JSRits no longer the 1990’s son. Many countries that could’ve been Mig-29M importers are opting for Flankers. Even African countries are going for Flankers. Lots of trained pilots, technicians and infrastructure for Flankers too. Ethiopia and Eritrea hired many Russian and Ukrainians to help with Flanker work. Eritrea.. after getting spanked by Ethiopoian Flankers.. bought Flankers, not Fulcrums, after the war.
The older MiG-29s were only successful because of the cancelled Iraq order that led to many spare unsold ones available. Those are nearly gone if not all gone now. anything sold has to be used stock or new build M/K/35 or whatever Mig is trying to call it.
If Russia didnot start distributing lots of MIG-35 it will lose allies to China down the road. when Chinese start producing FC-1/J-10 at much greater number after satisfying there own demand
so it is better to corner the market now and give training to airforces of alot of countries for free as these pilots become decision makers down the road.
Most of these countries are resource producers or transit countries in Africa/Middleast/Asia.
JSF will be too expensive to distribute freely by under debt US.
It is not they are unneeded. only one side either have to back down and lose face in the world or collide.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/11/world/middleeast/in-rare-blunt-speech-saudi-king-criticizes-syria-vetoes.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501714_162-57375836/diplomat-russia-will-keep-shielding-assad-at-un/
JSReven if it was not so light in the end.. it would at least be cheaper to operate (single engined) and have commonality with the Flanker cuz of shared AL-31 engines. its like the Russian J-10.
Commonality with Flanker does not make it usefull.
J-10 is good for single role.
MIG-29K/MIG-35 are full multi role fighters with 5 wet stations & carrier capable. There non-after burning thrust is 11 tons. which is even more than 8.8 ton 117 engine. I doubt any single engine fighters have TWR or climb rate of MIG-35.
why didnot French make full multirole carrier capable single engine fighter.
They could have worked on M-53 advance variants to provide more thrust. since French could not make major upgrades to M-53 despite building 500 Mirage-2000. There is little chance there will be for M-88.
JSRThis is nearly a year old news but,
Boeing program vice-president Kory Mathews confirmed that the F414 Enhanced Performance Engine would be the baseline for the company’s offer to India.
………GE rates the new components at a technology readiness level (TRL) of 6 (indicating successful prototype testing) and notes that it has developed 17 new or derivative engines successfully from the same TRL.
The new engine offers up to a 20 percent thrust boost. That would take the EPE up to 26,500 pounds of thrust, giving it the best thrust/weight ratio of any fighter engine — almost 11:1. Alternatively (an option understood to be attracting interest at Saab) the EPE could be delivered with a 10 percent uprate and very generous temperature margins, extending its life and reducing fighter life-cycle costs.
So the product exist and just waiting for an order, or did India order F414 EPE already perhaps ?
if so it is in mass production.Btw how’s J-10B possible future engine hangin these days ? 😎
It is still in testing phase. Has Actual Gripen NG flown with this engine?. No one has ordered increased thrust engine beyond the standard. Infact lack of confidence on Gripen NG performance may have eliminated in MRCA competition.
There is long interview but China relevant part. Basically Salut is saying sales of AL-31 in all future variants will be reduced before 2020. It means before 2020 China would have mastered 5G engine production.
some where around 2014 J-10 with increased thrust AL-31FN will start entering service. so alteast there is stable yearly production.
http://www.salut.ru/ViewTopic.php?Id=1209
– Indeed, the AL-31F – the motor, high demand at this time. And we have confidence that in the medium term, production volume will be reduced. On the contrary, there is a definite increase. If you take the statistics and plans for delivery in 2009-2012, the annual increase will be at the level of 15-20% per year. Basically, it will continue through exports to China modernized AL-31FN engine for the J-10 fighter. A month ago, Rosoboronexport signed a contract with China for more than 120 engines, 13 engines for delivery in 2011 and the completion of deliveries in 2013. In addition, last June in Beijing meeting of the intergovernmental commission the Chinese side expressed its interest in the delivery of modernized AL-31FN with increased thrust – up to 137 engines. So up to the year 2014-2015, based on existing and future demands that we see, can be formed quite a tight production program. Of course, if we talk about the period before 2020, the AL-31F will gradually go from the market, the volume will be reduced.
