that’s a good point.. the Russian market is different than the Soviet one. With the economy contracting and China’s expanding,

Russia is also lowering external debt with economic contraction. China is expanding debt with much lower interest rate.

it is logical that Russia has been keen to develop new projects together with China on a number of things such as cargo and airliners.

after failure in ARJ-21, C919, Y-20, L-15 and whole series of helicopters .It is logical that China will be building every thing with russia, powered by Russian engines, materials and design.

But eventually China will probably be the dominant one and their relationship might end up like US and S.Korean arms industry.

S. Korea does not have arms industry or aviation industry. a lot of Russian worked in its software and semiconductor industry and automoblie design lead by Germans. while the rest every thing else learned in America.

http://www.asiamattersforamerica.org/southkorea/data/students/koreansinamerica
South Korea is the 3rd largest source of foreign students in the US, while the US is the 6th largest source of foreign students in Korea

su-35 is quoted with 6000 hour airframe lifetime by sukhoi, and that is “a dramatic increase” over su27 in their own words. So what is su-27’s normal lifetime? 4000 hours? over 30 years? and then adding 10 more years should be something like 1330 hours, not 2000 as the news above say. And if 10 year addition IS 2000 hours then the original is supposed to last 6000 hours with the new total being 8000 hours. Which, again, doesn’t mesh with 6000 hrs being a dramatic improvement by su35.

Past 30 years Su-27 was under used and certainly airframe was not calculated with strike weopons and higher performance engine/fbw.
Su-27SM is dramatic upgrade in sense that radar range can be more than twice and light weight avionics can increase range over 4000km.

I haven’t seen those wing tip pods on MIG-29. hence MIG-29 is less capable.

$2 billion sounds like old figures. Like the C-17, it is a costly platform with a price tag of over $333million/unit. Past the initial period smileys, these platforms are going to eat into the IAF and Indian budget for sure with the spares and maintenance.

India is the only ‘3rd world’ country operating the C-17 and with the Indian Rupee having the lowest purchasing power among all the operators of C-17s. it would be interesting to see what percentage of IAF budget these costly aircraft’s will be having in 10-15 years from now.

It seems IAF is turning into Arab airforce. start with Hawk trainer/C-130/C-17/A-330MRT/Rafale. This will proved to very costly to maintain and upgrade.

It will fly even higher with production engines and best options for high altitude operations.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/mi-38-sets-new-world-altitude-record-375811/
Mi-38 sets new world altitude record

That’d be stretching the definition of “rather current” quite a bit. While it certainly may be competitive to the World’s average, if one wants to compare it with that – it’s far from being competitive with what World’s premier air forces are procuring right now.

So su-30m2 is being procured as we speak for Ruaf. Lets see what is being procured for other strong air forces:
US: F-35, Superhornet.
UK, France: Typhoon, Rafale
China: j10b, j11b
Israel: currently preparing to get f-35, last orders were of F-16I
India: su-30mki, Tejas

India is closest i guess, but even there su30mki should be quite visibly more capable. Only Tejas might be seen as less capable…

Issues i have with su-30m2:
Its airframe is based on su-30 dating from end of Cold war.
Its engines are, performance wise, not much better than initial al-31f. Yes, they have longer life and perhaps better selfdiagnostics but all in all they’re still old Al-31s.
Its weight to thrust ratio is behind the most planes listed above at something like 28 tons / 247 kn of thrust (with 4,5 tons of fuel and 3 tons of ordenance/pylons)
Its range is poor compared to most planes listed above at 3000 km of ferry range. Translating probably into something like 1000ish km hi-hi mission with a few tons of ordenance.
Its radar still has an antenna of very old design, superseded in the West back in the 1980s. The back end of the radar is probably much newer but still – antenna must be holding it back quite a bit.
It has no visible missile approach warning system, as opposed to most other planes on the list.

Of course, in case i’m misinformed on some of these points, please do point it out. And yes, some systems can be replaced with newer variants. But that’s beside the point. Currently they’re what they are. Just as f-22 had older weapons for years, just typhoon lacked/lacks proper air to ground capabilities etc. In theory lots can be modernized. In practice, that’s a process that often takes 10-15 years.

Anyhow, I understand the political need for su-30m2 within ruaf, and as long as their numbers stay at what has been ordered so far it’ll be fine, as ruaf needs some trainers as well. The above lists are written on plane v plane merit, without the broader context. I actually have a bigger beef against su-30sm, which, while more modern than su30m2, still shares a lot of the same issues and, what is worse, does seem to be procured in far larger numbers.

I don’t see any political need for Su-30m2. rather quick build and inducted with all multifunctional capability. it will still outperform F-18E/Rafale/EF with loaded ordanance.

I think Su-30M2 has lighter avionics and airframe to get longer range than basic version. and engine can be upgraded at overhauls if not already.

http://www.ruaviation.com/news/2014/10/30/2699/
Su-30M2 – long-range multi-role fighter derived from Su-30 (Su-30MK2) jet, designed to destroy ground and surface targets with high-precision weapons. Compared to the basic version, Su-30M2 has longer range and more advanced avionics, A.Gordeev noted.

Or Putin may have slowed down the funding to PAK-FA considering the Russian export success wtih air defence systems and faster modernization of airdefence systems. importance of stealth fighter decreasing.

airdefence modernization at over 50% compared to 33% for airforce by end of this year.

http://in.rbth.com/news/2015/05/12/putin_prioritizes_task_to_keep_pace_of_armed_forces_modernization_43063.html
“Their share [of modern weapons] should reach 32% and 33% in the Army and the Air Force, correspondingly, 40% in the Airborne Troops and over 50% in the Navy and the Aerospace Defense Forces,” the Russian president said.

Only superior ground forces can effectively held the ground thats why they need faster modernization. Yemen airstrikes proves that point.

http://rbth.com/news/2015/05/13/putin_orders_serial_production_of_ground_forces_equipment_showcased_at_m_45993.html
Russian President Vladimir Putin has ordered that the Ground Forces equipment showcased at the May 9 parade in Moscow complete all tests as quickly as possible and go into serial production

Oh, as always you´re good, very good… Last time i´ve checked Switzerland was not part of the European Union.

A country does not need to be inside EU.

I doubt they put money in Swiss for storage there but more likely influencing EU for buying off FIFA/Olympics or firms. Renova/Oerlikon very active there.

EU is too small palace for Russian leaders. there is simply not enough land to build Sochi kind of imperial palace.

and even before best of times they were not willing to invest in EU let alone storing money there.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-05-11/russia-was-right-shale-in-europe-has-proved-a-dud