JSRI think your very optimitic about CHina.
what so special about 052D. The have bought loads of airdefence systems. now putting into a ship. it is not a new capability of putting space defence system on nuclear powered ships.
They are taking practically two decades to put into operational service a 1960s era Soviet tech aircraft carrier. and who knows how much cash they spend in borrowing tech with unlimited manpower resources.
there is no new Russian aircraft in production for number of years and if some thing goes into production it will go to Ruaf.
They are buying both regular and special helicopter and practically admitted they cant develop a heavy lift chopper.
http://www.whatsonningbo.com/news-5625-avicopter-and-russian-helicopters-to-develop-33-ton-heavy-lift-helicopter.html
see 300 Ton lifting by Mi-26 in single day in China far away from its operating base.
http://en.take-off.ru/pdf_to/to18.pdf
JSRThis is from sinodefence forum.
it is from March. they only deny agreement not denying negotiation. it is possible Chinese aproached for Su-35 but Russia gave it high price and long delivery time line.
China has very poor high end engg. skills. it will for ever import heavy aviation stuff.
JSRIndia has always wanted to mix western and eastern sources in order to not put their egg in the same basket in case the political uncertainty. I don’t think production overlap is an issue especially since the planes won’t be used in the same role at all.
Nic
That was in past when there was no LCA. Now LCA can play role of fighter with Western subsystems. and French political uncertainity risk is getting higher with time due to well known dependence.
see Libya example. Thousands of Indian lost there jobs and high Oil prices create rupee fall. All due to French.
I dont think Russia have acted or will act in manner that will directly shake India in big way. They have much higher level understanding.
JSRIt can’t be stronger for the same weight, but it certainly is stealthier because it represents a single uninterrupted surface.
I highly doubt it make a difference in frontal aspect. There are several hundred F-18E/ F-15 that Boeing sold without this setup.
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/pictures-boeing-unveils-upgraded-f-15-silent-eagle-with-fifth-generation-323962/
Boeing claims the end-result is an aircraft that can match the frontal-aspect stealth profile of any fifth generation fighter in configurations cleared by the US government for export release
It is old LM tradition from F-16 to use single piece canopy that was discarded by Mitsubishi F-2.
JSRWhen comparing the canopies side-by-side, the F-35 has much better forward visibility due to a larger opening, no HUD, and the inner support on the F-35 is much thinner than the split canopy supports on the F-2.
I didnot said the F-35 visibility is less . I mentioning this large single piece approach is not adopted by other firms.
There is no mention of single piece being more stealthy or strong.
http://www.ruaviation.com/news/2012/4/13/922/
JSRIIRC, The next decision for F-35 buys does not happen till 2014/15ish, so money spent on the Growlers will not affect that much
It is not just Austrialia but Israel that is spending on EW. The more countries spend on EW the less money available for F-35 airframes.
Israel initial order is now only 19 airframes. infact they dont believe the airframe will be more relevant.
http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/AW_08_06_2012_p28-482027.xml&p=1
“We think the stealth protection will be good for 5-10 years, but the aircraft will be in service for 30-40 years, so we need EW capabilities [on the F-35] that can be rapidly improved,” a senior Israeli air force (IAF) official tells Aviation Week. “The basic F-35 design is OK. We can make do with adding integrated software.”
JSRI am referring to relative size of opening in one piece. Japanese made it too small. JSF looks smaller than F-16.
http://giaoduc.net.vn/images/stories/2011/08/17/20100615215810!JSDF_F-2_Fighter.jpg
http://dmn.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/The-Business-End.jpg
why would different companies make different decisions.
JSRActually he deserves more credit than due.
2007 winter Olympic site was not easy win against much more polished South Korean bid. at that time Oil was far below $100.
Big down sizing of Armed forces and more than doubling salaries in one go. similar scale downsizing in Police.
http://www.itar-tass.com/en/c39/493411.html
starting 10 year military procurement programme. so more continuity and have more personal interest to oversee. from small soldier equipment, micro chips to 5G bomber/SSBN. There are other things like whose impact will show in couple of years.
other world politician spend almost zero time overseeing unfinished equipment.
JSRwhat Generation is below aircraft. Japanese removed this one piece from F-2 (At time Japanese had boat load of money). Boeing is not using it on F-18E. (far wealther firm than LM ).F-35 is not exactly one piece either. so consensus is that one piece is not suitable. Chinese copied old LM concept.
JSRthat budget surplus is created due to already announced cuts. resource boom have created artificially strong currency that destroyed employment in manufacturing/service sectors.
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/time-to-get-over-our-debt-hysteria-as-boom-ends-20120825-24tfx.html
I dont see them putting large amount of money for JSF any time soon.
JSRThe main educated criticism is regarding the discontinuities the gap brings in terms of RCS and the way the frame perhaps limits visibility.
I have sat in an F-16 cockpit and I know how excellent visibility the bubble canopy can offer.
