‘Russian Stealth’ may gain market supremacy in ten years’ time
13.02.2010, 12.39
By Itar-Tass World Service writer Lyudmila Alexandrova
The Russian defense-industrial complex has delivered a fifth-generation jet that is promised to be far less costly than its US rivals.
The fifth generation jet is less costly to operate. For instance, one flight hour of the fourth generation plane, such as Su-27, costs 10,000 dollars, while that of the fifth generation jet has been slashed to 1,500 dollars.
:p
For instance, the Pentagon gave up the intention of making the F-22 super-maneuverable.
Really?
It is believed that highly-maneuverable, variable thrust rockets the F-22 is armed with make it unnecessary for the pilot to make a tail approach to the enemy for attack.
For now F 22 got no “variable thrust rockets”…
Then there surfaced some problems with repairs and maintenance. It turned out that the most advanced US warplane requires nearly 24 hours of maintenance work after each hour in flight. The cost of one hour of flight operation exceeds 4,000 dollars
More like 19,000 $…and those are only variable costs.
Besides, the Raptor is expensive and very unreliable, so the Pentagon decided against using it in Iraq or Afghanistan.
They are nopt needed there.
“If one looks back at how the Americans spent 25 years to tune up and adjust their F-22, it will look very likely that our plane will require far less time, because all of its aspects have been researched rather well – this is a second version of a fifth generation jet already.”
F 22 flew in 1997. That’s not 25 years. Even YF 22 flew only 19 years ago…
What can i say? Fine example of profesional journalism…
Once again the JSF weight may very well be dictated by the performance parameters, not by the need to shed weight.;)
The one variable that is ‘mobile’ is performance, especially the software and its ability to perform certain functions, this is where the future savings will be made as it tried to avoid the death spiral, just watch out for it.
I’m amazed by the continued upbeat outpourings that come from the JSF apologists, if they could just say the program is in trouble but they hope it can be turned around then I think we could all agree with that.
but despite the cosy increases, the delays, the restructuring, the sackings, they continue to assert everything is ontrack and under budget!!!.
Something has to give in this program – whats your guess as to what it will be.?,
Cheers
Let’s stick to the topic. Cola posted the clip with F 35 flying along the F 16 both in AB and his deduction was that, contrary to what test pilot(s) say, the F 35 need AB when the chasing F 16 do. I thing he is wrong
Delays, cost increases are normal for every fighter program as big and ambitious as the F 35. And they have nothing to do with needing or not needing the AB.
I just watched the vid as youtube is blocked at work, but cola you are really reaching if you are gonna use a 4 sec part of a vid with afterburner to judge the acceleration of the F-35….
Once again, the use of the AB by the F 35 could be very well dictated by the test flight profile, not by the need to use it.
They will be squadronS of Su-50’s (150/200) flying, thats thier plan,
historucally speaking, the Russkies have ALWAYS had better pilots than U.S.
Of the Allies in WW2 the best “Aces” goes like this:1. USSR
2. U.K.
3. U.S.
So “Historically” speaking, I expect Russia to catch “BACK” up AND surpass U.S.A./ NATO for the coming WW3.;)
:p:p:p:p:p:p:p:p:p:p:p:p:p:p:p:p:p:p:p
Your figure of 2,500 US a2a aircraft is way off and you know it.
Of course, only the F 15C and F 22 are dedicated AA. Howver, F 16C/D, F 18 C/D/E/F, F 15 E are perfectly capable to deal with present threats.
On the F22; the point and fact is that the worlds premier a2a platform carries 8 aam’s.
Whether this is the first, last or Queen Elizabeth the Firsts favourite reason for the F22 being the “king of a2a” is irrelevant to this discussion.Or are you going to question the wisdom of the F22 having the ability to carry 8 aam’s?
Well, if you had to chose between 186 F22 x 8 AAMs and 1700 F 35 x 4 AAMs, what would you pick? I know that the original 700 F 22 would be nice, but…
As others have pointed out you need to compare your future force make up to the likely force make up of the opposition.
OK, in 10 years, how many VLO fighters do you predict being operational 10 years from now in 1) US; 2) China; 3)Russia; 4)India ?
Arrogance has nothing to do with being from the US or not.
The US currently disposes of a fleet of 522 F15C/D, 1,280 F16C/D and 137 F22.
1,939 operational a2a, i’m being generous with the F16’s, and including the F22’s, of which how many are combat capable?
You could include the 223 F15E’s if you were really stretching it, giving you 2,162 aircraft.
All of those aircraft when tasked a2a can carry at least 6 aam’s.
Not being generous it is 659 a2a dedicated aircraft, including the F22’s of which a number are know to be non combat coded.
Source: http://www.af.mil/
As somebody else pointed out when exactly will they all be lined up together awaiting the opposition coming over the hill?
The F22 which is held up as the king of a2a carries 8 aam’s.
Now why would that be?With reference to the non existence of other “stealth” fighters, how many F35 are in service right now?
– I see you excluded US Navy. I know that SH is not exactly #1, but still there are 400 of them, not to count the older F 18C/D. So the figure I mention is correct;
– Of course not all these A/C are not “combat coded” (the oficial term is PMAI); but that also true for any AF arounf the globe;
– the fact that it can carry 8 AAMs is the last reson F 22 “is held up as the king of a2a”;
– the problem is not that there is no F 35 in service, but how long will take for another country to have on operational VLO fighter.
