The way I see it. Nobody is going to risk expensive attack helicopters or their
crews, against an enemy that has a ground to air missile capability.
What were the Americans doing in Vietnam, or the Soviets in Afghanistan in the 1980s or even the Syrian government today? They all thought the risk was worth it…
“The naval Flanker had 12 hardpoints instead of ten; still the ordnance was limited to 6500 kg because of the fighters higher MTOW.”
I would love to see a photo of the Su-33 taking off from the Kuznetsov with 6500 kg of ordnance – but i don’t think such a photo exists…:rolleyes:
As far as I know Su-33 doesn’t even carry R-77.
Wait till you see KPMG’s ‘upcoming report’ on the full cost of the J-20 and PAK FA…;)
I’m no fan of the F-35 but this single-engine bird strike stuff is just nonsense.
In fact, I am something of a fan of the F-35, but I also think this single-engine bird strike stuff is just nonsense as well…
The Chinese even copied the Russian habit of painting the wheels dark green (even for carrier based aircraft?)…
Is it true that F-22 wasn’t fitted with vectoring thrust to improve its maneuverability anyway?
So maybe a lot of this discussion is just a red herring anyway?
I am sure China would indeed be interested in taking a handful of Su-35s for examination – in the same way that many companies in Russia would like to have a deeper look at the F-35 for something to learn, perhaps. But China is not going to spend several billion dollars acquiring a few dozen Su-35s, when such money can be better spend within China itself helping to develop Chinese R&D.
(I’m sure Lockheed themselves wouldn’t say no to a few T-50s or J-20s)
Поэтому многие обозреватели с осторожностью отмечают, что фактически строевые части ВВС России вряд ли начнут получать истребители пятого поколения ранее 2020 года.
PAK FA may not be ready for actual front line service till the year 2020.
The most recent AL-31 China bought from Russia is around $5million each
In which case how much will the 117S variant cost?
That number is absolutely impossible to achieve.. HAL have paid $11mil for eleven F404 engines for LCA testing, and that was back in 1987.
Current unit price of the series F414-GE-400 variant is $4.5 million.
Indeed your’re right – I didn’t find the ‘$700,000’ figure very credible either:
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/326M-to-GE-for-80-F414-Engines-Equipment-and-Spares-06239/
I thought the problems with the WS-10 had been sorted out, isn’t the PLAAF been supplied with WS-10s on their J-10s now?
Military jet fighter engines and civilian jet engines are two totally different things.
No they’re not, not in key technologies such as materials and digital engine control – there is a lot of crossover. Many different military and commercial jet engines have a common central core/hot section.
I wonder what it is that the Chinese could learn from the Su-35’s engines that they couldn’t learn from the CFM LEAP-X which they are going to fit to their COMAC 919?
Or perhaps the GEnx motors fitted to B787 and sold to Chinese companies?
The Su-35 has got vectored thrust, but are the Chinese interested in that?
Nevermind that they got them from NATO.
Nic
How do you know that?
I can imagine NATO, being able to supply SA-14 and even SA-16, but where would NATO get their hands on SA-24, they’ve only been produced and supplied on the international market a few years.
Thank you. Great to hear. Sounds as if the schedule is running to plan. To have weapons release already 3 years into schedule and airframe testing finnishing soon also says things are moving along quickly. F-35 has just started weapons release, how many years into the programme, at least 6 years.
The Su-35S has still to perform any weapons release testing yet, or has it? It’s already done over 4 years of testing and 650 flights (as of August).
At least the loss doesn’t seem to be related to the oxygen supply system, as per the other losses, this time round.