dark light

JSR

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 811 through 825 (of 4,319 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: USAF T-X #2192667
    JSR
    Participant

    he is making decision when public spending money is involved. The amount of job creations at his supporting states and US built parts will become key criteria.
    he is decreasing power of congress by directly talking to firms.

    http://fortune.com/2017/01/27/donald-trump-navy-submarines-spending/
    We’re lacking submarines and we’re going to build new submarines but the price is too high so I’m cutting the prices way down,” Trump said in an interview on Fox News to be broadcast later on Thursday

    in reply to: RuAF News and development Thread part 15 #2193070
    JSR
    Participant

    I am surprised at scale of order book for Brahmos. The total Yakhont family may even be over $50b. this world largest missile project.

    http://tass.com/economy/740460
    BrahMos missile orders exceeded $6 billion in India
    Our next target is $10 billion,” he added. A source in the company told ITAR-TASS this would be achieved over two or three years.

    in reply to: KF-X/IF-X & TF-X for Europe? #2193089
    JSR
    Participant

    Not really sure what You are smoking but even if I wont deny this in comparison to other countries I’m sure corruption is at quite a comparable low level … hint, hint a bit further to the East, Middle-East or so !

    comparable low level?. its just invisible in ordinary life to those who don’t understand, the bad quality products (no long term reliability), billions in pollution fines, (hint Chinese hasn’t put fines on same scale as US despite China biggest VW group market), banking system that is risk exposed to trillions. on top that nearly every German product has parts made outside that country that make the German industrial system open to blackmail to those third countries whether its Romania or Poland all the way to Mexico or US with more than 10% Airbus parts. Germany will make EU so poor that every country in Europe will look for exports/investments and tourism inflow from outside Europe. forget about any kind of military power.

    in reply to: KF-X/IF-X & TF-X for Europe? #2193243
    JSR
    Participant

    You mean to keep and hold political pressure to withhold that sale or in military sense ?

    yes. corporate Germany is totally bankrupt and corrupt. they need these Middleastern investors. Both UK / France/US has been selling there for decades and I bet there will be Germanic parts or industrial machinery used in them.

    in reply to: The PAK-FA News, Pics & Debate Thread XXV #2193287
    JSR
    Participant

    Yes , but PAK-FA is said to carry similar or more fuel than Flanker, it also said to be able to carry weapon internally. I find it rather hard to believe that it is still smaller than Su-27

    how big MIG35 look compared to early 1980s MIG29?. It carries more than twice the payload and 50% range increase.(pay attention its range increase not fuel increase) on wider nose airframe/cockpit with more powerfull engines to higher altitude. This is called technology implementation correctly. PAKFA technology implementation is much higher level. even some special versions of Tu-204/214 family has more than 10,000km range.

    in reply to: The PAK-FA News, Pics & Debate Thread XXV #2193399
    JSR
    Participant

    As far as IRST detection, claims of 50km, 100km ranges against ANY aircraft target are only being quoted by 3rd party news sources and fanboys, especially those in denial about radar stealth. Think about why countries (US, China, Russia, Japan, France) would spend numerous billions building LO aircraft, avoiding detection by a 10 million dollar radar sensor only to have it negated by a $500k – $1 million IR device. Surely the ultimate aircraft would have a giant gimballed telescope on the front. The reason countries still pursue radar stealth is that those detection ranges are fantasies.

    where you get this information Russia spend billions on stealth?
    Russia has highly effective management and education system with very effective R&D. that’s why country debt level so low despite the most intensive air and ground support to Syrians. US despite producing numerous Nobel winners need all the help with its Boeing planes and F35 also made 50% outside. I have doubt US can win trade wars with Mexico. such level of dependency.

    http://rbth.com/defence/2015/04/07/russian_defense_ministry_to_slash_orders_for_new_pak_fa_aircraft_45033.html
    In 2010, Putin said that the first phase of the aircraft’s development cost around 30 billion rubles ($530 million), and a similar amount would be required for the completion of the work. During all this period six flying prototypes of the PAK FA aircraft were created.

    F-35 not even comparable to MIG35 which fly higher and faster and will be equiped with much faster missiles to do round the clock operations at safe distance with higher tempo.

    https://sputniknews.com/military/201701271050083906-mig35-analysis-interview/
    Tough, Cost-Effective, Timely: Russian MiG-35 to Be Armed With Laser Weapons

    in reply to: KF-X/IF-X & TF-X for Europe? #2193414
    JSR
    Participant

    To admit, as long as the political situation does not change, I hope Germany will block any sale of the EJ-200.

    Is Germany that much capable once Persian Gulf join Turkey in military projects.

    in reply to: KF-X/IF-X & TF-X for Europe? #2193439
    JSR
    Participant

    I called it some time ago.. TF-X will end up basically being a mid-weight stealth aircraft with Eurofighter guts.

    I think it’s more apparent for the UK to do it with out the EU or US, now that May and Trump seemed to disagree on foreign policy.

    it may also attract investments from countries like Qatar. I don’t see that much urgency from Turkey for F-35.

    in reply to: RuAF News and development Thread part 15 #2194473
    JSR
    Participant

    That 160 km range old figure. I doubt that radar is going into 2019 serial production.

    the key word is tracking so many targets at this distance without mentioning RCS.

    http://tass.com/defense/927627

    “The onboard radar allows detecting and tracking from 10 to 30 targets at a time at a distance of 160 kilometers,” the general designer said during the international presentation of the MiG-35 fighter aircraft

    The range with external fuel tanks increased by over 10% more than MIG-29K.

    http://tass.com/defense/927673
    Russian Aerospace Force Commander-in-Chief Bondarev earlier said the MiG-35 would become Russia’s sole light fighter jet

    And the MiG-35 is an excellent plane plus its ability to strike targets both on the ground and in the air and its range without landing is 3,500 km, which suits us very much. We’ll be purchasing it as soon as the state trials are over. As soon as these planes are serially produced, we’ll be immediately receiving them,” Bondarev said.

    in reply to: The PAK-FA News, Pics & Debate Thread XXV #2194487
    JSR
    Participant

    Think the kiddies have been snorting the goofballs again. This thing is a shiny disco ball in comparison to the Arleigh Burke, let alone the…

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]250970[/ATTACH]

    Anyone can “reduce” RCS for something that sticks out like a city on radar, but only a few teams are implementing actual “stealth” levels of RCS reduction.

