JSRI’d rather see Russia maintain global reach capacity, too. It keeps their enemies nervous. Europe should stop looking at Russia as the enemy and more as a market. The Ukraine and Poland should be prospering under joint Russia-EU trade, not quarreling. It’s a fools game in Europe. They are both under assault by the same ideology, one perpendicular to economic philosophies.
Real prosperity or fake prosperity.
http://www.dw.de/whats-behind-polands-emigration-wave/av-18176142
http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/innovation/policy/innovation-scoreboard/index_en.htm
http://in.reuters.com/article/2015/01/29/norway-oil-jobs-idINL6N0V83L020150129
Germany has pretty much destroyed rest of EU politics (every country is divided without strong leader), military, and buried them in debt and
incompetitiveness. I don’t think EU can become a military power and energy independent. it has no ability to deal with Middleast rather it is totally dependent on them just look at Airbus sales. Russia has chosen other partners not EU to fight them.
JSR1. I’m not sure the L159T was a turnkey solution, so it probably had too much lead time to introduction.
Its industrial supply chain was EU based
7. With drop in oil prices this has to hurt Russia.
Few billions dollar of weopons and training is not make difference to Russia but its far more important that Iraq production increase in safe environment.
JSRJSR insists Mi-28 and Ka-52 is cheaper than T-129, based on his assumption that mass production and high production rates will decrease its manufacturing costs. Fact is, cost will be dependent on contracted numbers, not desired numbers of their respective buyers. Mi-28N’s unit cost is determined for the number given the contract. In an extreme example, his point MAY had been true if there were only 4-5 T-129 were ordered, where all development costs would need to be added to cost of each helicopter, possibly exceeding the cost of Mi-28/Ka-52. With 60 helicopters on order, this is simply not the case.
writing so much nonsense. When i said mass production it means mass production across industrial supply chain not the final assembly. think harder you will get the answer.
If Russia were to order more Mi-28Ns, its unit costs would go down, and its also same for if more T-129 is ordered. However, Russia will not. It will buy upgraded Mi-28NM/UB variants, which will certainly have their own development costs, which will be reflected to unit cost WHEN their deals are signed. Turkey, however, will buy the same T-129 they are developing today accordingly to the agreement. (50 + 50 optional was the original agreement, order for 60 is signed, 40 is still optional). In any case, Mi-28N->NM costs will increase and T-129’s costs will go down. I really don’t see how Mi-28 will cost less than T-129. This was my point.
they don’t need order or disclose orders as long as industrial supply chain is working at optimum efficiency be it on Mi-171 or mi-38.
Well speaking of recent days, TAI produced 30 F-16 Block 50s in just over 14 months. (October 2011 to December 2012). If you are into pissing contest, how was your beloved MiG-29’s production rates were recently?
It is called dollar based imported assembling of F-16. you cannot even compare it to MIG-29 industrial chain. that industrial chain include 200 engine supplies to FC-1.
Seriously, just for one second put your idiotic nationalisim aside; For a brief period in late 80s, TAI pumped out 38 F-16s in 7 months, averaging at 5+ aircraft per month, which makes 60+ per year. As T-129 is a much simpler product than F-16, and from any reasonable point-of-view, TAI could possibly build all 56 in a one year if required.
my opinion always balanced and reasonable. I never consider assembly of imported parts as some kind of production efficiency. rather its waste of resources.
F-15 was never cheap to operate; Along with Su-27 and F-14, they were the most expensive fighters to operate back then.
F-15/Su-30 are always cheap to operate consider its long life span and reliability of twin engines compared to F-16/M2-K. infact Su-27 is the cheapest as its sorties can be of long duration.
Funny thing is, I had specifically selected F-15E and Yak-130 for their weight relations. Operating F-15E (14300kg) is more expensive than Yak-130 (4600kg) because it has 3.1 times the weight, as you admit. How operating a Mi-28 (7890kg) is LESS expensive than T-129 (2530kg) despite having 3.15 times the weight? This kind of logic is the prime reason why people tend to ignore you, and so should I.
