I’ve already pointed out how the Americans needed foreign expertise to develop their jet engine tech. The point being – most countries do tend to borrow technology from each other to a large extent. Sometimes this ‘borrowing’ can be easily seen (Tu-4), or not so easily, J69 (Turbomeca Marboré) on USAF T-37 Tweet.

You could also argue that Russian jet engine technology is entirely due to us Brits handing over examples of Rolls Royce engines to the Russians…what was it that Stalin said…

How many people know that the V2 diesel engine in the Soviet T-34 tank is basically copied from a French airship diesel propulsion unit!:eek:

its quite possible that the two will merge their air forces together purely out of economic reasons.

interoperation may suffer due to language difficulties:

Flt Lt Winston: You know I always preferred the French Le Baguette airshow over Farnborough
Sous Lt Jean: Le Baguette? I dun nu what u toking about, now get this avion on un chat apult. Ve will drop ze bon bon on ze Libyans coz Sarkozy is not happy Libyans violate ze ban on ze burqa

Your average RAF pilot might actually have inferior foreign language skills, compared a previous generation of RAF officer (but I’m only guessing). The French officer’s English language ability would certainly have improved during the same period.

Compare the alleged foreign language skills of RAF officer Prince William to those of his granny’s, who I believe, can speak very good French and German.

How do you know for sure its an upgrade? It could as well be inferior to the original Su-33 in several parameters for all we know.

Do you think the J-15 has inferior avionics to the 1970s era Soviet kit, N001 radar, etc?

Certainly the WS-10 powerplant should be an improvement.

In addition, he said, an important factor in India’s Defense Ministry choice was India’s latter day attraction for American arms. “The Indians are well aware of the strengths of American military equipment, but do not know their weaknesses. And they can expect a lot of surprises,” – said the expert.

http://ria.ru/defense_safety/20111025/470479032.html

What weaknesses did he have in mind that the Indians are not aware of?

for trimmed flight:

Thrust = Drag
Lift = Weight
Sum of Pitching moment = 0;

Lift to Drag is just as important as T/W.

Thanks for clarifying. I found a good Wikipedia article on this:

The thrust-to-weight ratio and wing loading are the two most important parameters in determining the performance of an aircraft…

…In cruising flight, the thrust-to-weight ratio of an aircraft is the inverse of the lift-to-drag ratio because thrust is equal to drag, and weight is equal to lift.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thrust-to-weight_ratio#cite_note-0

I take it we’re talking about the advantages of the ‘lifting body’ aerodynamic design of the Su-27?

the radar, targeting computer, weapons hard points, and portions of the gun were removed, thus lowering the weight by 3,000 pounds. The lower weight, along with the cleaner configuration, makes it a “hot rod airplane,” according to Steve.”

Surely that’s a bit of a red herring – don’t most versions of the F-15 have a better thrust-to-weight ratio than most versions of the Su-27 family?

Does the Mirage III have inherently greater range, compared to the F1, due to its pure tailless delta design?