JSRand who’s going to buy all those, especially if Syria’s government doesn’t survive in the near future?
People prefer Flankers, not Fulcrums
17 export customers and still going strong
MIG-29 (MIG brand in general) is known commodity across the world. There are trained pilot, technicians & infrastructure. from Ex-Iraq all the way to Burma.
MIG should just churned out these many fighters ever year regardless of customer and distribute freely among allies at time of need.
IF MIG manage to raise output to 50 to 100 MIG-29M per year at $50m price. It will cost $5b at most to Russian government.
The more Russia stand up for these countries. The more contracts for MIG and other busineses will come down.
first benefit of Russian veto.
http://www.emg.rs/en/news/world/174200.html
JSRRecognizing that the F/A-18E/F will assume new roles and missions over its lifetime,
as well as face an uncertain and ever changing threat environment,
GE designed the F414 with thrust growth potential to meet these anticipated needs.
Already envisioned for the F414’s first growth step was a 10 percent thrust increase that could be available by 2005.
Increased performance would be achieved with an improved core having an all blisk compressor and higher temperature turbine alloys to
withstand a modest temperature increase.
The second growth step would provide 15 percent more thrust than the initial F414 – about 25,000 pounds of thrust
(or roughly 111 kilo- Newtons ). This engine would use the improved Step A core with a larger fan and low-pressure turbine.
It would still fit within the existing F/A-18E/F engine installation, however.The final growth step – Step C – would produce an engine with 30 percent more thrust than the F414 – just under 29,000 pounds,
or about 128 kilo- Newtons. This thrust level is nearly equal to the F110 Increased Performance Engine.
To reach this impressive thrust level will demand further airflow growth from the fan,
a modest temperature increase, a new two-stage low pressure turbine and a new afterburner.
This incorrect assumption. USAF F-15E has practically same engine for past 20 years. and i highly doubt much more powerfull engine is on horizon.
USN F-18E has practically the same engine for past 12 years. and no higher thrust engine is being ordered. and that was best of economic times.
Infact with incoming JSF there will be even less money available for F414 upgrades. GE even kill JSF engine.
contrast this with J-10 future. There is no competition in PLAAF budget with J-10. There is twin engine J-11 & future J-20. but the same engine upgrades to those fighters will benefit J-10. while JSF engine upgrades will not benefit F-18E.
Gripen NG is on its own as far as engine thrust is concerned. and without higher thrust engine. NG AESA radar and high speed dash/Climb rates will be ineffective compared to J-10.
JSRThis argument is invalid, the Demo has completed all tests and the production model roll-out is october 2013, in fact SAAB has slow down pace in case Brazil want anything to do.
And it has two orders already.
It is completely valid.
J-10 has stable production volume between 30 to 40 aircraft per year.
So there is greater chance of manufacturing, avionics, software improvement in J-10 than Gripen NG. There is no road map beyond 22,000 GE engine thrust for Gripen.
I am not sure Rafale is even effective as airdefence fighter as the whole point of Rafale is Omni-role. It will have hard time keeping up with more numerous and potentially better trained single role fighters.
In India context J-10 has arrived in Tibet for training. infrastructure and pilot training is established for new type that will increase the gap in technical efficiency and effectiveness.
http://www.ecns.cn/military/2012/02-03/7474.shtml
2012-02-03 11:18
J-10 fighter unit makes maiden flight in Tibet
JSRASSUME – that is the keyword here. Based on what?
There is zero order of FC-1 for Chinese airforce and based on engines alone 500 J-10 ordered. It seems they have more confidence and investment in J-10 programe. Those 500 J-10 should be done by 2017. when first Rafale will enter IAF asssuming everything goes right from start?
:eek::eek: – not impressive? The Rafale’s fuel load is impressive in every aspect – it has a better fuel fraction than F-16, F-18, MiG-29/35, EF-2000. Ya, I’d like to see more impressive figures for the J10, only the Gripen NG is more impressive.
These are all old aircrafts without significant upgrades.
