JSRIts interesting story. Those IL-96 were parked in Uganda since Russia
sold them $744m worth of aircraft.
http://www.newvision.co.ug/news/641195-russia-used-entebbe-as-security-base-sources.html
JSRBangla land is generally closer to China and also anti-India.
I would believe its much more likely they would buy L-15 over Yak-130.
L-15 is highly unlikely as it is not adopted by PLAAF. JF-17 has some chance due to common engine with MIG-29.
http://indrus.in/world/2013/01/18/hasinas_visit_russia_edges_out_china_from_bangladesh_21715.html
JSRFrom what i can read on posted document, RVV-BD can engage targets pulling 8g… Rafale operational flight envelope is given 9g, and is pulling more then 10.5 g in demos…
You can also read from same document that RVV-BD range is limited to 200km for export. so that 8g figure is also likely limit for public. and you dont know what kind of aircraft is that 8g figure. as pulling 9g in Flanker with TVC will be entirely different than 9g in F-16.
I am sure no heavy external jamming pod or ET involved in 9g . so that 9g figure has very limited practical value.
F-18E is limited to 7.6g and i believe EA-18G is even more operational limitd.
The older versionof R-77 have Mach 3.6 intercept capability. R-37 had Mach 6 intercept capability more than a decade ago. so it is reasonably assumed that bigger missile have more burn time and much higher speed to approach target that gives much more flexibility in time management to the firing platform.
There is also lack of confidence on missiles like Meteor. very slow production rate. and rich export customers like UAE/Saudi are not rushing to adopt it.
100 MIG-31BM will get RVV-BD as its primary weopon. and other planes will be getting the same missile. Your simply mistaken that MBDA can spent more money on Meteor/Mica (with its limited quanity) than Russia can spent in improving R-77/RVV-BD.
http://en.rian.ru/russia/20120124/170929008.html
http://english.ruvr.ru/2012/01/31/65019117/
The RVV-BD missile will replace the R-33E long-range air-to-air guided missile which is the basic weapon of the MiG-31 interceptor, Obnosov explains. As for the new missile, it will also be carried by the PAK FA fifth-generation fighter jet. The all-weather RVV-BD is designed to destroy fighters, attack aircraft, bombers and cruise missiles
Equipped with an active warning and radar system, the missile has high maneuverability and optical jamming immunity. It is capable of effectively eliminating enemy targets from all aspects and against all ground and water surfaces. Additionally, the missile is equipped with a multichannel launch system based on the launch-and-forget principle
JSRYou do bolster my claim as long as you give no real specific data and stick to general claims. Please forget it as your assumptions show.
I didnot made any claim these are specifications based on manufacture data. which is backed by real world production figures of various components.
do you even understand that Australia decision of EA-18G growler.
higher altitude and high top speed plane has decisive advantage in air combat. otherwise why keep MIG-31BM and F-22. or you think bulider of smaller planes know aircombat better. offcourse there is RVV-BD missile that will prevent Rafale with ET flyings.
JSRI don’t question Su-35, i have seen air shows what it is capable of in the hands of an expert, (Yes, it is stunning performance)
but looking at history, the pilot quality makes more of a difference than the fighter,
and since Rafale by any metric should be cheaper to practice with,
meaning more flight hours,
it stands to reason that the Rafale pilots on an average will be higher quality
Well there is advance simulators. and new trainers like Yak-130. i highly doubt it will make a difference.
I think Rafale with its lower production rate make it more expensive. (There is no commitment from French state or export customers to built closer to 1000 Rafales before 2020). that much Flanker derivatives are going to built before 2020. This will lower the cost across component supply chain.
French method of building weopons is way expensive thats why it takes long time for them to land export order. see UAE/Brazil/India etc. or every corruption scandal from Malaysia to Taiwan etc.
JSRYou did not grasp my claim about that. In all the possible numerical comparisons in flight-performance and weaponary between a well known Russian fighter against a comparable European or US one of the same time, the Russian ones were better in many of that sticking to some well-known numbers only, like top-speed, climb-rate, service-ceiling, range of weapons and some other to name just a few.
Similar thing with the Su-35, which is comparable to present Eurocanards in the avionics, when from its size alone it offers higher data. All fighters are competive as long as they are not outclassed in all departments. By that the Su-35 is still a 4th generation fighter, whatever Sukhoi or Russia claims about that the national intrests in mind.
This is all your assumptions and claims with no substance to backup.
how many MICA missiles has been built in past 20 years and compare that R-77 missiles. The difference is big. so it is more likely that greater investment and refinement in R-77 derivatives.
similar case is with engines. China alone closing on 2000 engines in AL-31 types. So every thing in Su-35 is very beefed up. so even downgraded Export model Su-35 produces twice as much power as Rafale. and Radar can see atleast twice as much. and range on internal fuel is twice as much.
JSRI would say there is one particular scenario where Haarvala’s theory hold water.
