JSRThe funny thing in the story is how little the US actually get from their 700 billion budget, compared to other nations. Nr 2 China spends 1/6 of that amount.
.
total cost of Chinese military like business and real estate they control. The total cost of keeping Chinese military in shape is going to be far higher than stated. AVIC alone has 400,00 employees.
http://www.geaviation.com/press/systems/systems_20110121.html
Boeing/EAD combined 280,000.
JSRStrikes me as a wildly irresponsible allocation of state resources…
They are likely to be strip down version without radar/electronics. and certainly no ram paint. certainly more expensive than Yak-130 but considering there longer range. they can fly to airshows without too many touch downs.
JSRDue to timing.
it is highly unlikely Korea can get full developed EF or F-15SE before 2020.
The F-35 was all but eliminated in the Korean contest, as Lockheed bid $14.1 billion and the Korean government vowed they would never pay a dime more than $9.5 billion max. It is now the Silent Eagle vs Typhoon contest. Beside, the F-35 did worse than the other two in performance evaluation.
so you think F-15 silent and EF is cheaper than JSF. which is very unlikely they are in tail end of production by the time Korea chose them. there is no guarantee of enhanced thrust engine at this point.
JSRSweden approach is more toward developping and owning the rights to a system rather than build every screws of it due of course to budget limitations.
Beside western companies can have subsidiaries all around the world, so just because there isn’t SAAB tag on something doesn’t mean it has access too less advanced components than Germany or Japan (none of which come close to the experience in building military fighters SAAB has).
that approach is near failure. it worked when aircrafts were simple and have low life span with low agility.
If the Gripen cannot be “confident” to deal with Su-35, it has nothing to do with supercomputers. Aerodynamics for both platform haven been mostly defined for decades now, and the only differences of their new versions come mostly from electronics and sensors upgrades, as well as a few refinements of the basic airframe.
Building modern aircraft is getting ever more expensive, and while it’s true that Sweden is struggling to keep building new aircraft, the same can be said for the rest of Europe (Typhoon, collaboration on UCAV etc.), Russia (Su-35, PAK-FA etc. being developped with collaboration from India, Israel, France etc.), the US (F-35), India, China etc.
how is aerodynamics of Su-35 known?. just two things looking similar does not mean they will behave similar. more powerfull engines can give alot more energy to missile shot from platform. (missiles will need its own rocket technology and material science not some import depended).
and since engines are not imported. there is no point in disclosing actual thrusts for domestic variantsf for Flankers. India scientific contribution to Su-35 and PAK-FA is practically zero at this point.
JSRAnd an easy, two click search on google got me to:
http://www.nsc.liu.se/And there falls JSF solid proof of “Saab cant make state of the art products due to they never simulate stuff in a super computer” They have done it for 25 years!!!
The biggest cluster Triolith is in the top 100 in the world with its 350+ Tflops.And now, to the capacity sukhoi seems to have a 1Tflop system based on russian made CPU.
http://www.network54.com/Forum/211833/thread/1270615406/Sukhoi+takes+delivery+of+first+new+Russian+made+mini-supercomputerTo summerize..
Saab have a 350Tflops system for there simulations
Sukhoi got 1Tflop.
For comparision
Lockheed seems to have a 103 TFLOPS
http://www.top500.org/site/48266To to make a linear extrapolation of JSR argumantation. Saab makes 350 times better A/C than Sukhoi.
Hopefully the lots of you see the irony in that đ
I never said Saab not using supercomputer. they would need the most for Gripen. The system used by Saab is skylord with 460 cores. and most likely completely off the shelf.
http://www.nsc.liu.se/systems/
There is no $2b budget to bring supercomputing to next level.
Triolith system is used in academic (SNIC). i dont think it has anything to do with Saab. In Sweden the lines are blurred between academic and industry.
Saturn uses 14.3 terraflops in 2008 for larg size.
http://www.uk-odk.ru/eng/presscenter/odk_news/1130/
Results:
In 2005 and 2008 Saturn launched supercomputers with processing capacities of 1.0 and 14.3 terraflops respectively, each of which became the most powerful in the industry.The number of instrument channels for tests has increased 100 times, and a system was created which can process up to 1 petabyte of experimental data.
The cycle of engine design is now three times faster.
