View Single Post
  #35  
Old 08-07-2009, 09:06 PM
MT2008's Avatar
MT2008 MT2008 is offline
IMFDB & Forum Admin
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,612
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spartan198 View Post
Not that I'm either agreeing or disagreeing with you, but considering the F35 was designed from the outset as a strike fighter (much like the F16 and F/A-18), asking it to do the job of an F15 or F22 is only going to result in the US losing a lot of planes (and possibly pilots) when Su-37s start showing up.
First of all, I do agree with you that the F-35 cannot perform the same role for which the F-22 was designed. They are two very different types of fighters with different capabilities.

As for the Su-37 (which was the main argument in Congress used to argue for more F-22s), there are a whole bunch of issues I have with this:

(1.) The Su-37 is an updated version of the Su-27 Flanker, an airframe which is now 30+ years old, just like the F-15. It's considered a 4.5 Generation fighter, instead of a 5th Generation fighter like the F-22. Both the Su-27 and F-15 are 4th generation fighters. What Russia has yet to develop (at least efficiently) is a 5th Generation fighter. And the Chinese aren't any closer.

(2.) Although particular circumstance vary, most analysts agree that generally speaking, an American fighter of the same (or even a slightly older) generation as a Russian fighter is still superior. The Su-37 integrates technology into the Su-27 (namely, fly-by-wire) that the U.S. has been perfecting since the FIRST incarnation of the F-15. Even though engineers might debate performance aspects of the two aircraft (i.e. the thrust-to-weight ratio of a Sukhoi's engines versus an F-15), at the end of the day, the F-15 pilot still has battlefield capabilities that a Sukhoi pilot doesn't. Russia is WAY behind us in everything from HUD design to countermeasures.

(3.) Comparing individual fighter aircraft to each other is probably the single WORST way to argue that one air force is better-equipped than any of the others. Fighters are the smallest part of the big picture. Let me put it this way: It doesn't matter if the USAF ever tries to bomb Venezuela and Hugo Chavez sends his new Su-37s out to deny us air superiority. Even against our F-15s, he doesn't stand a chance in hell. His fighters might be half a generation ahead of ours on paper. But his AF doesn't have our satellites, our AWACS, our training and experience, and our industrial capabilities.

Or, if you want a historical (as opposed to theoretical) example, think of Iran's air force after the Islamic Revolution. Iran has F-14s that we sold the Shah back in the 1970s. But the pilots that we trained back in those days have long since retired, while the U.S. has hit Iran's military with an embargo on spare parts. Without well-trained pilots and American industrial support, the F-14s have basically been collecting rust in the hangers since the Iran-Iraq War ended (and even in that war, Iran's F-14s didn't exactly do an outstanding job against Iraq's older-model MiGs and Sukhois).

So, the point is, a country that buys the Su-37 from the Russians today would be the same situation. And that's why they will NEVER stand a chance against the USAF, no matter what fighters they have. And it's also why I think even our aging F-15s, as long as they are flown by American pilots and supported by American defense contractors, will wipe the floor with even Su-37s, just about any day of the week.

Last edited by MT2008; 08-07-2009 at 09:09 PM.
Reply With Quote