21AnkushFound this snippet in Aviation Week & Space Technology’s 10th Sept 2007 ‘News Breaks’ section:
“Four of China’s Su-27 fighters reportedly have been destroyed or badly damaged in the past six months, leaving 31 in service. Of the 46 Su-27s bought in the early 1990s, 15 have been lost in crashes and only 16 are combat-ready at any time. The inexperience or poor training of pilots, who recieve only 10 flight hours per month, is cited.”
21AnkushHave you ever seen the intake arrangement of the X-32?
On-topic, when does the first LCA-N roll out?
yes, thats a good point but even though the X-32s engine had to be placed somewhat forward to allow for hovering, the intake being chin mounted allowed for embedding the engine deeper than an intake that was 3/4th of the way to the jet pipe (as in the drawing shown above).
besides, the X-32 lost !:p
For the PAK-FA i’d expect far better intake and fuselage shaping to allow for a convoluted duct.
21AnkushPersonally, imho, I think the definitive PAK-FA design will be much closer (if not THE actual) to this…
[ATTACH]158239[/ATTACH]
the problem with this design you’re showing is that the engine compressor faces are directly in line with the intake..no S or Y (not possible for a twin engine) shaping for the duct would mean its no stealth fighter.
21Ankushsome RAF Tornado G.4s are due to get a Selex AESA Advanced Radar Targeting System (ARTS) radar as part of the Reforger program that Qinetiq is leading..will push their retirement out to 2025.
ARTS will allow the use of AESA multi-mode radar and Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) in the air-to-surface role, including real-time target imaging, in order to replace the 1970s-era Decca Doppler Type 72 mechanically-scanned terrain following/ ground mapping radar system.
21Ankushmost of the points on that blog are totally rebuttable..
for eg. cruise missiles attacking IAF bases near the border..this coming from a guy from a country that totally lacks strategic depth ! almost ALL PAF bases can be hit from within India by cruise missiles and since he almost always talks about the future, the 1000 km Nirbhay will be able to strike ALL PAF bases. so there goes that argument about how the PAF has an advantage there..and the ridiculous comment about less well trained IAF technicians ! 😀 PAF technicians apparently all hold doctorates and the attrition rate and sortie generation rate and turn-around rates of the PAF is the world’s best..:p no figures of course, just regular bravado and plain talk with no data to back it up.
21Ankushwow ! thanks Otaku ! looks a lot similar to the pic that was ‘accidentally’ put up on Saturn’s website..even Combat Aircraft had an article by Piotr Butowski with a 3 view layout somewhat similar to this wind tunnel model. the nose differed a little though and lacked the distinct chine..
21AnkushFor a more detailed view see here.
The weaponsload of a MiG-21 is what? – to be a usefull striker compared to Jaguar or MiG-27s?!
We can agree, that it does not make sense to compare different generation and role aircraft about attrition rate.
yes, the weapons load of the MiG-21 is not impressive compared to the MiG-23, 27 or the Jaguar, all of which the IAF operates, but its a fact that several IAF MiG-21 squadrons were completely Ground Attack oriented, not Air Defence. How many Air Forces operated ELINT and EW MiG-21s ? the IAF did, with a dedicated EW Squadron, the ‘Rapiers’. we can agree that the role of the MiG-21 in most OTHER air forces was the same as the F-104..
21Ankushthis is great news ! will keep the Tejas detractors’ mouth shut..:D IOC achievement looks like its on schedule since they’ve already gotten drop tanks, and a R-73 fired now..next will be the R-77 I assume.
21AnkushThey had to. The weather minima are so low there, that even experienced pilots pilots had to do familiariatsion flights to learn the country-side, before send there. You can live there through all four seasons in a single day. Your opponent did try to hide behind bad weather. Much less a problem to a bomber with a crew and much longer endurance with the opportunity to call off that “exercise.
The GAF with F-104G did fly under weather conditions, which was not allowed for the GDR and Russian MiGs by a wide margin. That kind of flying was never allowed for the much more advanced Tornado again. More than once F-104G were trapped by fog and by that forced to hard landings. But that kind of flying had its price. See the accident rate of that years and compare it with nice weather and high altitude flying in Spain for example.
