VnomadEh? Why would it be so unstealthy?
Internal payload, canted tail, early engine stages worked over for LO, RAM treated airframe with increased composite content. No chines though. Boeing claims (probably with some exaggeration that it compares to the F-35 in the forward sector).
Otherwise I’d like to hear more about the PAKFA’s stealth features. Wikipedia has barely one line on it (in addition to a quote by Carlo Kopp). Unfortunately everything else I’ve read too has been, well… underwhelming. Maybe because I had pretty high hopes from Sukhoi. This for example –
According to a defence ministry official, “It is an amazing looking aircraft. It has a Radar Cross Section (RCS) of just 0.5 square metre as compared to the Su-30MKI’s RCS of about 20 square metres.”
Certainly better any most aircraft saddled with an external payload without going into VLO extremes. Merits a comparison with the F-15SE.
VnomadThis thread has reached 30 pages, let’s close it & get pack on topic on the new one…
Nic
Ahem, arent we slightly off topic?
:very_drunk:
Vnomad– RAF – roughly 50-50 split between 4.5th generation and 5th generation.
– Italy – roughly 50-50 split between 4.5th generation and 5th generation.
– France – 100% 4.5th generation.
– Germany – 100% 4.5th generation
– Israel -33% 5th generation (100 x F-35 by then), 67% 4th generation
– Japan – 15%+ 5th generation (42 F-35 + F-3 to enter service in 2027), and <85% 4th generation
– India (Air Force) – 20% fifth generation, 80% 4th generation
– India (Navy) – 100% 4th generation.Not sure about Russia and China but they’re buying hundreds of 4th generation jets between now and 2020 (Su-35, Su-30, Su-34, J-10, J-11, JH-7) which would seem to imply lower numbers of 5th generation than 4th generation jets.
The list is incomplete unless you factor in UCAVs. After all, while the F-117 could have technically been classified as a bomber, it would have merited inclusion in the above list, were it still operational. The stealth UCAVs that are currently in development, will perform the exact same role.
What makes it interesting is that every country mentioned has a stealthy UCAV in development, even its unseen (Israel, China) or still on paper (India). The only exception – the USAF (and of course traditionally pacifist Japan).
VnomadWhy not cut F-16 or F-15s? The focus is on A-10 cause the USAF doesn’t like it, has never liked it and has never liked supporting the Army.
?? There’s nothing an A-10 does that an F-16 can’t, except for sustaining a greater degree of battle damage. Adversaries in ‘small wars’ or counter insurgency typically have negligible air defences making that half ton titanium on the A-10 more or less redundant. It doesn’t have the loitering capability of the MQ-9, the low speed maneuverability of the AH-1 or AH-64 (when based close by) or the range of the F-15E and F-16 (when operating from a distance).
Thanks to (a) proliferation of PGMs, (b) their increased accuracy and (c) improvement of optical targeting systems, the pilot no longer needs to get eyes-on-target before conducting an attack. Even in the anti-tank role, an SDB-II from standoff range or the CBU-105 from high altitude can to do the job better than an A-10 gun run.
Basically, the A-10 is to the Air Force what battleships were to the Navy. Far from useless but built in and for a different era.
VnomadI don’t think this news is true . The Indians decided to go for the MMRCA ( Rafael) knowing fully well that they have signed up for the T 50 & have already paid billions to the Russians. The contract for the purchase of the Rafael has been postponed by a year due to their ongoing economic problems & a forthcoming national election.
More than a year most likely, if not more. The economic problems aren’t going to recede within the next year, in addition the current govt’s spending on social programmes will probably spurt, to boost its prospects before calling elections.
Also the next govt will get an opportunity to study the program only by June next year.
VnomadA more important question is where is the market?
The large jet market belongs to the giants – Boeing and Airbus.
Similarly the regional jet market is well established and dominated by mature product ranges from Embraer and Bombardier. Older companies like Fokker and Fairchild Dornier have gone bankrupt while newer entities like Sukhoi and Antonov have not been particularly successful.
The turboprop market is mature as well, dominated by Bombardier and ATR.
Business jet market; Dassault, Gulfstream, Bombardier.
And the only military transport aircraft that being bought with any enthusiasm is the C-130J.
BAE was a late mover both with the Avro AJX and with the ATP.
The same issues would probably be faced by Mitsubishi as well.
