….and airbases cannot move a centimetre – an issue when someone comes along and postholes your runways, POL storage, maintenance facilities, ammunition dumps and C3 nodes with Land Attack Cruise Missiles.

A fixed target is an easy target to hit. I’m sure you will tell me of all the wonderful SAMs the target can have now but, remember, a battery only ever has so many ready-to-fire at one time – however good they are!.

IADS system has mobile SAMs with practically unilimited amount of SAM. One Battery of S-300PMU-2( 15 year old tech) can engage 36 targets with 72 missiles and that is downgraded export version at range exceeding 200km. And u need bunkerbusting bombs against hardened structures. Now it is possible of creating layered mobile airdefence system of interlinking SAMs and Radar in which even fighters will control SAM missiles. they dont have to light up there radars. opportunities are plenty. Even two decade old system could destroy 400 targets in single salvo. In 21st century ur taking about thousands of targets destroyed in single salvo. Ships are by nature limited and fixed.

Understand this – a mobile target, like a carrier force, will always have the advantage because it knows where the airbases are and it can choose when and how to engage them. The ground based force has no such luxury and never will.

Surely it knows where the airbases are but it will not know where the SAMs are. whether they are real or dummy. (read about Rusball). Ground based force has more choice in airbases. Remember Russian aircraft are for rough field performance. It is the aircraft carrier which has no second choice.

There is no air-launched Klub, KH-59MK is a straight flight subsonic missile and Kh-31AD is not a skimmer according to any credible information I’ve ever seen.

Surely there is no airlaunched club since it has been exported yet. How do u know the flight profile of latest antiship missiles when customer themselves will not know about other customer missiles and credible information?

…and what do you think those munitions would be expended on?. Russia may have hundreds of fighters, bombers and missiles but lets face it…we’re not always talking about Russia. Plus even if it were to come to an attack on Russia there would be many dozens of ships, with thousands of VLS cells doing the attacking. Expending that much ordnance would take a while.

dozen of ships and thousands of VLS.? Always dreaming. who will put so much gas in ships and supply chian? what if war does not happend and u have to back down. u lose all money for moblization. Naval strategy is costly and worth less.
In less than five year time there wont be a place of signifiacance where Russia will not express its interest. u have to live with this reality.

Thousands of sorties?. Think about the practicalities of what you are talking about. The logistics involved in such an operation would be extraordinary and to get sorties in that volume you are looking at 3 or sories per day off 300+ airframes. Think about it!.

I am surely observing various exercises. There are 400+ Flankers and 400+ Su-24. I am not going into bomber and Naval squardons. For Flanker 3 to 4 sorties per day is not a big deal. Its engines are designed for sustained operations of 10 to 12 hrs per day. Infact Su-34 engines are for 16 hr flight times. What do u think they want to put so many hrs per day. 2 to 3 hr per sortie with 3 to 4 sorties are not big deal for Flanker.

The only way in which the Su-34 could ever be immune to A-A missiles is when the aircraft is grounded in its hangars.

And with Russia’s funding difficulties and the dire serviceability of the ‘Flanker’ family, one has to accept that’s going to be the case for a lot of the time.

But in the air? It’s a massive target, with a stonking great radar cross section from all aspects, and with two damned great IR sources. Nor is it an unusually strong airframe.

Hit it with an ASRAAM, and IRIS-T or even an inert ‘Winder, and the chances are you’ll knock it down with a single hit. (As would be the case with a Typhoon, a Rafale, an F-22 or any other fighter type).

If you believe the infantile “immune to missiles” propaganda then you’re deluded.

I am waiting for evidence servicibility issues with Ruaf Flanker fleet. Flankers has the best supply chain network among all the fighters in Russia. Normally 40 to 60 of them can participate in single exercise. how many typhoons have been airborne at the same time?. Flankers are now deploying in large numbers to Kant Krgyz airfield. Ruaf is not down grading its airforce numbers but upgarding all its current inventory because it can afford to do so.
Surely u havent seen the big tail sting in the back of Su-34.which is bigger than the front nose of F-15. I certainly dont believe any baseless assumpitons without any evidence. West Produced 200 to 300 Economic Nobel prize winners and end result is for every one to see. Sinking under mountain of debt. u have to give credit to institutional competence of Sukhoi/Saturn/Ruaf.

😮

Well I will say it again… You are truly the King of the Fanboys! Maybe even the emperor:rolleyes:

DO you just spend your entire time looking for web reports to try and proove your point?

Yes Saturn is a serious firm but it’s not MAGIC!

I only read serious stuff not Joust simulation based on inaccurate assumpion.