J-10 is the second most important fighter of world second largest defence budget so improvements will be continous.
Rafale nose is not bigger than J-10. Gripen NG is paper project.
Yes, that is why they have a clear, publicly available roadmap for the Rafale’s evolution. Engines? M88.4 or even Kaveri.
It is still on paper. No evidence anyone can fund high power engine.
Are you serious? Thales is a leader in electronic/radio/comm tech components and has a share in SPectra, RBE, you name it. Jeez.
Thales is leader only when it buys smaller firms from around the world. It has very small figher market. Virtually no Presence in advanced AWACS and large size fighter radars. Thales still need to source components from Outside France. It may not have IP to all the technologies.
Chinese have now built more AWACS, MPA, large fighter radar for J-11.
Putting a top notch avionics should not be big deal for medium size fighter like J-10.
JSRI thought the J10B we are using as a comparison will have an ESA, IRST etc? As far as composites go, it all depends on how much metal the J10 has in the first place. IIRC, the flanker was almost all metallic, and hence weight savings became possible with composites, not to mention smaller/lighter electronics/digital components compared to analog instruments. In any case, IIRC, the original Su-27 was rather light – about 16 tons iirc so the Su-35 has not really gotten that much lighter.
In the case of the J10 however, how do we know how much composites it has used in the first place? What sort of weight savings can take place via sensor suite changes?
The Point is Su-35 becomes Multirole thats why it gained weight over original one. not to mention increase in interanal fuel capacity by 20%.
If it was simple airdefence fighter. The possiblity of weight gain
is not there.
We know that FC-1 weighs 6500kg with 249m/sec climb rate as it was in the charts presented. It is safe to assume J-10 will better than this figures.
Rafale top ceiling and top speed is not much impressive and without CFT. The internal fuel is not impressive either.
J-10 has alot of growth potential interms of advance manufacturing and uprated engines. Like AL-31FM2 or WS-10 updates. There is no such thing for Rafale.
what Chinese aero company has the kind of experience that Thales offers when it comes to manufacturing top quality sensors/equipment
Thales is good in Civillian Avionics which requires constant 24/7 operations with 60,000 flight cycles in an aircraft. For fighter aircraft
with 6000 or so ariframe life and at most 200 hr per year use. these manufacturing qualities are not that much important.
JSRAt this point it does not matter who ever the customer.
MIG-29 should be produced at maximum quanity per year. just like MIG-21 in 1960s. This will lower the cost of production and increase leverage. There is something needed cheaper than Flanker in mass quantities.
JSRBecause the J-10 is not a simple AD-fighter and in the same weight class as the present F-16s at least. None fighter lost some weight during development really. Growth potential comes along with extra weight in general.
See the F-15 or Su-27 about that.
J-10 is airdefence fighter. Unless you can show us its Anti-ship/Sead capability. Even the external ET on J-10 are not larger than FC-1. so I doubt Chinese development of J-10 will be static and they dont need to increase its weight. Multirole fighters are always a compromise not so much for airdefence fighter.
see example of Su-35. It gained larger fuel capacity, Electronic scanning radar, TVC, auxilliary power unit, coated canopy, double payload. and 4 extra weopons stations over basic Su-27SK without increasing that much weight.
JSRThere is no way the J-10 will weigh less than 8 000kg empty.
It is clearly a larger plane than the Mirage 2000, and later model F-16’s, and indeed the Gripen NG.
It has a large afteburning engine who’s weight is starting to approach that of 2 M88’s as used in Rafale. Seeing as the Rafale weighs in empty at around 9500kg plus, I’d assume a figure of around 8900 to around 9500 to be a perfectly reasonable expectation for a jet such as the J10, dependant on what equipment is inside.
I doubt J-10 has larger wing area than M2K. The point i am making is that Chinese are not using J-10 as bomb truck unlike F-16C.
J-10 dont have IRST/Electronic scanning radar.
so why should a simply airdefence fighters weigh so much. Idealy it should not weigh more than F-16A. which is 1970s manufacturing and avionics.
FC-1 weighs 6500kg. and it has demonstrated quite similar payload to J-10.