Sukhoi systems is for small groups.
http://aeroindiaseminar.in/index.php/technicalpaper-detail?value=140
At the moment Sukhoi Design Bureau is operating compact supercomputers with 1, 3 and 5 teraFLOPS power. Special engineering facilities are not required for operation of such compact supercomputers . They are low-noise and can be installed in rooms
where people are working. The main designation of such compact supercomputers is service for small calculating groups. They help to resolve tasks of aerodynamics, gas dynamics, stability, safety problems while a/c operation.
The first versions of the Russian simulation modeling program LOGOS have been installed on the compact supercomputers .
One of the important direction of the activities under the Project âDevelopment of supercomputers and grid technologiesâ is acquirement of trust to the software product from the usersâ side, definition of its area of usage, creation of usage methods and their implementation into the real design process of aviation equipment. In 2010 â 2012 Sukhoi Design Bureau jointly with partners conducted a large-scale validation of Russian simulation modeling software complexes , more than 4,5 thousand tasks were resolved and Đž over 6,5 thousand full-scale tests were conducted for the benefit of the Project. As a result validation basis, which maximally covers operation of modern aircraft, and it also allows to objectively estimate possibilities of simulation modeling software complexes and to justify their usage in aircraft industry.
JSRThe size part is the big denominator and since the J10 is based on J9 that was a version of Viggen (not a copy, just an adapted concept).
One cant just pick a jet that is 7 tonnes and one that is almost 10 tonnes and say because they look alike they are alike. There are a lot of differences.
The J9 flew in 1975.
It seems more like hearsay than real connection. it takes years of flight testing to have data about aircraft behaviour to various stresses. It is highly unlikely in 90s. J-10 could have progressed so fast without external help. when every thing else in Chinese aviation industry was at stand still.
F-16A is 7 tons and F-16E is 10 tons. it does not mean they are not same concept.
JSRYou mean exporting goods has no impact over a goverments spending power of its defence budget?
it depends on the goods and real priced of the goods produced. see Japan with its indirect subsidies.
Seriously man, you have absolutely no concept of a capitalist economy?
Have you ever been to a top rated University?
Have you ever read a science magazine, where do you think those discoveries come from?Funding>research>discovery>investment>product.
so funding and dicovery automatically means competitive product. compare Ericsson with Samsung or Hyundai with Volvo.
You think to much and know to little, Russian built airplanes has been a part of NATO opfor units for decades. How do you think they decide on future capability and design for new systems and weapons?
Alteast i learn that thos fighters were design and built without supercomputers and advance japanese/german industrial machinery and certainly not with this pool of budget and colloboration. (see Siemens PLM software and Sukhoi) so it has no relevance to past.
which is back to original question by some one claim that Swedes confident about Gripen NG dealing with Su-35. when untill this point it hasnt been shown that SAAB is using what level of supercomputers and funding level is obviously less and implementaion is even slower.
JSRYeah I am part Russian, so i might actually be more Russian than him hehe.
4 links to super computers, and they have absolutely nothing to do with anything in here, fascinating.
surely supercomputers have nothing to do with aircraft design.
http://insidehpc.com/2011/08/19/boeing-taps-jaguar-super-for-aircraft-design/
Boeing Taps Jaguar Super for Aircraft Design
Boeing researchers are using Jaguar, the fastest supercomputer in the U.S., to validate aerodynamics codes for airplane design
I think LM owns its own supercomputer company.
JSREhh, the J10 is developed from J9 which was a “Chinese Viggen”.
Gripen was built to be a modular system that was:
1 Being omnirole.
2 Have a low maintenance footprint
3 Being cheap to manufacture and thus smaller (and lighter) than its predecessors (Draken and Viggen)
4 Being easy to upgrade with continous upgrades during the life cycle instead of block upgrades.
5 Being a high performance airframeThe J10 is not based on the same principles. Just start with the basics, is it in the same weight class as the Gripen or is it closer to a Hornet in weight?
how many years have Chinese Viggen flown and what kind of engine power. I highly doubt in mid 90s China have the budget and experiance for canard delta design certification.
The list of things that you enumerate for Gripen will not have that much influence on aerodynamic design.
JSRYou were bragging about your budget and big projects, yet you fail to do the simple connection? The science research budget of the EU is several times the Russian defence budget. You know why? Because it benefits all sectors in the economy.
scienc budget for benefit of whom? like design industrial machines or autos to be sold in China. it has no relevance to enhancing or imparting unique ability to Swedish aerospace. It is already dysfunactional as none of Rafale/EF/Gripen is flying with uprated thrust engines. and it took ages to operationalize a new AAM bvr with very limited quantity.
