That says alot about russian engine tech 😉

More like it is revealing of policy at the time the decision was made.

Speaking about engine tech, how are those American engines on the Gripen 😉

hehe, the Russians also stated the T-50 would be operational by 2013 too. Lets not forget they also stated they’d have a carrier armarda of 10 aircraft carriers too by 2020. Non of which will happen. They talk the talk but rarely walk the walk.

As I said, you clearly have a better appreciation of the radar solutions for the PAK-FA than the team itself. Cool.

Not to mention you are comparing what actual team members have said, to claims made by ignorant officials. Whatever works man.

For the record, nobody said they would have a carrier armada. Plans to start construction, are not the same thing. if you are going to attempt to insult someone, at least know the subject please.

You don’t really belive that tripe about five different radars in the T-50 do you? Really?

It has been stated time and time again by Sukhoi and NIIP officials. Tripe, it is not. You know better though!

Don’t you know? Super Hornet and its unmatched 100 mile AESA are gods gift to earth. Su-35BM, MiG-35, MiG-31BM are all Russian garbage that doesn’t come close. What in god’s name were the Malaysians thinking when they chose the Su-30MKM over the SH.

But yeah, Scooter got (once again) utterly shut out in the Admiral “Kuzetsov” (still trying to figure out what the hell ship that is) thread, had to drop nonsense somewhere after all.

If, the PAK-FA can match the performance of the Super Hornets Avionics. I would be impressed……

Edit: No, not going to waste my time. Just quoted for hilarity.

4. It is a real argument because no large airforce operates with a structure where only 10% of its strength (propose LCA MK2 and MK1) is single engined.

Russian air force is 100% two engined ;).

A silent flanker would would be even more expensive to operate then current flankers, and the current flanker already cost 4-5 times more then gripen to operate. Still i like the idea of reducing a/c models, and commonality among those fighters kept in service.

“Silent Flanker” is an oxymoron btw, there’s no fighter with larger RCS around.

Mig-31 is higher. F-14 is probably higher. Not to mention something like F-15 is very close, close enough that the difference is negligible. Sukhoi claims some decent RCS reduction for the Su-35 btw. However I think it is pointless to go too far down RCS route with Su-30, better to use its inherent advantage (large size) to fit powerful active defense systems.

Do you have factual evidence to support that 4-5 figure? I have no doubt it costs more, but how much is the question.

first Armavia Superjet (and a Government Tu-214):

http://www.aviaport.ru/images/archive/117/