Dassualt put Rafale in 10 ton class. If Chinese introduce same level of composites in J-10. J-10 weight will be even further reduced in future versions. J-10 has alot of growth potential.
JSRIf J-10 weighs 8860kg than it is pretty much out dated.
it is not multirole figher with heavy loads or have electronic scanning radar in nose or IRST.
just adding IRST and electronic scanning radar will add 500kg.
J-10 should not weigh more than 7500kg in air defence version.
Rafale is better in TWR even with underpowered engines.
JSR2. More of JSR’s blind jingoism. Sukhoi has to find a radar & systems supplier, & pay for the development & integration or persuade a partner to pay up. No sign of that happening. It has a huge disadvantage from a customer’s point of view, in that it doesn’t have an installed base. For small users, being able to piggy-back on civilian supply trains is extremely valuable.
All i said was E-195 has smaller x-section than Sukhoi. It simply dont have large aircraft comfort and space. Its range is similar but there is no long range version being developed. Sukhoi dont have to find AESA supplier. It will be scaled down A-100.
3. The Boeing 737/A320 market is irrelevant to the KC-390 market. Neither is a military freighter, & neither Boeing nor Airbus is competing head-on with the KC-390. And it isn’t an ‘even heavier and more complex transport’: it’s slap bang in the middle of the A320/B737 weight range.
when you abondon this segment of Civil airliners what confidence is that this KC-390 will be successfull product and not overweight with poor aerodynamics.
JSRI think it would be more accurate to say that the US had much more money than the USSR and could afford to dive headfirst into every nook and cranny without rocking the boat too much if it turned out to be a colossal waste of time.
And of course that goes the other way too re: folks praising Russia’s prudence in evolving the Flanker platform. Russia was forced to that path by necessity, not choice.
US also made compromises. Instead of creating new generation replacement for F-111. They created F-15E/F-16C. which will need more tanker support.
Su-24/Su-34/Tu-22M may not need to same extent.
There is no dedicated interceptor like MIG-31. but more MIG-29 class. F-15C.
The gap between F-15C and MIG-29M is not there interms of TWR/Range/climb rate on internal fuel. F-15C and MIG-29M are upgrades to basic F-15A & MIG-29A. MIG-29K is branch out from MIG-29M. while completely separate aircraft F-18 was created instead of creating Naval F-15. (whether it is possible or not?)
TVC was only productionized on F-22. if TVC is not important why implement on F-22?. It increases weight, lower up keep times and drive cost.
by implementing TVC and hence enhanced FBW across range of fighters. Russia has signifcantly brought down the cost & time line of developing 5G fighter.
There is also cost saving in implementing nearly identical cockpit, engines and same factory (training of workforce) for both Su-35 & T-50.
There is no such thing to same extent F-15, F-22, JSF, F-18. All are built at different places with different workforce.
Problem is further compounded by international program like JSF. when every one is delaying there previous plans at same time. so who is going to pay the world wide workers for so many years without production. As all those subcontractors are going to raise the cost of final component across the supply chain. different level of investment involved in building 30 planes year vs 200 planes a year.
http://blogs.star-telegram.com/sky_talk/2012/01/australia-to-re-think-f-35-acquisition-plans.html
JSRif Russia knows Syria is a slowly sinking ship and that there may be a new government, then why not do more to change relations with the current regime to improve relations with the next one.
it can work… new regimes in Iraq and Afghanistan still buying Russian stuff even after.
if Russia knows Syria is a slowly sinking ship and that there may be a new government, then why not do more to change relations with the current regime to improve relations with the next one.
it can work… new regimes in Iraq and Afghanistan still buying Russian stuff even after.
Russia knows this arab world is sinking ship thats why it
veto Arab league supported resolution. The most daring part is that Russia is telling the arab world that it will sell arms to Syria which is ruled by minority. minority in context of whole arab world not just one country.
sadam in Irak was minority but he was not minority in arab world.
more interesting case is of China. It has huge trade with Arab world but it still veto resolution.
Chinese may have come to conclusion that Arab world cannot live without Chinese products and they have to sell Oil to China just to feed the growing unemployed and unskilled population otherwise there will be revolts.
Sign In
