Airbus Awarded Contract to Retrofit 26 Bundeswehr CH-53 Helicopters
LOL
Yeah, that’s how you show that you’re “serious about defence” — send the 45yr-old choppers in for another round of overhauls.
I think we can safely assume that J-15A(?) will include a range of systems updates in parallel with the ongoing evolution of J-11/16 over the period.
so their 2nd carrier is a kuznetsov variant, and they’ll retire the first
then the 3rd one will be a catobar..
they’re going to buy totally different set of aircrafts and operations?
What? Liaoning isn’t going anywhere, they’re just building more carriers.
China’s future CATOBAR carrier(s) will operate a new J-15 variant, fixed-wing AEW, and eventually — undoubtedly — a new VLO combat aircraft. Plus the usual array of helicopters.
Fantastic!
Pakistan is rumoured to be interested in S-400 also.
The A400 has a huge potential, there is no doubt about that — if they can just work out the kinks it will become a great plane.
Like F-35, it is a question of maturity. As a mature system, A400 is probably an ideal match for New Zealand. Even so, I’m surprised they would entertain it vs. cheaper options such as C-130J and KC-390.
Note the implication: ISIS to be around for (at least) a few more years.
Huh, I didn’t realise that Aridhaman and follow-on units were going to have eight silos. I thought eight silos were only planned for the next class equipped with a ~150MW reactor.
Of course the real question, as always, is implementation. It’s one thing to imagine several operational nuclear boats equipped with a mixed loadout of nuclear K-4s, conventional K-15s and Nirbhay cruise missiles, but when can we realistically expect such a thing? Nirbhay in particular doesn’t seem to be going anywhere fast.
Well if they are going to re-start Tu-160 production, might as well make PAK DA a smaller flying wing powered by 2x NK-32 sans afterburner. That would give it about as much thrust as a B-2, probably with better SFC courtesy of higher bypass ratio.
But maybe, from your perspective, you have a better explanation for the sudden twist in relations towards Russia.. let us hear it..
The “sudden twist” in relations was the disagreement over Syria, culminating in the unfortunate Su-24 incident, and that disagreement has become less pronounced over time. Both parties should be commended for continuing a process of dialogue, working through their disagreements and emerging with a working relationship.
Come on Rii.
The obj 30 will not be in the same class as F135.
Don’t eat everything that comes out from UEC, etc.
I’m assuming that it will deliver around 35,000lb of thrust, anything more is a bonus.
Russia would have to settle for a smaller singel engine vs F135.
Which is a good thing. A smaller (and single-engine) aircraft is a cheaper aircraft with better export prospects.
VKS could do with a twin engine fighter ala Mig-35 class but they surly don’t need it to cover their requirement and future threat challanges.
On the contrary, the MiG-35 is a waste of time that only exists for industrial purposes. The difference between it and the Flanker series is not significant enough to justify all the additional resources required to develop and operate it. Take all the money poured into developing MiG-35 systems and put it into further development of the Flanker platform and everyone (except MiG corporation) would be much better off.
So how much will the initial R/D bill be
Less for a design that uses AL-41 than one that also has to develop a new engine, that’s for sure.
To reiterate, I don’t think Russia really needs a smaller aircraft either. But if one is going to be developed it should minimise development, acquisition and operating costs whilst maximising differentiation from T-50 series and export competitors. And that means a single AL-41 powerplant.
Afaik, Russia are light year away from a F135 class engine.
Other than the engine that is scheduled to fly in T-50 this year, you mean?
You end up with one fat engine, then add fuel and int w-bays, which make the jet very much F-35 fatso.
Less so if you don’t make a fat high-BPR engine like F135 in the first place. Less so if you don’t require internal carriage of heavy munitions. Less so if you aren’t dimensionally limited by LHD lifts.
Russia erred in not developing an AL-31 powered light fighter to complement Su-27, no need to repeat the same mistake a generation later.
I don’t think Russia needs a smaller aircraft either, but if they are going to develop one they should opt for the smaller, cheaper, single-engine aircraft that leverages commonalities with T-50.
from the article
14000 flight hours in 10 years. That’s 1400 flight hours per year. For 14 Gripens, gives an average of 100 flight hours per year for each Gripen.
Compared to the PAF’s JF-17 fleet which reached 19,000 flight hours with 65 active service JF-17s in April 2016
Seems like the JF-17’s availability is nowhere near that of the Gripen.
Why assume that availability is the limiting factor for PAF’s JF-17s? Also, I’m pretty sure those 65 airframes didn’t all turn up at the same time.
The implication being that there are no European aircraft capable of conducting such measurements?
I’m sure the Russians could spare a Bear or two if asked nicely.
Dairy farmer would rather customers buy milk than cow, news at 11′.
39,566lbs of afterburning thrust, you say? I heard it was only 39,563lbs.