Because (some) analysts feel that China is beyond making unlicensed copies for sale past the F7s, and it would not be appropriate for the Chinese-Russian alliance, as well as for the future of the SCO.

I am holding out for a sinofied Su35 tailored to maritime roles for the PN/PAF. I would think it best without TVC though.

The alliance, such as it is, is quite lopsided. Of course, the Chinese with there huge economic heft might not be too concerned about the revenue lost by foregoing J-11 exports. But if they did decide to go ahead and offer the aircraft to Pakistan, I doubt Russia would try to make an issue out of it, in light of current geopolitical realities (recession, sanctions, depressed commodity prices, etc).

If you knew the very back ground history of J-11, you would also know that any export of J-11 is prohibited. Its eighter Russian Flankers or some other two engines jets.

Could you please elaborate. Why would China refuse to export a J-11 powered by pair of WS-10As to a near-ally i.e. Pakistan? Yes its roots lie in a license-production deal for the Su-27, but that was ages ago. The design has been extensively (entirely?) indigenized over the years.

That’s a joke, right? 🙂

Gen Mike Hostage said something similar.

Just please don’t quote me that clown. He starts BSing the second he opens his mouth, just to thrash talk Su-30MK. He should really stick with military stuff and leave science to engineers. You know, 28 degree turn @ 20000 feet (sustained or not) is physically impossible as F-22 flying to Mars and back, even at its empty weight.

Even while playing to the crowd, I thought he was fairly complimentary – ‘these are young guys, still learning on the aircraft… eventually they’ll be able to beat the F-15 & F-16 on a regular basis‘.

I don’t want to make the same calculation I’ve already made in this forum before, but just to tell about its absurdity; A clean F-16 with 25% fuel can sustain 11,8 deg/s at 20k feet. Same F-16 sustains 21,5 deg/s at S/L. Now IF F-22 sustains 28 deg/s at 20k feet, it could easily sustain 50+ deg/s at S/L. F-16 can really sustain 21-22 deg/s for 360 degree turns in airshows. 10 years in active service, countless demo flights and F-22 didn’t even sustained 20.

I agree its not happening at 20k feet. He probably mis-spoke. Don’t think air shows are really relevant. But point again was that the (F-15) pilot put the F-22 on a pedestal when it comes to BFM.

How about thinking about the possibility of no single military pilot has free-will to openly talk about such things? Let me talk about pilot quotes;

Typhoon pilots say, Su-30MKI demonstated better maneuverability than their aircraft. Typhoon pilots say F-22 is at disadvantage after the merge.
So Su-30MKI>Typhoon>F-22 according to Typhoon pilots.
Our idiot colonel claims F-22 > Su-30MKI > F-15C directly contradicting to what Typhoon pilots are saying.

And please, DO question the pilot’s credilibity in such claims;

At low speeds/lower altitudes, one would expect the Su-30MKI to be more maneuverable.

But again, even with ‘we more than held our own’ comments, that admiration for the F-22 still filters through. I find it hard to believe that its, as you suggest, entirely unfounded.

“Raptor has vector thrust: Typhoon doesn’t,” he said. “What the aircraft can do, it’s incredible. The Typhoon just doesn’t do that.” – Wg Cdr. Rich Wells, RAF.

Can you shed some light on the PAK-FA procurement program of the Indian Air Force?

Based on some media reports it seems the Indian Air Force will purchase an un specified number of PAK FAs off the shelf within the next 3-4 years and eventually the FGFA will roll out in another 10 years. Thanks.

Can’t say I know any more than what’s been reported in the press. The PAK FA requirement started out with about 250 jets, a figure which was then formally cut to 127. Then last month they again announced that the projection had been downsized to 65 units, probably off-the-shelf.

Given that the program is still a long while from operationalization, its not likely that the actual order would be placed any time soon. Which leaves a basic question unanswered – why cut a ‘notional’ order? The bulk of the actual expenditure is a decade away and the cut isn’t going improve the current cash-flow situation.

My guess is, they’re trying to back out of the FGFA program. The window for India to be involved in the design has long since expired, the ToT offered is less than expected, and the workshare is minuscule. Instead of running a ‘joint venture’, I believe they’re coming around to the opinion that a normal PAK FA acquisition (with possible licensed production a la Su-30MKI) is preferable. No R&D investment.

Though where most parties would have made a clean break, the India govt is backing away quite slowly, since the deal has a political dimension (an outright cancellation would be perceived as a snub to Russia).

Based on what exactly?

Thrust to weight ratios. Empirical observations vis a vis drag. But more importantly, details that come through from test pilots, squadron pilots, exercises, etc. But I admit it is a general impression rather than a conclusion based on hard numbers.

F-22 will surely have better maneuverability than F-16/J-10/Rafale/Typhoon especially with fuel for long range flights and at high altitude for air superiority missions. Still for same mission, I expect Su-27 and F-15 to offer better overall maneuverability though.

Maneuverability is a rather nebulous term. Depends to a great extent on the flight regime. At transonic and supersonic regime the only aircraft that can match the F-22 will be the PAK FA, with a slicked off EF being the next best thing.

At lower speeds its an open field – MiG-29, Rafale, SH, F-35 all fairly competitive. But the F-22 will still be better than the baseline Su-27 and far better than all variants of the F-15.