@fokker

I do see your point, and ya a lot of squadrons won't put up with losses but there are a
few who disregard combat losses and still punch through.

ANYWAYS...the ruggedness of russian aircraft is in there ability to land in NEARLY ANY
CONDITION.
Can the raptor land on a dirt runway? Possibly

Can US aicraft withstand a full amount of bad runway conditions? Not really...

I've seen video of the SU-25 land on a dirt runway and take off again, same with most of
the russian aircraft that's where the ruggedness is not in mid air combat. Mid air combat
no fighter can survive a direct hit and keep flying, just look at bosnia when a F-16 when
down due to a russian SA-5? or SA-8 i can't remember which one.

@ Falcon

Any SU-27 to -37 version. Can they super cruise? No.
Can the F-22 super cruise? Yes at near Mach 2.

The F-22 will not be caught if it doesn't want too.

Also, since an AMRAAM 120-D can hit targets at close to 45 miles from launch (let's
say 30 is more effective), that is a lot of territory to try to cover to get into visual
range. Basically, your squadron is flailing around blind trying to find the enemy while
continuing to lose aircraft to AAM fire. Sorry, no one will put up with that.

I love the myth about "ruggedness" of Russian aircraft. Their engines break down
far more frequently than Western counterparts. Their electronics suck and more
frequently malfunctioin. Their airframes are typically rated for fewer fligth hours than
Western fighters. The various Middle East conflicts have shown that Russian aircraft
are not immune to AAM. One Sidewinder or Sparrow or AMRAAM was sufficient to kill
various versions of MiG or Sukhoi aircraft. The Flanker has no advantage here.

Russian 5th Gen (more 4.5) is the PAK-FA. Get back to me when it goes into service.

In terms of a strategic outlook, wouldn't US forces want the Russians to press on in such
a situation? The F-22s would take them out with impunity and the Ruskie would rapidly run
out of aircraft. They may fight their way to their objective, but you can't afford to
sustain those sort of losses in the long run.

Personally I think a lot of the posturing the Russians are doing is simply that:
posturing. They haven't the money to maintain what they have, much less build any
significant amount of new material.

I mean, when you have to feed your soldiers dog food to keep costs down it's not usually a
good sign.

@fokker

Remember this though, the russians don't back down from a fight and visual contact is
possible. The Raptors airframe isn't built like a russian one (there pretty rugged), a
raptor may have stealth but the SU-37 has power the Terminator earn that named because of
the simulations just like the raptor earned it's name. Russia is also developing a fighter
that will outclass the Raptor completely, can't recall the name of it right now but i'll
post it later.

The F-22 design is more than just "radar" stealthy. Reportedly, its stealth extends
to IR and sound as well.

Think not like a video game but real world. You command a squadron of advanced
Flankers on a flighter sweep or escorting a strike package. Suddenly AMRAAMS start
picking off members of your squadron and you have no idead of where or how many
Raptors are out there.

It would take an amazing amount of willpower to press on in that situation. More
likely you exercise some discretion and order a withdrawl with perhaps a just a few
squadron losses. If used correctly, the Raptor can dominate a battlespace

@fox
You are partially correct imo.

The F-22 is more then capable of dog fighting and second only to a few experimental
aircraft and no actual production fighters.

However even if the SU-37 was to go into full production the F-22 pilots still have
superior training and experience and the SU-37 is not far enough ahead of the F-22 in terms
of maneuverability and speed to overcome that advantage.

The US cannot continue to pump these uber advanced and expensive aircraft out and Russia
hasn't been in a position to do so for decades.

Aircraft are called weapons platforms in the military and what you will find is that in
the future they will become just that, uber fast, possibly stealth, remote controlled and
inexpensive.

This just might be me but I think the F-22's role is all wrong, my opinion it makes the
perfect interceptor, fast unseen and able to strike and run and possably go back to
stealth. Why use it as an offensive well to me its like NF Locals is folly and somewhat
pointless because they do the same thing as regular fighters. Defensively they are far
better at this role of taking down a flight of enemy bombers or fighters.

However offsneivly it's also not hard in the same way to take down a F-22 as stated before
It would be like Vietnam Pilots would feel far superior and take out the Human element of
fly and rely on technology, however what can a group of F-22 's do if you have 20-30 Gen 4
fighters coming towards you, Yes get a first strike but then it goes back to World War 1
and 2 tactics the F-22 is not built for furballs and dogfights, and in the public
siumulations and CGI simulations the F-22 is usually escorting something that is "BAIT"
Another thing its much cheeper and cost effective to research missels that can Track
"Stealth" as if I am correct modern Stealth aircraft are really just Radar un-seeable
aircraft not physicaly stealth.

I guess i been in video game world but really the only thing on Earth the F-22 couldnt
intercept would be a Hyper-Sonic Fighter/Bomber but thats a another story. Another problem
is well the current world status, Unlike in the past 100 years of flying we have came from
wodden inventions, Bi and Triplanes Monoengine Fighters, Jet fighters Missle fighters,
VTOL and now Radar "Stealth" right now the aircraft we have now (GEN 4) are still the Apex
of Military Aircraft design however in capitolism and our modren technology driven world 1
can not standby and let technologly get the better of them, If the US doesnt have the
lattest and greatest its a bad thing, The irony is when it comes to Aircraft the US and
Russia are still fighting the Cold War. Still only a handfull of nations can even afford
such things and use them in good numbers.

-Fox

@falcon
I see no reason why the tactics would be different. The F-22 would use the same tactics
against the SU-37 as it would against a F-18.

Most common tactic would involve baiting the enemy fighters in this case the SU-37's into
attacking a flight of say F-18's or another target. As the SU-37's close to attack their
target they are fired on by the unseen F-22's. The F-22's then vanish again. Any SU-37's
that survive the initial attack will still be out of range of the F-18's and still unable
to find the invisible F-22's running around at max missile range.

Thus the Advantages of the SU-37 are negated by the advantages of the F-22 and the SU-37's
abnormally huge radar signature.

If a raptor is seen by another fighter it isn't doing it's job correctly. It's meant to be
nothing more then a high speed stealth missile platform.

The F22 wld avoid all dogfights if possible & use its stealth to get in range of its Beyond
visual range missiles... I think tats its main strength.
However do remember that the F22 has vectoring thrust nozzles..

true night

But the 4th gen fighters do still lack certain capabilities even with pilot experience
that the 5th gen have. But again that's another major factor to consider in, like you said
the tactics used in a F-22 VS SU-37 fight would be completely different then 4th gen vs
5th gen