JSRYes, it is unlikely the world will ever see such a striking example of how “less is more” again, but as engines slowly improve and speed increases,
so will interest in aerodynamic perfection increase.
Rising fuel cost will just make it even more desirable.
rising fuel cost should not bother Canada but Canada is turning into Norway/Saudi . Canada is deindustrilizing at fast pace. pretty soon it will need all its Oil to sell just to maintain its living standard.
single engine fighters have lower operational altitude, slower acceleration, less upgrade potentional, less power supply to onbaord electronics and generally shorter life due airframe streessed out than twin engine fighters.
There is not a chance of single engine fighter to catch twin.
The role of single engine fighters will be taken by UCAVs.
JSRApologies for going off topic here, but it really all comes from the aftermath of Suez. The French formed the exact opposite conclusions that we did and decided that they had to be prepared to stand up for their interests and that meant they needed to have a genuinely independent nuclear deterrent. They refused American help and this meant that it took longer for the Force Oceanique Strategique to reach the water than the RN’s Resolution class SSBN’s did and it was arguably less capable at first, they kept spending money on it. In contrast Britain gave up its rocket technology thanks to good old short termism so we don’t have the expertise to build an indigenous SLBM. Whereas the M51 SLBM is derived from the Ariane 5’s solid boosters and that no doubt helped to reduce the development cost.
That’s the fundamental difference between France and Britain, the French realise that to be at the top table you have to spend money, that’s why Dassault can tell potential Rafale buyers that the aircraft has fully integrated air to surface capability, ECM etc whereas BAe can only tell potential Typhoon buyers “Err can we get back to you on that?” Its that whole short termism and trying to do things on the cheap mentality that has cost Britain so badly in just about all aspects since the War.
Ah well rant over! 🙁
France is not much better . Sarkozy has turned into Merkozy. See libya example. French would not have been able to defeat kadaafi without US/Arab cash. and i dont think French would have performed better in Falkand war. There is not big difference in French and UK influence despite French having more indigenous military capability. French have more export prospects in equipment but it does not pay for the huge expenditure in R&D. and this advanatage will erode with time in Nuclear strike as well as things get more expensive in next generation.
JSRChina
China has extensive dependence on west and arab countries. it will not be able to resist the combine pressure. simple google search is enough.
http://www.rferl.org/content/pakistan_confirms_china_pullout_gas_pipeline_project_other_options/24515444.html
http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-13-13755-Russia-to-help-Pakistan-build-IP-gas-pipeline
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/04/06/world-view-4-6-2012
Only Russia alone can save iran from sanctions and military interventions. China does not even have military reach in that neigborhood.
JSROk fair enough. But still I don’t think Iran ever will order brand new Tu-204’s.
They have other solutions to get ‘new’ airliners.
sure Iran have other cheaper and may be more reliable options but if Russia really want to sell Tupolev to Iran Just to make brand name out of Tu-204.. Iran will not be able to say No
Russia has done alot of favors to Iran and Russia is the only country in world that can buy all Iranian Oil and resold in the world for profit.
http://www.turkishweekly.net/news/133476/russian-deputy-minister-iran-our-valuable-energy-partner-.html
http://www.turkishweekly.net/news/133531/eu-advisor-with-iran-sidelined-if-russia-doesn-39-t-sell-oil-to-eu-prices-can-increase-by-10-15-percent-.html
JSRTotal no less than 300 airlifters with about 100 will be MTA.
http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/ain-defense-perspective/2012-03-30/russian-commander-explains-air-force-acquisition-plan
60-70 ruslan for private airlines that can be use by military.
http://en.ria.ru/mlitary_news/20120402/172554583.html
so total access to new transport aircraft is about 400
JSRThat’s understandable considering:
5. The majority of the avionics dev is done (AESA, EOTS, EODAS, RwW,MADL, etc).
.
if development of avionics is done.will it not become obsolete by the time full scale production begins in 2019. around 2020 this thing will need further upgrades to deal with post 2020 SAM systems.
JSRA twist cassegrain antenna is a RCS nightmare in its own right.
It does not matter as SM3 has newest ECM. i would not be surprized if it can sniff latest LPI radars.
since it is equiped with longer range weopons with superior acceleration (light weight, uprated engines, less drag) and altitude. it will always have first shot advantage over current Su-30. Radar alone cannot decide superiority of one plane over another.
http://www.sukhoi.org/eng/news/company/?id=4596
Sukhoi has completed a state contract for the supply of new multi-role Su-27SM(3) fighters to the Russian Air ForceNew and upgraded equipment installed at the aircraft allows the use of new “air-to-air” and “air-to-surface” extended range missiles. The capabilities of the aircraft under intense enemy air defense counter-measures were upgraded due to the application of a new set of ECM.
JSROr develop conventional versions of the French ASMP-A, which is already in service & entirely built within a NATO member country.
ASMP-A is more in class of Kh-31PD/AD. and how many ASMP-A can M2K/Rafale type aircraft can carry.
Brahmos will be larger class. more like 1.5 to 2 tons.
JSRSu-35 is a deep modernisation of the Su-27 with new generation materials and technologies. Not a new aircraft, they still shares the same great aerodynamics. And can you prove about Su-27SM has the new engines?
you can modernize Su-27 into Su-27SM3 but you cannot modernized into Su-35. Su-35 is new aircraft.
AL-31FM looks similar to basic Al-31. and it is in Sukhoi own press release.