GDR and Russian MiG-21 seldom flew below 2000 metre/6000 feet, when not in the final at home-base or at the shooting range. The early Atolls had a minimum height and did operate at best in a “look-up” position hardly to achive against F-104Gs at 200 feet AGL.
http://images.google.de/imgres?imgurl=http://www.codeonemagazine.com/archives/2002/articles/jan_02/polar/images/12556_e.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.codeonemagazine.com/archives/2002/articles/jan_02/polar/index.html&h=193&w=288&sz=21&hl=de&start=7&um=1&tbnid=2dEMMnBXXHL6xM:&tbnh=77&tbnw=115&prev=/images%3Fq%3DBod%25C3%25B6%252Bf-16%26svnum%3D10%26um%3D1%26hl%3Dde%26lr%3Dlang_de%26client%3Dopera%26rls%3Dde%26sa%3DN
dude, stop giving excuses for why every other AF other than IAF had climactic conditions that caused attrition..you have no idea how bad the flying conditions are in the sub-continent..on most days, visibility is poor due to hazy conditions..and the IAF operates in more different terrains than almost any European air forces..from the high altitudes of Srinagar and Leh to the deserts in Rajasthan and Gujarat to the extremely wet North east regions. and the MiG-21 in IAF service has been used for ALL roles, from strike to air defence to EW. Also, dont compare the tactics and operations of the Russian AF to the IAF. they’re different.
also your claim that MiG-21s operated above 2000m mostly does not hold ground for the IAF’s MiG-21s that were in the strike role, regularly operating below that altitude
and most accidents were during the take-off or during the landing phase of the flight..if you had a flameout during approach due to a bird hit, that was it for you. there is an article by former Air Chief Marshal Tipnis that describes the helplessness of the pilot- he himself crash-landed a MiG-21 after it flamed out. there was very little margin left for a pilot in the flight envelope at low speed, if anything untoward happened during these two phases of the flight..I’m quite sure the same was true for the F-104 since it was’nt a very forgiving aircraft either, with strict limitations on flight envelope at low speeds. add to that poor pilot visibility and situational awareness and these earlier gen fighters were difficult to fly.
21AnkushJAS 39 and EF has with very small differences the very same capability in radar, in instantaneous turn rates, in the type of AAM, in HMD, even the gun.
Some differences yes but nothing to really set them apart in air combat against a SU-35. Nothing to validate such a claim by the MOD.
More power on the EF which can be helpful at some altitudes, but smaller size, smaller IR image, integrated EW jammer and better autonomous datalink on Gripen. And the Hungarians claim a close combat JAS 39 kill on a Typhoon so if they can on a sleek EF than why not on a gigantic radar and IR target called SU-35. I don’t see how TVC is going to be any savier vs a modern BVRAAM or TVC enabled Fox 2 queued from the enemies HMD.
You can argue what might be slightly better, EF or JAS 39 but to claim one is capable to 60% to kill SU-35 and the other 0% capable is just moronic.
the Su-35 has been RAM treated to reduce its signature significantly. so its not a “gigantic radar and IR target”..the IR signature will be almost the same since the EF is not IR treated in any significant way. and the Su-35 carries modern BVR AAMs and can be easily integrated with HMD (MiG-29Ks of the IN will be equipped with the TopSight) as well, so whats this you’re crowing about?
as to 60% capable or 0% capable, its all BS. the number of factors that can go in to decide who wins are far too many and pilot aptitude, training and skills are just as important. put a rookie in a EF and a veteran in a Su-35 or JAS-39C and the EF could get smoked and vice versa.
21AnkushDon’t think any F-16 user is seriously going to challenge the IAF MiG-21 crash record anytime soon. If ever. Besides, they first have to beat the Marines with their AV-8s…
EDIT: Haven’t done this in a long time, soooo….
well, the MiG-21 was a generation behind the F-16, so there’s no surprise that it was more unsafe than the F-16..compare it to its contemporary, the F-104..the F-104 had an equally dismal record..its crash record with the Luftwaffe, with 292 lost, and a total of 138 for the Italian AF (total attrition rate 37.5%) earned it the same reputation as the MiG-21. The Dutch had an attrition rate of 35.8% with the F-104 and the Canadians had 46% of their total F-104 fleet lost in attrition (total of 110).
as for the dig at the IAF, with the upgrades to the MiG-21 and the greater emphasis on safety, retirement of the FLs and training of pilots on the Hawk in the UK, the MiG-21s record in recent years has been good..and the Bison’s attrition record has been very good, considering that nearly 120 are in active service now and only 1 has been lost.
