THIS ARTICLE IS OUTDATED AND WILL BE REDONE, CONTENT OF THIS ARTICLE MAY BE INCORRECT. I've decided to put all comparisons into blog posts, because I think its better as they are locked and no one else out of me edits them anyway so when these blogs have reached enough popularity, I'll delete the artices.
CHECK OUT MY YOUTUBE CHANNEL!!:FightercraftProductions and keep updated with videos such as comparisons, analysis and rankings on fighter aircraft !
First there are a few things to say, the web is full with comparisons between the F-22 and the PAK-FA and so many of them are biased and full with wrong statements and propaganda, because of people who base their conclusions on wrong facts; for example there are many people claiming that the PAK-FA can do everything better than the F-22 and then there are videos like "United States fifth generation is officially dead " or "F-22 Craptor" and things like this, only because of some rumours and problems, which were disproven and solved and two crashes in testing phase and its early service time and one caused by a pilot fault, each aircraft that is new has technical problems, that is nothing new. And the PAK-FA will have lots of technical problems in the next years, the first one was an engine blow-up during take-off. The problem is, that in fact, none of these people are realistic and the only thing they aim is downplaying the F-22 and that just all American fighter aircraft are "useless crap", without having any proof. Actually the former Russian prime Minister Putin claimed that the PAK-FA is superior to the F-22 in terms of Manoeuvrability, Weaponry and Range, he’s right, but that’s all.
This article is just to compare the capabilities of the different aircraft.
|Supercruise||1963 km/h||1800 km/h|
|Speed||2575 km/h+||2100 km/h|
|Range||3200 km||5500 km|
Detection range against 1 m² target
|223+ km||350-400 km against 2.5 m² target|
|Stealth ( RCS )||0.0001 m²||0.5 m²|
|Wing load ( lower better )||375 kg/m²||330-470 kg/m2|
|Ceiling||19812 m||20000 m|
|Number of Missiles (internally)||8||10|
To make an aircraft stealthy a lot of paralleled edges are needed to prevent the radar waves bouncing back to their source and and the use of Radar Absorbing Material (RAM) and paintings, to absorb radar waves which are not scattered by the shape and thus prevent the enemy to track them. These are the main principles of stealth, but there are also other methods, one of them is to minimize the emissions of the aircraft's sensors, which means that, for example the APG-77 radar of the F-22, uses just as much energy, as it is needed to track the enemy, thus, the Raptor is able to prevent the enemy's passive sensors to track it through its radar emissions. Another important ability is to prevent becoming visible through communication systems, while it is possible to track the source of a signal, so that the aircraft becomes visible, this is being the reason for the fact that the F-22 is currently able to communicate only with other Raptors, because conventional aircraft give away observable signals. Also, it is necessary to minimize the Infrared-emissions of an aircraft, because newer IRST (Infrared search and track) systems (like the Russian OLS-35), are able to detect aircraft through their IR-emissions, which are mainly generated from the engines, but also from their systems and surfaces. And to minimize the IR-emissions the nozzles of the B-2 Spirit and the F-22 Raptor (but also the YF-23) spread out the hot engine exhaust and the surfaces and leading edges of the F-22, F-35 and B-2 are downcooled, so that the IR-observability is lowered significantly. The F-22 features all of these, the PAK-FA lacks IR-reduction methods and stealthy systems.As seen on the picture the F-22 has a way more paralleled edges than the PAK-FA and especially on the PAK-FA’s rear fuselage, which is considered the most unstealthy part of the PAK-FA, aren't any paralleled edges. In terms of stealth the F-22 is ahead, because it has clearly full aspect stealth, cooled engines and a RCS of 0.0001 square meters, the PAK-FA on the other hand is not as stealthy as the F-22, it has no reduced IR signature and its radar cross section is about 0.5 to 0.01 square meters and its RAM coating is not as advanced as the F-22's. Unlike on the F-22, the engine blades of the PAK-FA are not hidden, which is a big problem, because the engine blades reflect radar waves very good and increase the IR-signature drastically. But there is one thing that the PAK-FA will eventually have and the F-22 not, Plasma Stealth, Plasma is claimed to be an effective way to reduce the RCS, while producing a cloud of plasma around an aircraft to deflect or absorb radar; but all in all, even with Plasma Stealth the PAK-FA has a much higher RCS and the Plasma will make the PAK-FA probably "blind", because it would jam the PAK-FA's own radar and its sensors. Furthermore, it is much more questionable if it is even possible to produce Plasma around an aircraft and to hold it there; this is only theoretically possible, but most likely not practically.
