dark light

JSR

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 856 through 870 (of 4,319 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2200379
    JSR
    Participant

    Couldn’t care less about a “list”. They are either new designs or not. If the Su-35 and F-18 E/F are entirely new designs, then they are analogous. One is not more “newer” than another.

    The F-18 E/F didn’t need an entirely different FBW system as the F/A-18 had the first digital FBW system, the control laws obviously are different as they are different aircraft.

    F-18E is not new design. It is just enlarge version of F18C. It does not bring anything in performance. does F-18E has high supersonic range?. Su-35 weapon load distribution is different .

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2200655
    JSR
    Participant

    Su-35 has an internal fuel load of around 11.2 tonnes or so – more than either the F-35 or even the F-22. Like the two Americans the Flanker can be fitted with drop tanks but I should think that in most combat roles they are not expected to be used – they are just not needed.

    Su-35 11.2 tons is not that much considering the engine power and size of aircraft. Even F-18E without CFT at 6.5Tons. Su-35 need those tanks just like Su-34 it’s just they don’t have the mission yet. Or they will use airrefueling.

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2200662
    JSR
    Participant

    If we look at the SU-35, we could compare it to the F-16C Blk 50 to Blk 60 transition. The upgrade program required the UAE pay US$3 billion, involved a new AESA radar, an integrated FLIR/laser targeting system, higher weights, an upgraded EW system, an upgraded engine and expanded weapons and fuel carriage.

    As for timings, UAE ordered the jet in early 1999, it first flew in 2003 and deliveries started in 2005.

    What weopons and fuel increase in F16E that is not in late model F16C?. what is non-afterburning thrust of F16E engine.

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2200968
    JSR
    Participant

    Not even close.Nothing more than your usual deluded nationalistic attitude

    The description is very clear in differentiating Su-35.

    Same top speed, same wing area, same aerodynamic and inlet layout , higher wing loading. It won’t fly higher. You can keep going on and on with your so called keywords and add in your own interpretation of them.But physics won’t change whether you like it or not.

    Jf17 has same top speed as F35. MIG35 can fly higher than MIG29 . Look at MIG press release.

    If you stop being a morons and start to google the detail in photo, you will see mentioned of range increase.Or at least use some common sense. But as usual, you resort to be a moronic troll instead
    https://s30.postimg.org/ab9x5sgip/5d6798d270f589ec095af09bf23f789c.jpg

    Ever since F16 gained weight LM has stop publishing it’s range on internal fuel . These are all unsubstitiinated vogue numbers.

    in reply to: Military Aviation News #2201067
    JSR
    Participant

    Well, its not A RUSSIAN fleet. Its a company with several different interest. Think ICS has their main office in London. And support facility in Poland..

    its very obvious.

    http://www.dw.com/en/german-military-relying-on-russia-ukraine-firms/a-36767734
    While the Antonov Design Bureau is to bill the German taxpayer 37,509 euros ($39,872) per flight hour, Volga Dnepr only wants 23,341 euros per flight hour, ARD reported.

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2201070
    JSR
    Participant

    Top speed of Su-35 is not faster than Su-27

    those key words are exclusively reserved for Su-35.

    http://www.uacrussia.ru/en/aircraft/lineup/military/su-35/
    This airplane combines the qualities of a modern fighter (super-maneuverability, superior active and passive acquisition aids, high supersonic speed and long range, capability of managing battle group actions, etc.)

    Su-35 doesnot flight higher than Su-27

    it does. pay attention to news item periodically released.

    quite significant with CFTs

    F-16C also carries CFT. nothing special creating a unrefined bulges. I don’t see 900km range increase with 2 ET. all I see is fuel increase not range increase.

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2201085
    JSR
    Participant

    Same aerodynamic lay out and everything. To say Su-35 does not share any characteristic with Su-27 is like saying F-16E and F-16C does not share any characteristics.

    Does F-16E has high supersonic flight compared to F-16C?. Is F-16E fly higher than F-16C?. what is internal fuel capacity increase for F-16E?.
    Su-35 has weopon distribution and loads flexibility which Su-27 simply cant.

    They do

    which fighter can increase flight range by 900km with just 2ET and at such location?. show practical examples.

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2201100
    JSR
    Participant

    su-35 is a derivertive of su-27, get over it. Any fighter can carry EFT on wing.

    Su-35 does not share any fundamental characteristics with Su-27.

    http://www.roe.ru/eng_pr/eng_pr_12_03_27_a.html
    Su-35 multi-purpose fighter. This super agile fighter incorporates fifth-generation technologies

    yup every fighter can lift 2000L tanks at such location.

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2201132
    JSR
    Participant

    The Su-35 is a poor comparison as it is a derivative airframe.

    Su35 derivative airframe?. try put dfbw control 3D TVC with high supersonic flight speed in another airframe see how many decades take for another firm to make just the weight right. there is picture of location of 2000L fuel tanks on wing in below brochure. it will show you what it is capable of carrying.

    http://www.knaapo.ru/media/eng/about/production/military/su-35/su-35_buklet_eng.pdf
    High agile capabilities supporting
    supermaneuverability implemented by a
    new-generation power plant with thrustvector
    control and new flight control

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2201150
    JSR
    Participant

    How would the Superhornet fare in that fictitious environment?

