So AESA TRM-module counting aside, the next step after the reviewing the commercial bids of the down-listed planes which passed muster will be opening negotiations with the L1 vendor, correct?
BTW, why would anybody bring up 2-way datalink when whatever is selected will have the same Indian datalink?
The only thing I`ve seen saying that Sukhoi is back in contention is Russian MASS media,
which has previously published that Sukhoi was still in contention when that was definitely not true.
The sort of stuff at most based on diplomatic meeting where Russian side says `re: your FX-2 contest,
Su-35 is a very advanced plane` and the Brazilian side responds `yes, indeed, yes it is…`
If anybody has seen substantial reports, this is the place to link them…
No not really , the SSJ-130 will come with P&W GTF engine and at a later stage they will be offered with basic PD-14 engine to match its thrust requirement.
BTW, do you know why P&W doesn´t list SuperJet as an application for PurePower unlike MS-21?
Snow Monkey, you seem to think the foreign Mirage 2000s (french, qataris…) are in Suda because of the available support for the Mirage 2000 (greek) ?
It’s a good idea, but… From what I see on Google Map, Suda is an F-16 base.
Hm, I don´t think I was thinking of that specifically as much as the UK using Italian bases for Tornado, but obviously from the fact you point out something like this isn´t strictly NECESSARY to use bases on relative short-notice. Still, it seems a reasonable arrangement and probably a location relatively close to may areas France may actually need to use FJ (that it doesn´t already have bases nearer to), a version of the UK´s bases in Cyprus (though that is a bit further from the action in this case).
This whole thing makes me think that France would REALLY like to see Greece buy Rafale,
since they could then use Greek bases more easily, with Rafale support equipment already in place, etc.
Almost makes enough to sense to offer to pay for the bases, and their air-defense, etc… 😎
Paralay is just photoshopping in the late 80`s/early 90`s patent drawings for a potential 2D TVS.
This design is almost certainly NOT the one going to be used, so I can`t really see why he does this.
I suppose it`s a way to `represent` that a stealthy TVS is planned for PAK-FA, but since the actual layout of the PAK-FA system isn`t going to resemble the old patent drawing, it`s mostly just misleading. As we know, the final PAK-FA nozzle has been reported to be `2.5 D` whatever that means, not `2D` like the ancient patent.
I`m likewise confused why he doesn`t use folding-fin missile cross-sections in his work, given those models are routinely displayed at weapons shows by their developers, and are explicitly stated to be the weapons that PAK-FA will use, not current gen missiles.
Final spec PAK-FA nozzles are supposedly going to be oblong / elliptical for better air mixing / heat dissipation,
and it seems to me like the `toed out` configuration itself reduces the line of sight to hot engine parts.
…So I don`t think Sukhoi and Saturn / Klimov are paying any less attention to this aspect than Lockheed did on F-22.
Mod Edit: Personal criticism of another member removed.
Eurofighter has no reason not to give up everything they have…
Co-developing upgrades with Japanese funding would be a dream for all EF partner companies,
and the realistic prospects for Japan taking any knowledge gained and turning it around into a competing product on the world export market for the very next generation (5+/6, c.2025-30) just isn`t big enough to worry about IMHO, certainly not compared to concerns of the next 5-10 years. If anything, it opens up opportunities for future collaboration, including non-fighter projects.
I don`t think Boeing has any problem with Tech Transfer for F-15/18 either, but US export control process would be tougher and less certain… SH *IS* set to be one of USN`s top poles for quite some time, and that is certainly doubled if one wants to toss around Growler/NGJ as a sweetener.
I think F-35 does have very good chances here for various reasons…
In a way I think a split buy of EF and F-35 has alot going for it. With the tsunami more jets will be needed immediately, and a split buy involving domestic industry maximally with EF and `more` off the shelf F-35 buy would satisfy alot of the strings pulling on this issue. Joining EF means Japan would almost automatically be involved in the ongoing upgrade development process at equal level to UK, DE, IT. EF is obviously going to be available on a much quicker time-scale, at least if Japan doesn`t mind buying earlier batches direct from Euro assembly lines before it can set up it`s own.
I would say budget reasons are 99% likely, general budget tightening along with natural disaster in form of flooding in the past season.
My personal opinion is that Sweden should not have contributed these aircraft anyway
I think it’s a good thing that Sweden is able and willing to contribute and add some force in support of the operation.
Perhaps this addition of assets for NFZ enforcement can enable NATO to allocate more aircraft for air-to-ground work?
Yeah… Sweden´s contributions to stealth technology should really be recognized. Stealth NATO membership.
I`m pretty sure he was just re-iterating the DISTANCE of 55km, and wasn`t venturing a guess as to the specific altitude, although the way he quoted the question of launch altitude could have been misleading. But I agree with him… it must have been `high altitude` at least…
Thanks, the source I was reading was just rather unclear about the subject (leaving GTF out of the picture)…
I read recently that UAC is considering integrating a PD-14 derivative on the Superjet-130 stretch…
This just doesn´t seem like a good commerical move to me, when GTF is readily available and used on the C-series.
I´m not saying PD-14 will be HORRIBLE, but realistically it will not compare well to GTF on the international market.
Integrating PD-14 derivative is not going to be faster or cheaper than using GTF… If it´s desired to ALSO have a PD-14 derivative integrated (just like MS-21) for the Russian military and/or domestic/non-Western market (e.g. Iran), that´s fine, but it seems like a bad ploy for SSJ´s international sales.
PD-14 should do fine between MS-21 and MTA, and possibly with domestic Russian SSJ-130´s, but it seems narrow-minded to hold SSJ hostage to the all-Russian engine. Perm has good relations with P&W, I´m sure they could even sub-contract GTF production from P&W and MTU to a certain extent…
Any more information on this? Any ideas if Russian MoD IS planning applications of SSJ, e.g. maritime patrol?
I haven`t seen a clear-cut explanation of the basis of a $1B increase, is anybody familiar?
I would assume that extending the negotiation window means extending the production window,
and so the extra money would be for covering inflation, etc, that all producers are subject to. …Or something completely different?
The time frame any Japanese stealth fighter would be produced is after F35 induction for Australia and Japan itself.
Thus why possibility of merging Japanese program with NGAD is brought up, tech transfer/espionage issues aside.
Australian needs may very well line up with the Japanese program, OR NGAD, but it isn’t a ‘competitive’ situation with F35, rather. complementary.
Right, I never suggested the F1 should self-escort,
I´m saying I was surprised it needed a Rafale escort in ´A2A config´,
when a Rafale or other semi-modern multi-role jet in strike config with simply wing-tip MICAs should more than suffice,
while carrying more bombs to take out ground targets… if it is needed to cover for F1, perhaps not JUST wingtip MICAs,
but even with 4 MICAs that still leaves plenty of pylons and payload for some AASMs and GBUs.