VympelAirframe-wise, no. Avionics
Avionics? The Gripen is nothing special. The most it has going for it is a nice looking cockpit, which is no longer the exclusive province of Western aircraft 🙂 And that falls under MMI anyway. An N011M/ IRST equipped Su-35 is simply in an entirely different class of technology.
maintenance, cost of operations, I’d bet on the Gripen (as did former Soviet Bloc countries Hungary and the Czech Republic.)
Well, of course it’s cheaper in that regard, in comparison to a Sukhoi, the Gripen is a midget. That also means it’s far less capable in all sorts of departments critical to a large country’s air force. You really do get what you pay for.
Nothing is foregone if the Gripen carries an AMRAAM or Meteor.
Meh- R-77 + R-77M-PD. Also, the kinematic advantage for BVR combat is just even more ridiculous when you’re comparing a heavy fighter like the Su-35 and a plaything like the Gripen. Hell, the Gripen’s engine at full thrust (80.5kN) doesn’t even exceed it’s weight in basic fighter configuration:
(Gripen: 8.5 tonnes normal TO weight in fighter config
RM12: 8.2 tonnes thrust at full burner)
A Flanker with canards is about as a big a radar target you can possibly get for fighter.
The Gripen has no special RCS advantages.
(Did I mention I find Gripen fighters highly over-rated when it comes to what they’re capable of? The Gripens a nice toy for countries on a budget, but they’re not serious war machines capable of playing with the big kids.)
VympelWell, there’s no need for it to be as antiseptic as acig sometimes is, we don’t need to adopt their rules of posting- but really, I’m sick of looking for posts I *know* I or someone made all over the board, not to mention the clutter is … unsightly.
VympelFair enough- however, I would point out that the only criticism of Western aircraft that I’ve seen so far on AFM alone is the JSF (from ELP, for budgetary/need reasons), the Hornet (because it’s an inferior replacement to a previous American aircraft) and the F-16 (from Arthur, because it’s boring).
The British Harrier is better than the Freehand. The Gripen is better than the Mig-29 and is considered a match for the Su-30 in the Brazil’s competition. The US stuff is, of course, out of reach.
In terms of the Gripen, when they say “match for the Su-30” they’re talking about the terms of the deal and the attractiveness to the government, rather than any technical superiority (IIRC, the Su-35 is favored by the AF), which it clearly doesn’t have a lot of. Air combat between an Su-35 and a Gripen is a foregone conclusion in favor of the Su-35, IMO.
VympelThe ones who support Russian planes tend to criticize American ones in response to questions raised about Russian quality.
Can you think of examples?
Not so with the Chinese aviation supporters. I, and others like Crobato, tend to support our case by saying that China is reaching for Western standards (Western machining tools, Western project management, increasing capitalistic company doctrines, advice from Western, and so on.)
How is this very much different from the direction of Russian aviation companies (except for advice from the West- they don’t need it)?
I like Chinese planes and that’s the interest where I spend most of my time following. But I have said time and again that aviation standards are set by the West. It would be stupid to think otherwise.
They’re set by the United States. The “West” is too broad a term IMO.
VympelAre there plans to fit the F-22 with the EOTS of the JSF?
VympelAfter the announcement of the to-be moderators, nothing has happened. The person who currently has moderating abilities is still only the Webmaster.
Besides, why delete stupidities like this? It’s far more fun for everyone to have a few cheap blows at the gullible morons taking PS-crap like this serious rather than dumping it into the trashcan immediately.
Fair enough, I now know you guys aren’t lazy 🙂
VympelThe T-90 is basically the T-72M3 or whatever number they are up to now. The problem was the performance of the T-72 in Grozny, which is hardly fair as no tank on the planet can shrug off 5-10 RPG hits to the rear and top.
Yeah, the original name of the T-90 was T-72BU. But T-72M1 etc. are export names only.
[quote]
I personally think a very good upgrade option would be the new autoloader with a turret bustle that the Russians have designed. They have displayed a T-55 with the new turret and of course a similar system is fitted to the Black Eagle.
BTW the LAHAT definitely has a longer range than Reflex
KBP’s new gun-launched ATGM (‘Arcan’)- when fired by the T-62, has a range of 6km (or 5.5km when from the BMP-3/T-55) so I’d expect the advancements employed to possibly make their way to a future Refleks variant.
Vympelindia millltary is interesting, all the weapon from bullet to aircraft carrier all made by other country, also india has its own research plan, but something such as LCA, or the new generation main battle tank still have long distance to indian goverment’s goal, i wounder if there a war comes, how india can repair its weapon.