I think basic Su-27 has 10 suspension points. this Su-27SM3 may have 12 or 14.
http://www.sukhoi.org/eng/news/company/?id=4596
The Su-27SM(3) fighter aircraft has a strengthened airframe to enable takeoff weight increased by more than 3 tons and additional suspension points to accommodate weapons. The fighters are equipped with new equipment and weapons complexes as well as with the new AL-31F-M1 turbofan engines produced by the MMPP “Salut”, which are characterized by high thrust and extended time between overhauls.
JSRIts not a big modernisation, only a well balanced upgrade with modern MFD’s but not one piece! and upgraded radar with more modes and ability to fire new missiles. Su-35 is the real modernisation, its mentioned lots of times. I didn’t see any Russian one piece MFD yet, as far as i know the whole Russian fighters today has two or three piece MFD’s in cockpit but hope we can see something new at Maks-2013:rolleyes:
New engines, radar, weopons, EW, cockpit, communication/navigation system. is pretty much big upgrade.
Su-35 is new plane not a modernization. as fuel capacity, FBW, intakes and materials which keep weight down all got changed. you cannot modernize Su-27 into Su-35.
JSRSingle piece large russian/belarussian touchscreen MFDs were shown at the last MILEX show in Minsk. Russian or American doesn’t matter. All these screens are made in Taiwan 🙂
I doubt Taiwan makes it. they are more consumer type.
this place developed plazma a bit earlier than Japanese.
http://plasmalabs.ru/
Areas of application monitors our production – is:
– Military equipment;
– Air Force;
– W / e transport;
– Equipment used in harsh climatic conditions, etc.
JSRI find it quite peculiar that we are even talking about comparison between N001V and BARS. The N001V can be glad if it has TWS mode and can track two targets simultaneously, the technology of the thing is ancient.
Su-27SM3 has latest mulitmillion dollar engines, communication,navigation sytem, EW with latest avioncis. so ur assuming they cannot spend few million on radar antenna if they are not able to upgrade the old radar to suitable capability.
http://russianmilitaryphotos.wordpress.com/tag/su-27sm3/
The weapons suites and avionics on these fighters are far more advanced than those on upgraded Su-27SM fighters, and the radar has also been upgraded. These aircraft also have new glass cockpits and the ability to fire the new medium-range RVV-SD air-to-air missiles.
JSRIn our nuclear age, most of those multibillion dollar wonder weapons are just for posturing and keeping afloat national defence industries.
I hardly can imagine any useful application for the existing Russian aircraft carrier. But this doesn’t mean that Russia won’t going to spend another billions of dollars so as to look like a big boy in the yard.
Russia is going to spend $800b on armament before 2020. and another $175b on aviaton support but this does not include finishing new Aircraft carrier before 2020. all this without increasing debt to gdp ratio beyond 20%.
think about it how this is going to be funded.
Aircraft carrier is desperately needed by countries like China/India. remember thousands of workers in libya evacuation. Russia manpower is much more expensive so there is less chance of getting them trapped in thousands in third world places. so much smaller ships like Mistral is more suitable. or send long range bombers and use IL-76s after that to occupy a landing strip. Aircraft carriers are for those who either have smaller land mass or lack technical means to built long range aircraft/weopon systems. Flanker in Black Sea can potentially strike all of Mediteranean/Middleast. there is no mtcr limitations on missile ranges.
JSRThose plans for the carriers are not dead yet. Just a week ago R. Trotsenko, the United shipbuilding corporation president, said that they hope to get the MoD contract for designing an aircraft carrier in 2013 financial year and to start building in 2018. He described some characteristics of the proposed carrier: 55-60 thousand tonns deadweight, nuclear power plant, MiG-29Ks and copters for an air wing.
This is not in the interview but my assumption that they hope to get MoD into a contract for building one carrier every five years at the SevMash plant after comissioning the Indian carrier.
The only place Russia could need a carrier is Middleast/Mediteranen.
but if Su-30SM experiment with brahmos class weopons is successfull there wont be need of carrier. Irkut has production capacity of 50 Flankers a year.
Imagine 300 to 400 Su-30 each with 2 to 3 brahmos. each brahmos has energy of 9 subsonic cruise missile.this is fire power equal to 10,000 tomhawks on a single strike against multiple targets from hardened structures to antiradar and anti ships.
http://en.ria.ru/world/20120330/172478672.html
simply Land based aircraft can use long runways and have less limitations on payload. Aicraft carrier is manpower intensive 20th century not very effective against a strong airforce.
China/India need carrier as they have small geography not easily reach to there trade routes.
JSRAbout the only way the N001V could conceivably be better than the Bars is if it had more sophisticated software algorithms and processing hardware – both wholly artificial restrictions, seeing how they are from the same manufacturer. Since the Bars has been going through phased upgrades since service entry I’d say there is at best not much in it between the two in terms of back end hardware, and the antenna technology of the N001V is obviously obsolete.
Conceptually, the Bars is far and away the superior radar, any drawbacks in practise are artificially imposed by export laws or similar considerations.
PESA does not automatically translate into more range. Only in SAR modes PESA will be better. Su-30MKI with Canards and raised twin cockpit is more than likely to have higher RCS. Bars is not improvement on same scale as IRBIS.
I still think lighter, more engine power, less drag (3 major differences)
Su-27SM3 will be provide superior range,altitude and acceleration.
http://www.ainonline.com/?q=aviation-news/ain-defense-perspective/2012-01-20/russian-air-force-takes-upgraded-su-27s-intended-china
The onboard communications complex is jam-proof and provides a secure datalink with ground command posts and airborne assets. According to Sukhoi the Su-27SM(3) is more than twice as effective against aerial targets and three times more effective against ground targets than the Su-27S.
Sign In