The Brazilian military transport project has most of South America onboard. The Chinese state orders can more than sustain their civil and military programs. The Indian regional jet program is more of an technological aspiration for the future when China-like scale becomes viable.
VnomadI think a decent A2A configured T/A-50 (F/a-50) could be hard for under 30 million dollars per. You could upgrade it as you see fit…Raytheon offers the RACR and NG offers the SABR both AESA’s which have a decent order run and which are designed with scalability in mind. Your standard Elta EL/M-2032 should be good enough so you really do not need an AESA.
Indonesia signed a $400 million contract for 16 T-50 trainers. Works out to be $25 million per unit. The Filipino TA-50s were $29 million/unit even though the T-50 would probably be sufficient for basic air policing.
VnomadI’m reminded of the Yes Prime Minister Episode – A Victory for Democracy.
Laughed till I teared up.
VnomadAir policing is not only for defence against direct attack by other states. Remember 12 years ago in the USA? The most dramatic & successful case, but not the only one.
1) The bulk of QRA job is not composed of flights in order to intercept TU-142´s.
With regard to air policing, they could, like I suggested before, acquire a supersonic trainer, perhaps even join the USAF’s T-X program, cost and politics permitting. Being capable of Mach 1.5, a stripped down variant of the KAI T-50 (unless the AF would like to utilize it for training as well) could carry out routine interceptions as well as most modern fighters, freeing up the F-35 fleet for expeditionary operations, while costing a fraction as much as even the Gripen.
Also how does Ireland manage air policing? Unlike Albania, Slovenia, Croatia etc its not tied into the NATO air policing operation and can’t rely on neighboring countries for QRA assets. I’d imagine even Iceland and the Baltics wouldn’t have requested a NATO detachment if they weren’t neighbored by Russia.
VnomadFrance offered Tiger helicopters to Russia?
don’t think Russia would gain much..
Other way round – ‘offering to sell’.
http://www.janes.com/article/24248/russia-may-offer-ka-52k-to-france-as-part-of-mistral-negotiations
VnomadApples & oranges. In order to support that four aircraft flight in the Baltic states, how many other aircraft of the same type must whatever air force which owns them operate? Who provides air defence for Ireland (via a tacit, never spelt out but completely understood agreement) & Slovenia? Their airspace is not undefended, & never has been.
The Netherlands is a rich country, with twice as many people as the Baltic states combined & four times their GDP. It has four times the population & GDP of Ireland, eight times the population & about 12 times the GDP of Slovenia. It’s expected to pay its way, not be a freeloader. It contributes to the policing of Baltic airspace, for example.
Both heavylifters and freeloaders appear to have their defence needs catered to. But again, who’s this defence against? Carry on east from Ireland all the way to Belarus and you encounter nothing but allies.
Countries in Europe that are NOT members of the NATO –
1. Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, Macedonia (NATO applicants)
2. Ireland, Austria, Sweden, Finland (EU members)
3. Albania, Serbia (EU applicants)
4. Moldova, Kosovo (EU aspirants)
5. Switzerland (St. Switzerland)
6. Russia, Ukraine, Belarus
(Not included states like Andorra, Malta, Monaco etc)
Effectively only Russia, Ukraine and Belarus exist as potential ‘threats’. The majority of people in the both the latter countries support accession to the EU and Russia is apparently comfortable with buying warships from France and offering to sell attack helicopters back.
I wish my neighborhood was so cozy.
And how many Typhoons does the RAF operate? How many Typhoons are needed in order to maintain a six jets detach? How many Typhoons airframes are in maintenance in order to have six permanently capable of operating at 24/7? How many airframes besides the ones who are in maintenance are needed for training?
And how many airframes are needed to maintain a four fast jet detach in the Baltics?
You dont do QRA with four jets, thats entirely nonsensical, those are the numbers to maintain ready to take off, on top of that you need severall more to use in training and part of the fleet will always be grounded in maintenance, you need a full sqn, anything smaller and there’s no way to maintain jets available for the QRA job.
I’d imagine operational availability for the fleet would be over 75%. (?) The aircraft deployed to the Baltics remain do four months stints while the RAF flight at the Falklands has aircraft permanently stationed there with aircrews rotating. QRA is provided without any additional aircraft deployment/rotation.
