By Kris Osborn, President, Center for Military Modernization
Russian news reports claim that new “guided missiles” for its Su-35 and Su-57 will soon be showcased at an upcoming international military technical forum called Army-2023. The operative question is … how effective are these upgrades and what might they mean for fighter jet attack sensing, range and precision?
The new Russian missiles to be showcased, described in Russia’s TASS News Agency by weapons-maker Rosoboronexport, may be a specific attempt by Russia to rival the air attack supremacy of the US F-22 and F-35. The Russian newspaper quotes the Rosoboronexport CEO specifically stating weapons on display will outmatch the West..
“”Russian weapons to be on display at the Army forum’s sites have a successful track record of their use on the battlefield.They have proven to be easy to operate and simultaneously very effective against cutting-edge hardware of our Western competitors,” the paper quotes the CEO saying.
Little specifics may be known about Russia’s Su-57 5th-generation stealth fighter, and Russia does not appear to operate a large fleet or force of the aircraft, yet certainly new guided missiles could increase the threat it presents. The Russian Su-35, by contrast, exists in much larger numbers and has been upgraded extensively in what appears to be an effort to rival the US F-22.
New Russian Su-35 “Guided Weapons” vs. US Air Force F-22
The ultimate deciding factors determining which fighter jet prevails in any kind of major air-to-air combat engagement are likely to involve a mix of intangibles and tough-to-calculate variables such as pilot proficiency, decision-making speed and aerial maneuvering. It would seem likely that a more experienced pilot, if even in an inferior fighter jet, might still prevail in a dogfight.
However, alongside these less calculable variables, there are clear technical parameters likely to greatly impact the equation as well, in terms of weaponry, sensing, computing and precision targeting. Sensor range, for example, is a clear and somewhat measurable way to discern which fighter jet can “see” and “target” or destroy the other from undetected stand-off reasons. For example, in Air Force war games such as Red Flag, the F-35 has shown an ability to see and destroy larger formations of fourth-generation aircraft from distances where it cannot itself be seen. Stand-off range, therefore, when enabled by long-range, high-fidelity sensing and precision weapons guidance systems, is a clear technical parameter which could quite simply determine victory in air war, regardless of how other variables compare. This is why many suggest, for example, that the F-35s sensors are so advanced that it may actually never “need” to dogfight, even though it is capable of it. Is dogfighting going to become obsolete due to the advent of AI-enabled, long-range sensors? Does is simply come down to a question of sensing range and weapons accuracy? Seems this is a reasonable and quite relevant question to ask, which is precisely why it is likely very important for Pentagon and Air Force weapons developers to learn the specifics of the Russian fighter jet weapons upgrades.
This is why the Russian media claim about upgraded “guided missiles” for its Su-35 and Su-57 could be quite significant, as an air-to-air or air-to-ground weapon is only as effective as its sensing and targeting allows. Should a Russian 5th-generation Su-57 or 4th-generation “plus” upgraded Su-35 be upgraded with guided weapons able to maintain an precise targeting trajectory from superior stand-off ranges, then it might operate with an advantage. Details regarding what kinds of weapons upgrades will be demonstrated on the Russian fighter jets were not available, however the TASS media report raises the critical question of how weapons upgrades on the Su-35 or Su-57 compare with enhanced weapons systems built into the F-22 and F-35. The jet which detects identities and is able to “hit” the other from safer stand-off ranges is clearly the one with an advantage likely to prevail in air combat.
A key question would be whether the Russian guided weapons upgrades are in any way comparable to the highly-effective 3.2b software upgrades built into the US Air Force F-22 fleet which massively improve range, targeting precision and accuracy of the AIM-120D and AIM-9X Sidewinder. This fleet wide F-22 upgrade, which is now operational, not only improved the guidance systems and lethality of air-launched weapons but also “hardened” their targeting networks making them harder to “jam.” Software upgrades or drops on the “F-35” for example, continuously enable the integration of new, more high-tech weapons systems. For example, missile, guidance and fire control upgrades now enable F-35 pilots to fire the AIM-9X “off-boresight,” meaning it can destroy a target behind or to the side of the aircraft. In effect, an air-launched AIM-9X can adjust course in flight to destroy a target not in direct or “linear” line of sight.
Additional upgrades to the AIM-9X, according to Raytheon weapons developers, include the engineering of a Block II variant with digital ignition and a redesigned fuse. The AIM-9X Block II also incorporates upgraded electronics which enable a “long-on-after-launch” capability and advanced datalink to support targeting beyond line of sight. The F-22 3.2b software overhaul also enhanced the AIM-120D, a beyond visual range Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM) engineered for all-weather day and night attacks using active transmit radar guidance, Raytheon data states. The upgraded AIM-120D also operates at much greater ranges and a two-way data link able to improve flight trajectory, guidance and targeting.
These kinds of ongoing enhancements to the F-22 and F-35 are clearly designed to ensure US 5th-generation aircraft operate with a margin of superiority over rival Russian jets such as the Su-35 and Su-57. Therefore, it seems entirely reasonable to posit that perhaps upgrades to the Russian fighter jets are deliberately aimed at trying to match the vastly increased weapons capabilities of the F-22 and F-35.
US F-22 vs Russian Su-35
Extending this thinking, the Russian Su-35 seems built to rival or challenge the US F-22 in many respects, as its blended wing-body shape and extensive upgrades are such that Russian media refers to it as 4th-Generation “plus.”
The configuration of the Su-35 appears to the observer’s eye to contain similarities to the F-22 and some of the listed weapons specs are comparable. Available specs on the two aircraft suggest they are comparable in terms of speed, as both the F-22 and Su-35 are listed as capable of flying Mach 2.25 at altitude. Also, while this may not be verifiable to a certain extent, 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.The F-22 is well known for its supercruise as this extends dwell time and lethality while lengthening attack missions without needing an aerial refueler. This ability can massively improve survivability, should an F-22 be locked in a dogfight and need to sustain maneuvers.The most surprising point of Su-35 vs F-22 comparison, however, can be seen in thrust-to-weight ratio. A data chart published in the Russia Defence Forum says the Su-35 has a higher thrust-to-weight ratio whe
n compared to an F-22. 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.
While both the F-22 and the Su-35 can take off vertically and accelerate, does the Su-35 outperform an F-22 in terms of pure thrust, acceleration, and thrust at a high rate of climb? At the very least the two aircraft may be comparable, a significant observation given that the F-22 is widely referred to as the world’s best air-dominance fighter jet.
The Su-35 operates with a passive electronically scanned array reportedly able to track multiple targets at ranges out to 250 miles and generate renderings of the ground below using Synthetic Aperture Radar.
The aircraft has a measure of computer automation with a fly-by-wire system and is also quite lethal as an air-to-ground and air-to-surface weapon, as available specs say the Su-35 can fly and attack with an Oniks anti-ship cruise missile as well as a large suite of air-to-air weapons and air-to-ground weapons.
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
