JSRIt is not, quite on the contrary. Current RD-33MKs won’t make it over 54/88 kN at dry weight of 1,145 kg. The F414-400 makes 58/98 kN at dry weight of 1,110 kg.
The EJ200 is the champ here, with 60/90 kN while weighing only 990 kg. The M88 is the lightest one, 50/75 kN at 897 kg dry weight.
These are paper specification not real world performance. MIG29 is now larger airframe than EF with less advance material and still had 5 wet stations with all the high performance characteristics of classic MIG29. see the MIG35 19km altitude , 3500 km range and mach 2.25 top speed. Rafale has the weakest engine I doubt anyone using it for single engine application.
JSROriginally Posted by MSphere
It’s not that bad, finally, there are not that many other platforms.. Current RD-33MK is technologically roughly on the F404-GE-402 level (~77 N thrust from 1 kg weight, digitally controlled FADEC, cooled blades, IR signature reduction, service life 4k hours). Granted, EJ200 and F414 can do slightly more (~88-91 N from 1kg weight, 6k hours), but the advertised thrust increase to 98 kN for the Klimov should get it roughly on the same level..Now, get the unit price for EJ200 and RD-33MK in a comparison chart and you’ll see what I mean.. given current RUB/USD exchange rate, a twinpack of Klimovs costs ~20% less than a single F414..
http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=n3vu4x&s=7#.WRo5cfmGPIU
Last edited by MSphere; 15th May 2017 at 23:49.
RD-33 is alot more morefull than EJ200 and F414. try remove those composite materials from EF and F-18E and see how they perform compared to MIG-29. RD-93 also very efficient in real world application. that JF17 has 3500km ferry range.
JSRThis is getting a bit silly. You might see a need for “multi-spectral, holographic flares”, but I do not know if the countermeasures industry does. And it is going to be some time before every combat aircraft can be fitted with DIRCM.
As for “A target vehicle that’s more classified than front line stealth fighters and bombers”, I made no such claim. Towed decoys are hardly a big secret, but the RCS level of the targets I was tracking, the frequencies I was using, and the tactical scenario were (and probably still are) classified, so I could retain no docs etc when I left that field of activity.
“If you know the design approach the other side takes.” Which you don’t…”
So how did the US manage to engineer their Fan Fong equivalent and get it largely right? A mix of humint, elint, and the knowledge of what approaches were practical in terms of the engineering technology of the day seems to have done the trick. A similar process has been used for other systems such as ‘double-digit’ SAMs, and is under way today.
Similar process like Fan Fong cant be replicated infact it can happen in opposite direction. Think about Soviet Union appoach of developing things with it’s human resources and Russian approach and the very different people behind it.
JSRwhat make you think not things can intercept Iskander before it dive for terminal phase ? there are still SM-2, SM-6 and PAC-3MSE
Are all those systems located in same area. its very expensive way of defense. infact these can be saturated with smaller cruise missiles like Kh-35 and let Iskander fly through after portable missile strike.
JSRKh-35 designer interview and its exports. i think he referring to India when do comparision.
https://sputniknews.com/military/201705121053551612-kh35-anti-ship-missile-designer-interview/
JSRYes the Mountain Home squadrons were the first with the AESAs and all carry data links. There are around 45 AN/APG-82’s (total with all squadrons) installed with the Strike Eagles at Mountain Home getting their first unit back nearly 3 years ago.
Attached is the AN/APG-82 installation schedule (I’d have to go back and see but the Congress should have added ac couple of radars in Q4 FY17 that the Obama’s PB17 submission left out).
Are there engine upgrades to those F15 otherwise radar range will improve at most 50% which is not much.
JSRthey are incorporating Syria experiance. i am sure they will accelerate procurement. A-50U/ Tu-214R/IL-20/Tu-142 are all there.
JSRNot sure about economic resources – arguably the lack thereof as a foundation for their frenetic military spending is what did the country in.
The military spending was simply not efficient in USSR as factories were spread around and alot of duplicate military products and unreliable allies. France/UK simply can’t match Russia human resources let alone economic resources. France /UK need mass migration just to keep health system afloat let alone more complex things. Russia can bomb all Middleast and Eastern EU and it will have no impact on it’s prosperity and technological development . That technological gap is going to increase.
JSRIMHO 4th gen a/c is not much of a threat for the F-35 — the capability gap is too big.
Perhaps a/c like Rafale, Gripen E and Typhoon (with advanced IRST, AESA radar, and improved sensor fusion) can reduce the gap, however those are mainly operated by allies and therefore not a threat.
Until J-20 and PAK-FA becomes operational it is difficult to imagine there can be any air threats at all (and even then it seems highly likely that the F-35 will maintain a significant lead since by then the F-35 will be further upgraded).