The F-22´s AN/APG-77 has about 2000-2200 receive modules and its an low observable AESA radar, which is able to track a 1 square meter target at a range of 240 km, it is considered the most advanced fighter radar. The PAK-FA´s radar has 1500 elements (it tracks a 2.5 m² target at 400 km). Furthermore, the PAK-FA has full 360 degree radar coverage because of two L- band radars on the wingtips and a small X-band radar on its tail. The Raptor can do so as well, through the use of sensor fusion and highly advanced passive sensors, but it does not provide 360 degree radar coverage. One problem of the PAK-FA is that its radar lacks a "Low Probability of Being Intercept" mode.
|APG-77||PAK-FA AESA (AESA derivative of Irbis-E)||Irbis-E|
|Range vs 1 m² target||200-240 km ||400 km(which assumes a 3m² target, as it is not states there, thus, about 260-300 km vs 1m2 target [projected and never achieved])||260-300 km (as 350-400 km vs 3m² target[projected and never achieved])|
|Electronic Warfare capability||Yes||Yes (but less advanced than on the F-22)||No|
|LPI||Yes||Yes (but limited)||No|
- Most advanced fighter Radar
- Low probability of being intercept mode (locate enemies without being noticed)
- Ability to jam and block the enemy’s electronics and avionics
Low wavelength radar
The Low wavelength radars of the PAK-FA are also not a panacea against VLO aircraft like the F-22:
- They are unable to provide weapon guidance because of bad resolution and accuracy
- They need to be ungainly large to track an aircraft accurately
- When mounted on aircraft, they are too small to track something or to get a lock on
- The high power emissions makes them easily to detect by passive sensors
Editors Note: Because of a lack of trustworthy sources, it is not possible to make clear conclusions concerning the radar ranges, only little information is available on the PAK-FA's radar, the Irbis-E's range figures, cited by NIIP, are only projected (90 km range vs 1m² target, the range of the APG-77 against such a target is unknown, the only source is Ausairpower, which states the range to be 75 km, whether this is credible or not, is not clear (and all radar range figures of the PAK-FA and Flanker were based on these claims). Another example are T/R modules, the F-22 has about 1,500 and a range of 200 km vs a 1m² target (DoD), however some sources claim 2,000-2,200 T/R modules, which would mean higher range, and there's no doubt that the APG-77's range is far higher than currently stated. The Russian Air Force chief admitted that the Su-35’s avionics are inferior to American aircraft of the same type , this means that they are inferior to the F-22 (as it’s the best American aircraft) and probably to the F-35 and F/A-18E/F. So does this consider radar range as well? Most likely.
Passive detection and Low Probability of Being Intercepted
This is another clear advantage of the F-22, its LPI mode, which makes the Raptor's sensors stealthy through a wide bandwidth and frequency variability (it changes frequency over 1,000 times a second), so that it is very difficult for an aircraft (like the PAK-FA) to track another one (F-22) with passive sensors, which are designed to track an aircraft through its radar emissions. The PAK-FA's radar lacks an LPI mode or is expected to have only limited LPI capabilities; in this area, the F-22 has a clear advantage over the PAK-FA.
Passive radar emitters
In this area, the F-22 outruns all competing systems, the Raptors radar warning receiver, the AN/ALR-94 has a detection range of 463 km and it is considered the most powerful and effective radar receiver, being even more powerful than the APG-77. The system is able to provide target information to the APG-77, allowing the APG-77 to operate passively, this greatly increases the F-22's stealth and allows the APG-77 to track a target with a narrow beam at much greater ranges than usually and then to shoot the target down with an AMRAAM missile. It is superior to the Khibiny M system of the Su-35, of which an upgraded version is going to be used by the PAK-FA, which will be outperformed by the AN/ALR-94 as well.
Payload and range
Because of its bigger size the PAK-FA has a greater range and it can carry more weapons, the F-22 is able to carry 12 missiles, 4 on external pylons and 8 in internal weapon bays. The PAK-FA can carry 10 internally and six externally (some sources say 8 internally and 8 externally, but if so the PAK-FA will lose it’s advantage over the F-22, without compromising stealth) and it has with 5500 km a greater range than the F-22 (3200 km).