I am sure there are more operational MIG-31BM than Gripen with Meteor. and i dont think this old slot array radar with unupgraded engine will be effective against high powered jamming.
Russia might have a nice military industry complex, but you suck at producing civilian consumer products. And guess what, that is where you make the big bucks.
there are also virtual products like search engine, industrial protection software, electronic government etc. and it is not even desirable to enter into labor intensive consumer products as most of east asia has natural advantage to component supply chain and large labor pool.
JSRSeriously man, this is the third time you link to some super computer being built, is this some kind of fetish?
supercomputers is the most critical thing in leapfroging various fields.
There is another $2b exascale coming up.
http://eng.cnews.ru/news/top/indexEn.shtml?2011/09/29/457577
Capitalism=Trade. Its a buyers market. You can build whatever you want, but if its not wanted on the market, and to expensive no one will buy it. Swedish products sell, because you niche your product to fit the market.
harldy a buyer market for unique products and capabilities. Sweden products sells because they are part of collobrative effort and for the benefit of multinational firms that sell them onward. It does not mean unique ability.
Russia can develop what ever they want really, the question is, will anyone buy it?
first thing u need is solvent government that can buy it.
You do know that Russia have sold weapons to pretty much every Arab dictator in the region surrounding Israel? Israels closest ally is USA, you think your gone get the deal of a lifetime with Israel? What do they teach you in school over there?
hardly any relevance. ur confusing soviet Union giving away weopons that are relatively advanced for that time for entirly different reason. USA will call any country receiving its aid as ally. and that aid has restrictions like buying US made products. or some flexibility in negotiations with neighbors. and obama made budget cuts to pentagon. it can negatively impact Israeli industry exports. and Russia hardly sells advance weopons to Turkey or Arabs/Iran.
Yes Sweden can afford the extra cost in defense budget, even a billion $ or more is not a problem.
first built couple of prototypes per year. it is non existent project at this point. with very slow implementation.
JSRYou dont understand do you? That money is spent on basic research projects in every field possible for future MBA and doctorate students, who will then go on and work for or start their own companies. Its about financing cutting edge science. Like funding the LHC, open borders university programs etc. EU and east Asia is doing pretty good in this area, while the US and Russia is lagging behind. Last i checked the Russian scientist who discovered Graphene is living in London and just became a British citizen. Ring a bell?
I dont care about Israel in aerospace, last i checked they just airstriked some brand new Russian made SAM vehicles in Syria. Thats going to work wonders for Russian PR in Tel aviv.
so ur assuming that you got a $1b euro for basic research it will be automatically successful and none of competitors have access to $1b euro. and only Nobel commitee can rightly judge competence of scientists and scientific breakthrough. and no other organization knows to employe effective project management for scientists.
and you have be little modest about some thing called brand new SAM. and Israeli strike is likely to benefit Russia. as attacking Arab country automaticalll rise energy prices.
JSRYou might have missed the fact that even USA is doing joint venture development for example f-35.
F-35 engine, weopons, radar are US own. now there is some colloboration in some structures and some partner weopons. It is simply not the case with Gripen NG. first thare are not that many prototypes flying despite years in the news. and most of systmes and weopons are imported.
I dont really know why you consider some deal between Russian and Israel as “news of the year” does it matter to SAAB? Israel was never a potential costumer. What is your point? Russian companies have bough new supercomputers? So?
there some claims in this thread from long time. that Sweden is very valuable to its partners that they will trade there industrial commerical secrets.and sweden has the money and industrial capacity to act on it.
Israel has unique technologies that it has developed over decades. and it will benefit Russia alot more than Sweden gets benefits from its partners.
Sweden has already financed the Gripen E deal and it passed the Parlament vote. The whole deal + upgrades on all C/D versions and lifetime cost of the whole Gripen(E/F+C/D) fleet will be $12 billion until 2042.
$12b at inflation adjusted amount is very small when extrapolate to 2042. it is more likely like job retention programe than capability enhancement.
Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldtâs administration is under growing pressure to increase defense spending from its current level of $6.1 billion and re-establish Sweden as the Nordic and Baltic regionâs foremost military power. The low level of spending, which was continued when the Moderate-led coalition took power in 2006, is regarded by military and political circles to have weakened Swedenâs overall defense capability and stalled the armed forcesâ development, said Peter Hultqvist, a Social Democratic member of parliament and chairman of the parliamentâs defense committee
JSRJ-10 have nothing to do with Gripen. Gripen have never tried to be fitted into israelis or russian requirement (why?!). More likely be a good oppontent to them.