F-15E of 14.3 tons weight will have 1000 hrs life span. It is no less than 20tons in modern version like F-15K. 4 times weight of Yak-130 with much more range due to CFT. don’t rely on unreliable Wikipedia.
JSRempty Mi-28NM is 7000 kg while max loaded t129 is 4000 kg:confused::confused::confused:
this is a lot less than 14 ton difference between F-15E and Yak-130.
JSR@JSR According to your logic F-15E is cheaper to operate than Yak-130 because its more mass produced, and shares its engines with F-16.
F-15 was cheap in era when over 200 F-16 were produced in a year. and F-15 is 4 times the weight of Yak-130. There is not much difference in weight between T-129 and Mi-28NM.
By the way, if we are to ignore usual “Russia will buy”s and look at the SIGNED orders, currently T-129 have more signed orders than either Mi-28 or Ka-52.
It is not the signed orders but yearly production rates that matter Turkey can sign up for 1000 helicopters but it may take 1000 years to produce.
JSRCost of initial purchase and then subsequent cost of maintenance and flying hours are both an extremely important factor when choosing a heli-gunship type – as it is with fixed combat types. Both Mi-28 and Ka-52 are the heaviest gunships out there – both are probably twice the empty weight of either a Tiger or T129 so I would imagine costs are also much greater as well. Not to mention the costs involved fitting radars to helis – especially AESA radars…
Mi-28 and Ka-52 will be cheap to operate considering engines are shared with mi-171/Mi-38.
Tiger and T129 have very low production rate and will be out of production sooner than Mi-28/Ka-52 upgrades.
Any thing built in EU can become out of production sooner.
JSRIf the boycott failed, why are Russians facing big increases in food prices, massive capital flight, & other signs of a major economic crisis?
The Chinese haven’t replaced western customers for Russian goods, or western suppliers for Russian imports. Transport links, & wrong products: China doesn’t export the same things, & in the short-term there are tight limits on how much more Russian oil & gas it can take. There is also the matter of self-inflicted damage by Putin’s reaction to the sanctions, & capital flight, neither of which the Chinese have done anything about. Their ‘support’ hasn’t made much difference. As far as I can see, it consists of talk, in exchange for which Russia has sold China up to date weapons it had previously withheld, buying Russian oil & gas at a discount, & trade denominated in renminbi instead of dollars, which by a happy chance loads all the exchange rate risk on Russia, & none of it on China. To me, it looks more like China cashing in on Russia’s weakness than giving support.
It will take a while for you understand economics. infact it eliminated Ukraine as low cost producers of weopons as competitor. and provide much more people for employment in Russian enterprizes.
http://gulfnews.com/opinions/columnists/obama-s-bravado-on-russia-has-a-hollow-ring-1.1446582
And sanctions have made it all but impossible for Russian entities to borrow in the West, causing Russia’s external debt to shrink to $599.5 billion from $728.9 billion at the beginning of last year. In the medium term, this might just make Russia more resilient to external shocks.
There is no exchange risks in Chinsese currency when iCrap is made in China and contribute to China trade surplus.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/economics/china-trade-surplus-soars-459pc-in-2014/story-e6frg926-1227183285543?nk=76fe23a37c7eaf9cc779e73b0ed15f19
China trade surplus soars 45.9pc in 2014
JSR@Isengard
Does Zelin know what the maximum speed of the F-22 is, much less the J-20 (which is still in the prototype stage). Higher g-load? From what I’ve read the T-50 is rated for 9 g, just like the F-22 and presumably the J-20.And of course the head of the VVS would claim that they have superior platforms. It’s just about as credible as some USAF general calling the T-50 4.5 gen. Note that he didn’t actually specify any parameters. Frankly, you’re really not adding anything to this discussion.
