star49Metal prices are not a major part of the cost of weapons. Look at the price per ton of any weapon, & compare with the price per ton of the raw materials.
Complete, absolute & utter nonsense. No significant military company owns its sources of raw materials.
Price per ton of aircraft includes labor, energy, metal (alot of material is wasted in conversion).
1991 First Su-27 Flanker contract 24 for $1B for PLAAF.
2006. Su-30MKA contract 28 for $1.2B
how can they maintain the same price for 16 years with increasing capability? compare that with mass produced F-16 price that is almost double.
star49One word, rather two statements of caution
The timeline has been substantially compressed- from a 14 yr program with 10 deliveries yearly to a 10 year one. This will have impacted the investment necessary to ramp up production substantially, compared to a more gradual increase
u are still negotiating for new plant for MKI. it does not matter if u produce 10 aircraft per year or 14 aircraft per year. u dont need a separate plant for 4 aircraft in whole year.
The CAG report is a year old at the minimum, since that is how the system operates, plus it could relate to an earlier period which the audit covers
so if it covers earlier period so how can u sure that future price will be less?
u have to read this. metal prices are sky rocketing. Only those defense company will survive who owns natural resources. the rest will be knock out.
http://www.moscowtimes.ru/stories/2006/04/05/044.html
State arms exporter Rosoboronexport held a closed meeting on Tuesday to call for Russian metals producers to reign in their export ambitions and concentrate on supplies for the domestic market, metals industry sources said.
Hence, the integration of equipment is not an issue and is a sideshow
The “meat” so as to say, is the program cost.
from where u got this. there is no proof yet u can make or integrate by urself.
star49That IRST might be generation ahead compared with other Russian ones, but is generationa behind US made.
On what basis u make this statment. there is a reason that Algerian MIG-29SMT price is almost equal to Su-30MKA. If they are going to export Su-35 with 400KM radar range to latin america. it is reasonable to assume that they have alot better radar for themselves.
star49they said that baseline Flanker is 30% more agile to F-15A.
so if Su-35>Su-30MKI>Su-27. so alteast 50% more agility is reasonable guess for Super Flanker over other 4th generation fighters.
http://www.royfc.com/acft_news_old_apr1.html#14apr
As a result of the modeling performed by the military and scientists, the who combat potential of the Su-27 has surpassed the American F-15A analogue by 30 percent. Theoretical calculations were confirmed in practice aerial combats which took place during a visit of a group of Su-27 to the U.S.A. In which connection, our airman, as it is said, “at the same time obstructed” in the heat of battle also the F-15, from which video taping of the encounter was occurring. The American airmen, discouraged with the results, tried to “save face” and announced that they are satisfied with the capabilities of their equipment… Now they are trying to show abroad with the help of computer modeling that their equipment exceeds the Russian. And they refuse Russian offers to perform a maneuvering dog-fight at any air salon.
star49some should better read this.
Vladimir Mikhaylov also noted that the S-400 “Triumf” anti-aircraft missile complex will be the starting point for transition to air and space defense. “We plan to transition from the S-400 to and air and space defense when the anti-aircraft missiles complexes operate not only against aerial but also against space targets,” the CinC declared
star49I know. Projecting those figures forward 100 years is, of course, nonsensical. I was merely trying to show the scale of the growth needed to achieve what Star49 predicted And I agree with your analysis, as far as it goes, but the scale of the likely movements isn’t anywhere near enough for his prediction to be possible. Russian reserves will rise relative to Chinas & Japans in the next couple of years, but will still be much smaller. The silliness of a straight-line projection doesn’t change the fundamentals. Russian revenue from oil & gas exports can’t grow fast enough for Russia to accumulate $1000 billion dollars in reserves in two or three years, which is what’s needed to make his statement true. If the prices rose enough to make that possible (we’re not talking $100 a barrel, but lot more), there’d probably be a slump which would reduce both consumption & prices.
Let us consider one of his arguments, that Chinese & Japanese exports will “level off” because the demand is limited. He clearly sees trade as a zero-sum game, which suggests poor understanding of basic economics. But even if what I think he means (i.e. that Chinese growth can’t continue) is correct, that won’t benefit Russia, since a major factor in current high oil prices is Chinese demand. Chinese export slump = oil (& other commodities) price slump = less money for Russia. Even a slowdown would have the same effect, since current prices are based on the assumption of continuing growth.
He’s talking out of his anus.
It just took one week to disapprove ur economics. if there is linear relation ship between export minus import to calculate foreign currency than go figure out this one week variation. and this figures does not take into account current commodity prices whose effect will come 6 month later.
http://en.rian.ru/business/20060518/48292803.html
Russia’s gold and foreign currency reserves grew by $5 billion to $236.1 billion as of May 12 from $231.1 billion a week earlier, the Bank of Russia said Thursday.
star49Unless they’ve made some revolutionary advanced in avionics (RC/MC) I dont think they can replaced “monkey version” indian avionics (and another vendor that I guess is not open source) with their own clunkers and still come out with a definitive variant. There is a reason why MKI Mk.3 is what it is. Till they decide to come up with their own super flanker the MKI remains the top dog.
F-22 attempts a Cobra and other mad skillz early 90’s Su-27 style moves
http://semperapollo.com/Quickstart/VideoLib/Langley2006/Raptor.mpg
Russia need India avionics to make a fighter super? I better not post there news item. new MIG-29OVT can take care of any export flanker in wvr. just the IRST is generation ahead.