F35 is so advance that Turkey accelerated it’s purchase.
JSRSisi understand that Sudan airforce is built on Russian planes and they got boat load money from Saudis . western aircrafts are too expensive and limitations.
JSRhow they equal to 40,000 lbs thrust MIG31BM and Su-35. those two are the air to air platforms. These are the correct upgrades.
JSRThe radar is diferent, the irst is diferent, the mission computers are diferent, the ew suite is diferent…
Then there’s the internal bay’s mechanisms to clear.
Mercurius is correct
It is not 1980s internal bay testing. Computers and software sufficient advance that it’s very minor testing. The cannon already tested.
JSRMore like 6 hours.
But during those 6 hours, there will not be any breach of airspace with UAV or anything else.
A-50U is more like 10hours loiter time. Sukhoi jets have sufficient big radars that there is no need of small and medium AWACS.
JSRIronic, rare earths can be mined in Canada and Australia (or US), but those pesky environmental laws make it expensive (and toxic). People don’t want to pay 1,000 US for an IPhone.
$1000 iphone? you certainly have no idea how much profit/revene growth needed to keep Apple stock high. Canada/Australia cant compete in simply fields are like Oil/Gas and you expect them the high end of rare earth metals. Canada is totally out of arctic.
Having a sole source supplier seems a bit risky considering the use of rare earths in military applications.
in 2013 when Oil prices were skyhigh Russia consider these rare earth expensive and only efficient R&D under Rostec can cut short the dependence in fastest time. i bet boeing will look at this one just like titanium.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-rareearth-china-idUSBRE9890EI20130910
Russia to invest $1 billion in rare earths to cut dependence on ChinaRostec aims to cover Russian demand for these raw materials by 2017, the company added.
“The (Russian) President (Vladimir Putin) and the government have set a task to expand rare earths production as Russia’s stocks are almost depleted,” a source in state industrial and defense conglomerate Rostec told Reuters on Tuesday.
“Stocks need to be replenished as the main producer, China, has increased prices sharply,” the source said
JSRAs I had mentioned the US Government only awarded the contract to Lockheed to begin executing the Saudi order only in late December of 2015 so they are likely to begin getting deliveries this year and receive all missiles and launcher modifications by 2019. With US FMS sales it is easy to follow FMS notification date, or even vendor_customer contract finalization dates but what is the only ‘real’ completion metric to look at is the actual DOD contract award. For now their upgraded PAC-2s are the best they have and I don’t think they have configuration 3+ either. UAE has the most advanced system in the region. Saudi’s are likely to announce or finalize their THAAD and perhaps an IBCS order during Trump’s visit there if everything could move along in the Congress. Informal, and back channel requests for IBCS and THAAD has been pending for a number of years as part of a broader GCC missile shield but much like Qatar’s and UAE’s request the previous administration sat on it longer than usual.
While it is easier to see missiles being fired, it is harder to deduce shot doctrine or tell how many targets they are actually attempting to defeat unless one has such a clear view that one can see tens of km in altitude, and downrange to deduce warheads, decoys or missile fragments.
Few dozen interceptors at a time? A PAC-2 launcher can only carry 4 missiles so I’d love to see videos of them emptying 3-6 launchers in one go (Typically the Saudi’s should be using 4-6 launchers per radar). 2 PAC-2’s per Ballistic Missile target should be a good shot doctrine, but you could even allow 3 per target if you are protecting a very high value asset given the nature of this particular conflict (Saudi’s have vastly more resources and are at home). Even PAC-3 shot doctrine calls for mostly a twin launch per TBM target. 3 Incoming Ballistic Missiles could warrant 6-8 PAC-2 interceptors depending upon the area they are protecting but unless there is a massive raid of say 6-10 incoming missiles you wouldn’t need to launch 12, 24 or 36 interceptor missiles at them even if it were physically possible given the PAC-2 and its size.
These are the raid sizes the PAC-3 with its 16 missile/launcher configuration is designed to tackle. PAC-2 not so much even if one gets past the fact that the PAC-3 exists primarily because there was a need for a considerably better TBM interceptor than the PAC-2 (even though the PAC-2 has been subsequently upgraded and improved).
The problem with all these complex airdefence systems that they are very hard to upgrade and maintain and get obsolete soon against primitive systems like in Yemen. even F-16 so mass produced at many places but hardly 5% can be consider modern.
http://www.defenseworld.net/news/19189/Saudi_Arabia_Could_Insist_on_Locally_made_Spares_For_Imported_Military_Hardware#.WQ7rcqllDqA
Saudi Arabia Could Insist on Locally-made Spares For Imported Military Hardware
Sign In