    This goes for the PAK FA as well. The attention to detail in signature reduction on it is primitive and clumsy compared to what has been done with the F-35.

    – Little/no attention to surface discontinuity management (even the Rafale handles this better)
    – Fat, rounded leading edges.
    – Horrible surface alignment, especially for the side facing surfaces.
    – Portions of the side surfaces almost vertically facing.
    – Protrusions exposed directly to the sides
    – No buried canopy frame.
    – Exposed, forward facing blockers (a feature that F-35 designers only deemed suitable for the F-35’s butt).
    – Non-VLO, forward facing IRST
    – No airframe masking of IR signature (F-22 addresses this with flat nozzles, F-35 addresses it with single, small nozzle hidden behind a widened central airframe)

    In a stealth-on-stealth type of fight where detection ranges are well within both sides’ NEZs, the first to detect the enemy will prevail almost always. Racing into the fray, blind, at M1.8 will not help either, it will only reduce the pilot’s reaction time and options when the missiles start appearing in front of him, not to mention giving away the fact that he’s an aircraft and not a decoy drone.

    Actual stealth is sharp where it needs to be sharp, rounded where it needs to be and has thresholds on how vertical surfaces and edges are allowed to be.

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]250971[/ATTACH]

    T-50 still has decades to go to catch up to 1980’s level stealth.

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]250972[/ATTACH]

    you haven no understanding of effectiveness stealth technology as applied b. Russia will not develop stealth that is slow and visible in circumstances (Subs under the ocean priority) or can be used only once a year like B-2 with huge support.

    fast missiles are the first thing to effectiveness of platforms. it wont take too long to see whose science and government effectiveness better.

    http://tass.com/defense/927705

    We are working on the missile’s light version. It should fit the size of a torpedo tube and be almost 1.5 times smaller by its weight. It will be possible to mount our airborne missile on a wide range [of aircraft]. Of course, we’ll be developing it, first of all, for the fifth-generation plane but, possibly, it will be mounted on the MiG-35 fighter, although we have not carried out such developments,” he said.

    in reply to: RuAF News and development Thread part 15 #2194679
    JSR
    Participant

    MiG floated a single-engine design for export simultaneously with MiG-29. It was called two names, actually, available as MiG-23 or – to only one customer – the MiG-27. They even floated Al-31 powerplant with it. Nobody wanted it. It’s safety record left a sour taste in operators mouths. Shame, too, because an Al-31F powered MiG-23MLD with a PESA-based radar would have been interesting.

    I wonder if a simplified Kuznetsov NK-32 or a non-swiveling Soyuz R-79V-300 wouldn’t have been a better basis for a single-engine multirole fighter. NK-32 production would have benefitted with additional orders, driving down Tu-160 costs. You don’t really lose much basing MiG-29 off a single big engine versus the twin RD-33’s. As popular as MiG-21 was, really, surprised the Chinese were the ones to push a single engine RD-33 fighter. MiG missed practically every potential market trying to force MiG-29 down every customers throat.

    NK-321
    http://www.leteckemotory.cz/motory/nk-32/nk321_01.jpg

    MIG-29 much more successful than single engine fighters. I bet Iran would have been big operator in 90s and so are many other countries that curtailed due to political restrictions. Once assembly line goes active many customers will come. It share engine with JF17. Burma has MIG29. Those single engine J10/F16/Gripen hasn’t landed on carrier.

    in reply to: RuAF News and development Thread part 15 #2194684
    JSR
    Participant

    You don’t read official statements that performance is better than previous versions and it will exploit all the futuristic weopons and this thing needed in Syria. There is no limitation in range , sensors and performance.

    https://sputniknews.com/military/201701271050065455-russia-su-35-syria/
    Russia Needs MiG-35 Fighters for Combat Missions in Syria-Like Conflicts

    in reply to: RuAF News and development Thread part 15 #2194718
    JSR
    Participant

    That 160 km range old figure. I doubt that radar is going into 2019 serial production.

    in reply to: RuAF News and development Thread part 15 #2194937
    JSR
    Participant

    What compromises does MiG-29K/KUB have that MiG-35(UB) doesnt have? Because framewise it is exactly the same. They kept the beefy landing gear, they kept the Krueger flaps, the massive barn door flaps, the overall wing and frame design etc etc. Same engine too. So it is flying exactly like K/KUB would.

    After the presentation there is no real ambiguity about the engines or the radar. Engines will be the vanilla RD-33MK’s and the radar will be the vanilla Zhuk.

    .

    The only official information is radar following between 10 to 30 targets and flight performance improved since it’s same size as MIG29K so the engine are more powerful.

    in reply to: The PAK-FA News, Pics & Debate Thread XXV #2195025
    JSR
    Participant

    So you are equating theoretical research an mock-ups (none of which were fighters) to 30+ years of operational experience?

    Today computers redundant 30 years operational experiance and only for those countries who can use computers effectively. That’s how Russia succeeded in drug trials more effectively.

Viewing 15 posts - 811 through 825 (of 4,319 total)