which reflects the bigger problem of factories producing their own rogue variants and the state pouring money in buying different versions of the same aircraft in order to keep its workforce employed.
you don’t see Boeing’s Long Beach plant and Macon plant making their own C-17 variants.

You need independent factories and atleast two to three engine and radar manufactures. Its big risk to depend the entire airforce on single factory. All kind of issues from labor unrest to, natural disaster to espionage can happen at single factory.

well duh sherlock, we all know the su-35 is better than the su-30MKI. that was never the question
its a matter if the su-30MKI can meet the same job demands.

India cannot afford Su-35 at this point. as it will require separate licensing and pilot training will be different as cockpit and performance levels different.

And do you think Russia would survive if oil and other resources prices plummeted or if the economy collapsed again or if there’s was a coup or a Martian invasion?

Just because Malaysia does assembly work doesn’t means it’s not a stable country.

Given USSR’s implosion in 1991, civil war in Chechnya and to a lesser degree Dagestan, large scale terror attacks in USSR, male life excpectancy down to about 56 years due to chronic alcoholism, massive corruption cases, ethnic tensions between Cossacks and Muslims, I’d say Russia is just as unstable as Turkey, Malaysia and Indonesia and potentially more unstable.

Next USA will be a poorer country than Russia/China because it had the Civil War,

These are some of the daftest posts I’ve ever seen. Are the forumites being infested with Scooterism?

Russia does not need foreign money or labor to dig out of the hole from USSR implosion. It repaid all the foreign debts. All big corporations are in Russian control. New police force trained just 40,000 for Olympics alone. huge investments in long term scientific innovations & infrastructure. Even i will forecast Russia will not need Suez canal and Malacca straits in few years. Once Russia does not need them. it will be better able to squeeze them more. I am not even going into Military investments that will practically change thw world.

Chinese are very mercantile they understand what Russia has to offer them compared to rest of the world. Thats why no matter how much Arabs/Turks plead China. there answer is always No on Syria.
.
.

Turkey isn’t in the same category as Israel, & they should not be considered together. It’s viewed differently. It’s also already pissed off with Syria for shooting down one of its aircraft, & the deaths of Turkish citizens in cross-border shelling (to which the Turks reply in kind, but more so) & car bombs. The prime minister seems rather keen to back US action.

I don’t think we can rule out Turkish involvement.

Turkish PM is not just backer he actually want to participate in strike as he think Obama strike will be not strong enough to close this thing in reasonable time but he lost 25% of his currency value despite spending 25% of foreign reserves thats without some one turning energy screws.

it is unresonable to expect any export order for Su-35. as Ruaf deliveries are still very slow. it is the new weopon system that may have Chinese interest.

You know I sometimes wonder about the fantasy world you live in JSR. Only you would think that a war that led to the death of fourteen and a half thousand Soviet troops and a humiliating withdrawal was a huge success.

I dont live in fantasy world but more realistic assessment. humiliating withdrawl means you run away from battlefield and sign surrender document which is not the case. That was very orderly withdrawl and Afghan government survived for 3 years after that. This despite that USSR has incompetent leadership at that time and there wasnt any new innovations introduced into battlefield. there was lack of hard currency to buyoff loyalties on grand scale.

That thing also cleared the perception about certain things permanently in post Soviet space. China also learned valuable lesson. see its behaviour from Xinjiang to syria. That war has very big consequence down the road in Middleast.

some people still not learning from experiance.

http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/mccain-saying-allahu-akbar-is-like-saying-thank-god.html

Actually most of the Israeli fighters with Mirage IIICJs delivered in 1960s. Generally comparable to a MiG-21 and technically MiG-21MF was more modern.

i dont see how they are comparable. as you dont know the pilots flying hours in the theatre. Israelis has alot of experiance in that neigborhood. I dont think in those times that much computer and simulators that creates realistic scenarios in all terrains for pilot training.

Not if your opponent is an incompetent tyro. It’s kinda like the Wehrmacht smashing Red Army in early 1941. Certainly no 3 to 1 numerical superiority there.

when there is no fight so the competency does not arise.

And this is why you got your butts kicked in Afghanistan and then initially in Chechnya.

By the way American intel on Afghanistan was also crap.

Afghanistan was huge Soviet Success. infact that Soviet experiance gained in Afghan war prevented further rise in islamism. thats why you see so many pipelines built in CIS now in safety. while Middleast is in flames and more depended on tankers. Nato is lucky that Russia didnot create hell for them in Afghanistan.

All this is irrelevant to the following facts:

1. USSR deployed Soviet MiG-21 regiment (135th) to show the Egyptians how to fight against Israelis.
2. In a massed dog fighter on 30/07/13, 16 IDF/AF aircraft (4 F-4, 12 Mirage III) engage 24 Soviet MiGs. 5 Soviet MiGs are shot down and only 1 Mirage damaged.

Quite humiliating for Soviets.

MIG-21 is short range fighter. you cannot expect much more than that against trained F-4. you pick one instance and make claims about it. so now your going to extrapolate MIG-31BM performance against F-16 from MIG-21 fight against F-4?

Georgian military was about 18,000 strong (with 2,000 deployed to Iraq).

Russian forces were 19,000 backed up by 8,000 South Ossettians and Abkhazians. They had a 2:1 advantage in armour.

Even if your figure are true. you need 3 to 1 advantage and in mountanous area much more to defeat comprehensively. it is not some big advantage.

Russians had complete numerical superiority with multiple regiments of SU-24/-25/-27/Tu-22M compared to Georgia with 10 or so Su-25s as well as large army aviation and ballistic missile support (an Iskander strike wiped out a third of Georgia’s armour when a base was hit by it).

Those were deployed much late and without regard to any intelligence.

Already discussed:

Poor C3I
Poor infantry performance
Poor logistical performance
Poor suppression of enemy AD (e.g. you lost a Tu-22)
Etc etc etc

still Georigian wind up in 3 days in much harder terrian. I guess with same weopons Poland will be defeated in two days.

Given Russia views the whole of the Caucasus as it’s own sphere of influence and was worried about NATO encroachment via Georgia, it’s clear that Georgia and South Ossetia were important.

Russia alot of places as important. It does not mean every thing can be equiped and trained at same time.

If you can’t keep tabs on potential enemy’s military capability and plan on neutralising it, then that’s poor planning.

Especially when that enemy is a neighbouring country with which you have already had altercations with and who is chumming up with your number 1 enemy, the USA.

There are so many other countries. Russia can always smash Georgia so no need to keep tab. You only keep tab on things where you expect some competitive fight.

You know Iraq smashed Kuwait in 3 days too and Kuwait had a better airforce, AD system and army than Georgia.

And then the Iraqis got steamrollered and their once proud military obliterated.

Kuwait was flat ground and almost entire Iraq force went down there. You make small instance and extra polate.