Dogfight capability and speed
The PAK-FA’s engines will allow it to supercruise at a speed of Mach 1.5 to 1.7 and the F-22's let it cruise at speeds of Mach 1.82. The maximum speed on full afterburner is comparable, while the prototype of the PAK-FA has weaker engines than the definitive version will have, which engines are expected to produce a thrust of 170-180 kN, but the F-22s smaller size and its lower weight, as well as the classified top thrust are probably able to balance this. So when now comparing the manoeuvrability of the two aircraft, the PAK-FA has 3D thrust vectoring with a range of 15 degrees in pitch axis and 8 in yaw axis and full moveable LERX and tailfins. However 3D TVC does not provide a significant advantage over 2D. The TVC system acts as an additional control element to improve the manoeuvrability of an aircraft. The yaw control surfaces are very small and ineffective and useless in dogfight or when the pilot tries to outmanoeuvre enemy missiles an aircraft could actually fly without yaw axis, as seen on tailless designs.
Thrust vectoring in yaw axis is not used to turn left or right, all in all great yaw manoeuvrability is pretty irrelevant and the only small advantage an aircraft with 3D TVC has, is roll manoeuvrability. So the advantage of 3D TVC isn’t significant when compared to 2D TVC. Thrust vectoring not only boosts the agility of an aircraft, it also boosts the stealth, because of the moving thrust, while the hot thrust is not always at the same position, it is difficult for IR-seekers/missiles to locate an aircraft with TVC. The F-22 on the other hand, has 2D TVC, with a range of 20 degrees, but only in pitch axis and it has bigger horizontal stabilizers than the PAK-FA but the Raptors vertical stabilizers are not fully moveable, but this doesn’t matter. Even if the F-22´s agility is very close to the PAK-FA’s, the PAK-FA has a higher turning rate than the F-22 due to its LERX.
The following criteria boosts the Raptors agility:
- Lower wing loading than the PAK-FA, but comparable thrust to weight
- much bigger stabilizers
- good aerodynamics
- flight control surfaces on the F-22 are very large and give the F-22 the edge in the turn
The following criteria boosts the PAK-FAs agility:
- very good aerodynamics
- 3D TVC
- Full moveable LERX
- Full moveable vertical and horizontal stabilizers
The PAK-FA shows that it is the closest match to the Raptors domination, while it has greater range, manoeuvrability and payload. The F-22 has superior stealth, radar power, more advanced avionics, the speeds are comparable (Note: F-22´s top speed and top thrust is classified, so that the F-22 is probably faster), the F-22 is also being upgraded with an HMD (Helmet Mounted Display) system like on the F-35, giving it an advantage over more manoeuvrable aircraft. With the PAK-FA Russia will be comparable to the US for the next one or two decades but the United States have already start work on a 6th Gen. Fighter, maybe the 5th Generation fighters will fly a way more agile and stable than the 6th generation Fighters and will have all in all better performance but they will have inferior stealth, supercruise and sensor fusion and 6th Gen. fighters will use directed energy weapons, allowing them to kill threats with the speed of light, being the reason for their inferior agility.
In an real combat the F-22 will get first lock when tracking the PAK-FA at about 50 km using the advanced APG-77 and firing AIM-120D on it, the PAK-FA won’t see where the missile comes from but it will see the missile and it will be able to outmanoeuvre it, lowering the kill rate of the Raptors missiles. The PAK-FA will track the F-22 at 30 km when its eventually damaged, and it will fire it’s Vympel R-77 on the F-22, but the F-22 is able to escape, due to its good agility. If the PAK-FA is not down until then it will come to a close range dogfight but then the Raptor is able to defend itself with the very fast and manoeuvrable AIM-9X which hits and downs the PAK-FA, but in this case, it still depends a lot on pilot skills, which aircraft will outmanoeuvre the other one first and will achieve a lock on.
