish between a stealth and non-stealth target - they all reflect the radiowaves in meter range absolutely equally. You also can hit the stealth aircrafts even with very old soviet missiles from 60ies - like it happened once with the F-117.
bahnstormero
It's delusional (with all due respect) to attempt to include US Stealth technology in your 'trademark' category that granted most other country's level (including Russia) appropriately do fit. The breakthrough came when the Raptor was in design mode. The Raptor wasn't shelved because it's stealth didn't work (as many jealous 'experts' love to claim) but because maintenance for it wasn't cost effective. But US stealth? In a word: 'scary'. It consistently and reliably reduces the aerodynamic footprint of any jet to the size of a small bird. Now the same 5th generation US technology has been applied to the F-15 and F/A-18 Hornet. It always comes down to the same basic equation: you simply can't kill what you can't see. In summation: the current level of US stealth technology makes every other country's 'modern' jet fleet obsolete.
а зачем тогда на F-22 используется управляемый вектор тяги?
Юрий См Good question. The Raptor was initially intended for stealthy air dominance but YES it is still vulnerable to detection at certain times such as when they carry external store, rejoin with tankers or talk on the radio (secure or unsecure ones). Then they DO become more vulnerable to detection. Better to have TVC (Thrust Vector Capability) and not need it then to need it and not have it.
Ognjen Davidovic
Hey, like I said, it's awesome technology - but only for an airshow. It's totally useless in practical applications. Bottom line? Russia mastered thrust vectoring, the US mastered stealth. I'll take stealth over a cool airshow toy any day.
Красиво!!!!Но всё для шоу,в бою все эти выкрутасы не особо нужны,манёвр при котором самолёт резко теряет скорость не нужен.Если бы он мог бы резко её набрать это другое дело,или тоже манёвр,но без потери скорости.А для шоу конечно красиво.
Следуя пожеланиям Жириновского, нужно было назвать модель - ВПДНС (вам п*да, даже не суйтесь). И это было в 2005 уже.
Ещё бы внутри страны порядок навести.
5:52!
***** This assumes a few things and none of those assumptions is actually safe. Stealth is of limited value and relies too heavily on the reliability of BVR missiles. Stealth aircraft are optimised against the X-band radar used in fighters but there are plenty of others like S-band, C-band, I-band, J-band and Ku-band, most of which can see and even track a "stealth" aircraft. The second thing you need to know about stealth is that even an F-22 is only stealthy from certain angles and pilots have to be very careful with the profiles they fly in order to avoid detection. Thirdly, it relies too heavily on BVR missiles. If a force package of F-22s was flying towards an oncoming force of Su-27s at a closing speed of say, 2500 km/h, the pilots would only have a few seconds to acquire and fire on the incoming EA. This assumes a Pk of 1.0 for the AMRAAM (the only BVR missile left in the US inventory) and does not go into F-pole and A-pole tactics. Closing is the real problem. The real Pk for an AMRAAM is 0.59 which is not bad but it means that nearly half the missiles will miss their targets so there will almost certainly be some survivors. Once the surviving EA get through the fighter screen, stealth is essentially useless because we're down to guns. History shows that WVR, the F-22 is vulnerable to non-stealthy aircraft like Euro canards. The next assumption people tend to make is that the EA pilots will become totally defensive, like the Syrians at the Bekaa Valley did and obligingly get themselves shot down. Any enemy pilot worth his salt in that situation would ignore the F-22s, hit the afterburners and press on to other high value targets like AWACS and tankers.
So you can see that few, if any, of the assumptions about the value of stealth are actually safe ones. And stealth has nothing whatsoever to do with what you called the "aerodynamic footprint". BTW: remember the F4 in Vietnam? A USAF-sponsored study in 2008 investigated the 588 shoot downs since 1950 and found that only 24 of them took place BVR. The era of the dogfight is not over; not by a long way.
Your points although well-intended are useful primarily only in a vacuum. You're over-thinking the 'what-ifs' and therefore missing the main concept of the Raptor's 5th gen Stealth Technology which is to avoid the typical 50km Radius (100kv diameter) dogfight engagement arena in the first place. True, any advantage stealth provides the F-22 during WVR (Within Visual Range) conditions are neutralized and then it comes down to pilot & machine close-sequence tactics such as superior Helmet Cueing, Thrust-Vectoring Control, AoA and target tracking, pilot training, etc., during which both fighters could very well end up in a never ending 'rate fight' - exactly what the designers of the F-22 built it to avoid.
***** Overthinking? Vacuum? The art of tactics is to put yourself in your opponent's shoes and assume he's not stupid and that he won't fight the way you want him to. That said, all I did was to precis the Rand report. I wouldn't call that overthinking. Any assumptions made within the 50km radius were in the F-22s favour. I did not allow for jamming or use of stealthy EA either. What I am doing is showing that the value of stealth - which was extremely effective in 1991 when used for deep penetration strike mission - is less so in air superiority missions. I also pointed out, as does the Rand report, that the AIM-120, on which so much of this depends, has not been anywhere near as effective as the "one-shot-one-kill" slogan claims. The WVR scenario is only useful if your opponent decides to engage. If he ignores the F-22 and pushes on at top speed, there's not a lot the Raptors can do about it.