Assumption
Rafale can strike at max 1000 nm
Su-35 can strike at max 1100 nm
Then the only time Su-35 has cost advantage is if the target is 1001-1100 nm away,
where Rafale would need to be topped off by tanker but Su-35 doesn’t.Any shorter distance than 1001 nm and neither require tanker
Any longer distance than 1100 nm and both require tankerBut in peacetime, which is the majority of time, Rafale win the cost every time,
and will probably cover the possible extra expense of tanker support within
the interval 1001-1100 nm, should the a/c ever see action
Rafale is simply useless at 1000nm.
first it will will need ET. It cannot have big jamming pods on wing tip and centerline. without this powerfull EW ability it will have great difficulty in gettng close or defend itself. see the big pod at center of flanker.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vgmSdx_eiCI
Rafale lacks long range radar for air survellence. Air survellence is very important for battlefield success. for example Su-35 can fly to Mediterranean provide air picture of flights from active airbases in Saudi. This data is feed into other platforms like Subs-Ships-bombers for cruise missile.
There is another advantage of having bigger internal fuel tank. Airtanker can refuel Su-35 at much greater distance from battlefiled. I believe one air refuelling provide 6500km range to Su-35. Su-30 is limited to 5600km.
Su-35 as platform is so much flexibile interms of pods, air refuelling, air survellence, greater top end speed/altuide so faster response time etc.
JSR.. and that way the Russians lost many time to their surprise. See some comparisons about that: MiG-29 versus F-16, MiG-23 versus F-4F, MiG-21 versus Mirage IIIC, MiG-17 versus Mytere IVA, MiG-15 versus F-86, I-200/MiG-1 versus BF-109E about that. Nothing more is misleading in arial warfare before the opponent is outclassed really. To be outperformed in some areas by raw data means nothing at first. Personal I have no problem to accept that the Su-35 has better raw data in most areas. In Mathematics and Statistics the Lancaster Rule shows to win over two [Rafale] with a high propability to win a single one [Su-35] has to be four-times as good at least. Russian military planner had just that in mind, when the learned the hard way that not all that nasty details had the same value in a specific situation not predicted that way before. What works in military exercises and staged maneuver does not so on a real battle field against an opponent not sticking to the rules. 😉
What has Ruaf to do with those battles with monkey model aircraft with insufficient training and numbers.
Su-35 is not raw data. As the raw data is for downgraded export model. Su-35 is product of a government system that takes into account all opponents decades to come. According to Sukhoi only F-22 is its competitor.
http://eng.kremlin.ru/news/5086
The new models must be the best of their kind around the world. I want to stress this point. You all realise that if we take today’s models as our future blueprint we will end up lagging behind tomorrow and by evening today will already start having to think about upgrading. We need to look at the future and keep our sights at least a few steps ahead.
The air force units need to be ready to receive and use the new equipment. You need to use the latest approaches and methods in organising military training. This was something we discussed just recently at the last Defence Ministry Board meeting in Moscow.
Russian government intelligence gathering and bargaining ability is much more than French. So It will know much more about Rafale than French can about Su-35.
French government did not know the intention of Germany (government next door). Promising big military help for two years and than backtracking. There is alot of things that French government said that has proven false.
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2013/03/201332822537150268.html
French simply could not anticipate the poor reception that Rafale received in Arab world. The primary source of previous Dassault success and current EADS . Su-35 is simiply designed for bigger tasks than Rafale.
Su-35 can carry bigger jamming pods than Growler and radar that can see much further than AWACS and certainly fly higher/ faster with unmatched ability for standoff supersonic missiles. Su-35 is not Su-30. Su-30 is product of modest investment from India/China in 1990s. Su-35 is product of much bigger investment from Russian government with precise Germanic/Japanese industrial machines with most advanced supercomputing. There is no way French have similar technical ability and certainly no deep pockets. Germany could help them little bit with money and technology like in EADS.
JSRJapan’s not so certain – AH-64 acquisition program stopped after 10-12 out of 60 odd airframes were delivered and F-15 upgrade program seems to have been decreased to just 16 a/c. Also the F-2 procurement program was curtailed before all planned aircraft were delivered.
And to add wierdness into the mix, they’ve just brought several ex-US KC-130Rs.
Japan’s current procurement seems strange – lots of indigenous programs that don’t seem to be going anywhere coupled with small deliveries of aircraft.
So while Japan might acquire 42 F-35, they might also acquire less.
And given Japan’s recent history, any reduction is not a criticism of F-35 capabilities but rather JASDF procurement practices.
Japan also boldly proclaimed that Mitsubishi MRJ will be composite but later changed into traditional airframe and that is countless years delayed. Japan make big plans but little follow up.
JSRCoal liquefaction needs large, expensive plants. They’re not economical in peacetime, & they take a long time to build. China doesn’t have such plants now, & would run out of fuel before it had enough plants up & running to make up the shortfall.