I dont think visibility is too important for 5G sensors and netcentric warfare.
5G fighter suppose to fly higher than all the fighters. so pilot has to look downward more often.
There alot of reduced RCS fighters like Rafale that dont have one piece canopy. why dont chinese implement single piece canopy in all other fighters beside J-20.
JSRMore money for F-18 means less money for JSF before 2020.
http://www.smh.com.au/national/growler-obsolete-in-5-years-expert-says-20120823-24pb0.html
Australia’s $1.5 billion ”Growler” electronic warfare fleet may be redundant within four or five years of its delivery in 2018, a senior Lockheed Martin official has said.Tom Burbage, Lockheed Martin’s general manager for program integration, said his company’s Joint Strike Fighter was one of the planes that would be able to carry the next generation jammer which is expected to come into operation with the US military early next decade.
JSRwell, once bitten, twice shy. And having spoken to people in the forces and those who’ve spoken to people in the forces, things are still not that great when it comes to spares and support for Russian equipment. Things are promised and then those promises are not delivered on. There are many examples of that, such as the issues we’ve seen on the T-90 gun barrel ToT which has led to production lagging at Avadi.
I believe the IAF would be better served buying a heavy lift helicopter that actually is guaranteed reliable (and no one will argue about the Chinook being reliable) and useful in more situations than just airlifting outsize loads. Besides, what’s the production run for the Mi-26T? How many militaries operate it and how do we know that the spares/support is going to be issue free over 30 years of operations? Can it even operate for that many years as opposed to the original Mi-26 that had a service life of just 1200 hrs/8 years ?!
The only forseeable problem with the Chinook is the possibility of sanctions, but now that the IAF and IN are looking to induct so many different US platforms and weapons, I think that this threat isn’t considered to be very likely.
30 year guarantee?. In 30 years there would 2b people in India.
Taiwan, Turkey, Saudi, Japan, China, UK far wealthier countries than India. are used as bargaining chip by US in various situations.
India is not so much wealthy that it can simultaneously maintain East & West equipment.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/21/AR2010032101111.html
Chen cited some instances of U.S. restrictions. After the massive earthquake in Sichuan province in 2008, for example, China sought to buy engines for Black Hawk helicopters that the United States sold China in the 1980s when the countries were aligned against the Soviet Union. Chen said China was trying to make the purchase so it could use the helicopters to save people injured in the quake, but that the United States rejected the request. (U.S. officials have raised doubts about China’s claim, pointing out that Black Hawks have a limited carrying capacity.)China solved its problem by borrowing helicopter engines, and subsequently buying helicopters, from Russia, Chen said
Price of modern Chinook is so high that you can buy Twice many Mi-26T2 so even with 50% reliability Mi-26T2 will be fine. and MI-26 just like any Russian helicopter has long future as on Mi-26 basis new heavy lift helicopter is being created.
JSRhelicopters for China. This will make china largest users of Mi-171.
http://twocircles.net/2012aug21/russia_make_mi171_helicopters_china.html
JSRyeah, pay billions of $ to “join” the test phase of the FGFA..and do what with that? No one is asking to part with technology for a “nickle”. It’s billions of $, much more than any other country would be willing to pay for a partnership in a program of this sort. Those who can go it alone do, like China, those who cannot, partner. But if the tangible benefits don’t show up in the form of actual participation in the program and gain in technology, then why bother to partner at all? Why not just cut the order down to 126 units and spend the rest on the F-35?
I’m sure that the attitude you’re displaying doesn’t really show up where it matters. If it did, I’m not sure that the GoI would be willing to put up serious money on a sham partnership.
$11b in over and above PAK-FA. R&D.
$5.5b of India money does not mean that India is going to provide 50% of R&D. Simply there is no infrastructure for providing anything worth $5.5b from India side. All that $11b spent in building more prototypes, test flights (putting fuel in such heavy bird for so long), integrating new weopons, systems and training Indian workers in mass producing it. It is more like testing/famillarization money not development money.
You have to start at smallest level.This year Russia started 90nm production (Year 2000 level in West) ability and they are moving towards more advanced level soon. This statement was made at Knaapo.
http://melisbek.com/story/2012/02/rogozin-calls-greater-domestic-microelectronics-industry
http://www.mikron.sitronics.com/press/news/5688/
http://www.mikron.sitronics.com/about/business/molecular_electronics_research_institute/
http://eandt.theiet.org/blog/blogpost.cfm?threadid=45419&catid=366
No where it is written that India can solve this problem.
India would be lucky to get license of Rafale for $5.5b. as that programe cost are now at 40 billion Euro and only 100 or so delivered.
India efforts are disjointed. no relationship between LCA & Rafale engine/radar/weopons untill this point. as this thing will cost alot of money to unify the systems. and without unification all the systems will be not at 5G level as money is thin out over so many projects.
Sign In