TheThirdMan
The Rand report? What am I missing? The Rand Report on this subject was explicitly directed to determine a 'what if' dog fight scenario that will never happen. No offense but you need to update your understanding to the correct perspective: During the Civil War the moment the two ironclads (Merrimack vs. Monitor - Battle of Hampton Roads, 1862) finished their battle every other 'Modern Navy' on earth became OBSOLETE. It no longer mattered to even discuss the 'what-ifs'. In post WWII after the Cruise Missile was developed all future Battleship vs. Battleship encounters became OBSOLETE. Discussion of which battleship would win a theoretical fight no longer had value. See where this is going? Beginning to grasp the rules of the new era? See the aforementioned 'vacuum' now? The moment 5th generation Stealth Technology was achieved (US has it, no one else does) every other jet fighter on earth became OBSOLETE. The only viable manner of thinking that matters now is to recognize and limit dependance on meaningless data and update realization instead to not only the fact that the dog fight era is dead but discussion of it (Eurofighter vs. F-22 etc., etc.) no longer even matters. I'm not suggesting you think outside the box - I'm telling you the box no longer exists. And yes, 5th Gen Stealth Technology IS that effective.
***** No offence mate but you sound like a Lockheed Martin spin doctor. If you have not read the Rand report in its entirety, it is difficult to see the implications and they are not dependent solely on the scenario they outlined. Otherwise you are just putting a telescope to a blind eye. If you don't want to offend, stop using so much invective and patronage. Otherwise, go right ahead but don't expect a polite response.
The Rand report shows that in the 50 years BVR has been around it has not worked except on rare occasions. The USAF, up to 2008, had fired 17 AMRAAMs for a total of 10 aircraft destroyed, including one "own goal". Four of those targets were WVR and the others were mostly non-manoeuvring. In none of those cases did the EA have any advantages at all, including functioning coherent radar, jamming support, numerical superiority or any AWACs support. It should have been a cake walk but it wasn't.
The F-22 does nothing to change that situation. The US teen series fighters are all capable of BVR combat and have been since inception. The only difference is detection. (I guess you are familiar with the Boelke Dicta).
I'm interested to hear your counter-argument on the Pk of the AIM-120, the very missiles these invincible weapons depend on. The hard data is out there. I'm interested to hear why you think the Rand report is wrong. Why will that scenario never happen? Don't forget the invincible battleships Japan built in WWII or the Maginot Line. They relied on assumptions that their opponents would fight a certain way. They relied on the assumption that they would be able to bring their weapons to bear on their enemies. The F-22 makes exactly that assumption. Like the Maginot Line, it only works if your opponent takes you on in the manner you want him to. Invincible weapons have a history of turning into hyper-expensive white elephants. It has already been demonstrated that there are ways around the scenario where the F-22 shoots down an enemy before the enemy pilot knows it's there and there are even ways to defeat it, even if that goal is more difficult to achieve. The scenario proposed doesn't even allow for the possibility of a coherent enemy force with jamming and stealth of its own. It asks you to use your own imagination. That's what war planners do.
I'm not actually interested in the Typhoon vs F-22 argument either because it's too much fine detail in a debate which requires a big picture view. I only mentioned it in passing. If you had read either of my previous posts you will know that. You would also know that for any incoming aggressors, the targets are not the F-22s. In short, the F-22 has been built for a fighter vs fighter scenario which is the product of a bygone era. The only difference is the standoff range but if it has to happen, at a macro level, history has already shown that dogfights are still the most common way by which these conflicts are resolved. You will doubtless argue that it will not happen because of BVR etc. In a small, localised combat, like what the USAF has been doing for the past 40 years that is true. In a larger theatre conflict, it most certainly isn't.
TheThirdMan
I'm not sure why you're not understanding there simply is no such thing as a jet fighter vs jet fighter dog fight any more. 4 years ago when the Raptor was still prime time they tested the best fighter jet (the never been defeated F-15) on earth against it 5 to 1 over the desert sands of Utah in an all out 150 mile by 150 mile hard deck arena. In less then 30 minutes all 5 F-15's were 'shot down' and everyone of the pilots said the same thing: we simply couldn't see the Raptor - not on our radar screens and certainly not visibly. It didn't matter what they did. Nothing worked. It doesn't depend on what the Raptor pilots 'wanted' them to do because there isn't anything they could do. That was Stealth Gen 4 Technology. Gen 5? Even more insane. A new era. I'm not going to spend too much more time on this discussion. Some things you just can't teach. This is the stealth era. Dog fights are a by gone era. You either realize this and 'shelve' all those data oriented arguments and scenarios or get left behind. Good luck.
Здраствуйте, Павел Власов, МАЙ СИ ОТИДЕ БЕЗ ДА ВЪВЕДЕ МАЛКИЯ ИЗТРЕБИТЕЛ НА БОРДА?
Поздрави!
Yes Russian keep it up & beat the USA aviation technologe.
Bless u God, yes, yes that it's it !!!
.
💘👋🤟
Coool👍👍👍👍💪💪💪💪😃😃😃