JSRUnlike Saudi Arabia, China is well over 9 million square kilometers not counting Taiwan and South Tibet. China is a major political opponent of America on the world stage, Saudi Arabia is not.
so you think Saudi king control less area and people than China?. infact Saudi wields more power than China.
JSROkay, so what would be “higher mach?” And how does that somehow suggest Mach 2.5+?
how many aircraft in world that can launch ARM for 20km height and have speed less than Mach 2.5. that 20km may be understatement for export purpose.
lower speed top speed is usually associated with lower altitude performance.
JSRAlso, since this is not the PAK FA’s definitive engine can I assume that the production variant with the 117(?), will have its huge exposed engine area somehow shrouded?
why it matter for engine area. T-50 is supposed to fly higher where any missile launches against it will be seen by network of long range radars at blast off stage. i would think long range cruise missile has low rcs and very small engine burn compared to AAM.
JSRT-50 is too expensive for SK budget. I dont think Russia is going to sell T-50 below F-35 price. and certainly it will be downgraded for export. There is S400 near to NK. more as deterrance.
.
NK is source of labor for FarEast so Russia may even not want the two koreas to unite and lose that source of labor.
JSRSu-24 is roughly comparable to Tornado GR1. It is no F-111.
Su-24 is some where in the middle of Tornado and F-111. Su-24 carries much heavier loads to longer distance.
JSREspecially if KFX is delayed or enters a cost death spiral, which given low numbers involved is a risk.
Given current Korean AF, I wouldn’t be surprised if they turned out to be a major F-35 user and one of the few operating more than 100 airframes (and possibly 200+ to replace F-4 by 2020, F-16 by 2030 and then F-15K).
I think Turkey will go the same way – $33 billion for 200 TFX sounds insane. Instead I expect up to 250 F-35s.
Turkey and Korea F-35 is hot air. see the size of there military budgets.
JSRBudgets are budgets though and very few countries have billions just lying around collecting interesting. Pulling an extra $2 billion dollars or so means something else got scrapped or delayed.
South Korea by this time already knew how much F-35 will cost. there is small orders of Japan and Israel as example.
there was no point of price cap and now all of sudden delay this thing for an year.
JSRI just want to know how they can just pull the extra billions out of their butts.
Surely that has ramifications somewhere.
.
you mean south korea. well they have been building factories left and right in China. so cheap labor and huge market. very unreliable way of money.
I dont think they can afford 60 F-35 thats why they have to restart the competition and will buy the planes at much slower pace.
otherwise no need to put artificial price caps.
JSRMach 2.6 huh, sure… [Citation needed]
Variable intake ramps mean nothing in and of itself. MiG-29 and Su-35S with intake ramps have max speed of Mach 2.25.
There is indirect confirmation of kh-58ushke one of primary weopon of T-50 can be launched from 20km altitude.
http://ktrv.ru/production/68/653/804/
higher mach aircraft tend to perform well at higher altitude loaded.
JSRDry thrust on the F110-GE-132 = 19,100 lb – as fitted to Block 60 F-16 of the UAE air force. I would imagine 19,100 lb dry thrust is not far off from the 117S dry thrust figure. How good a supercruiser is the Block 60?
blck 60 is overweight and draggier platform. if you put that engine in F-16A it may supercruise. the unique characterisitc of Su-35 is it didnot increase the weight and drag.
JSRAs a rule of thumb, the total numbers of all T-50 built over 40 years production lifespan could be roughly from 1/2 to 2/3rds of the Su-27 series. That makes ca 810 Su-27s + ca 480 Su-30s + say 100 Su-35s + 120 odd Su-34s = between 750 and 1000 T-50s serving in Russia, India, Algeria, Vietnam, maybe even Kazakhstan….
Cannot see much demand elsewhere.. My 0.02 only
I dont think any of the export customers can afford T-50 at this time except for Kazakhstan.
1. Su-27 production has to compete with MIG-29/MIG-31/Su-25/Su-24 for funds.
2. Su-27 entered produciton near the tail end of Soviet system where funding practically dried up.
3. Su-27 production faced low productivity of Soviet labor and lack of automation.
4. there is also dysfuncitonal soviet leadership from 15 republics. see Su-25 factory example in Tiblisi. There is no effort in consolidation. now $100b for consolidation into East.
http://en.rian.ru/russia/20130903/183148882.html
5. There is also lack of hard currency in USSR that inhibit it to employe western labor/systems/software/intelligence on scale that Russia is employing.
see Siemens Team center software example.
