ORIGINAL: TimBle
Sorry but you're not correct on many counts.
ORIGINAL: Evil_Merlin
Um, no, you also forget that those ''military analyists'' also were trying to sell something when they said the Su-35 had a slight edge over the F-22.
Number 1, the Su-35 is a multi-role fighter, the F-22 is not (however currently it is being fitted to do so with software and hardware upgrades).
1.) The F-22 is more manuverable than the Su-35 by a considerable margin
The Su-35 has a slightly higher wing loading but uses 3D thrust vectoring nozzles. What also needs to be considered is that the wing loading of the Su-35 is misleading since the design of teh fuselage is also aerofoil shape and reduces the wing loading considerably lower than the F-22. True the F-22 is a lifting body design but that does not help it at all angles of attack
2.) The F-22 is faster than the Su-35 (not by much however it does have supercruise which the Su-35 does not)
True , 20km/hr argh well just leave off a pylon.
3.) The F-22 has a much better thrust to weight ratio than the Su-35
The trust to weight ratio is actually similar. But it depends on which figures you look at, Wet weight thrust the SU-35 is 1.1 and the F-22 1.08. Armed these numbers vary considerably
4.) The F-22 has a higher rate of climb than the Su-35. While the exact number is still classified its known to be around 300 M/s which is considerably faster than the Su-35's 250m/s.
Incorrect, the Su-35 truerate of climb has not been disclosed and is thought to be in excess of 300m/s, Yes it can break the sound barrier going straight up. I'd call this one a dead heat since the true figure for each is not known. Sukhoi claims 280m/s but it is generally thought to be >300m/s
5.) The F-22 has a larger combat radius than the Su-35 (not by much however)
Incorrect again, the combat radius of the Su-35 is considerably bigger at 3600km vs 2900km. Its combat range is around 30% greater than the F-22
6.) The F-22 can carry a CONSDIERABLY larger combat load (83500 vs 76060)
Have you been reading George Bush's fantasy journals? The Su-35 has more hardpoints for a wider configurationof armament. For the F-22 to carry the comabt load you mention it would have to fit external hardpoints, destroying its stealth and considerably increasing wing loading while reducing range
7.) The F-22 AN/APG-77 is probably the best radar in the world currently, even the makers of the Irbis-E say its system isn't as good as the 77 (but does supposedly have better range, but they were talking about Block 1 of the 77, not the newest upgraded systems).
I'll concede on the radar simpl because I know nothing of the su-35's radar except that is has both forward and rearward looking antennae, is both passive and active and is linked to IR sensors to track the heat signature of an aircraft BVR.
Advantages the Su-35 has?
1.) Its much less expensive than the F-22
2.) It is easier to maintain than the F-22, however the F-22's maintenance record is quickly improving and is almost a 4 hours of flight to 1 hour of maintenance, which is a good record for ANY aircraft let alone a stealth aircraft.
This you have correct.
What you need to realise is the F-22 was developed as a deterant. It is designed to boggle the mind of the opposition and be part of the sledge hammer over all strategic plan of the USA. It is a plane designed for peacetime than may see conflict.
The Su-35 is designed for combat. It is designed to operate off unprepared runways (which the F-22 cannot do), it is designed to be repaired quickly and easily and it is designed to carry a wide variety of ordanance.
the F-22 sacrifices a lot of payload capability in order to be stealthy.
Its a fantastic achievement and is everythign I would expect from a company like Lockheed but it has been severely compromised by federal politics and the wheeling and dealling needed to create jonbs in various states hence everyone wanted a finger in the pie. Its a shame because without this politics the cost could have been lower.
The Su-35 never suffered from those issues.
Any pilot who encounters a Su-35 in combat and does not treat it with respect will find him/herself dead.
In many ways the T-50 and J-20 do not appear to have been compromised to such a large degree and also reflect some clear political thinking; in order to win wars, it must be available in numbers and quickly.
The USA could not afford too many F-117A's, nor too many B-2's and now F/A-22's. Why? ask the politicians.
Yeah I'm going to get shotgunned by the patriots now but the truth has a tendency to sting.
For the record TimBle, you are wrong on a few points as well. The Su-35 has a canted 2d thrust vector system, not nearly as effective as full 3d, secondly, what YOU must realize is that every scenario you depict assumes a knife fight, which would only happen if the raptor pilot chose to play down most of his own advantages.
leave off a pylon to match the raptor speed? ok but leave off the weapon as well.
The sukhoi was meant for combat but the raptor was meant only to deter??? are you seriously saying that Lockheed had no intention for the raptor to actually experience combat??? Ill give you a moment to recant that theory. you can thank me later.
I know nothing of farmers and chickens I will defer to your obvious expertise on that, but your mention of the raptor intakes detection by the archer, yet again supposes a WVR confrontation,
Long range Irst detection is indeed retained by the SU-35, and no the raptor as of yet does not have this ability. but then neither does the f-16 or f-15, both of which have numerous victories over the mig-29 which does have this capability, so It isn't a deal breaker.
You said, the truth stings... perhaps
This you have correct. but don't worry stings heal in time.
You take speculation, then postulate and try to post as gospel. South Africa is pretty far from any American air base I'm aware of.... and further still from any Russian ab.