JSRHappy to see how my post have sparked a good quality debate.
Let’s add that in the end of seventies/begin of eighties we had the reverse case of lightened up fighters versions (F-4F and MiG-23ML) to be used in the tiny and crowded european theater, sacrificing autonomy in order to gain better performances.
Needless to say as soon as the Cold war ended the same concept of a Frontal Aviation fighter fell down in pieces for Russia as they passed from an advanced deployment along the tiny DDR/ Czech border to operating into their own enormous territory.
They were indeed lucky to have developed the Flanker or they would have remained just with the ecqually niche PVO planes.
They had MIG-31 for long range missions. remember Soviet have two big design houses and many factories. If there was no Flanker development I am sure that MIG-1.42 development will have been much faster priority. even now MIG-35/MIG-29K has place in Russian aviation as they belong to separate industrial chain. it is just to risky to depend on on set of industrial chain.
JSRT-50 supersonic range is double of Flanker. This with more powerful engines. At subsonic settings it will have no trouble outstripping Flanker range by wide margin.
JSRThe F-15 arguable is the West’s Flanker analogue. It has smaller dimensions, but in terms of speed, range, maneuverability, etc, they’re quite close. The F-22 is not even in the same weight class as the Su-27, nor does it carry as much fuel. The F-22’s subsonic combat radius is about 590 nm, with a 6% rerouting factor. Doubling gives range of 2,325 km, which is pessimistic since it doesn’t take into account combat. Supersonic range is a bit hard to find, the range slide shows 460 nm combat radius with 100 nm supercruise, but it’s not known if it only supercruises one way or both. I think back in 2009 AvWeek stated that the F-22 has 37 minute supercruise (correct me if I got this number wrong), which I assume here to be at Mach 1.5, which gives about 928 km at altitude. This works out to be about 42% of the subsonic range, which is quite a substantial drop, but something that’s expected.
For comparison, the T-50, which carries even more fuel than the Su-27, is stated to have 3,500 km subsonic range and 1,500 km supersonic range. Turns out that the T-50’s supersonic range is about 43% of the subsonic range, which is quite close to the F-22’s.
If T-50 is carrying more fuel than Su-27 than its subsonic range will not be 3500km. more like 4500 to 5500km. this is the sleekest design ever. more powerfull engines than Su-27 with double supersonic range.
JSRthe improvements will come soon.
http://tass.ru/en/defense/888491
Russia’s Syria experience to strengthen Armed Forces, create new weapons — minister
JSRDoes this include billions needed to base upgrades .export customers can only afford one or two bases to operate them on permanent bases. I don’t see this aircraft can be supported from make shift bases long term. Weight and draggier platforms make range performance costs almost to twin engine fighters.
JSRHaha… Su-35S deployed to an exclusively A2G theatre against an enemy without any radar or EW assets to speak of, with an A2G load of two FAB-250 high-drag M54s.. But then for “self protection” it has six A2A missiles (R-73, R-27 and R-77) plus ECM pods on the wingtips.
I think it’s pretty clear what this Su-35S deployment is all about. Definitely beats the usual Akhtubinsk exercise schedule. Russia learns at it goes right now, and takes every opportunity to max it out. It lags some 25 years behind the US when it comes to these practical things, and lots need to be worked out.
The point is US was building armoured Humvees, mrap and over dependence on contractors as the wars move along after the fact. US underestimated the task and lack of intelligence cause it to rely on unreliable allies.
Russia already knew what is needed it’s justing putting then into practice to check reliability of systems and competence of personel.
considerng the intensity of airstrikes there is almost none to few bombs or rockets dropping on friendlies.
I am sure there will be alot of feedback from Russian arms supply to Irak.
JSRhow do you know the drag index of 600 gallon tanks and CFT?. LM PR?. where is the space in wings and its impact on drag. again what is the altitude and top speed of this F-16 when its loaded. Can it provide sufficient acceleration for missile launches at high altitude. MIG-29 fuel tanks are longer sleeker that’s why it is designed for 19km altitude.
JSRAl
Today MiG-35 no doubt has more range than original MiG-29A, but same could be said for F-16;
-A modern F-16 blk50+ or 60 has 4585 kg fuel with CFT, plus 4609kg with 3xEFTs (2x600gals+300gal), totaling at 9194kg. A MiG-35 will have ~5200 kg internal fuel, plus 3492kg (2x1150l + 1x2000l) totaling at 8692kg. Due to CFT and new 600gal tanks, fuel capacity improvement on F-16 is actually way greater than the MiG-29/35…
-So a blk50 F-16 will definately have more range, plus it will be able to carry pretty meaningful payloads with 3xEFT; F-16 can carry 2xAShm or 2xARM like MiG-35, but also it can carry 6x anti-tank missiles, or GPS guided munitions, 4x Laser guided 500lb munitions 2x2000lb munitions or variety of cruise missiles.Of course, MiG-35 will be able to carry 5 EFTs making total fuel capacity 10559kg, but remaining pylons are good only for 2xBVR and 2xWVR missiles, and nothing else.
where you get idea F-16 internal plus CFT carries 4585 kg of fuel?. the drag penalty of 600gallon tanks?
see the MTOW.
http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/products/f16/F-16Specifications.html
JSRnewer specification has 26.5 tons of MTOW. 19.2tons of NTOW. This thing can now alteast lift 7.5tons external load.