Chinese oil imports, by source, 2011:
Saudi Arabia 1005
Angola 623
Iran 555
Russia 395
Oman 363
Iraq 276
Sudan 260
Venezuela 230
Kazakhstan 224
Kuwait 191
UAE 135
Brazil 134
Congo 113
Other 572Total 5076
Dearie dearie me. 12% from Russia & Kazakhstan, & at least 77% imported by sea from other countries. And how does that Russian oil get to China? Some of it via a single new pipeline through Manchuria, which could be knocked out, some via a pipeline through Kazakhstan, & some still comes by sea – as does some of that Kazakh oil, because the pipeline doesn’t have enough capacity. Add it all up, & China’s getting about 90% of its oil imports by sea.
very misplaced assumptions. Russia Railway and trucks can deliver much more but it is not as economical as pipline supply during peace time.
http://usa.chinadaily.com.cn/business/2013-01/02/content_16075661.htm
Operation of the pipeline has been praised for reducing cost and raising efficiency of China’s oil import from Russia, which had previously relied on railway, said Wu Zhenning, an official with the Pipeline Branch of Petro China Co Ltd, the operator of the Chinese section of the pipeline
incase of war China can provide the premium money for energy to make its economic functional. it does not mean 8% growth but 3 to 4% growth rate. with reduced consumption for personal transport.
what Japan is doing?.
http://www.japantoday.com/category/politics/view/abe-to-visit-saudi-arabia-to-secure-stable-oil-supply
do you seriously think Japan/Korea can take energy from Arabs during war time if China give $100b to $200b upfront to Russia to choke it?. You have to consider the power of upfront money. China did it with $25b in 2009 and pipeline got built within two year.
West practically squeeze these Arabs to vote for Russia WTO membership last year in exchange of not helping Iran. That bargaining is not done yet.
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/world/2013-02/26/c_132191686.htm
“If bargaining is to begin, firstly, political will must be demonstrated, as well as the inner resolve to move into this stage
There will be new round of bargaining coming up once Russia rearmament programe gains some traction and Mediterranean presence is established.
JSRWell, the Diaoyu Islands and the Spratlys were not on that official PRC map in the 50s and 60s, yet Chinese government has no problem claiming them today.
Exercising in East does not mean preparing conflict in East. Infact it is more training for long range missions without alerting the real targets. see permanant presence Meditarranean.
http://www.9abc.net/index.php/archives/18823
Russian Su-34 fighter-bombers, two consecutive record flight 8000 km
JSRIt can be a surprise, but in the case of F 15, the AESA wouldn’t add weight !
While in another plane, the oversized cooling system needed for AESA radar would add weight. The reason is that the standard F 15 has 300 kg of ballast in the nose for mass balance. The cooling system for the APG 63 (V)3 or APG 82, is less than 300 kg, while the AESA array is actually lighter than the mechanical antenna and its servo.The SA will be lighter than the standard E for another 2 reasons:
-FBW. They say they save 500 kg (cables, pulleys, etc. for the standard mechanical system);
-the DEWS (digital electronic warfare system) is packed in one box vs. 6 boxes the ALQ 135 + ALE 56 in the F 15 E.So, the SA will be ligher than the E…:)
There is alot of individual parts that become lighter but airframe get overall heavier for greater life and maintainability. you dont want aircraft that you want to look for cracks often.. AESA radars are heavy. see F-18E example. it is 14.5 tons on boeing website.
JSRRadius (in-out) not range is the most important. The F 15 E can do 1000 Nmiles in A-G, and 900 nmles in A-A with CFTs (no EFTs). See: http://www.slideshare.net/TheDEWLine/silent-eagle-media-briefdoc. With CFTs that’s ~ 1200 Nmiles.
F-15E has 1000NM combat radius without ET in Air to Ground mode. but 900 NM in air to air.
usually air to air produce greater combat radius. and CFT only has 4400kg
fuel. max combat radius of 1000NM is achieved with ET otherwise it wont be called maximum.
http://www.f-15e.info/joomla/technology/fuel-system/91-conformal-fuel-tanks
http://www.boeing.com/assets/pdf/defense-space/military/f15/f-15k/docs/F-15KBackgrounder.pdf
JSRAs for the Su-30/35 its coming to the end fast. As India just placed another order for Su-30MKI’s. Yet, with the PAK-FA and Rafale coming down the road. The odds or yet another order are highly unlikely. You may see a couple small orders in the next ten years for some models of the Flanker but that’s about it. The Su-35 so far has only received a small order from the Russian Air Force and maybe an even smaller order from China. (i.e. 24 Aircraft)
Sorry, but 4/4.5 Generation Fighters won’t be winning to many orders in the next several years. As most of the major powers are moving on to 5th Generation Fighters.
Acutually Flanker is not coming to fast end. . and the way India is approaching Rafale deal. it is highly unlikely that any meaningfull number of Rafale will be operational with IAF in 2020. PAK-FA is long way off for them.
Majority of 1000 aircraft Ruaf intended to procure before 2020 will be Flanker derivatives. 5G fighters are more capable but the lack flexibility of 4.5G fighters.
http://www.russianhelicopters.aero/en/press/publications/4000.html
By the end of 2020, we expect to receive about 2,000 new aviation complexes, including 985 helicopters, from Russian enterprises.”
JSRI was talking about flight per man hour……..
with new engines/subsystems F-14 can become more reliable but F-18 still cheaper to procure due to higher production rate. F-14 simply cannot compete with F-18 in overall cost.
Sign In