For a JSF a combat will end not good: Because of no reduced IR-signature, the PAK-FA will get first lock using its advanced infrared sensor and then the JSF will have a missile on its tail and the pilot will get warned by the advanced DAS sensor, but however the missile will most likely down it, because the JSF hasn’t got the manoeuvrability to dodge a R-77 but even if some of them can survive such an attack, only 4 AMRAAM’s probably wont be enough, maybe the AIM-120D has better manoeuvrability and a higher kill rate than the C-version and it’s able to down PAK-FA’s, but the cruising PAK-FA will quickly get out off the JSF’s effective engagement zone and then it will kill it within visual range.
|F-22 vs PAK-FA||F-35 vs PAK-FA|
|Stealth||F-22 advantage (F-22 0.0001 m²; PAK-FA 0.5-0.01 m²)||Comparable|
|Avionics||F-22 advantage||F-35 advantage|
|BVR capability||F-22 advantage||PAK-FA advantage|
|Maximum and Supercruise speed||Comparable (Eventually F-22 advantage)||PAK-FA advantage|
|Combat Radius||PAK-FA advantage (maximum range 5500 km)||PAK-FA advantage|
|Counter Measures||PAK-FA advantage (not enough information available on the Raptors defence system)||PAK-FA advantage|
|Dogfight/WVR capability||PAK-FA advantage||PAK-FA advantage|
“The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter struggles to survive against the conventional Su-35BM Flanker, with only its -30 dBSM class front sector stealth keeping it alive in some BVR combat situations. Against even a -20 dBSM class PAK-FA, the F-35 falls within the survivability black hole, into which US legacy fighters such as the F-16C/E, F-15C/E and F/A-18A-F have already fallen.” “ The fate of the F-35 Lightning II would be far worse in an air combat environment challenged by the PAK-FA. If the Mach 1.5 PAK-FA is using its infrared sensor as the primary sensor and observes radio frequency emission control (EMCON), then the first detection by the F-35’s APG-81 radar could be at ~20 nautical miles or less with a missile launched by the PAK-FA’s infrared sensors already inbound from 60 to 70 nautical miles away. The PAK-FA could easily break to a direction outside the F-35’s AIM-120 engagement zone.” “The sustained turning performance of the F-35A Lightning II was recently disclosed as 4.95 G at Mach 0.8 and 15,000 ft. A 1969 F-4E Phantom II could sustain 5.5 Gs at 0.8 Mach with 40 percent internal fuel at 20,000 feet. The F-35 is also much slower than the 1960s F-4E or F-105D. So the F-35A’s aerodynamic performance is ‘retrograde’ when compared with 1960s legacy fighters. The consequence of such inferior JSF performance is that its DAS might detect an incoming missile, but the aircraft lacks the turn-rate to out-fly it. As the F-35 also lacks the performance to engage or escape, repeated ‘freebie’ shots from the PAK-FA could inflict high losses. Expect the exchange rate to be of the order of 4:1 in favour of the PAK-FA, possibly much higher.”
This is what Ausairpower.net says to the F-35 JSF, and they claim what will happen if not more Raptors are going to be produced and I agree with them in most aspects, the PAK-FA has almost every advantage over the F-35.
“Fights between the F-22A and the PAK-FA will be close, high, fast and lethal. The F-22A may get ‘first look’ with the APG-77, the Advanced Infra Red Search and Track (AIRST) sensor having been deleted to save money, but the PAK-FA may get ‘first look’ using its advanced infrared sensor. Then, the engagement becomes a supersonic equivalent of the Battle of Britain or air combat over North Korea. The outcome will be difficult to predict as it will depend a lot on the combat skills of the pilots and the capabilities of the missiles for end-game kills. There is no guarantee that the F-22 will prevail every time.”
And this in a combat between the F-22A and the PAK-FA, and what is actually questionable is the statement that the PAK-FA could gain first lock when fighting against the F-22 Raptor, this is unrealistic, because the F-22´s engines and a special coating are optimized to prevent this and the maximum range of the PAK-FA's OLS-35 IRST is about 50 km against a non-afterburning target, but against a IR-stealthy F-22 it is much lower (about 20-30 km, estimated) so that the F-22 can still have first lock capability using the APG-77 and the F-22´s clear superior stealth design prevents it to be locked by the PAK-FA’s weaker radar.
