Both MiG & Sukhoi assisted Chengdu & Shenyang in their respective future fighter projects (JF-17, J-11&12), but afaik no formal request for co-development of PAK-FA was made, even during the dark Yeltsin years where Chinese money was ‘co-funding’ many Russian defence programmes.

As for India, they were approached to co-fund & co-produce Sukhoi’s PAK-FA, as the design had already been finalised, but India wanted to be involved from the inception stage (bolstered no-doubt from the debacle that is the LCA), hence their likely co-operation in MiG’s LMFS project, which will have good export potential, and is the pet project of Fyodorev- the new president of the Unified Aircraft Corp. UAC probably acknowledges the export potential (or desire) of the PAK-FA is low, after the F-22 experience, whilst MiG’s smaller 5th gen will have full order books, much to the disdain of Mikhail Pogosyan.

Recent history shows that the oppsoite is true, the cheaper Mig-29 variants have achieved only penny packet deals to a small number of countrys where as the Flanker, usually in its most advanced and expensive variant at the time has achieved remarkable success.

China and India both made triple figure orders, Malaysia, Algeria, Vietnam, Venezuela, Ethiopia, Yemen, Eritrea (despite already operating the smaller/lighter/cheaper Mig-29) and Angola have all ordered smaller numbers.

On the other hand post cold war Fulcrum deliverys have been limited to Yemen, Peru, Iran, Sudan, Myanamar and Eritrea, all in small numbers and largely in basic variants.

The lesson seems to be that whilst there is a place for a lighter cheaper fighter it may well not be as succesful as a bigger stablemate from the Russian market.

I disagree. I think they see the Flanker as the long range fighter, while the Mig-29 is the short range lighter fighter. What I think we misunderstand here is that they are now realising that big heavy F-22 5th gen fighters will not be sold widely… just like S-300s have only sold to a few countries and that if they (ie MIG) want to make money exporting fighters they need to make them high tech but also affordable by easing up on the performance requirements in range and payload. The Mig is going for the budget niche, and Sukhoi are worried that that might be the only 5th gen fighter the Russian government might be prepared to export. A stealthy 5th gen Mig might be seen as a preferable option to the current option between flankers and fulcrums which the Sukhoi design bureau are happy with (understandibly, though the Mig-35 might be more competitive for countries that dont need the Flankers extreme range.)

You are welcome to your opinion but you are wrong, one can identify three distinct size ranges defined by the engines they use.

Heavy- Mig-31/S-37 with the DF-30 and the Mig 1.44 with the original larger AL-41 engine.

Medium- Flanker, AL-31 series.

Light- Mig-29 RD-33.

Considering that the Mig- 7.01 prject is supposedly still alive (barely) it makes sense that that is what would be regarded as a heavy fighter by the Russians.

However I would agree that there are probably designs around for a smaller Mig-29 sized fighter, probably with a single AL-41F. However if the Pakfa, as every indication says it will, turns out to be powered by two AL-41F’s it will be in the same size range as the Flanker, it will actually have the same powerplant as the Su-35!

It is a ridiculous notion that the Russian government will not be willing to export at least a variant of the Flanker- they offered to cooperate in its design and production with both China and India!

“It is understandable that Gen. Mikhailov’s declaration caused anxiety at Sukhoi. A few days later, the head of Sukhoi Holding, Mikhail Pogosyan, said “there is no technology in Russia to develop a light fighter,” clearly indicating that — in his opinion — only Sukhoi’s PAK FA can be the fifth generation fighter. Moreover, he added that the PAK FA is not a heavy fighter, as “it is considerably smaller than the F-22A, Su-47 or MiG 1.44.” According to Pogosyan, “any discussions about Russian heavy and light fifth generation fighters are pointless.”

The problem we have is that the AL-41F has been selected as the engine. If the Pakfa is twin engined, as all indications say it is, it will likely come out out at about the same size as a Flanker. Now admittedly that is smaller than the Su-47 and 1.44, but they were intended to use the much larger original AL-41, in reality those two were probably closer to the Mig-31. If the Pakfa is indeed a twin engined design it will still be larger than the F-35/Rafale/Typhoon.

My opionion is that we are all mis-understanding the debate in Russia, I think that they regard the Mig-29 as light, the Flanker as medium and the Foxhound as heavy and they have decided to standerdise on their interpretation of medium weight- Flanker sized. That would also provide another explanation for the desire to intergrate heavy AAM’s on the Su-35 (KS-172).

So, Eurofighter with:

CAESAR (Already done)
Meteor (Already done)
EJ-270 with 3D TVC (Like EJ200-01A)
Conformal Fuel Tanks
Conformal Smart Skin Array

Is just my wild dream or a geniune possibility?!

Considering how long Typhoon is intended to be in service and how many countrys will be operating it (we are now upto 6) I think that ultimately a configuration like that is entirely possible.

This is not actually entirely certain – the UK plan is to field eight high end ships (the ‘C1’ ships), in addition to the eight T-45s. It is entirely probable that these could simply be T-45s, though possibly without the extensive AAW fitout. The problem is really one of funding – once the carriers are being built, then the RN can push for more ships, ideally simply continuing to buy the ships. The UK could buy one T-45 every year, and one Astute class sub every two years…

But Ed you are forgetting that that makes sense, which means that the MoD will cast the idea aside and begin and endless process of deisgn and procurement studies that end costing more than any prucurement of the shelf would have done to start with!:mad:

It seems to me that Pakistan may be trying to offset the deficencys of the JF-17 by procuring copius amounts of AEW. Makes sense if they can try and at least partly erode the IAF fighter forces sensor advantage by doing that but it would make more sense to just buy a better fighter. Especially considering that India will likely eventually deploy an Irbis/KS-172 combination that will make any PAF AEW aircraft very vulnerable.

EU cities have the right to ABM systems provided they built it with there own Intellectual capital and own Money. Debt ridden EU has neither the money nor the technical capacity to built 21st century ABM system. Russia has now more hard currency than entire EU and it is not depended on debt to grow the economy.
and I think the whole issue dates back to WW2 where Russians feel that gave the greatest sacrifice in saving the Europe and rebuilding Eastern EU and feeding it with subsidize energy. so they just dont want external weopons stored near there borders and cause future conflicts.

I think more weopons systems are on way. Simply better manufacture process to old systems.

I dont know what the hell it is that you smoke but you realy need to stop smoking it before you post!:rolleyes: