inkThe new airplane may be required by the air force
The new airplane may be required by the air force
The new airplane may be required by the air force
The new airplane may be required by the air force
….may
inkMore news from RIA Novosti:
MOSCOW, December 20, (RIA Novosti) – Not fewer than four large-scale exercises involving long-range aviation will be held in 2005, Lieutenant-General Igor Khvorov, commander of long-range aviation (or rather of the 37th special air army of the supreme command-in-chief), said in a RIA Novosti interview.
“In 2005, long-range aviation is facing more serious tasks than in 2004. Practically every two to three months, we will take part in exercises,” he said.
At the same time, the commander pointed out that a final plan of the coming exercises has yet to be worked out.
“What can be said for sure is that out of four contemplated major exercises one will be a large-scale strategic exercise. In addition, there will be a string of different command-and-staff and combat flying exercises. During them crews will be doing combat drills (including missile launches)”, Khvorov said.
“Serious flying will be done over the oceans with practical launchings of missiles, range bombings, super-long flights and hops,” he added.
The commander also indicated that in the course of the exercises it is planned to practice anti-terrorist methods.
“At some tactical level, privately, we will bear them [anti-terrorist methods] in mind during our drills,” the lieutenant-general said.
Earlier last week, General Khvorov said that long-range aviation is ready to deliver pre-emptive and pinpoint strikes at terrorists.
According to him, such a mission can be accomplished by the Tu-22M3 aircraft, which is capable of carrying all kinds of aviation bombs. “There is practically nothing new about it, since long-range bombers made such strikes in Afghanistan in the 1980s,” Khvorov pointed out.
At the same time he noted that Tu-95 and Tu-160 planes are inadvisable to use for such missions, although possible if necessary.
Over the past three months Russia’s top military brass have come up with repeated statements about the possibility of dealing pre-emptive blows to terrorists in any spot on the globe. General Staff chief Yury Baluyevsky spoke of readiness “to take the necessary measures and actions to eliminate all terrorist bands and cells” throughout the world on September 8. Appropriate statements and comments on the subject of preventive strikes and the possibility of using different types of tactical and strategic weapons have also been made by Russia’s Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, and Boris Cheltsov, chief of main air force headquarters.
inkNumerous F-18C/Ds are in service with different AFs for many years now. Combat proven too.
We try to compare proven capabilties with promised ones at best.
I have a slight gripe about the “combat proven” part of your argument. I agree that the C/D has been in service for some time and that the type has seen combat and that these facts are definitely a positive as far as logistics and maintainence are concerned. I do not, however, agree that the combat missions flown by the type are a ‘fair’ representation of its combat performance. It has always flown air to air and air to ground missions with the full support of a multitude of assets that most airforces cannot provide even a fraction of. Furthermore, it has flown missions exclusively against a much weaker, more poorly equipped, more poorly trained opponent. Even MiG-29As might perform well against aircraft of a previous generation or with downgraded avionics in a situation where they had the full support of AWACS etc and the opponent was fighting blind.
inkThat’s an interesting idea, buying R-27EAs.
Well, theoretically they don’t even have to buy new missile bodies – the R-27 is modular so they could just buy the seeker heads and screw them on to the R-27s they already have (assuming the missiles aren’t too far into their shelf-life).
inkAbout Malaysia to put the MICA on the MKM, I never heard such official news even rumor in local magazine. btw, why buy MICA since it has shorter range than R-77 and R-27
Speaking of the R-27 – couldn’t Malaysia sneakily get the Russians to put active radar seakers on their R-27s and thusly get around the danger of starting an arms race. A kind of “what they don’t know won’t hurt them… until the day when it counts…” sort of philosophy.
inkink, i like to read other stuffs that only aeroindustry magazines, sometimes that “specializated” press confuse everything, anyway if you think that the berkut comes from the flanker, thats your opinion and (as i have said many times to avoid problems) i respect it.
As I have said many times, it is not my opinion – it was something I read! As for you convincing me that its false – you haven’t. If you have read something in one of those
other stuffs that only aeroindustry magazines
that can convince me otherwise then I would be very interested in hearing it (it wouldn’t surprise me awfully seeing as the idea that the Berkut’s fuselage was based heavily on that of the FLANKER was surprising anyway).
Also, could you conjure up a clearer picture of what you were trying to show please – I haven’t been able to figure out where that missile is being carried and how exactly that made it stealthier than if it was carried in an internal bay.
inkNot necessarily, they could always clear it with the US first – or perhaps they could simply target areas in the north-west where US control is thin on the ground and local “war-lords” simply do what they want (including supporting Chechen guerillas).
inkFrom RIA Novosti:
MOSCOW, December 17 (RIA Novosti) – The Russian Air Force’s strategic air command is ready to launch preventive strikes against terrorist bases in different parts of the world. This was disclosed to RIA Novosti today in Moscow by Lt.-Gen. Igor Khvorov in charge of the afore-said strategic air command.
The strategic air command is ready to accomplish this objective; and we were prepared to do this a long time ago, Khvorov added.