In any case, I’m not suggesting that the Dutch cut their air force to four aircraft. As long as policing of civilian traffic isn’t a overriding priority, the KLu should have the bulk of its strength available for short expeditionary operations and at least a squadron strength available for longer deployments.
VnomadAnd if those ME royals go and intervention is “required” it’ll be the US kicking the door down, not the Belgians or even the French.
I wasn’t suggesting NATO would intervene to preserve monarchy. Rather whichever regime/govt followed would inherit sizeable numbers of fourth generation aircraft. Frozen support will cause those fleets to suffer attrition but it’ll take time. Meanwhile the western built aircraft could be employed against a neighbour or maybe non-combatants in a civil war.
In January 2011, France was still showcasing the Rafale for sale to Gaddafi. Two months later it was bombing him with it.
Any future coalition will be US-led and the US will perform most critical missions. But then the US would have carried out most critical missions even in the event of hostilities breaking out during the Cold War.
The US can certainly handle most conflicts acting unilaterally, geography permitting. That said, during a conflict with a broad political consensus if a European country wants to sit it out or make a token contribution, they needn’t invest in F-35s (or any modern fighter for that matter). But if operating fused with US forces, a majority of which will be F-35s, is an objective the F-35 is the best choice, even if adopted in lower numbers than say the Gripen. Also, current inadequacies in the NATO command structure cannot dictate the selection of an aircraft intended to serve 40 years.
VnomadBecause its entirely impossible to do any meaningfull 24/7 QRA with three airframes, thats why…
You need at least a full sqn of combat jets to cover a small airspace 24/7, plus training, plus maintenance.
MSphere made a very good point, with 37 jets, the entire KLu will be able to field two small sqn´s, trying to do QRA and expeditionary detach´s will be stretching things almost to the absurd.
The detachment recently dispatched to protect RAF Akrotiri from ‘rogue’ Syrian jets consisted of six Eurofighters. Why would it take 18 F-35s to merely police Dutch airspace in the heart of Europe? A non-essential job that if still deemed necessary, $250 million worth of KAI T-50s could do perfectly well.
Slovenia and Ireland are almost the same size as the Netherlands. Neither operate any fighters and appear to be managing fine. Nor for that matter do any of Baltic states and the NATO air policing mission there consists of just four aircraft.
VnomadYes, it does. No Gendarmerie can take over the task of intercepting jet intruders. M-346 or Hawk, let alone a turboprop are completely unsuitable for that role.
Jet intruders in Europe? Where from?
Norway might occasionally play tag with the Russians but I don’t see why it should concern anybody else.
Unless you were referring to a business jet/airliner. Don’t believe its a pressing concern, but if so how about a stripped down KAI T-50. I’m sure a Gendarmerie could manage the operational side of it. Maintenance and support can be contracted out.
???? I am not following you now. Which Middle-Eastern countries operating 4.5 gen aircraft are considered adversaries?
None today. But then again there was a time when the Iran used to be one of closest non-NATO allies to the US, fielding a fighter fleet in 1979 comparable (superior?) to those of the RAF and AdlA. Times change. Who can predict how long the royals in the current ME will hold power and what will follow. And this is assuming that the Europeans will never commit forces to the Pacific.
With the numbers of F-35 projected for air forces like KLu you can pretty much forget any future alliance with US ops. KLu will not have sufficient airframe even to guard their own airspace.
Guard their own airspace from whom? For simple air policing, why would a country the size of Netherlands need a larger force than the RAF detachment at Mount Pleasant?
The threat from Russia having receded to the point where its comfortable buying warships from France, most of the NATO is now expeditionary in nature. In which case, the KLu contribution can go upto two squadrons of F-35s in wartime. That’s a fairly potent force.
VnomadAgain, my standpoint is completely different: an European air force covering a relatively small country, with primary missions of interception, air policing and air superiority. A-G work of secondary importance.
Does such a country even require an air force? Wouldn’t some sort Air National Guard or Air Gendarmerie be more than adequate? Equipped at best with something like the BAE Hawk or M-346, if not a turboprop. Even better, outsource air defence to a neighbor (or NATO or EU) altogether.
Now if being at the forefront of a US-led alliance in a potential war against an adversary operating 4.5 gen aircraft (which includes most of the Middle East) is a possible requirement…
IIRC the first shootdown during Allied Force was by a Dutch F-16AM.
Sign In