What I was referring to was that the F-16 is the most numerous of all fighters, like the MiG-21 and will be this generations MiG-21 in terms of having the most crashes.
look at some of the European operators of the F-16..considering how few F-16s Norway bought (72), 17 have crashed till date, thats 23.5%..Dutch F-16s attrition record comes near 37 writeoffs and 12 severely damaged out of a fleet of 213 F-16s..
and F-16.net had this to say about the Belgians “The Belgian Air Force was one of the first four international customers for the F-16 Fighting Falcon. Belgium ordered a total of 160 F-16s in two batches. Heavy attrition and restructuring of the armed forces reduced the operational inventory to 72 aircraft.”
Among all modern day fighters in widespread service, this is easily the highest rate and will only get worse as the US fleet ages and so does that of other operators.
21AnkushBy the same account, there are many design similarities between the following, so one must be the copy of the other.
The 052C to the Arleigh Burke
Lexus to Mercedes
Airbus liners to Boeing liners
all front engined econocars to the original Austin Mini.
Dolphins to the sharks.Get real.
in both the cases of the J-10 and the ARJ-21, there have been persistent rumours of design assistance. its not something that I’m pulling out of my hat..and the rumours are well founded if you look at the history of having assembled the MD-90 in China..the tie up between McDonell Douglas and CATIC obviously meant that a lot of the lessons learnt during MD-90 assembly were used towards design of the ARJ-21. whats wrong in that ?
as for the J-10, the reports on Israeli support from the Lavi program have been going on for ages, so this is not something new either..it hurts your nationalist sentiments, but even if not completely based on the Lavi, the J-10 has had support from Israel, including design support. as for sources, there are more than enough sources who say the same..and not all are bad journalists or bad journalism. if it does’nt suit your interests, it automatically becomes bad journalism..happens to everybody, so this is not something you need to take personally.
21AnkushConsidering Iranian isolation at present and divisions within their own ranks about nuclear issue, i think IRNA or ISNA would have beating their drums if this news was official or had a some solid sources. While i can imagine China selling something like J-8IIM or JH-7 to Iran, J-10 is a far fetched idea. Even JF-17 is a long shot considering Pakistan’s involvement in that project as well as F-16s.
With regard to the idea of using Novotsi/Haretz etc as a source to prove a point such as ‘J-10 is based on Lavi’-without them quoting any proof-is absurd and laughable.
Vikas, lets call a spade a spade..the design similarities between the Lavi and the J-10 or even the ARJ-21 and the DC-9 are not just “coincidences”..design support is crucial for those without too much experience in new generation technologies..and where China is gaining it now, it did not have it at the start of the J-10 program..assistance from Russia and Russian engineers and Israel is not surprising- and going by the development timeline of the J-10, its not hard to believe that a decade after the Lavi was shelved, a derivative (not necessarily a complete rip off) of it was flying in the form of the J-10. there is no offence to be taken in that.
21AnkushThe MOD comments doesn’t make sense at all. Gripen has at least as good avionics package as EF and both have excellent maneuverability in the AA role. Gripen is only a smaller jet but that is actually an advantage in air combat as the visual ID is more difficult. And the jets carry the same weapons packages, IRIS-T and METEOR or the US alternative. And EF only 60% chance against the school bus target SU-35.. ? come on! He’s pulling cr4p out of his pants. Jeez man. Start looking at who’s paying his dinners.
surely the Gripen’s maneuverability will not match that of the Typhoon..the Typhoons low wing loading and high excess thrust means that it can accelerate very quickly as compared to the Gripen..and with the Gripen NG, the all-up weight increases for no corresponding increase in wing area- means that its performance will be more sluggish and the increased thrust will only make up for the increased weight.
small visual signature is a benefit, but the enemy’s radar would’ve detected the Gripen well before the merge into visual range, so its just a matter of an advantage in case the enemy pilot loses sight of the Gripen during WVR combat.
also, dont underestimate the Su-35..there’s nothing that the Typhoon has which the Su-35 does not match or exceed. not radar, not weapons (no Meteor for the Typhoon as yet), not IRST, not DASS either (the latest Russian defensive suites are good, also look at the MiG-35 suite). and in WVR, the TVC of the Su-35 will be very hard to handle and both aircraft can carry off-bore sight missiles, so no advantage there either for the Typhoon.
21AnkushLawn darts are becoming this generation’s MiG-21s in terms of air crashes too..
In the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30, there were 10 “Class A” F-16 accidents — crashes that resulted in death, loss of the aircraft or damage of more than $1 million. (An 11th F-16 crash was counted separately as a combat loss by the military because the pilot was strafing enemy trucks at the time.)
Sign In
