MM11No problem. Next to MIDS digital data link which was was developed by the EuroMIDS consortium (comprises American Data Link Solutions) here a few examples:
– Typhoon’s IFF system was developed by Raytheon’s UK division together with German EADS, Italian MID and Spanish ENOSA and it requires US export approval.
– Typhoon’s avionic and navigation computers (developed by Teldix) are all based on US-designed Motorola 68020 CPU cores and Motorola 68882 math coprocessors. There are other RISC-based processors for floating point and matrix computations which are, too, of US origin. Even Typhoon’s quadruplex FBW is based on US processors, the system includes four FBW units each containing eight 68020 cores. That’s for Tranche One. Tranche Two switched to Apple PowerPC cores.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorola_68020
– A part of Typhoon’s software is American, as well. Check here: http://www.ghs.com/customers/eurofighter.html
The processors are of no concern for the US neither are the software tools, as the software itself is not developed in the US. Raeython UK doesn’t mean US contends. It would be the same if you say the support computers on the ground use Windows so they need US approval. The critical systems are GPS and MIDS, though produced in Europe they require intergovernmental approval between the customer and the US as the US has to approve the licenses to use GPS, which is also a critical part of MIDS (required for synchronisation). If the US is concerned about the Rafale being sold to a specific customer they can block it as well as long as GPS and MIDS is aboard.
MM11Not true, I demand sources. Rafale uses very less U.S content, when i last asked in the thread it was Ejection seat and something else. While a lot of EF is American.
You don’t need U.S govt approval to buy the Rafale, unlike the EF.
Compare the above link with the Saudi situation. 🙁
The ejection seat is actually british not american. The only licenses you need need from the US are that for GPS and MIDS and that’s the same for both the Rafale and the Eurofighter. Find me yet a single other piece of equipment on the Typhoon which is US supplied and requires US approval!
MM11Delays now are because of lack of parts coming from the U.K from BAE. Read that post in that thread.
It is the same. It happens with every country. The European companies all use American parts in their jets, so are succeptable to Sanctions just the same way. This is especially true for British companies compared to the French.
So if Americans are not preferable it makes sense to go for French or Russian Jets.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/10/23/us_gove_saudi_eurofighter_sale/
British are too dependent on Americans for their tech ;).
There is no more US contends in the Eurofighter than in the Rafale, but the Eurofighter uses more weapons of US origin atm.
MM11That has a lot to do with the Vikramaditya issues i believe. Anyway its not a MIG-Russian specific problem, we know how delayed British Hawks were and how delayed they are now, just check the news thread. :rolleyes:
That doesn’t change the fact that the MiG-29K is later than intended as was the Su-30MKI ;).
MM11Let alone, that the virus affected the computers and not directly the aircraft. Though that caused problems for mission preparation.
MM11Nice to see the De Gaulles back in duty. Are the SEMs still onboard?
MM11What’s that pronounced zig-zag pattern at the base of the radome?
Looks like a RCS reduction measure.
MM11If you assess the japanese situation objective, the Eurofighter Typhoon is indeed the most reasonable option for the JASDFs FX requirements. An all out war between China and Japan is unlikely but no one can predict the future and China is indeed the sole true threat. South Korea is a concurent economics wise but no militarly threat. North Koreas behaviour is unpredictable, but their conventional military capabilities are insufficient. And what kind of interest could the Russians have to invade Japan? Chinas economics are growing and its military becomes more and more capable. The entire japanese military is leaned towards self defence, so is the JASDF. The 3 types of combat aircraft being operated are all used in the air defence role, with the F-2 being used for naval strike as well. The JASDF can’t make up for the PLAAFs vastly superior quantity of fighters so they opt for a qualitative advantage.
The JASDF intends to purchase up to 100 new combat aircraft to replace its ageing fleet of F-4EJ Kais from 2013 onwards. The service definitely seeks a high performance air superiority/air defence fighter and the JASDFs prefered choice would be the F-22 which is argueabley the best aerial fighter in the world today. The US congress blocks any sales of the type to foreign countries, however and a decision to continue production of the F-22 has yet to be made. Even if the Raptors production line is kept open there is no guarantee that the export ban will be lifted. If the production is ceased there is no chance to get the F-22 at all and even if Japan is allowed to buy the type, when will it be ready? It is unlikely that the US would sell the stock USAF F-22 model and there won’t be any sort of ToT or license production. So what about the japanese aerospace and defence industry? Developing their own 5th generation fighter is no option in the short term.
While the chances to get the F-22 looks slim, LM brings up the F-35 which would be a feasable alternative. The problem is that the type will be introduced in a strike configuration and that it won’t be available on time, especially as Japan is no partner within the JSF programme. Can the JASDF afford to wait and will they accept a gap in capability between the retirement of the F-4 and the introduction of a new type? The F-35 could be a better option as a replacement for the F-15J/DJ which isn’t exactly brand new either and might need a replacment from 2020 onwards. At that time the F-35 should be mature enough and available on time.
There is a reason why the JASDF considers the F-15FX, F/A-18E/F and the Eurofighter Typhoon as potential candidates for its FX requirements!
The F-15FX as a considerably upgraded variant might be sufficient in the near future, but after 35 years of service the Eagle is showing its age. Production will be ceased in 2011 if no additional customers are found and that means a decision has soon to be made. In the long term the F-15 is no suitable option as the number of in service aircraft is decreasing, which might cause problems for support and operating costs in the long term. Apart that the F-15 is already operated by the JASDF.
