What aircraft has an 11 ton MTOW? Surely you’re not confusing Typhoon empty weight with MTOW? Oh wait, of course you are.:stupid: Still waiting for evidence of how these lighter electronics will increase Su-27 range by 40%, which is what’s required to make the Typhoon’s internal fuel range ratio 60%.

Su-34 has 11 ton greater MTOW than Su-35. based on Sukhoi website they both carry identical weopon load. what is the logic behind that?. Su-34 lacks TVC. so that factor should reduce its weight right? and where is the specification for Su-27SM3?. as according to your statement every thing should be on the website.
you don’t have any official figures for Typhoon range with 6AAM on internal fuel. so quit posting any claims regarding it. and what is the weight of Typhoon with electronic scanning radar.

Even if Saudi Arabia sold every projected barrel of its oil right now, it still wouldn’t equal the combined value of a single year’s GDP for the US and EU alone, let alone the combined value of all the industries.

Saudi Arabia owns your GDP. you can produce GDP but you cant own it. You don’t have savings to keep interest rates low below real inflation for credit markets. think about all those housing loans.

Load capacity hasn’t got **** to do with anything. Only you brought that up, I simply said it was irrelevant. I backed up everything I said wrt RCS with sources. Engine power LOL. How does that factor into range?

rcs with sources? who are those independent scientific sources that use same radar for tracking, same payload, speed. (heat signature), electronic warfare power to come to rcs conclusion?. engine power. think about diesel engine. the low rpm enable it high efficiency. more powerful engine means less revolution needed.

Marginally smaller at best. 8% on wingspan and 10% length and 3% on weight but the Su-35 contains 12% more fuel. And it doesn’t mean that the same technology has been applied to the Su-35. I didn’t see anything about an Su-35 update, no official change in range figures, which prospective buyers would be more than interested in.

Stealth planes are way heavier relative to conventional planes due to internal volume for weopons/sensors and higher performance loaded envelope. if you don’t see external fuel tanks after years of testing on Su-35 it means they have achieved 4500km range without need of external fuel tanks.

All that oil and still little productivity and lower GDP, not to mention that lack of infrastructure.

lack of infrastructure, low productivity. why they need productivity when they are already wealthy. productivity is for countries like Japan to keep them afloat.
.
KSA are spending over $3trillion on infrastructure.
http://www.arabiangazette.com/saudi-mena-construction-infrastructure/

they gave $400b to Turkey. Compare Greece with Turkey.
http://www.saudigazette.com.sa/index.cfm?method=home.regcon&contentID=2010040268135

$100b on Nuclear reactor
http://www.politicalforum.com/latest-us-world-news/209719-saudi-arabia-spend-over-100b-16-nuclear-reactors-ex-envoy.html
There are hundreds of billions in arms contracts. and hundreds of billions in aid to countries starting from Egypt all the way to Malaysia.

Yeah and you’ve been almost exclusively wrong on everything you’ve said, along with the other idiots who suggested the Typhoon only had 60% of the range of an Su-27 on internal fuel.

I am exclusively right in estimation. you should not compare Typhoon with Flanker built with 21st century technology and funding.

Sorry, but what has India to do with all that ???? …

I mean to say India thinks Russia is not only providing airplanes but a lot more involved.

and to be correct (please read again) I did not question the usefullnes of these fighters in general only or better to say especially they are without a special sense for fighting against rebels like ISIS troops. For that the Su-25 is surely the best one but types like “Rimos” mentioned (MiG-29M2, MiG-29SMT, Su-24 and Su-34) are plain stupid. Combat helicopters are surely much more usefull than supersonic fighters but for rebels, which simply hide in urban areas none of these are truely effective if You care about civilians.

Deino

Su-25 is usefull for tactical advances city by city but it still cannot solve Irak problem. that problem is way bigger that need practically every aircraft that Russia can sell with addition of active Ruaf participation.

So what are you saying here? The Su-35 still uses Soviet ere electronics? I can’t really figure out what your point is.

did I said this. upgrade reading comprehension. I said that avionics for 2008 Su-35S will not be the same as avionics for Su-35 in 2014 that’s due to tremendous investment in semiconductor industry by Russia.

Last I looked GDPs suggested we were doing okay relative to Russia.

I gave you hint of Noway. no two countries measure the same GDP let alone continents. compare China GDP with Japan. Saudi with Turkey.

The reason they don’t publish empty weights is because it allows people to work out loaded weights, which in turn give TWRs below 1.0, which is embarassing.

As I said those are paper specification. Su-35 can lift on wing tips as much as EF on centre line. Just look at Electronic pod size on Su-30/Su-34. The centerline may lift as much 2.5 to 3 tons Brahmos. The whole plane is designed from ground up for much heavier loads across various weopon stations.

And what about the Su-35? Is that still using Soviet era avionics too when it gets 4,500km with 11.5t of internal fuel and 3t of external fuel (5.1t more than the Su-27 in total). And the Typhoon’s range on internal fuel comes out just below 60% of this ferry range even before tank drag is factored in.

Su-35 started with Soviet era avionics. you have to understand Russia has vast budget that’s why it simultaneously develop MESA/PESA/AESA for fighters. and each new batch has tremendous capability difference. Su-35 design they thought they may need ETs but now with advanced engines and light weight materials. it does not need it. so you wont see operational Su-35 picture with fuel tanks. as its range is already 4500 without out ET.

Doesn’t make any difference. You’re just being disingenuous. We could claim the Typhoon figures are for export models too if we went down that route. Su-35 weighs about 10% more empty, some dispute that. It also has TVC to improve range by reducing drag though.

Typhoon developers has limited budget and technical ability. they cannot create fundamentally different export model.

