PAF and the JXX Fifth Gen Fighter

[SomeGuy]

The optical connection, the physiology and connenction between the eye to the brain in humans is based on different factors as compared to that of the eye/optics/sensors in the missile head to the missile brain.

Whereas there are no jammers to block our sensation of vision persay ( flash bang grenades )---the jammers on the F 22 can blind that aim 9 sidewinder to where it doesnot know if there is any aircraft in the area---. So----there is no place for common sense---.

I don't understand. I thought jammers only jammed radars.

Sidewinders are heatseekers that passively detect IR, how would you jam them?

I know F-22 has IR reducing technology, but these only reduce the IR signature - not eliminate it. I also read somewhere that IR sensors (QWIP) are being developed that can detect cooler objects at much greater distances (BVR). Many experts predict that these new QWIP sensors will be game changers.

Don't modern IR missiles have flare decoy avoiding ability as well?

 

[Martian2]

Air-to-air missile - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Fifth generation

The latest generation of short-range missiles again defined by advances in seeker technologies, this time electro-optical imaging infrared (IIR) seekers that allow the missiles to “see” images rather than single “points” of infrared radiation (heat). The sensors combined with more powerful digital signal processing provide the following benefits:[3]

* greater infrared counter countermeasures (IRCCM) ability, by being able to distinguish aircraft from infrared countermeasures (IRCM) such as flares.
* greater sensitivity means greater range and ability to identify smaller low flying targets such as UAVs.
* more detailed target image allows targeting of more vulnerable parts of aircraft instead of just homing in on the brightest infrared source (exhaust).

Examples of fifth generation missiles include:

* AIM-132 ASRAAM — Britain (1998&#8211
* AIM-9X Sidewinder — USA (2003&#8211
* IRIS-T — German lead consortium (2005&#8211
* Python 5 — Israeli
* A-Darter (under development) — South Africa and Brazil
* Vympel R-77 — Russia (1994&#8211
* PL-10/PL-ASR — China
* AAM-5 — Japan
* Astra missile BVRAAM - India"

----------

Merry Christmas to ol' curmudgeon Gambit. While you possess a repertoire of military knowledge, your enthusiasm caused you to lose this skirmish (e.g. my opinion). It's okay to be wrong every now and then. No one is perfect.

I wish you my best.

Best regards,

Martin

 

[Myth_buster_1]

^^^Do not change your plans just coz of one blurred picture up in the forum, its long way to go...

Yes as if i am the PAF top brass.

 

[MastanKhan]

You are just annoying me. The bright orange flames that you see in the engines of the F-22 are emitting electromagnetic radiation in the infrared range. This is basic physics that everyone learns in high school. The infrared detector on the heat-seeking missile will home in on that electromagnetic emission for a kill.

Have you noticed that "gambit" is not disputing that a AIM-9 Sidewinder would kill a F-22 from behind in close range? He's trying to squirm out of it by claiming that the F-15 in the Red Flag exercise may only have radar-tracking missiles.

Gambit knows that I raised a good point, but his pride prevents him from acknowledging it.

Sir,

Under what scenario would the aim 9 get a lock on the F22---your aircraft has to be at its 6 'O clock and within single digit miles from the target to get a lock on---in a tail chase within 3 to 5 miles of the F 22---that could happen if the pi-gs could fly and if the F 22 is out of weapons---the pilot is sleeping---it is running on 4 cylinders instead of 8---.

Now if someone says that it is flying at a lower altitude and comes under anti aircraft gun fire---that will take it out---other than that---it is just a wish.

And don't be annoyed please----it puts wrinkles around the yes and forehead.

 

[Martian2]

Sir,

Under what scenario would the aim 9 get a lock on the F22---your aircraft has to be at its 6 'O clock and within single digit miles from the target to get a lock on---in a tail chase within 3 to 5 miles of the F 22---that could happen if the pi-gs could fly and if the F 22 is out of weapons---the pilot is sleeping---it is running on 4 cylinders instead of 8---.

Now if someone says that it is flying at a lower altitude and comes under anti aircraft gun fire---that will take it out---other than that---it is just a wish.

And don't be annoyed please----it puts wrinkles around the yes and forehead.

You came into the middle of a discussion without reading the earlier posts. The discussion starts at post #103 and the claim of RAAF squadron leader Chappell at Red Flag.

 

[Myth_buster_1]

 

[MastanKhan]

This doesn't sound right. The F-22 is within eyesight through the canopy of the F-15 pilot. Yet, RAAF Squadron Leader Chappell is too dumb to maneuver his plane behind the F-22 and fire a heat-seeking missile? His claim and your analysis both sound like propaganda that we hear from a defense contractor.

When the F-22 is within eyeball-range, it has a large engine heat-signature. It is vulnerable from behind. A competent pilot would maneuver his plane behind the F-22 and try to win Red Flag.

Here is the heat signature of a F-22 at eyeball-range. Do you see that bright orange flame? An AIM-9 Sidewinder would score a quick kill.

Sir, I understood you the first time---. They could not get behind the aircraft howsoever they tried---otherwise, he would have stated it otherwise.

Everyone of these fighter jocks wants to be the one to have taken out the F 22---sunnyside up, overeasy, from behind---. Each one of them wants to be the one with their name on the plaque---. It is preposterous to ecven think that neither one of them tried it from the behind----they all tried to---but could not make the penetration.

 

[Jigs]

^^^Best explanation i heard so far.