JSRDave Majumdar article so his ‘original’ research is predictably lousy (UHF for tracking, IR signature based on ‘inlet temp’), but features a very interesting quote from Lt Gen Davis of the USMC –
Is the F-35 a lethal ‘Velociraptor’ or easy prey for Russia or China?
Putting a quote from American general. what could be incentive. his first is to get rid of his old planes that are not likely to get any upgrade money or even if upgrade money is coming it is stretch out more than buying newer planes. i am sure there are no short range defenses to shoot down the projectiles from F-35.
JSRive been mistaken then.
but looking at the numbers on those planes, they are some really old versions. the early su27 is comparable to the mig-23 in capability, so its no doubt more modern gripens can dispatch them. in plaaf service, j10s had no problems taking out su27s
Reread the article. it says Chinese pilot has to do some calculations for BVR shot that often not accurate. how they came to know its not accurate or pilots are mostly key board warriors used to display screens than the old instruments.
JSRFor the foreseable future UCAV´s might not be a complete replacement for the all the manned fast jet fleets, but almost surely will be a replacement for part of those fleets.
Can UCAV lift bunker buster and thermoboric bombs at sufficient speed to target area?. UCAV is not replacement of man fighter at all. rather the light attack chopper duty is given to UCAV. Attack choppers you can base it near to the battlefield for quick response but they cant deal with deep tunnels.
Almost certainly true, and that will happen when their fleets of Phoons/Rafale´s/Gripens end their airframes life, thats midle thirties, beggining of the fourties… At least two decades from now. That or Russia goes into “overdrive mode”.
Most of EU canards will be out of production by early 2020s with slow down already starting. what will happen to skill workforce?. Russia is already in turbo charged overdrive mode.
Russia to spend $15.6 billion on defense industry:
The initiative also aims to get 929 new production facilities into operation and develop 1,300 technologies by 2020, Tass reported
On the “immense amount of funds” bit, in case no one noticed, the budget of the biggest European MODs are entirely comparable with the ones from places like Japan, South Korea and even Russia… so, yeah… And just to finish this discussion, there are TWO European UCAV prototypes flying today!
EU has very limited military budget and every thing is usually included in that budget (they run out of ammunition in Libya, need US help from behind)and projects are spread over many years with inefficient supply chain so the effectiveness is very less. EU simply not have any understanding how to separate R&D, Industry development (cant have private monopolies selling to government), Procurement and training budget.
Export chances to Middleast are getting less with smaller quantities and this big Syria let down will have very long negative consequences on EU health.
JSRCentral bank. Don’t confuse government investment with private investment. London property is a private investment.
how can central bank give credit to rest of the world?. They can only increase money supply and where that money supply goes is entirely different matter.
Except those coming to the UK from the EU average only £8.86/hour, meaning that they are unskilled. There are also no checks and balances to filter them on skill either. And imported workers can still join unions.
imported workers do much less protests and higher beneficial to big firms at lesser costs.
It is race to bottom.
http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/no-longer-a-secret-ukraine-is-europe-s-new-frontier-market
Don’t tell my competitors—if they want to keep going to China, let them,” said Alain, a French IT company manager who was boarding an Air France jet for the three hour flight back to Paris. “Programmers in Ukraine are better than in China, more innovative than in China, and cheaper than in China.”A new study by Horizon Capital shows that Ukraine graduates 130,000 engineering students every year, almost twice as many as Britain. But IT salaries here are about one third the British level. As a result,
Ukraine is now Europe’s leading country for IT outsourcing work.
JSRNope.
It does not say who is money originating from UK/US?. you still haven’t shown the ownership behind the money. see the global ownership of London property market. or this example.
http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Largest-US-Refinery-Now-Belongs-To-Saudi-Arabia.html
Largest U.S. Refinery Now Belongs To Saudi Arabia
There’s no point importing labour to punch a hole in public finances, because as the cost of living goes up, so does the cost of public services, which are still used by the imported labour, which doesn’t pay enough taxes to support them.
Reread Obama statement. he said immigrant works harder. it only mean the natives are less inclined to work . offcourse he will not say much more openly as it can create revolts among the natives. what does it mean is that immigrant both skilled and unskilled are imported so that natives have no protesting power against the big corporation whose owner can be anybody globally.
JSR610 gals, Yes.
I mentioned higher speeds. where is your evidence.
PW-220 engined F-15’s are faster than PW-229 or PW-100 engined ones, despite having least rated thrust of all 3.
That is your opinion. show me F-15C with Electronic scanning radar weight, IRST, EW pods, 3 670gallon ET, 8AAM, CFT doing Mach 1.5 at 60k ft.
Sign In