Actually, India does produce it’s own assault rifle (INSAS- it was really crap at the start, but I hear it’s better now IIRC), so not exactly from bullets (they’d make their own ammo, surely). It also license produces it’s BMP-2s (and the custom variants they’ve made) and T-72s, as well as the T-90s.
Vympel*frustrated*
we’re supposed to have moderators, aren’t we? Where are they, exactly? I haven’t seen a single moderator action since they were instituted.
Dumb threads like this should be locked immediately. Period.
VympelWell, I heard about it in several short news items on the western press (FI, AFM, AI, etc…)
concerning the development of Lyulka engines and Su-27 upgrades. The
argument runs like this “PAK-FAs dimensions and weights are being
designed to fall in Flanker’s
figures ballpark as a way to fit in Flanker’s subsystems, if the new ones
don’t happen to be ready when the first airframes start testing”. But yes,
it could be a load of typical journalist drivel.
What I have heard is that initially, the PAK FA will probably be equipped with a PESA rather than an AESA- however, this is wholly dependent on what NIIR and NIIP can do in the time they have alloted. But yeah, to have the PAK FA use current standard Su-27SM avionics/processors etc just sounds silly.
BTW, Vympel, do you know where I could get some info about current developments in Russia on
sensor fusion and EW in combat aircraft?
aerospacetech’s website about Russian avionics is a pretty cool source. Journal of Electronic Defense Online (free, just register) is also an up to date source- e.g. they did an excellent blurb on the proposed Su-27IB jammer variant back in 2001 (MAKS).
VympelIn my opinion the PAK-FA program is just Russia saying “We can still stay with the West.” Let’s be realistic. They should be focusing on getting the Air Force to the required levels, which means focusing on aircraft that are in service (i.e. Su-27 and MiG-29) and updating them to the necessary standards.
That’s what they’re doing. The focus until at least the end of the decade is primarily upgrading. The PAK FA isn’t intended to be procured in large numbers for a while yet.
VympelI basicaly agree with you, Vympel, but you have to account for the rumors that in the first production runs the airframes will be fitted with interim engines (AL-31F version) which will impact in supercruise ability and interim avionics adapted from the recent Flanker retrofit (I don’t recall the version now).
Mate, I asked you in the other thread- where did you hear these rumors? Like I said there, neither of them make much sense, especially the Su-27SM avionics one. Personally, I think these rumors are the product of crossed communications some ill-informed journalist read one day, and they don’t trump the more definitive info. Like I said in the other thread
– Su-27SM avionics: They’re basically Su-30MKK avionics, which will be over a decade old by the time the aircraft is supposed to have reached IOC. It’s simply not plausible. Leninents has already designed an impressive avionics suite for the Su-27IB, based around the B004 on some sensor fusion features, which was part of the reason why a special civilian aircraft was converted to serve as a testbed (like the F-22 had to, incidentally).
– AL-31Fs in ten years is also, quite dumb. The AL-41F has been around for some time (work focused on increasing TBO etc) and the reduced thrust version (AL-41F1? F2? whatever) from the original for the bigger MFI should reduce, not complicate matters. AL-41F technology is already being incorporated in a modernized AL-31F (AL-31V: 137kN).
VympelSurely it is larger then Typhoon, has more range and might even be faster in supercruise. But does that make it F-22 class ??
It has all the relevant requirements to at least theoretically compete, theoretically, which is more than one can say for the Eurocanards etc.
I have yet to see any prove for it being more then RCS reduced.
Every piece of media on the PAK FA program cites “stealth” as a requirement. Not “RCS reduced”.
VympelF-22 class has more to it then size and number of aircrafts.
I am well aware.
It also includes supercruise
A requirement.
stealth
A requirement.
range
? Su-27 size and you think range is going to be a problem? 🙂
I would say PAK-FA could be Typhoon class.
:rolleyes:
And you base this on what? The PAK FAs engines have almost double the thrust (90kN for Typhoon vs 156kN maximum for PAK FA), the PAK FA is manifestly larger, will probably be heavier (simply taking into account the reported size increase), and will certainly have much more range. The Typhoon is not an Su-27 class fighter. It is therefore not a PAK FA class fighter, irrespective of it’s other abilities (unquantified supercruise being the only one of note, as it is not a stealthy aircraft).
Vympel*sigh* ………………
For the umpteenth time:
It is not a JSF class aircraft. Not only is it a twin-engined (AL-41F variants ranging from between 140-156kN thrust class), Su-27-size (weight is another issue) fighter, it’s primary role is air-to-air, not air-to-ground (only secondary- Su-27IB is the new striker). It’s far beyond JSF class. Where’s the room for ‘doubt’? It’s parameters have been common knowledge for a few years now.
Sign In