Also, Berkut, I’m pretty sure Acatomic is right. Compare to the canopy of T-50-4, there’s definitely a difference in the rear part.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]234848[/ATTACH]
Most fighters are rated at 9g it does not mean they have the same top speed, acceleration, ,altitude. and by this time it is pretty much given they will know from shape of F-22/J-20 how much drag it will generate. J-20 does not have TVC implementation.
JSR.
Note to self: never take internet knowledge as fact, look at the manual before typing. BTW, I am think the centerline tank MiG-29K carries is not 1500l tank, its larger. 2150 liter was what I’ve read, can anyone confirm this??
so internet knowledge is inferior to obsolete manual. think harder if MIG-29K has 3 1500L tanks. that is 3600kg external fuel. add to that 4800 of internal fuel. that is more efficient than clean Su-30MK.
JSRUtter rubbish.
– Euro variability over the years has been in the +/-10% range.
– Norway is not a member of the EU.
– Unlike other oil producing countries, Norway is remarkably prudent with revenues from oil sales, a large portion of which is squirreled away in savings for the future.
I have good idea about soverign wealth fund of Norway it is invested where other Oil rich countries soverign wealth funds are invested. once they start drawing down there own by selling assets. the value for norweign investments will go down very fast.
simple Norway oil industry cannot exist below $70 oil for extended period of time. and soverign wealth fund can evaporate in less than 4 years with low prices and high spending.
JSF is long term expense beyond 2019.
JSRBetween Poland and the Ukraine, Russia had a broad buffer zone between itself and the West. There is no excuse for the EU not to transfer in freebies to counter the naked aggression. The sad thing is that Russia has to weaken its frontier forces elsewhere to reinforce the rebels. So at what cost is Russia waging this war? Obviously, it’s a high cost when Russian officials are propping up Putin’s image by declaring all Russians will have less to rally around their leader.
If you look at from economics. this conflict highly beneficial to Russia.
EU is using its budgets to prop up bankrupt countries instead of rearming itself.
It will decreased EU exports by over $200b to Russia/Ukraine and all CIS.
Euro going down that is devaluing the value of investments of Norway/Arabs inside EU.
More nuclear reactors for Iran means more Oil-Gas free to export.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-30015464
More Russia energy exports to China means. China is in better bargaining position to press Arabs.
http://www.icn.com/en/globalhighlights/2014/12/30/china-to-accelerate-free-trade-agreements-with-gcc-members/index.aspx
China is said to step up talks of free trade agreements (FTA) with six Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries, according to state media as it seeks to cut costs on its imports from the region, mainly energy.
Less money for Arabs/Norway the further Euro is going down.
JSRRun your mouse over that chart again. The grid is a little misleading. The NOK didn’t dip below 0.18 until well into the third quarter. If you take the average exchange rate for the first half of the year, you’ll find it hovering close to 0.195.
While there’s no competition when it comes to operating costs, on plain acquisition the gap between the two aircraft in 2019 will be a lot narrower than one would have guessed a couple of years ago (going by the costs associated with the Swiss proposal).
for Norway Euro based fighers are better Euro will certainly go down. infact if Oil stays this low for two years. Norway currency will depreciate 90% turning it into poorest country of EU. so there is no point at looking 2019.
JSR2020 and not even any mention of RD-33MKM.
WWSD? (What Would Stalin Do?)
Why would they spell out every component. By keeping it in perpetual R&d it can potentially offer export updated and faster.MIG-29K still in production.
JSRBecause of Turkey’s ‘lack of support for Israel’ – unlike, of course, Morocco. :highly_amused:
Morocco is moderate country it has the king palace.
JSRTo quote from your source:
Why would the IAF be shipping the mission computer to Russia for servicing, isn’t it actually sourced from India itself, a home-grown product? The same goes for the cockpit displays – aren’t they French or Israeli sourced?
Either report is wrong by blaming others or it shows India incapable of upgrade and integration work on Sukhoi. This unbelievable claiming 100% TOT transfer and cannot overhaul the same plane after 20 years in service.
Sign In