 

[Martian2]

Sir, I understood you the first time---. They could not get behind the aircraft howsoever they tried---otherwise, he would have stated it otherwise.

Everyone of these fighter jocks wants to be the one to have taken out the F 22---sunnyside up, overeasy, from behind---. Each one of them wants to be the one with their name on the plaque---. It is preposterous to ecven think that neither one of them tried it from the behind----they all tried to---but could not make the penetration.

You're hopeless. I'm getting tired of reposting my points. This is my last reply.

Previously, you claimed that there was some eyeball-to-brain phenomenon that would disrupt or prevent a heat-seeking missile from downing a F-22 from behind. That goofy idea was debunked. You also made some other silly arguments that I will not bother reviewing.

Let me address your latest point. As previously posted, I informed Gambit that RAAF squadron leader Chappell gave absolutely no details in the article on the Red Flag exercise. The only thing that we know for a fact is that Mr. Chappell was within eyeball range of the F-22.

Mr. Chappell and Gambit both gushed about the invincibility of the F-22. I indirectly reprimanded Gambit for his unprofessional fanboy response to Mr. Chappell's unsubstantiated claim.

Here, in your post, you are making the same mistake as Gambit. There is absolutely no factual basis to back up Mr. Chappell's claim of complete impotence in close combat (i.e. eyeball-range) with a F-22.

As I reminded Gambit and of which he is fully aware, a F-22 is most vulnerable in close combat. Mr. Chappell's claim is hard-to-believe and he gave us no information to support his assertion that a F-22 is unbeatable in close combat. It is simply hogwash.

Any competent combat pilot would have attempted to maneuver behind the F-22 in close combat and use the F-15's cannons or AIM-9X Sidewinder to win the Red Flag exercise. Mr. Chappell is either incompetent or a fanboy of the F-22.

That's it. I'm done repeating myself.

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi,

Soryy--that we didnot meet your standards of understanding.

 

[abaseen99]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

First disclosed by US Office of Naval Intellegence (ONI) in 1997 as XXJ, J-20 (?) is a 4th generation fighter to enter the service around 2015. Since 90s both CAC/611 Institute and SAC/601 Institute had been working their own designs for a twin-engine multi-role heavy fighter with enhanced stealth capability and maneuverability comparable to American F-22. It was speculated that 601 Institute was working on a "tri-plane" design based on canard/conventional layout/V-shape tailfin while 611 Institute working on a design based on canard/tailless delta wing/all moving V-shape tailfin/side DSI/bump inlet layout. All designs were expected to feature an internal weapon bay to reduce RCS, which has been speculated to be <0.05m2 (head-on). It was also rumored initially that J-20 could be powered by two 13,200kg/WS-10 class "high thrust" turbofan engines with TVC nozzles which would result in a normal TO weight exceeding 20t. J-20 may also incoporate an advanced FBW system fully integrated with the fire-control and the engine systems. Its fire-control radar is expected to be AESA (Type 1475/KLJ5?). The aircraft may feature a "pure" glass cockpit (a single F-35 style color LCD display and a wide-angle holographic HUD) as well as an IRST/LR. Many of these subsystems have been tested onboard J-10B to speed up the development (see above). Russian assistance has been speculated in terms of softwore support for calculating the RCS of various designs, as well as supply of Salyut 99M2 turbofan engine (14,000kg class) to power the prototypes, if the domestic engine (such as improved WS-10A) fails to meet the schedule. The overall performance of J-20 is thought to be superior to Russian T-50 (stealth) but still inferior to Amereican F-22 (electronics & supercruise). It was reported in November 2006 that a T/W=10 17,000kg class turbofan (WS-15/"large thrust") is being developed for J-20. In August 2008 it was reported that 611 Institute was selected to be the main contractor for the development of J-20 and 601 Institute as the sub-contractor. A full-scale mock-up may have been built at CAC. One rumor in May 2010 suggested that 611 Institute started to construct the first prototype, which is expected to fly by 2012, even though the full configuration one won't fly until a few years later. The latest rumor claimed that the first two prototypes (2001 & 2002) have been constructed and the first high-speed taxiing trial by 2001 took place on December 22,

 

[mshoaib61]

Front side pic of JXX

 

[rockstarIN]

Are you referring to the ..fans.. plans here..or the actual plans?

Off course the fans mate, after seeing this pic, I see PAF fans are changing to Jxx than their previous stand of JF-17 + J-10+F16.

I think earlier I only hear from T-Faz to go to Jxx instead of J-10, but that time, hardly any takers for that..

 

[rockstarIN]

On a side note, SU30's perception with Indians of "God's Gift to Aviation" still continues . 2 SU30 are good enough to take on F22 , i think they forgot how the F15's and F16's hammered the SU30MKI to the point where the IAF pilots refused to go one on one against the top tiered USAF pilots. The Americans evaluated the MKI at Nellis, they weren't impressed as it was nothing revolutionary considering what the Indians were saying about this plane.

I do not want to comment on the MKIs performance in Nellis as it has been discussed to death in most forums, neither I think it a God's gift. F-22 is superior and all admit that, just to reply for the bold part.

Recent mock fight between F-22 & EF, Eurofighter scored a radar lock on F-22. May be because F-22 is not on stealth mode. But they canceled all one to one combat with EF supposed to take place next day. Is that mean F-22 guys are afraid of EF? I believe not.

 

[link16]

the fifth air craft ne ed 5 -8years to get in to use