The F-22 is far from clumsy and the official demo in 2008 will show that. With yaw rates in excess of 30deg/s and pitch rates in excess of 50deg/s in a normal combat load with full fuel, the Raptor can turn and burn with the best of them. I never said that the Raptor dominates WVR combat. It will however combat any Flanker effectively in close range.

For target acquistion the Raptor uses its LPI capability, plain and simple. With a beam that switches frequencies at 1,000 times per second, no American fighter has been able to pick up the APG-77 while it's operating in this mode. I wouldn't expect the Flankers to be any different.

The Flanker airframe is built for manuverability, with no concessions for anything else.

That is evident in its RCS, which is akin to a barn door, its cruise speed which is not much greater than its cornering, as well as its ceiling and top speed, which, although ok are not astounding

As far as airframe, look at the Inducted and Parasitic drag formulas, then apply them to your research. They are applicable no matter what.

And your response about my "rant" somehow counters what I said reguarding propagenda.

Wrong, if a Su-37/30MKI pilot were saying the same about his/her sled, I would question that as well.

But, at the airshow in question "1996 Farnborough" M Simonov challenged any US aircraft to a mock dogfight ". any time, any place!" pg 118 Modern Fighter Aircraft, Francis Crosby. Imperial War Museum, Duxford, UK.

Of course a mock dogfight would be equal numbers, both sides using skilled pilots, and No outside assistance

You have to sell it to the politicians/leaders, whom then sell it to the voters/whomever holds some sway. Thats where the debt angle comes in. Which does relate, if looked upon as a whole.

The 1st law learned in a IPS or Physics class should be (according to my instructor) "No Free Lunch" for something gained, another is sacraficed. That is why doubts enter.

My info is gathered by reading independent sources, AFM and Combat Aircraft are my favorities. Two of my favorites are Bill Gunston and Jon Lake.

Both are noted, independent, writers. Without any known prejudice, loyality, or obligation. Can you say the same for your sources?

"Look out for a offical demo due out in 2008." I cannot wait.
But, its not the 1st time I've heard that. Subtract the year though.
I have been both impressed and dissapointed, by such.

As far as the type radar, still emitting energy. with a broad enough scan range something will "see" it, although it will be a difficult task. Furthermore; A passive detection system does not need to dissimalate frequencies, it simply "feels."

As far as what they said in the video, go argue with them.
It was a Contractor/USAF production shown on the Military Channel.
The only reason I quote that, is their reflection of positve attributes and limitations, both.

Good Day.

The Passive detection system could only tell you something was out there and give a very rough location in the case of the Raptor, and, only if it's a "High-End" unit, which the Russians have.

A2A such as the AiM-120M and its Russian counterpart, can track and home in on radar emissions, if the targeted radar is deactivated, the missle activates a search pattern.

However; the Raptor's oscillating frequency and stealth design, make it a difficult target, esp in BVR engagements.

In a nutshell, an opponent flying a Flanker or Fulcrum, would know something was out there, and a broad local in which to search. If she/he so chooses.

Myself, I would call for back-up, and/or a Foxhound which has a better radar system for the given situation.

Thats all for now.

look at the thread topic, it is meant to compare f-1x to su-30s, why do u keep on saying, wait for the f-22, it shows that u admit that f-16/f-18 have nothing to be discussed in front of a flanker?

we could have compared data, arms etc on the 3 fighters, but no u have to go off topic and just say f-22, how abt PAK-FA ;)

This is an open forum right? Don't have I the right to post some comments in here? I believe everybody have the right to do so. I did not say that the F-16/F-18 have nothing to do with this thread. Of course they were, because they are the main subject to this topic and I knew that. I am not as dull as what you are thinking as of now.

I took the born year, not enter in service. For example still it is confuse in case of Su-27 the year of enter in service.

We will have to start another post on the American Crescent-shaped and Boomerang airframes that perform amazing manuevers at incredible speeds. Placed in service back in the 1990's, the Department of Defense still won't allow these planes to fly in the day time.

I agree.

Overall the Raptor is the current Sky-King in the fighter arena.

Why would one bring up the 30MKI, when the Mig-29 is the counterpart of the F-16/18 (varient not withstanding.)

You could conjer up the Su-27. To counter though. The 27 a.k.a "Flanker" is a larger bird. In terms of MTOW the "Flanker" and it's varients are the 2nd largest fighter aircraft made. Behind the MiG-31 "Foxhound" alone, and that is a fighter/interceptor by design.

The Raptor is a whole new breed of cat.

Whereas; The 30MKI is a mod'd 2 seat Su-27UB.

As far as the MiG-29 vs F-16/18's?
Both sides have compelling arguemnts.