MTOW has nothing to do with range. The Typhoon’s stated MTOW may just be what it’s so far qualified to carry. Anymore than 16,000lbs of load on a fighter is getting a bit silly anyway.

I’ll say again, there’s no possible way a Typhoon’s range on internal fuel comes out to only 60% that of an Su-27. It’s impossible.

MTOW is the key figure to find the empty weight of aircraft. SU-30MKI is 38.8tons. Su-34 is 45tons. Su-35 is 34.5 tons. Su-27SM is 33tons. these are vastly different aircraft in combat performance.
large electronic pods is the single most thing in aircraft.
just look at EA-18G export price for Australia and that aircraft already benefit from F-18E support infrastructure.

Better tell that to all those mercenaries who have been flying ex Soviet jets around the world for the last few decades.

completely irrelevant. this is very well funded high tempo conflict and who know Saudi AWACs/Airforce guiding the rebels. Those jets are going to Southern Irak.

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2014/06/28/world/politics-diplomacy-world/iraq-lawmakers-urged-to-make-quick-deal-on-new-prime-minister/#.U66vlBsg-po

Neither of us can possibly know about the availability of the Iranian airforce, I was making an idle speculation.

considering the sorties generated by Mi-171 and Mi-35M. it is reasonable to assume Iran cannot provide the helicopter support on same scale. if Iran not capable with helicopter support. this is very little difference it can make on fighter sortie generation.

I was speculating on what they could offer, not what they will offer if at all…this is a forum you know. As for Oil “Blah Blah Blah…usual JSR waffle”!

Oil is the thing that make US hesitant.. Russia does not have such compulsion. infact this whole fast operational delivery of jets may enable cutoff Oil supply to Turkey.
http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2014_06_27/Russia-to-seek-ban-on-oil-export-from-terrorist-groups-held-Iraqi-and-Syrian-territories-3757/

They cancelled the helicopter purchase and re-did it properly…so I was right there. They are buying the L159 ALCA, so I was right there. As for the F-16, I was making a general point about the usefulness of precision fast air. If you read back I have already said I doubt they will be delivered. If the F-16 “WAS” is service it would be useful, it isn’t hence an observation…please try and keep up.

It was media speculation that you fall for it. Mi-35M is additional order. the rest of orders like Korean T-50 and Czech L159 remain to be seen. F-16 not in service because deliveries are slow. you constantly ignored this slow delivery part for years and still babbling about usefulness.

Another thing to note is even if he does get some fast jets in the next week or two (not impossible – it has happened before usually via the Ukraine) the only way that they could be put into combat quickly is with mercenaries.

mercernaries means retired soldiers which simply cannot handle the task. Irak needs active pilots that are trained on advanced simulators and active flying, can use communication system with air to air and air to ground operations. mechanics that can maintain aircraft for round the clock the sorties. and basically unlimited supplies of missiles/rockets.

Or if Iran was so inclined airstrikes by their Fencers and Phantoms would be useful.

Iran airforce cannot maintain sorties for such spread out area.

If the US does decide to intervene with Airstrikes, the B-1B with its massive precision bomb load and supersonic capability would be highly effective if forward air controllers could be put on the ground.

highly doubt US can or want to do much. It was possible in 2003 when Oil was cheap now it is 2014.

On the other hand those F16 would be rather handy at the moment and not for the reason that everybody has been getting so hung up over on this forum. The precision strike capability those F-16 offer is far more useful currently then what air to air missiles they carry!

even more predictions. how was your predictions about corruption in Irak helicopter purchase or Czech trainer usefulness. so how come these F-16 can become usefull when only two or so can be delivered in months with limited weopons.

Dumbest statement ever.

why it is dumb statement?. I already shown you China example of building J-20/Flanker series. India is another example of going top heavy planes. Saudi is another example. The bottom line is those who have money always go for bigger planes in larger numbers.

The Su-27’s ferry range is just that. Ferry range with 2 tanks (3 ton total) only. The Typhoon manages “>2000nmi” ferry range with 3 1000L tanks. If you divide both by total fuel and times by internal fuel, the Su-27 ends up needing 83% internal fuel to match a Typhoon on full internal fuel but that doesn’t take into account the greater difference in weight and drag when you take the 3 tanks off the Typhoon relative to removing 2 from the Su-27, or the “>”. So in all likelihood, the Su-27 will need about 90% internal fuel for it to be equal.

You cannot make up the numbers. Su-27SK (aircraft older engines and avionics than Su-27SM) has 3530 ferry range with 4AAM. (equal to 6 western AAMs in weight). where you get this number of Typhoon with 6AAM and 3 drop 1000L drop tanks?. where is external tanks on SU-27SK.

No one said anything about external loads. Typhoon overweight? J-10?:highly_amused::stupid: Funny how the Typhoon is the only aircraft that can get from brakes off to Mach 1 in <30s clean with a full fuel load.

http://www.baesystems.com/enhancedarticle/BAES_156125/typhoon?_afrLoop=1286601462051000&_afrWindowMode=0&_afrWindowId=null&baeSessionId=THnLTnQb2nvDn3TMs0sm58TGY0rB7zchf1QyQQyQqPyzzyjNsdMp!-1651352847#%40%3F_afrWindowId%3Dnull%26baeSessionId%3DTHnLTnQb2nvDn3TMs0sm58TGY0rB7zchf1QyQQyQqPyzzyjNsdMp%2521-1651352847%26_afrLoop%3D1286601462051000%26_afrWindowMode%3D0%26_adf.ctrl-state%3D9x58rukoi_4

Show me another aircraft that can.

This website claim. which does not mean other cannot do it. just look at paris airshow Su-35 takeoffs or J-10. They all surpass EF. it is good that you drop reduced RCS EF claim.