J-20 Black EagleNot only the F-22 Raptor and the PAK-FA will dominate the skies of the future, there’s still a Chinese J-20 which wants to catch up. While it is not as agile as the F-22 or PAK-FA, because it is too large and is aerodynamically inferior, it has a greater payload and range. Maybe it is not as stealthy as the F-22 but it is already stealthier than the PAK-FA, therefore the F-22 and the PAK-FA are better supercruisers and they have a more advanced avionic suite. So when hearing all this it seems that it is no match for the two fighters, but this is definetely not the case, the J-20 is an heavy armed long range interceptor, the F-22´s superior radar and stealth protect it from being locked and killed with long range missiles, so that the F-22 won't lose it´s "first look, first shot, first kill advantage". For the PAK-FA the situation is different because its probably not stealthy enough, so that the J-20 can track and lock but then the PAK-FA will be able to outmanoeuvre the missiles and after that it will counter with an R-77, which will most likely down it. Or the extreme agile PAK-FA will outmanoeuvre the J-20 in close combat. To conclude, the J-20 can be considered a very competitive fighter, which, however, is not superior.
All variants of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter would be equally so outclassed, assuming this failed project even progresses to any kind of actual production.
"The US Navy F/A-18E/F Super Hornet is outclassed in every respect, and would be as ineffective against a mature J-XX [J-20] as it is against the F-22A Raptor.
All US Air Force, US Navy and allied legacy fighters are outclassed in much the same manner, and are ineffective cinematically and in sensor capability against this class of threat system."
This is another Ausairpower statement concerning the F-35 and F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet fighters, claiming them to be rendered absolutely "ineffective" in combat with Chinese J-20 fighters.
What about the Typhoon ?While the United States has a weapon against the PAK-FA (if some more F-22s are going to be build, while Russia plans to operate about 500 of them) what about Europe ? The most advanced European fighter is the Eurofighter Typhoon. In combat against the PAK-FA or the J-20 the Typhoon will be currently inferior because of the PAK-FAs superior avionics, stealth and performance and the same goes for the J-20, but the Typhoon will be at least better than the F-35 because of the fact that it´s faster, a way more manoeuvrable and it can supercruise, what the F-35 is unable to do and the only disadvantage of the Typhoon being stealth and avionics. And until the PAK-FA enters service, the Typhoon will be upgraded with 3D TVC, this plus the canards, the delta wings and the super-manoeuvrable airframe will make it an extreme agile fighter aircraft outperforming the J-20s close combat capabilities and it will be highly competitive to the F-22´s and PAK-FAs and the fact that the PAK-FA has no cooled and hidden engines will make its stealth useless against the Typhoons PIRATE IR-seeker and the question is now, who will lock on first ? The problem for the Typhoon is that it only has semi-stealth capability, making it an easy target for the PAK-FAs very powerful radar and its IRST but the Eurofighters advantage is that the PAK-FAs engines have probably a higher IR-signature than the Typhoons, because of the not hidden engine blades. But anyway the PAK-FA would remain the superior fighter as its first detection would be far before the Typhoon could ever lock. In aerial combat the aircraft who shots first has the highest chance to win. The Raptors AIM-120D has in combat against the PAK-FA a kill rate of 10-20 % and the Typhoons MBDA Meteor a kill rate of 10-15 % (estimated).
What does this mean now?As seen on the table, the F-22 has the most advanced avionic suite of all aircraft, as well as the best stealth and speed. The PAK-FA shows that it has the best agility and the J-20 the highest combat radius and the largest weapon bays (the PAK-FAs weapon bays and it´s range are also very high too, but the J-20´s is a little bit higher and the internal load is greater). The F-35 fails in almost every category against the others, showing that the JSF is not a useable combat fighter against the J-20 and the PAK-FA, but it has to be considered that the F-35 wasn't designed to do so. The only fighter being able to overpower and defeat the PAK-FA and the J-20 is the F-22, however Secretary of Defence Robert Gates favours the F-35 and not the F-22, a terrible mistake as seen on the comparison F-35 Lighting II versus Su-35BM it is even inferior against the highly manoeuvrable Su-35, while it has probably to fight against the PAK-FA in future. The F-22 is the only fighter aircraft that is superior to the PAK-FA, in many ways. The F-35 will also be more expensive than the much more advanced PAK-FA and J-20 and it´s program will make it also more expensive than the F-22 Raptor, as the cost of the F-35 is still climbing.
The critics against the JSF are, because of its limited capabilities against newer Russian and Chinese Aircraft and Air Defence Missiles. The JSF was designed to be a cheap and effective weapon against legacy fighters, but those legacy fighters aren't there anymore, Russia currently operates the advanced Su-35S/BM combat aircraft and China is probably going to buy these Flankers until the J-20 is combat ready, what is expected not to happen until 2016.