Eugene Nikitin, [ITAR]- TASS ([ENL]), on August 23, 2007.
Zhukovskiy is/[Moskovskaya] region, on August 23. Eugene Nikitin. With the use of nano-technologies usual aluminum can find the properties of steel, and the strength characteristics of titanium can be increased 1,5-2 times.

About these surprising possibilities “of nano-” described today in the course of airshow “max -2007” the representatives of the science and production association of/[NPO]/“Saturn”, The [kurchatovskogo] institute of nuclear fusion and Ufa motor-building production association. They conducted here the presentation of the innovation developments, utilized in the aviation engine construction.
It was noted, that these innovations has already been used “by Saturn” with the development of technologies for creating the engine of the fifth generation. As reported [ITAR]- TASS the deputy of the general director “of Saturn” Vladimir Krylov, in enterprise “already began the first stage of the industrial use of nano-technologies”. In particular, prototype for the vacuum- plasma application of coatings on the component of engine is created, specialist defined concretely. In this case the strength indices and reliability increase more than three.
It explained further, that the central objective of the application of innovation technologies lies in the fact that “during entire life cycle of aircraft engine a number of critically important units did not throw down to repair”.
“This is especially important with the creation of the promising engine of the fifth generation”, emphasized Krylov.

here is further leak of Supercrusie ability.

Su-35. This is the deep thrust-resource modernization of the engine AL -31[Fp], which is established on the most contemporary aircraft – Su-30[MKI].
The thrust of new engine relative to base AL -31[Fp] is increased by 16 percent and reached 14.500 kG, and resource grew 2 and was brought to 4.000 hours. The systems of the liquidation of surging, automatic starting in flight, counter starting ensure steady work of power plant during the application of onboard weapon. Separate reaching [NPO] “Saturn” should be considered steady and the reliable work of this engine with the speeds with the Mach numbers higher than 2. declared parameters and possibilities are confirmed in the course of the complex of the bench and flight tests of engine- demonstrator.
In the course of bench and flight tests the engine of 117[S] showed thrust of 14,5 tons. But running-in on the fighter Su-27 showed that the new motor makes it possible to fly at cruising supersonic speed. In this case 117- y it demonstrated the increased indices of super-maneuverability – pilots could improve known piloting possibilities Su-27.
The correctness of selected strategy was confirmed last summer, when “dry” selected 117[S] for its newest fighter Su-35. After this, the first two engines of 117[S] were established on flying model Su-35, represented at the airshow max -2007.

Military industrial messenger. “[OBORONKA]”. Ex-hawseIV. №30 (196) on August 8 to 14, 2007.
In the aviation circles Victor [Chepkin] – personality sufficiently known. In its time in Pavel Solovyev’s command they created unique in its parameters turbojet engine D -30[F]6, which was established on the super-fast fighter-interceptor MiG-31 and on the fighter S -37 “golden eagle”. Finishing construction works were under his management completed and were carried out official tests of the turbojet engine of the 4th generation AL -31[f] for the aircraft Su-27 and its subsequent modifications. He was the very same direct job superintendent on the engine AL -31[Fp], which allowed aircraft Su-30[MKI] and Su-35 in the regime of super-maneuverability to carry out acrobatic maneuvers. Telling the correspondent “OF [VPK]” about these developments, the first deputy of the general director of joint stock company “[NPO] “Saturn” on R & D and OKR, design project leader Victor [CHEPKIN] considered it as necessary to share with experiences, which predetermines future.

On what are based your conclusions?

– First, as you themselves understand, to me enters huge information flow not only from the open press, but also from the closed sources, which we have – glory to god, they work successfully. Therefore with the actual developments, which are conducted beyond the boundaries of our country, we are well familiar. Believe me, we found nonstandard symmetrical or asymmetric answers to these solutions – our aircraft and engine will be considerably better than those that they develop in the USA and Western Europe

Flex,

You understand correctly. I am saying that the ‘Flanker’ in service today (and for a decade to come) will remain inferior to the ‘derived Flanker’ used as a threat aircraft in JOUST. I don’t think any Russians were ‘read into’ JOUST, so I haven’t spoken to any Russian professional who validates it. I have spoken to French Rafale programme insiders who do validate it, and who pushed to use JOUST themselves.
.

That Flanker also includes Su-34 that is completely immune to missiles. what missile does it uses for EF to shot Flanker? what was the range of Flanker missiles? I am sure Joust also takes into account lighter airframe of Flanker, Its 11.5 tons fuel load for massive use of afterburner for superior BVR shot, 3D TVC.
Sukhoi has clearly disclosed its consenus opionion through test pilot interview that EF/Rafale/F-18E are inferior to latest Flanker. I am sure they are reading these magazines as Sukhoi is part of every airshow and Saturn has further said they get secret information which establishes that fighter (PAK-FA) they are working on is superior to anything developed in West.

Why nothing? They could start development of 750+ km BVR missile..

Who will give them money for 750Km+ missile and the time required required to built intellecutal level and organizational capacity in missile in ultrasonics. And than integration tests at high speeds and altitudes on platform. and than the cost of actual procureent of end product.
Missiles like Brahmos/R-37M/krypton cant be produced in EU.

I am surprised by your limited knowledge or I am not? Simulation is a very old technic to test things in advance. It does work the better, the better the related technology is known. A system, which does not stood the related tests in a sim-dome enviroment the last decades will not leave the “drawing-board” even. .
.

Engineers ability is limited the amount of money and support infrastructure available to It. Simulation result depends on data input which is based on intelligence about opponent and his thinking. See the importance of intelligence gathering for AL-31 designer.
U cannot expect engineer to built F-22 on EF R&D cost in EU where everythign is overpriced. Alot of things leave drawing because of vested interests of military-industrial complex not the effectivness of end product.

The T45 PAAMS(S) system with Aster was designed to engaged the 3M-54E missile system in its terminal phase. Knocking down a large target like a Granit 100ft up and tooling in at just over the Mach should not present the system with any great challenges!.

What they know about 3M-54E when the customer who are sold the actual sytem after years of indepth trials will not know the capabilities of Club to another customer.

Which way round do you mean the Udaloy’s vs T23 contest?. In ASW terms the T23 has no equal in any fleet in the world either in blue water with the 2031Z array or in the littorals with the 2087 active low-freq set. AFAIk Udaloy doesnt yet have an active low tail?.

Russian Naval officials have clearly said. That 20 minutes is all the time needed to sink entire naval ships. If some thing cannot be intercepted by Russian SAM system. It cannot be intercepted by any other system. and that includes down graded export Brahmos.

Push that back closer to 2020 for a hint of realism….Russia as of now i.e late 2008 doesnt even know where it might build a new carrier – let alone have an evolved design ready.

Contracts for large shipyards are already signed. No need to show exact location just like no one can see PAK-FA shape.

The PAK-FA that hasnt taken to the air yet….let alone been confirmed as navalised and carrier capable?. Ready for carrier deployment in 7 years. Optimistic?.

Surely optimistic. When u read some thing about conditions where Flankers/Foxhounds were developed. I am surpized they are taking 7 years for aircraft induction. It must be some thing out of the world.

Against a US fleet with SURTASS support you think a big twin-screw lump like Oscar is a threat?. Maybe you weren’t paying attention when the Kursk tragically took its crew to the bottom, but, that boat was being tracked and from a very great long way away!.

How do u know they are not tracking ur boats?

Slava isnt half the AAW ship a Tico is!. SPY-1 is poor relation to modern arrays but, with SM-6 gaining IOC in 2011 and E-2 CEC’ing for an active missile, even Kirov with two TOP DOMES is way back down the field – Slava with the single FC array is half that again!. S-300xyz may be a fast powerful missile but its still TVM and its still fire-channel limited.

Now u have become SAM expert. S-300 cannot be built the way Russians put the brains in it. Even if Chinese spent trillions on it and purchase all the Western tech from Israel. There is reason of more than 400 targets destroyed in single Salvo.

What criteria are you using to quantify the Burkes ASW against Udaloy?. What makes a Sov any better in antiship than a Burke – and please dont say Moskit!.

Surely u have built Moskit and know how to improve it.

So after all that, about the perceived superiority of Russian arms, poor little Russia should not be expected to compete with the Americans because they have half the populace?. You meant to say that did you?.

It is not that population that matters. it is the income generating population that matter. and u cannot have this without manufacturing or Natural resources in abundance.

The US and NATO wouldnt engage in such action for the same reason it didnt all through the Cold War and that is in no way down to any part of the Russian Navy barring the SSBN force. The same will be true in 2020 as much as it was 60 years before.

SO u know every thing about those antiship missiles. that they are putting nearly on every aircraft/ship/submarine with space based communication, survellence and navigation sytems. It was the one million Ex-Soviet Engineers that created the 90s IT revolution. West was done in front of Japanese/SK in 80s. and is crying again. but there is no help again.

then, throw on some Admiral Gorshkov frigates with YAKHONTS or BRAHMOS . . . I’d bet on the Russian fleet. Their only overall disadvantage will always be numbers. That’s fine, since possibly wrecking half or more of the US navy is deterrent enough conventionally. Russia with 150 million people should never have as many military assets as a country with 300 million people. It’s not needed.

I am expecting CSTO Navy under Russian command with 250million Population. Remember Russia control the transport routes/Natural resources/Wage growth difference to collapse several other countries in less than 10 years. Six aicraft carriers is just about right.