dark light

TR1

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 7,501 through 7,515 (of 9,195 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Russian Aviation thread, part V #2303947
    TR1
    Participant

    The basic airframe hasn’t changed for the Mirage 2000 true, but it didn’t need to like the MiG-29. The MiG’s airframe was rather crude with a low life time, payload capacity and low internal volume.

    Oh come on Scoprion, you know that’s a gross simplification. The Mig-29 had many of those perceived “faults” because it was designed specifically for the Soviet system, both in terms of supply and performance requirement.

    The relative ease with which range, airframe life, and the like were improved post USSR makes this obvious, rather than a failure on the part of the original design.

    in reply to: PAK FA episodeⅩⅧ #2303949
    TR1
    Participant

    Nope the Russians have already told the IAF the FGFA will be getting the latest and definitive PAK FA engine. So there is no question of it not being exported.

    Nonsense. Russian export laws exist. Even certain members of Al-31 family are prohibited from export. I am certain India will get a new engine, but will it be the most up to date one available? That is the question.

    Well Russian going at it alone can have a lot of difficulties funding the project. I meant the unit cost wud be higher, RuAf could end up with less planes.

    Russia has been going at it alone, and there have been no funding difficulties. I mean, yes, more funding is always better, and projects could always be going faster, but point is, domestic orders alone pushed the project. There is little to imply that Indian participation changes the RuAF intended order.

    Completley tied ? Its a two way street India can pull out and buy more MRCA till the AMCA comes, or buy the F 35.
    Sure, if it wants an inferior fighter sooner, or the AMCA in…how many decades? Anyways there will be several engine choices for export PAK-FA I presume, so its not a death blow to exports or anything.

    But like I said russians see sense in bringing India onboard which will help in funding and production and keep the unit cost down.

    Now you are making more sense. Since India seems to be making the right choice in the whole single seat/two seat order split, it absolutely means better things for both air forces in terms of unit price/delivery speed over the long run.

    Note that I am not saying India should not be allowed the use of the best engine possible. But one must look at India’s position in the project, and Russian export laws with a sense of reality not national pride.

    in reply to: Russian Aviation thread, part V #2304178
    TR1
    Participant
    in reply to: Russian Aviation thread, part V #2304188
    TR1
    Participant

    Thanks Ken!

    in reply to: Russian Aviation thread, part V #2304208
    TR1
    Participant

    That was the intent, but it has been declared as only 6 this year unfortunately.

    in reply to: Russian Aviation thread, part V #2304219
    TR1
    Participant

    The next batch of Su-34 should be out by this time..
    Any news?
    Why cant NAPO get an International Web design:mad:

    I guess all 6 will be delivered in one group in 2 months.

    in reply to: Russian Aviation thread, part V #2304270
    TR1
    Participant

    http://paralay.com/TEMP/su34/3yXQA-854b2a67.jpg

    Noob question- any schematic of how the support on the Su-34s landing gear works?

    Also:
    http://paralay.com/TEMP/su34/b4c5f92f903a.jpg

    It’s like a house.

    in reply to: Russian Navy Thread #2032396
    TR1
    Participant
    in reply to: Russian Aviation thread, part V #2304361
    TR1
    Participant

    Well, I never denied that for a period of time in history, for about 5 to 10 years, MiG-29s had some particular advantages over F-16. But only a temporary period.

    Here’s another case history to feed some scenarios. In the Eritrea -Ethiopian war of the late 1990s, it’s alleged that up to 24 R-27 missiles were fired – but only 1 hit its target…:confused:

    1.) I wouldn’t say some particular advantages ;). More like total over match in both BVR and WVR.

    2.) Come on man….in some of the African conflicts hordes of tanks were knocked out by technicals, what does that say? Absolutely nothing.

    in reply to: Russian Aviation thread, part V #2304365
    TR1
    Participant

    The question is 150 km what? Detection, tracking and what was the target’s RCS. Dunno whether the Zhuk-AE is ready and already tested in flight, any sources about this and the 150 km figure?

    And has the Russia signed any contract as of yet? My last info said they intend to buy 24 or so MiG-29K/KUB but have they been ordered yet?

    Hi Scorpion,

    I am referring to some early testing, where 3 targets were tracked @ 148 kilometers.

    http://igorrgroup.blogspot.com/2009/08/zhuk-ae-aesa-radar-finished-flying.html

    The new Zhuk-AE (that is, larger array) improved on this number, though the final numbers are debatable. It has been flying on the MIG-35 since earlier this year. There was mention in a Russian aviation magazine that figures achieved were north of 200km, I don’t have the link on hand though.

    Contract for MiG-29K is actively underway. It was already supposed to be signed a month back or so, but they could not agree on price.

    in reply to: PAK FA episodeⅩⅧ #2304377
    TR1
    Participant

    :rolleyes: Not a Big IF its from IAF itself we are getting the definitive engine.

    And in the IAF thread its clearly mentioned first AC in service by 2017. 😉

    Money speaks.

    What land of delusions do you live in ? What engine will they put on it? Kaveri?

    India is completely tied to Russia here, and the RuAFs plans with PAK-FA. Get over it.
    Hopefully Russian export laws don’t prevent “Type 30” from being exported.

    Plus, what information do you have that PAK-FA is underfunded, so Indian money would be the determinant when it enters service?

    in reply to: PAK FA episodeⅩⅧ #2304381
    TR1
    Participant

    I have my doubts if that will come up in 50-3. Stealthy nozzles, if they are supposed to be there, will not come before the next stage engines. Its too much work designing reduced IR signature nozzles for both 117s and 117.

    PAK-FA doesn’t have 117S my good man. 😉

    in reply to: Russian Aviation thread, part V #2304388
    TR1
    Participant

    Afaik the IAF’s requirement was for 130 km against a fighter sized target. Phazotron stated 130 km for the Zhuk-MAE in its specs which matches exactly the requirement. Whether this figure has been reached in reality is yet another question and the article is rather clear on that “failed to achieve the required acquisition and tracking ranges“. There is no room for interpretation here. It was the Zhuk-MAE which was demonstrated to the Indians, so the Zhuk-AE might meet the requirements, the MAE didn’t according that article.

    Well this is weird. The older smaller Zhuk-AE achieved ~150km a while back, so no question it meets that range. I was not even aware Zhuk-MAE was presented to the Indians- why would it be?

    Honestly sounds like journalistic inaccuracy to me.

    Also Scorpion, the MiG-29K has 45 orders from India, and another 24 from Russia. So thats 69 airframes in total.
    Not bad, given that the entire Rafale order book is a measly sub 200 airframes.

    in reply to: Russian Aviation thread, part V #2304568
    TR1
    Participant

    i dont think this was posted yet but recently Vietnam said it would acquire Yak-130s.

    Nice, news to me, any specifics?

    in reply to: PAK FA episodeⅩⅧ #2304571
    TR1
    Participant

    Aside from twin seats, what do you mean by FGFA mods Hotdog? That and the flat nozzles are really the only big futures I noticed on the fan art models, and the FGFA having flat nozzles depends on the PAK-FA having them in the first place IMO.

Viewing 15 posts - 7,501 through 7,515 (of 9,195 total)