"Another element of the PAK-FA ‘surprise’ is that the aircraft has been designed with a clear understanding of the effects of ‘stealth’ on air combat when both sides present with low-observable aircraft. Obviously, the combatants will be closer when their radar sensors detect the other side, so close in fact that the Infra-Red Scan and Track (IRST) might be the first sensor to detect the presence of an enemy aircraft. The problem is this: the PAK-FA has IRST capability and the F-22A does not. Worse, the extreme agility of the PAK-FA will allow it to dodge the F-22A’s AIM-120 missile shots, while the Raptor will likely not be able to out-turn the more advanced Russian (and Chinese) missiles. Surviving F-22As would then be committed to what fighter pilots call a ‘knife fight’ – close-in dogfights where superior agility wins – and the PAK-FA will outmanoeuvre the F-22A.
The answer to this air combat puzzle is simple: build more F-22s and build a better F-22, and give it better missiles. The basic design of the F-22 is sound and there is internal space for additional sensors such as IRST, cheek AESA arrays and possibly lower frequency radar that will detect the PAK-FA first. The thrust of the F119 series engines could be increased and a more advanced 3D thrust-vectoring nozzle fitted. Controls with more power and driven by smarter software can be added. The MBDA Meteor missile has a specification and design to kill a 9G target at 50,000 feet – about the edge of where the PAK-FA can operate. If the Europeans can make such a missile, why not the United States?"
This is a little bit exaggerated claiming by Peter Goon- not to get me wrong now, Ausairpower is still a good source for everyone being interested in aerial combat-, but in this claiming are some wrong facts, because an IR-seeker cannot detect the F-22 first that easily, because a special ceramic-matrix RAM painting is utilized on the engine exhaust nozzles to reduce radar and IR signatures  (it is also more difficult to deliver target information to a missile when using an IR-seeker, but the main problem is that the detection range is not as high as it is on a radar, and the addition of 3D TVC would be a terrible mistake, because it would strongly sacrifice the Raptor´s stealth. And how can additional yaw manoeuvrability be an advantage ? The only true fact on this claiming is that an IR-seeker can and should be mounted on the F-22; but the APG-77 is large and powerful enough to give the F-22 first look capability and the stealth on the PAK-FA is poorly when compared to the Raptors, especially in the rear and side part but what has to be said now, is that the front sector of the PAK-FA still provides a very stealthy design, all in all comparable to the F-35.
Give us feedback ! And if you dont like it, it would be great, if you post your thoughts on the articles talk page! That would be really helpful!
- ↑ "F-22 Raptor" fighter-aircraft.com
- ↑ "Sukhoi PAK-FA" airforce-technology.com
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 "PAK-FA Sukhoi T-50." warfare.ru.
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 "F/A-22 Raptor" fighter-planes.com
- ↑ 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 " globalsecurity.com
- ↑ 6.0 6.1 6.2 6.3 "PAK-FA assessment" ausairpower.net
- ↑ "Radar Cross Section" globalsecurity.org
- ↑ "India close to PACT on next generation fighter" business-standard.com
- ↑ "F-22 Weapons" globalsecurity.org
- ↑ . "7 Secret Ways America’s Stealth Armada Stays Off the Radar" wired.com.
- ↑ 11.0 11.1 " http://articles.janes.com
- ↑ 12.0 12.1 "Sizing up the Joint Strike Fighter" ausairpower.net
- ↑ "F-22A Raptor" amazing-airplanes.com
- ↑ "F-22A Raptor"T-50 / Project 701 / PAK FA globalsecurity
- ↑ "ИРБИС-Э" niip.ru
- ↑ 16.0 16.1 ./#idc-cover "Low Probability of Intercept Radar" globalsecurity.com.
- ↑ ."Latest F-22 upgrade brings ability to jam enemy radars " flightglobal.com.
- ↑ Maj. Gen. Carlsons briefing on Stealth Fighters, Tuesday, April 20, 1999
- ↑ 19.0 19.1 19.2 . /#idc-cover "Low Band Surveillance Radars" ausairpower.net.
- ↑ Maj. Gen. Carlsons briefing on Stealth Fighters, Tuesday, April 20, 1999
- ↑ . "Russian AF chief: US fighters superior to Su-35S" flightglobal.com.
- ↑ Sweetman 2005, pp. 101–103.
- ↑ "OLS-35" deagel.com
- ↑ . /#idc-cover "F-22 Raptor Stealth" globalsecurity.org.