By Kris Osborn, President, Center for Military Modernization
As a derivative of the 1980s era Su-27, the upgraded Russian Su-35 may not be fully understood as being the threat that it may actually be, given the scope and impact of the adjustments and upgrades built into the aircraft.
The Russian Su-35 aircraft is indeed a very capable aircraft, despite largely being a modern variant of the Su-27, for a number of key reasons. Not only is the Su-27 itself a high-speed, effective aircraft but the newer Su-35 variant of the aircraft could be called a 4th-generation ++++ (plus) due to the upgrades woven in. First of all, the aircraft is fast, as even the Su-27 can hit speeds of Mach 2.35, and the Su-35 is just as fast but also operates with an F-22-like “supercruise” ability to sustain speeds without needing afterburner.
Given this, and several other critical attributes of the Su-35, the question then becomes .. was it built to rival and challenge the F-22? The idea makes sense, because although the Su-35 may generally be regarded as a 4th-generation aircraft, it does possess a number of performance parameters and technology upgrades which might make it a formidable challenge to the largely unparalleled US Air Force F-22. This being said, the US Air Force and Lockheed have been quite diligent when it comes to upgrading the F-22 to ensure it retains its superiority. So — ultimately, which aircraft would prevail in an air war?
An interesting and potentially lesser-recognized factor is that the Su-35, while of course not a fully stealth aircraft, does appear to have some radar-cross-section reducing attributes. Simply to the observers eye, the Su-35 does look a little stealthy, as it has a slightly more rounded fuselage that most more sharply-edged 4th-generation aircraft. A blended wing-body presents fewer sharp contours and angles likely to generate a return rendering to enemy radar when electromagnetic “pings” bounce off the aircraft. Looking closely at the fuselage, the Su-35 does seem to slightly resemble the F-22, yet that by no means indicates its stealth properties are comparable.
The Su-35 did, however, arrive as recently at 2014, a timeframe suggesting that the aircraft may indeed incorporate a large number of more cutting-edge upgrades in the realm of weaponry, sensing, avionics, mission systems and non-kinetic weapons such as EW. Also, a Russian-language newspaper called Hoboctn BNK claims the Su-35 has an F-22-like “supercruise” ability to maintain Mach-speeds without needing an afterburner. However, perhaps the most striking area of comparison lies in its thrust to weight ratio, which appears to be “higher” than or at least “close to” an F-22. A data chart published in the Russia Defence Forum indicates that the Su-35 tops the chart with a 1.30 thrust-to-weight ratio, whereas the F-22 is listed as 1.18 or as high as 1.37 with round nozzles, according to the chart from the source. However, despite this apparent small deficit, the chart is also clear that an F-22 can reach a thrust-to-weight radio of 1.37 with round nozzles.
All of this raises the large and critical question as to which aircraft would prevail in air-to-air combat. Many regard the F-22 as the best air-supremacy fighter anywhere in the world, a claim which may well be true. While much of an outcome in a dogfight may pertain to pilot ability and decision-making, some might wonder if technical aspects of either plane might give it an advantage. The planes appear closely if not somewhat comparable in terms of speed and thrust to weight ratio, therefore it is likely other variables might determine the margin of difference between the two aircraft. The pressing question, of course, is which aircraft and pilot would complete the famous OODA loop first? John’s Boyd’s famous fighter pilot air-war paradigm articulated the idea that whichever aircraft is ahead of or inside of the other’s decision making cycle is likely to prevail. OODA refers to Observe, Orient, Decide, Act, indicating that the pilot and aircraft which perceives the dynamics and adjusts to circumstances faster and more accurately would be in a position to “decide” and “act” or kill and destroy first. After all the F-22 if often referred to as a “first-shot, first-kill” aircraft.
Therefore, given that both aircraft can take-off vertically and achieve high levels of thrust, vectoring and rate of climb .. the real technical difference in terms of performance parameters likely resides in the quality of mission systems, weapons targeting, sensing and computing. Such a question raises the key premise as to whether the entire concept of dogfighting may be becoming obsolete. This is, to some degree, the premise of the F-35, because although it is built to dogfight with great effectiveness, its computing, targeting, radar and sensing may be so capable that it simply does not “have” to dogfight to prevail in air war. This appears quite true with the F-35, particularly when it comes to engaging 4th-generation aircraft. In critical US Air Force wargames such as Red Flag, for example, the F-35 has shown it can “see” and “destroy” large numbers of 4th-generation aircraft from distances where it is not detected by an enemy fighter. Naturally, this provides an unparalleled advantage and offers itself as an example of the areas of technological difference likely to determine the winner in an F-22 to Su-35 engagement.
It is perhaps with this in mind that the Air Force and Lockheed have been quite diligent when it comes to upgrading the F-22 in recent years. Not only has the F-22 been upgraded with avionics, sensing and communications technology to enable it to operate as a “aerial quarterback,” but software upgrades have massively improved its weapons capacity. Several years ago, a fleet-wide F-22 upgrade referred to as 3.2b greatly improved the range, targeting precision and guidance technologies of both the AIM-9X Sidewinder and AIM-120D. Each of these known air-to-air weapons were upgraded in a way that substantially improves performance and lethality. The upgrades to the F-22 weapons also likely included “hardening” technologies, meaning methods of ensuring the RF and infrared guidance systems can continue on to a target despite enemy “jamming” efforts.
Lockheed and the Air Force have also reinforced, preserved and improved the “coating” of the F-22, a development which may have involved improving or at least maintaining its radar-absorbent materials. There have also been substantial communications breakthroughs when it comes to the F-22, as new data links now enable two-way connectivity between F-22s and the F-35 and 4th-generation aircraft as well.
Finally, one critical area of potential fighter jet air superiority likely lies in the realm of manned-unmanned teaming. For years Air Force scientists and weapons developers have made progress developing the F-22s ability to control drones from the cockpit. This of course extends sensing, targeting range and even attack possibilities and it is something the US Air Force has evolved to a substantial degree. Write ups in Russia’s TASS news agency indicate that Russia is indeed working to replicate this kind of capability, yet a reading of their news reports seems to indicate that the Russian military is not quite as advanced as the US Air Force when it comes to the realm of manned-unmanned teaming. The US Air Force, for example, has already shown it
can connect unmanned aircraft with F-35 fighter jets while “in-flight,” a step suggesting the ability for manned jets to control groups of drones from the air is fast approaching if not already here. This enables a 5th-gen aircraft to blanket an area with surveillance, test enemy air defenses, perform forward high-risk reconnaissance and even deliver weapons when directed by a human. The victorious aircraft in a combat engagement between an F-22 and Su-35 may be the fighter best able to operate unmanned systems from the air.
What all of this suggests is that, regardless of whichever aircraft might prevail in a dogfight, the fighter jet with superior sensors, weapons and targeting may be best positioned to prevail. This leaves many unknowns, as the full extent of the Su-35’s stealth properties, computing and weapons guidance may not be easy to discern, yet the fact remains that the Su-35 may indeed present a larger threat than is generally recognized.
Kris Osborn is President of Warrior Maven – Center for Military Modernization. Osborn previously served at the Pentagon as a Highly Qualified Expert with the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army—Acquisition, Logistics & Technology. Osborn has also worked as an anchor and on-air military specialist at national TV networks. He has appeared as a guest military expert on Fox News, MSNBC, The Military Channel, and The History Channel. He also has a Masters Degree in Comparative Literature from Columbia University.