    Superhornet cost less to built so more money can be spent on hypersonic and stealthy missiles launched from multiple racks.
    its not ideal platform as Superhornet is not that high speed, high altitude, highpower, big nose, big tail fighter but F35 does not bring anything over it.
    Trump knows US is fundamentally uncompetitive nation. its shouldn’t be spreading its limited skills on things that will increase its trade deficit in other sectors.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-russia-sanctions-nuclear-reduction-deal/
    Trump says he’ll reduce Russia sanctions in exchange for nuclear reduction deal

    The simple inarguable fact is the F-35 can do more now, farther, and with less supporting assets than the Superhornet. Will things get harder in the futrue, sure, but that just means that the F-35 has a better starting point with pleanty of expandable capability while the SH is already hampered by teh needed assets today.

    F-35 can do more with less?. F18 is already on carriers to it can reach global war on terror nations without extensive bases.

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2201396
    JSR
    Participant

    Technologically it is surpassed only by the F-35 (and F-22 of course). A true 4.5 generation fighter with excellent sensors, EWS, LO, and true sensor fusion. The French have a good reason to be proud. The price is high, but it has to be since almost all components are made exclusively for the Rafale, in a high-cost country (France). C’est la vie.

    Technologically Rafale is slightly advanced than Chinese JF17. nothing earthshattering for the price. and it seems Chinese are not going to replicate it.

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2201401
    JSR
    Participant

    On top of all of that, the typical CONOPS for the SuperHornet includes escorts, EW support, decoys, buddy tankers, etc…. While the typical F-35C CONOPS needs none of those.

    F-35A or what ever version will need much more escrots than Superhornet. think harder you will get the answer. 2030 is too far just in post 2020 era the advancement in AWACS/Satellite technology and hypersonic weopons loaded on aircraft with multiple racks will pretty much guarantee hit before even F-35 turn on its afterburner on tarmac. F-35 will need to be parked very far from theatre and will need extensive tanker support and even need a lot of cargo support to transport ammunition and parts to F-35.

    https://sputniknews.com/voiceofrussia/news/2014_04_12/Russia-should-be-ready-for-non-contact-war-Deputy-PM-0848/
    Old-fashioned army and fleet, organized in accordance with 20th century examples, will lose a war before they are face to face with the enemy. The era of high-precision long-range weapons has arrived. The future lies in smart weapons,” Dmitry Rogozin told students in the Urals city of Chelyabinsk.

    As far as SH upgrades, the userbase is too small to justify the expenditure (ie new engines, CFTs, etc). The ASH concept has been out there for a while but there has not been any takers.

    how exactly it is small? start with 100 aircraft per year for USAF and remember its built I believe in same plant as F-15 in state that has no immigrant pressure on scale of Texas that will keep cost down and a lot less foreign made parts.
    why you think LM CEO is touting 1800 more jobs because she knows that amount of money spent and imported components are not favorable and Trump may even force her to built F35 parts in states where Trump is likely to win next elections.

    http://breakingdefense.com/2017/01/lockheed-ceo-tells-trump-good-deal-close-for-90-planes/

    This deal would also create 1,800 new jobs at our Fort Worth, Texas, facility and thousands more throughout our U.S. supply base

    On the Swarms issues, they control themselves, the pilot only assigns targets, missions, etc. It’s not a high workload and something that the F-35 has built into itself already (ie asset management, target assignments, etc). The smart thing would be for the F-35 to act as a relay (using SATCOM & MADL) so that off-board controllers would manage the swarm most of the time leaving the pilot to do his normal job while still being able to take over the swarm as needed.

    why you think all advance choppers and Strike fighter like Su-34 need two. its about loitering, information overload and controlling ground based missiles be it SAM or strike missiles.

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2201740
    JSR
    Participant

    Rafale carries 3 times load to 3 times distance over Super Extendard. Moreover Rafale has long airframe and engine life advantage. and its price is based on 11 aircraft per year.
    There is no such advantage of F35 over F18E. F18E can upgraded with enhanced engine and CFT. infact twin seat F-18F will have advantage in 2030 over single seat F35 as C&C fighters of swarms of uavs and missiles.

    in reply to: Russia moving tac air troops to Syria #2201924
    JSR
    Participant
    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2201928
    JSR
    Participant

    Forget the joke about air to air missile “brochure” PK and kill rates. I want to be a rep for a surface to air missile company. Outrageous claims of effectiveness, with a history of:
    Yom kippur war- lots of kills, didn’t stop Israel from achieving air dominance
    Vietnam-lots of kills, didn’t prevent U.S. from air dominance
    Bekka valley- not so much.
    Libya (1986)- 1 F-111
    GW1- probably the most robust air defense system outside of Soviet Union (fact), dismantled in days
    Serbia- a few high profile kills (F-117) Serbian forces unable to redeploy. Forced to peace table
    Iraq “no fly zone”- cost minimal
    GW2- remaining Iraqi air defenses unable to mount serious opposition
    Georgia-few kills, unable to prevent Russian air dominance
    Libya (2011)- Air dominance established day 1

    History is clear, once the kill chain is broken, air defense units become just another target.

    History ?. Have you look at systems . Those are 3 decades old by the time the got attacked. US started far ahead in 1945 than Soviets in science and Engineering. now Russian systems are built on superior education standards and leadership.

Viewing 15 posts - 856 through 870 (of 4,319 total)