I think it’s highly representative. But you can believe whatever you want.
Then you didn’t visit other forums…
So, the SH is a… VLO design? Well, that’s news to me. Last time I checked:
I see your pont — SH is LO, not VLO, so maybe I should refrease: “OTOH, the final product (the oprational T 50 or whatever they name it) will probaly be VLO instaed LO, like the SH. ”
However, that’s not the engines (which BTW have blockers) that make the SH LO and not VLO (I believe that this was the reason of the picture).
I don’t see him claiming it’s an american site. Do you? (of course, it wouldn’t be the first time you attribute people things they never said)
Also, it doesn’t exactly take for too much luck to find such people in its pages. A better informed person would know.
He didn’t claim that it’s a US site, but he said that we only need to go to F-16.net to get an estimate of the general reaction to the PAK FA of the US military aviation community. Trying to find US military aviation community on F 16.net…There are only 1 or2 fomer US F 16 pilots that post. BTW their positions are very balanced towards nonUS stuff.
Being moderate is one thing (and a good thing IMHO); Being stupid is another. Many people in f-16.net are moderate and that’s nice. But there are others who don’t see beyond their Uncle Sam’s noses, like the guy comparing the PAK FA only with the Super Hornet in terms of… stealth. That is just that: Stupid.
Agree. But if that poster said that the prototype is comparable with the SH in RCS, he may have a point. OTOH, the final product (the oprational T 50 or whatever they name it) will probaly be more VLO than the SH. I don’t know about F 22/F 35 though.
Your coffee was not too good this morning, was it? :p
Why are you so agressive towards people that don’t share your opinions or preferences?
For not being negated, deterrence has got be maintained at a safe distance always. Then it’s called dominance.
Watch out! They will label you as arrogant…:D
LOL, kid.
Neither mr.Beesley, nor other officials (to may knowledge) claimed that.
You need to learn to interpret what has been said, before parroting something.
Yes, he said :
I continue to be impressed with the performance of the aircraft. The F-16s flying chase don’t have near the fuel capacity or payload capability as the F-35. The Lightning II does very well in comparison. For example, the F-35 often forces the chase aircraft into afterburner when it is in military power
http://www.codeonemagazine.com/archives/2007/articles/apr_07/flighttest/index.html
I’ll put my money on Beesley. He may know a thing or two about planes…
Engines – Volvo Aero (although it was a while since they built one from scratch)
AESA Radar – Saab Microwave (former Ericsson)
IRST – Saab Bofors Dynamics
Engines – GE kits assembled by Volvo
AESA, IRST – Selex/Saab…
A performancewise detail of JSF.
At 2:16, it’s clearly visible that trailing two-seat F16 engages AB after the F35 and disengages it immediately after F35 does the same.
The important point is F16 carries 2 fuel tanks.This clearly contradicts claims that F35 is in superior to F16, performancewise (accel, climb, etc…).
Wow, you expose those crooks…What if the scenario for that flight imposed the use of AB?
Please try to read again and to understand what I mean.
The F22 does not emit to the AWACS but only receives (that’s one of its limitations, being a superb ESM collection platform but unable to share except with other F22).
NO!
The Raptor, for now can’t transmit to other planes except other Raptors) by datalink (link 16) ! They can transmit using voice (ARC radio stations), as they did actually in various large scale wargames. In fact, those wargames prompt the introduction of a tramsitting datalink to platforms other than Raptors. Initially, The IFDL (intrafight datalink that allows Raptor to comunicate betwen them) and receiving-only Link 16 were considered enough. But those execises revealed that the Raptor is a true intelligence “sponge”. Of course it won’t detect/interogate/track hundreds of fighters at >500 km as a AWACS can, or pick hostile emmssions at even greater distances as a Rivet Joint, but the Raptor is over the enemmy territory and informations may be even more precise. In Nothern Edge games, when the AWACS detected a group of targets, the Raptor transmited (by voice) detailing: hey, there are 2 X F 18 and 3 X F 15…
Slightly arrogant that, not a very healthy attitiude as history has shown time and time again.
Having a limited number of the latest uber weapon isn’t any good if the opposition has thousands of cheap “disposable” kit, your one or two uber weapons will simply be overwhelmed.
I’m not from US, so you comment about arrogance is misplaced. However, US has now ~ 2500 4th gen. fighters, aside the ~ 180 Raptors contracted. Again, what country can field more?
If the US can develop kit discretely (F117, B2, and various other bits and pieces) what evidence do you have that others can’t.
The “black project” share in US defence budged is comparable with the entire defence budget of large countries. In 2010 the sum is ~ 50 billion $! As I said, stealth fighters don’t appear out of nowhere. Of course, China will build it’s J XX but not right now.
Yes we can? Sweden have no problem with that. Our defence industry have been working well for the last 200 years.
Well, potent air forces around the globe, such as Czech, Hungarian, Thai, and S Africans aseems to be very convinced about this obvious fact…
The only thing we dont do is carriers…).
:diablo: Carriers? What about engines, AESA radars, IRSTs? Because for the ipotetic NG, SAAB will buy them from US, UK, Italian companies..