T-50 is much more verstile plan than Su-27 from the start. It will take the role of cruise and billistic missile defence. Also perception of threat level. Russia facing much higher threat level than USSR facing at the time. so much larger quantity is needed.
JSRIf the UK needed to build a transport on its own it could and it could afford it. In 2010-2011 the UK gave up 7.9 billion pounds per year in over seas aid and in 2012-2013 it was 9.1 billion pounds per year and it set to be 9.1 billion pounds in 2014 which works out to be 43 billion pounds or 68.8 billion dollars and this dose not include the 160 billion pounds the UK has set aside for the next 10 years
When we put this in to context A400m has cost 20 billion Euros Boeing’s 787 cost’s 32 billion dollars KC-390 has cost 12-14 billion dollars so far
It is also important to point out that that the UK paid China 2.5 billion pounds and India 1.25 billion pounds in Aid in this time and in the same time these countries have spent billion’s on arms
KC-390 is merely assembling and testing of existing components so development costs are low. initial order of 28 planes is still not signed. production rate is low.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/19/us-embraer-kc390-insight-idUSBRE98I0BW20130919
The defense ministry is investing heavily in the KC-390 program: $2 billion of development costs, plus a contract for 28 planes, which should be signed within the next six months.
787 has close to 1000 orders and industrial-design-material chain willing to invest heavily to supply to Boeing (Japan-Italy-Russia).
who is going to invest for KC-390. when order book is so low.
JSRI’d say 40 Tankers is just right for VVS.
But how it makes your brain calculate some 1000-1500 Pak-Fa’s is a mistery..
it does not take rocket scientist to estimate that. 40 Tankers is a subset of IL-476 production chain that will include A-100 awacs. Cargo lifters for private airlines and some exports and not only that but same production supply chain will responsible for MTA with same engine set. so this thing is continous multi decade process.
Now Su-30SM production and procurement will stops before 2020. same thing will happen to Su-34/Su-35. All current aircrafts like MIG-31/Su-27/MIG-29/Su-24 will start retiring in post 2020 period.
only low cost subsonic UCAV is possible in post 2020 period.
T-50 will be exclusive air to air platform in that period with continous production as every thing is invested for that aircraft from new engines to radar. I dont think any one is going to redesign Su-30 for Type 30 engine.
first let US built a supercruise UCAV with 360 degree air to air functions.
JSROmg.. this is becoming painstaking tedious..
I allready pointed out that the total figure of units within VVS will be less, conciderable less than we have seen a few years ago. VVS New doctrine are focusing on increased capability(imo smart systems and platform) much like other western AF, but the Down side is a smaller AF.
If VVS has about 90-100 Mig-31, 250 Flankers, 100 Mig 29 and 260 Su-24(we allready know there will be less Su-34 replacing the Su-24’s).
And a good deal of these will be scraped in this decade. Then where is the aviable funding and infrastructure for 1000-1500 Pak-Fa!???
Ffs, get a grip! VVS has abanomed a large numbers of AB to make their AF more dynamic, less costly and more up to the future task and requirements.SU had a pretty ****ty Refuling priority back in the days. They had so many units to pull out from reserves and put on service that they was not depended on Tankers.
But the New VVS doctines in the future require a much larger Tanker fleet, due to change of Doctrines. IMO Russia want their AF to be able to Reach over the entire globe, more or less.
Those 40 Air refuellers are not coming before 2020.
first 48 IL-476 order expected to be completed by 2020. including some airframes for A-100 AWACS. than potentially PD-14 powered IL-476 in post 2020 period.
http://defenseupdates.blogspot.com/2013/02/russia-to-receive-48-il-476-il-76md-90a.html
The Russian Air Force is to receive 48 IL-476 / IL-76MD-90A instead of the 39 previously reported. Last October, a $4 billion contract with the United Aircraft Corporation was signed for the delivery of 39 IL-476 aircraft by 2020.
http://www.aviastar-sp.ru/press_center/company_news/1086/
“Today, our assembly and aggregate power plants already possible to produce up to 6.8 aircraft per year. According to targets set by us of United Aircraft Corporation (UAC), by 2018 we will have to go to power 18 aircraft sets per year “, – said General Director of” Aviastar-SP “Sergey Dementiev.
It is illogical to invest in long term production facilities if you are going to stop procurement after 2020. These things have 4 to 5 years lead time.
so post 2020 Ruaf structure which has nothing to do with current disbanding of aircraft and airbases.
JSR40 tankers are not even enough for Su-34/Su-35 fleet. These planes of large internal fuel capacity. and considering drag of heavy external loads. it will need every bit of fuel.
Sign In