Considering the potential and range of strategic bombers, one can say that terrorists will not be able to hide anywhere in the world, Khvorov stressed.
First of all, the strategic air command aims to defend the state against external enemies, so that any hotheads would not want to test the strength of our state, Khvorov added.
Previously, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov confirmed the possibility of dealing preventive strikes against terrorist bases in any part of the world.
We do not rule out the possibility of launching preventive strikes against terrorist bases in any part of the world, Ivanov said. Surely enough, we will not name specific locations and deadlines in advance because such preventive strikes would otherwise prove ineffective, Ivanov noted.
***************
There has been quite a lot of talk about this recently – even the BBC reported on it. From previous reports it seems that Tu-22M3s are to be engaged in this task although Bears and Blackjacks are not ruled out either. Appears that the Russians would use guided (possibly GPS guided) bombs or cruise missiles in high-precision attacks against “known” terrorist training and recruitment camps in foreign countries. Overflight permission, target identification and actual targeting are the main problems in terms of successfully carrying out such an operation. We are free to speculate about the countries which might contain such terrorist bases (Georgia (not the US state) and Afghanistan come to mind).
inkink, with all respect, you can read everything what you want, but the berkut desing have nothing to do with the flanker (maybe only that huge nose 😀 ), about the flankrum :p lerx design, is completely diferent of the berkut-f18 lerxs.
I’m guessing that your comment is based on something you read? Or maybe you just took a look at the photos and then went ahead and expressed a personal opinion?
In any case I already made it clear that I wasn’t certain about the FLANKER relationship and I initially brought it up in order to find out whether anyone could assert otherwise. I was hoping for some more solid evidence than the fact that the LERXs look similar to those of the F-18.
well that was an personal opinion, but i think that internal bay concept is an waste of time and resources, simpler is better.
Yes, it is my personal opinion that the internal weapons bays are a solid design feature – as already mentioned by Sundog they reduce drag and make it easier to fly longer and further in super-cruise etc etc. They also, however, make it easier to reduce the aircraft’s RCS when performing air-to-air missions or maybe even air-to-ground missions (if equipped with suitable ordinance). As for simpler being better, a decent statement and one designers should remember more often perhaps but there are times when you just have to complicate things in order to stay in the game (or get ahead of it. Otherwise the world’s airforces would still be happy with Sopwith Camels. Not that internal weapons bays are the world’s most compex aircraft design feature.
inkTiger,
I think that maybe your point would have been better made if you had said, “I suspect that Russia will not have the resources to realise its 5th generation fighter project, although it will be interesting if India is able to lend a hand.”
Blackcat,
Had your response been, “Actually Russia has one of the fastest growing economies in the developed/semi-developed world and are chanelling increasing funds into their defense R&D budget. Resultantly, my opinion is that they will realise their 5th generation fighter project.” We might have avoided the danger of a flame starting in what is otherwise a very good thread.
Stop bickering please.
inkWeird how we have to lose a perfectly decent thread in order for some guys from Pakistan to try to convince some guys from India that they and their country are better. Give it up.
ink1) berkut fuselage is not based in flankers, no way, its more like an f18 (even lerx)
2) i hope that the pakfa wont be designed with internal bay, that could be a mistake, but using an special low-drag arragment for missiles (like tornado,f14,etc) in an internal mid-intakes “canal” (like mig29,f14,su27,etc) could be an smarter solution
Actually although the layout of the fuselage is visually different from that of a FLANKER – i.e. the engines are closer together – I am still pretty sure (based on something I read some time ago) that it is heavily influenced by the fuselage design of the FLANKER. As for the LERX – well the FULCRUM and FLANKER both have LERX – whats your point?
Regarding the internal weapons bay – that is a completely solid design feature – there is absolutely no reason for the designers to change that. Why would 4th gen design solutions be better for the PAK-FA than a 5th gen one?
ink2-I’ve heard the same thing. Didn’t hear about a lift fan, but I have seen Yakovlev mentioned in association with the PAK-FA, being responsible for an unidentified V/STOL system. It might work, the F-35 isn’t a small aircraft, and Yakovlev certainly has a good experience base to draw from.
I have to say that will be the first to eat my words if the Russians actually manage it but it still seems like an unnecessary, overly complicated expense.
inkWheres a dictatorial moderator when you need one? Arthur?? 😉
Back on topic: I have two questions for anyone brave enough to assume the answers: – 1. Will the T-50/PAK-FA have external hard-points for air-ground missions in order for it to be able to carry heavy air to groound ordinance such as KAB-1500?
– 2. Will the T-50/PAK-FA be lumbered with a Yakovlev designed VSTOL lifting fan? Don’t laugh, I’ve heard it mentioned before. A VSTOL FLANKER sized aircraft – – please don’t laugh, I meant that to be a serious question.
inkWell Mr. Hamburger, I have to say, as unexpected as this is for me, I actually agree with you – it does look horrible. I will add, though, that this is only a potential outline of the final aircraft – nobody on here knows what it will look like.
Sign In
