Zmey,

Yea, perhaps it sounds a little selfish. Really I think I’m just frustrated by having to make sense of those funny little (confusing) robotic translations. Though to be fair it happens on other forums a lot more than here…

Well, that’s not how a lot of posters on this forum were putting it – apparently it was only because the USSR would only export downgraded versions of the MiG-29 which prevented it from performing superbly over Iraq and Yugoslavia!

Now I don’t want to cause any antagonism or anything but could you kindly point to a post that expresses that view – I haven’t seen one (for a very long time at least – maybe for longer than you’ve been a member here*) and would be appreciate being able to understand whether you base your opinions on posts by actual members or on pre-formed bias.

* But then I don’t read everything which is why I’m asking.

Otaku,

Where on the KnAAPO website did you find that acknowledgment?

Amazing that they kept it secret for so many years! I wonder what else is hiding in the Soviet closet. Perhaps we’ll find out around this same time next year.

Nice one Ken.

Oh and I agree that some people need to grow a sense of humour.

On FROGFOOTs:

VLADIVOSTOK/MOSCOW, March 26 (RIA Novosti) – A Su-25 strike aircraft that crashed last week in Russia’s Far East was downed by a missile launched by an accompanying plane, a source close to the investigation said on Wednesday.

A Su-25 Frogfoot close-support aircraft exploded in the air on March 20 during a live firing exercise over the Primorye Territory about 143 kilometers (90 miles) from the port of Vladivostok. The pilot died in the crash.

“The investigation conducted by a special commission established that the Su-25 strike aircraft was downed by a missile accidentally launched by a wingman,” the source said.

It had previously been suggested that the crash was caused by the explosion of an S-8 rocket during its launch from the doomed plane.

However, a Russian Air Force spokesman warned on Wednesday against jumping to any conclusions until the official investigation was complete.

“The investigation is still under way,” Colonel Alexander Drobyshevsky said.

“An official announcement regarding the cause [of the crash] can only be made by the head of the special investigation commission after the investigation is complete,” he said.

The Air Force suspended all Su-25 strike aircraft flights following the incident and until the investigation is complete, although a small group of Su-25s will take part in a parade on Moscow’s Red Square on VE Day, May 9.

The Su-25 is a single-seat, twin-engine jet aircraft developed by the Sukhoi Design Bureau to provide close air support for ground troops.

The aircraft is reported to have experienced a number of accidents in operational service caused by system failures attributed to the salvo firing of weapons.

The Su-25 aircraft has been in service with the Russian Air Force for more than 25 years. In 1999, Russia adopted a program to upgrade part of its aging Su-25 fleet. The Russian Air Force received the first six modernized planes, Su-25SM, in December 2006.

Very interesting pictures – thanks for posting them!

Ok, I’ll bite. If for no other reason than to explain a few things.

Though god knows I should know better than this…

Jon,

what i did say though is it would appear the PAK-FA is a seriously troubled program, extremely late, constantly being revised as if there is no clear direction on the project or blunders are being made

You’re dead right. It really is a flawed project in the sense that it didn’t go straight from the concept design to the workshop floor – that would have been nice but simply wasn’t possible. I know you haven’t followed the development of the Russian 5th gen fighter from the beginning, don’t feel bad though, neither have I – it started quite some time ago. On the other hand you may have followed the rocky path the Eurofighter had to take – many reasons, including the changes to the threat environment (a consequence of the ending of the Cold War – something the Russians had to deal with too) and bickering between the programme’s member countries. Now, it is necessary to also take into account the massive social, economic and political upheavals Russia has had to face since the early nineties – by comparison the countries building the Eurofighter have had it easy and yet there were still problems.

As for changes in direction – these have been nothing if not sensible – a lot of time has passed and there is little anyone can do about it. The designers have had to make up for ground lost (particularly during the economic collapse in 1998/99) very quickly and so redesigns have been necessary. Now, as it doesn’t look like the US will replace its F-22s and JSFs any time soon and that the Euro-canards will be in service for some time there is a bit of time to sit down and concentrate on building what is already on the drawing board.

If this project continues to blunder on at the same pace and still showing no signs of an actual aircraft then over time yes it will become a real headache for the IAF – one would be very foolish to claim it wouldn’t.

As an unqualified comment this would seem to be true. However. There is currently no reason to believe that the project would continue to “blunder” in the way that it has done thus far. Previous hurdles were caused by a combination of many factors, two of which stand out far above the rest; 1. a very serious lack of funding and, 2. changes in the design.

Now, Russia is no longer quite in the same scrape it was even a few years ago. The government has a lot of cash now and is being careful to spend it in a way that will benefit Russian industries (particularly high-tech and/or military industries). Obviously this doesn’t always work perfectly, far from it, but it is a massive leap ahead relative to the situation from, lets say, 2000.

Forgive me if i question the Russians ability to produce a stealth fighter on par with the F-22 but many areas of Russian tech are like it or not lagging far behind what the Americans can produce and use, where is the Russian experience with stealth to be able to jump straight to the top of the stealth game?

I see where you’re coming from but you ought to pay attention to other forum members when they say exactly what I’m about to say:
Here’s the thing, the PAK-FA doesn’t have to be “on par” with the F-22. It isn’t designed for exactly the same role and it won’t be on sale to the USAF anyway. It simply has to be cheap enough and effective enough to steal orders away from the JSF and Euro-canards (and possibly some Chinese 5th gen attempt) in the swing-buyer-countries (I don’t know, Malaysia or Indonesia for example) whilst being good enough to deter incursions into the air spaces of Russia and India. Personally I can see it being all of those things and more – though thats not to say that it will be, just that it seems realistic.

As for stealth – try not to think of Russia as a country that has never experimented with stealth – they have. Whether this means they will be “on top of the game” with their first stealth fighter… Well, I doubt it. But do not take this to mean that they won’t be able to produce an aircraft with good LO characteristics.

Where is the Russian advanced man machine interfaces present on fighters such as the JSF , F22 and possibly the best example being the of the MMI that of the Eurofighter? Infact where are the advanced avionics on par with ‘western’ fighters with features such as data/sensor fusion, they might be half way there but there still lagging behind a good deal.

In response to your questions I would like to say that I don’t know the answers. Simply put, nobody knows exactly what the avionics and systems of the PAK-FA will be like at this stage. We can, however, make educated guesses – isn’t that a big part of this forum anyway? Take that away and half the fun is gone.

Here, try this on for size: The Russians (and I say this with absolute certainty) haven’t been sitting around, idly twiddling their thumbs for the last, erm, twenty years. We are not still at the stage of analogue dials and missile-flight-time-clocks as found on base-line FULCRUMs of 1980s vintage. They have learned a lot about things like HOTAS, man-machine interfaces, sensor fusion etc not just on their own but also through cooperation with French, Israeli, Indian etc producers. How they put this into practice remains to be seen (and I fear that we’ll have to wait at least a decade to find out – even if the PAK-FA programme runs on schedule).

There are many questions that need to be answered, perhaps if people could sit back and think these things through a bit more it may become a bit more clear why some of us have serious doubts.

Its true that people on this forum are not able to answer all of your questions but that doesn’t mean that their opinions should be discounted as propaganda just on face value. Many of the members of this forum, including some you have crossed horns with (to put it politely), have much more knowledge and experience of aviation matters and, more specifically Russian aviation matters, than you do – that, I’m afraid, is plain enough. I would advise you to show a little more respect even (or especially) when you don’t agree with some one.

There you are – hope that clears up a few things.

PS Please try not to take offence at any of my comments – none is intended.

(also, sorry about all the brackets – couldn’t be bothered with footnotes)