The F/A-18E/F is a newer, more advanced design with a great growth potential and as its main customer the USN will operate the type for quite some time it would be a better option for the JASDF. The Super Hornet is not the really best fighter however. While its combination of advanced avionics, sensors and weapons should enable it to deal with most existing threats, its performance is insufficient and might be a problem in the future. The Superbugs airframe is to much compromised towards carrier operations and AG capabilities and that hampers its performance!
From the current point of view the Eurofighter Typhoon will be longer in production than both the F-15 and F/A-18, there is a large customer base which will operate the type for the decades to come and the type has a lot of growth potential. Eurofighter offers a membership, ToT and license production as well a customisation. There would be great benefits for the japanese aerospace and defence industry and the Typhoon is definitely the more capable A2A platform in the longer terms in comparison to the F-15 or F/A-18.
So replacing the F-4EJ with the Typhoon on time and the F-15J/DJ with the F-35 might be the best option for the JASDF, if they can’t get the F-22. Yet the close ties between Japan and the US might lead to a less favourable solution, however.
MM11Not so.
CAESAR was flown on the BAC-111 trials aircraft 3 years ago, in February 2006. That aircraft has been used for other things since. CAESAR was flown on Eurofighter development aircraft DA5 in May 2007.
Look at this.
And see below, with the blokes who did it –
It was then removed, but could easily be fitted to whatever Eurofighter can be made available.
I’m aware of that, but CAESAR is currently fitted to the BAC 1-11 again. The question is when will the aircraft be evaluated in India exactly? Who is going to do that and will the CAESAR be fitted on time? There might be some issues, though it is possible to install CAESAR quite fast if required.
MM111, ACM and IAF considers AESA important with regard to situational awareness.
And an advanced MSA radar doesn’t provide SA? Add one of the best, if not the best IRST/FLIR sensors, ESM, datalink, sensor fusion and an almost unmatched MMI and you have a pretty good SA, even without AESA.;)
2. The Aircraft should meet the capability at the time of evaluation not delivery.
That would automatically rule out Gripen NG and maybe even the MiG-35…
MM11Did the Su-27 really enter service in 1984? There may have been Flankers delivered to the VVS in that year, but perhaps that was only to allow pilots to become familiar with the new technology. The first Su-27UB 2 seat trainers weren´t introduced to the VVS until 1986, so there couldn´t have been many pilots converted to the type until then?:confused:
Remember; all the so-called commercial passenger flights of the Tu-144 supersonic passenger plane where piloted by test pilots of the Soviet state aircraft certification and acceptance agency, and not by regular Aeroflot pilots, so the Soviets certainly had a different way of accepting aircraft into service.
That is of course true, I just take the first delivery to the customer dates.
MM11What about the typhoon ? Its odds are struck by the revelation that the aircraft should have the desired capabilities at the time of evaluation and not the time of entry into service.
For the Typhoon it looks bad when it comes to presenting the AESA during the evaluation. The single CAESAR demonstrator is just that a demonstrator and it is fitted to a BAC 1-11 trials aircraft. Therefore you won’t see an AESA equipped Typhoon during the IAFs evaluation.
MM11May be, MIGs biggest problems are
1, An entirely Russian fleet.
2, The Platform not being operational anywhere else.
Arthuro can you update us on the status of Rafales AESA radar, will a production model be ready by April ?
Well a production modell of the RBE2 AESA will not be available by april, but there is a demonstrator onboard the Rafale B301 (which has already been evaluated in the Swiss in october 08) and this demonstrator should be close enough to a production modell do give the Indias a clue of what is awaiting them.
MM11Some one asked me to give first flight and induction figures of soviet aircraft, I did give of a few. I was not comparing Mig 21 with PAK FA or anything. But its nice knowing Su 27 took less years to complete than the Rafale or Typhoon. 🙂
But the Su-27 is a generation behind the Rafale or Typhoon and was developed during the cold war at a time when both the east and west were spending huge sums into defence and when there was much less political wrangling about such programmes. Yet the less complex Su-27 required between 7-8 years from first flight on 20th may 1977 to entry into service in december 1984. Not that much off from the Rafale or Typhoon. And if you want to compare the latest variants add the time which has passed since. The Su-30/35 aren’t developed from scratch, though much has changed in many ways. By that measure you could say it took Sukhoi some 35 years between first flight of the original T-10 and potential introduction of the new Su-35 ;). You see it’s an apples to oranges comparison.
MM11Mig 23
First flight 67 introduced 70
Mig 21
First fight 56 introduced 59
Mig 25
First flight 64 introduced 70
Mig 31
First flight 75 introduced 82
Mig 29
First flight 77 introduced 83
Su 27
First flight 77 introduced 84
Su 25
first flight 75 introduced 81
Su 24
first flight 67 introduced 74
They were doing much better than the west till the fall of U.S.S.R
You are comparing apples to oranges. Development time of combat aircraft increased with each generation as the aircraft became more and more complex. That means longer development times and longer testing. Development of western fighters were quite similar to those of compareable eastern designs at given times.
Comparing development time of the MiG-21 with that of the PAK FA is like comparing the time you would require to develope and test a simple hand calculator vs a complete PC with all the related software…
@SOC
That first flying “Su-34” was really the Su-27IB aerodynamic demonstrator, closer in purpose to the Rafale A or EAP. The 16 year figure then matches up well with the three examples you mentioned above, and that is including delays due to post-USSR funding issues.
But you have to take into account that the Su-34 wasn’t developed from scratch. The first new built prototype T-10W-2 was first flown on 18 december 1993, meaning just 3 1/2 years after.
Sign In