Gripen design based on similar concept to Lavi/J-10. there is nothing more in Gripen that cannot be in those designs. and those design is no longer pursued in Russia.
Sorry, you cant create a special “innovative culture” in some special companies. Its in the culture of the society as a hole, due to be created from kindergarden to universites.
yes you can create it. see boeing technical research and boeing design center in russia. the largest outside US for Boeing. there is nothing innovative or special about Sweden.
Saab Aerostructures and Volvo Aero are two big companies in A/C material industry.
Material science have students in every university in Sweden.This is one of those areas why Sweden is ranked in second in the world in the innovation field. Please readup before making any statments. it only makes you look like a troll. Trolls are likely getting banned…
SAAB materials is so advance that Boeing is using vsmpo avisma
Sweden doesnt understand why you need to develop things on your own.
Instead develop truly groundbraking AAMs with your friends. Like IRST and Meteor. Both which Sweden develop and manufacture key parts. For the rest search för “Saab bofors dynamics” and learn more of the Robot 17, NLAW, AT4 CS ,TAURUS, RBS15 etc..
you have to understand that any thing developed by commitee will slow down the upgrades and more likely to be compromised. for example French try to sell Meteor equiped fighter to India or some Arab countries. those customers will get indepth study of weopon system.
I have plenty of search Sweden has import dependence. it can develop some parts but whole system high doubt considering the budget limitation.
Saab have no problem filling the orderbooks. Please readup before making any statments, first prototype will fly this year.
when your production rate is low for few hand built aircraft. it is convenient to claim overbooked.
No need to be tailored. Depending on software layers and calculation tools. A smart solution is to use civil standards as your backbone. Sukhoi seems to go another, more expensive and less efficient roote. One wonder why. Maybe there not aloud to use western code standards. In my mind this would make them very much cripled in a digital world, based on standards.
This is ur opinion not a fact. Every has to be tailored to specific purpose. Those used in Academic research are more likely to be different than industrial use.
http://www.datacenterdynamics.com/focus/archive/2012/11/russian-supercomputer-helps-design-super-hard-materials
Russian supercomputer helps with design of super-hard materials
The Organov Lab at New York university takes materials research to a new level using specially designed algorithm and HPC
JSRSuper computers dont magically produce superior designs as evident by the problems with the F35. They just makes development of a modeling go a bit faster and cost less.
Linköping University LTH in the same city where the Gripen is built is going to be the center for Graphene research in Sweden. The investment for the technology alone is one billion euro corporation with 5 other place for the next 10 years. Europe is way ahead of US on this. I see this material as the next gen in aerospace engineering and computers on all levels.
Why invest in old technology? Remember the word graphene in the future.
F-35 is unique project. trying to cram more than 8 tons of internal fuel and weopons/electronics into small airframe with oversize engine and still have long life and stealth paint. it is understandable it is going to take a while and lots of money.
$1B Euro is nothing to enter into new field in big way. EU is falling behind every year and its fall is just about to accelerate due to high eneryg prices and uncompetivie economic and political system. Sweden auto, aviation and cellular manufacturing is living proof of that. so it is highly unlikely it is going to manufacturing hub of new materials.
http://www.timesofisrael.com/russia-is-open-for-israeli-business-says-expert/
There is more business cooperation between Israeli start-ups and Russian companies than most Israelis realize. That cooperation, quiet as it has been, has benefited both countries enormously
One of the areas of extensive cooperation between Israel and Russia, perhaps surprisingly, is aviation technology, said Moshe. âThe Russians have very high hopes for their civilian plane manufacturing industry, and they have used Israeli technology extensively in planes manufactured in Russia. They are trying very hard to compete with Boeing and Airbus, and have been developing models that compete very favorably with offerings from those companies in design, safety, technology, and price.â
It is a rarely discussed cooperative effort, but Moshe has been involved in numerous deals between Israeli avionic components, service, and software companies, and Russian plane manufacturers and technology firms. âFor example, one of the Israeli companies working closely with Russian manufacturers provides software and services throughout the cycle of a planeâs construction, an integral part of civilian aircraft manufacture today. A second company produces a hardware component essential to measuring avionic safety parameters. There are many more such examples,â Moshe said.
Sign In
