Iran should have Su-25s, they flew over in 1991 from Saddam’s air farce. And yes, AEGIS will still find and blast an Su-24 at low level. It’s not like you can do terrain masking or anything over the open water.

And yes, hanging weapons externally on any aircraft blows up its RCS unless they are RAM treated or stealthy weapons.

?? unless Burke or ticon’s are operating pretty close to the shipping lines (which would place the vessels dangerously within the range of land based ashm batteries) thats impossible because of something called radar horizon no matter how good aegis it limits its range is limited to the horizon.

Not pointing to semi-conformal carriage of the SH alone, even with some further ones under-wing, it will dash out at Mach 1,6.
So speed for interceptions is not a real issue.
With bomb load, it sticks to the subsonic range as most other fighters too.

how is it not a issue? as i said before what is if has to intercept for ex iranian Su-25 which is about to attack oil tanker, surely speed and accel would be factor then?

I have been raising issues of F/A-18E/F speed since day one and people flamed at for that (i.e Mig-29k vs F-18 topic ). I am gonna name any names but there those who think speed is irrelevant.

Edit: why did someone bump up a 6 yr old topic :rolleyes:

I don’t know the exact figures but I believe all RD-33 and RD-93 variants have a higher fuel burn rate (gallons/liters/kgs/pounds per hour) than the GE F-404 and F-414. As a result, the Fulcrum will have a shorter range than the Hornet or Superbug even if it carries the same amount of fuel.

it uses RD-33MK which only a month or so back finished testing, it is supposed to comparable to western fighter engines performance and maintanence wise. Dont have any stats for fuel efficiency but no reason why it shouldnt be comparable to F-404/414.

Sigh another comparison topic.

the Indian MiG-29K will crash into the ocean after it runs out of fuel shortly after take off.. then the Cinese Su-30MKK2 pilot will attempt to crash his aircraft into the wingtip of the floating Mig wreckage.

Mig-29k can carry more internalfuel than the F-18 but ~ 700 kg less than F-18E, but its smaller weight should make up for that. So their ranges with internal fuel only should be roughly similar.
Compared with Sukhoi its range is ofcourse less and has less payload but it does carry superior avionics.

The only reason the Sa’ar Vs suffer from excessive topweight is because the Israelis were more concerned with supporting their local defense industry than producing seaworthy combatants.

It wasn’t neccessary to fit a total of 64(!) Barak SAM missiles to this class. However, IAI produces the Barak missile and there wasn’t exactly a backlog of foriegn orders at the time the Sa’ar Vs were planned. Of course, since the ships were more-or-less free, Israel could afford to direct procurement money towards the domestically produced armament.

dont think barak was the sole reason its rather light weight system, the top weight issue IIRC was caused because the superstructure/mast design and its heavy armament only served to worsen that. This is something that should have been detected and resolved in design phase. Earliar saar iv Missile boat carry 32 Baraks btw.

YJ-83 is supersonic in the terminal phase despite being supersonic and weighing even less than YJ-62. And also, that one photo proves nothing.

I remember that Kanwa mentionning YJ-12 on 052C to be supersonic. Somehow, YJ-12 suddenly just disappeared and YJ-62 became the missile on 052C. I’m not sure if they are the same.

yj-83 terminal speed is listed at 1.5 mach which is not very fast (Klub is supposed to be around mach 3+) and the missile itself doesnt make sense to me it doesnt have 3rd solid fueled stage for that like Klub so its kinda puzzling how it is supposed to be supersonic in terminal stage. Either way yj-62 looks like it has turbojet from that photo why would the engine and design change if that photo is legit.

Leon, yes that ka-28 looks like a model. Even the model doesnt convey much about whether they can carry that or not i.e: it could very well be that they were testing whether pad not the hanger can handle ka-28. Considering how many of photos of 052 ddg’s are out there its bit hard for anyone to miss ka-28 operating from those ddgs.

China has only 4 asw ka-28 while there is 2 Sovernmenny,2 052c, 2 54 ffg, 2 052b and of course 2 more new sovremenny the math definetly doesnt add up unless china procures more ka-28 or kamov are to operate only from sovremenny.

I would say greater range, equal in warhead (despite being much less in weight, that’s never a bad thing).

its weight is less because its subsonic definetly not supersonic it uses TJ engine based on that one photo.