I think ur alteast 10 year behind China as far as Flanker is concerned. ur plant is in discussion stage they already have the most modern.
http://www.royfc.com/acft_news_old_apr1.html#14apr
General designer of the Sukhoy holding company, Mikhail Simonov, talked to Delovoy Vtornik
-“Not yet. I will cite an example of our international projects. China has request we help in erecting an aircraft factory. We have issued all the documentation for rigging and equipping according to an inexpensive and the best scenario. So: the Chinese always have selected the most modern solutions. They have not regretted the moneys for new technologies. They built a brilliant plant under our license. Today a similar deal is being discussed with India. Su-30MKI fighters will be produced there.
8 spares for 16 aircraft. It is like 1 engine for 2 aircraft. not like 7 engine for 1 aircraft myth that u have created.
MMP V.V. Chernyshev to Begin Series Production of RD-33MK Engines for Equipping Indian MiG-29K Fighters In 2007
((Total of 32 engines for installation on 16 aircraft, plus 8 spares. Not further translated.))Source: 12.04.06, ARMS-TASS
star49The Su-30MKI is relevant simply because its configuration reflects that of the Su-35 most, plus it is in actual service for years, plus has various improvements. If anything else exists that has config closer to the Su-35, please discuss that instead. It has little to do with semantics ie it being “Super” or not, has no relevance. Now, is there a greater chance of an Su-35 (which is not even in service) of Russia facing an F-22 in the near future? The answer is simply, no.
how is Su-30MKI closely resemble Su-35BM? One has canard/tvc the other doesnt. one is two seater than other single seater. both have different Weights and RCS, Different engine thrust. Different FBW and most of all avionics and radar. not to mention down graded export missiles of any Su-30 make it even less capable than even Su-27SM.
star49I doubt we would see anything like that in the near future. Most airforces are secrative about their top jets specially if like the Raptor they are stealth fighters . What the USAF/USN can do and is doing is going up against the best of the best (with 15’s,16’s and 18’s) like the su-30’s from india and other aircraft from other countries looking at how their tactics work against those jets and pilots identify deffeciencies in their tactics and study the oppositions tactics (remember these opponents are friends not enemies something that many forget) and go back to school and come up with better tactics which will help the USAF become a better unit ( as it would help the other nations) similarly they with the knowledge of the opponents jet and tactics can use it to more accurately simulate their performance against the raptor,JSF alike. The goal of such engagements is learning and educating pilots,tacticians and gathering data which when analysed and applied correctly can improve the standard of an AF and sometimes it can be very helpful against future or current enemies such as when USAF requested flankers(30’s) to participate in COPE to get a better knowledge of the aircraft as it is also being operated by china and the IAF wanting to go up against the Viper which is operated by pakistan.
I think tactics and training has become irrelevant. Su-34 is better than 12 Su-27 not because it is more agile or its Pilots are better trained in tactics but because of its Superior fire power, electronics and Self Protection as mentioned by Defence Minister Ivanov. I have never seen any news item where Ruaf is doing WVR training with foreign airforce or among themseleves. Most of it is concentrated on long range strikes of bombers and stand off weopons. Su-34 is claimed with shooting missiles down making the air to air fight irrelevant and still bomb the target. so it does not matter if u train with any variant of Su-30 because it does not have that capability.
http://www.royfc.com/news/dec/2203dec06.html
‘One Against Ten’Russkiy Kur’er has been able to find out the combat potential of the new Russian fighter bomber.
The military say that the Su-34 and Su-32 are aircraft which have no analogues in the world. Therefore, their performance is kept secret.However, we have succeeded in getting some data in private conversations. One of the NAPO engineers told Russkiy Kur’er that each such fighter-bomber is able to simultaneously “have” ten targets and to knock out a battalion strong point with its missile and bomb load. At the same time, our source noted that an infantry battalion holds a line at the front of about 3 – 5 kilometers.
star49S49
Its BS coz they are just doing feel good for internal consumption while eveyone impt keeps asking for better upgrade
why would they speak so openly that there export products are inferior to there domestic variants when it is there export earner?
now compare this Su-27SM radar performance with export counterparts and it is old tech.
http://www.royfc.com/news/jan/2405jan01.html
An Absolute Devil
The aircraft radar has obtained a mapping capability in real beam and synthetic aperture mode with medium and high resolution. A selection mode of moving target also has been realized, and a “sea” mode which provides for a decrease in the influence of the sea state in the search and detection mode. The radar detects radar contrasting ground targets at a distance up to 100 kilometers, huge surface targets at a distance up to 350 kilometers and small sizes up to 120 kilometers.
Avionics wise F./A-18 E.F is as good as any Sukhoi planned or inducted
they were comparing radar and weopons offered to RMAF and it is neutral opinion.
star49Again a lot of BS in my opinion (not by u but by the people who put them there) Lockheed put the F-16C and Block 60 at par with the MKI on may grounds does that mean that it is true?? USN claims f-18e/f to be able to shoot down any flanker (SF) out there is that a fact?? Of course malaysia will say the 30Mk is better cuz they just chose it over the F-18E does it mean that a head on comparison was ever made??
.
how is ranking of Flankers by various Russian airforce and industry officials BS? they are the most qualified in giving opinion about there own products.
they are not comparing them to some foreign aircrafts.(like LM is doing F-16C vs MKI or USN F-18 vs Flanker).
RMAF opinion was based on what was offered and usually export products are down graded from domestic variants.
star49If you are referring to N019/APG-66/68 radars, then you are completely, totally wrong. Wrong wrong wrong with a capital W. Did I mention you are wrong?
I am referring to there latest version like APG-68(V9) or Zhuk-ME/MFE.
Captor is an generation ahead of either radar. It easily outperforms the Su-27’s N001 radar by miles in every respect, and in detection range, number of tracked targets, LPI, ECCM, situational awareness, will beat the “Bars” too.
it depends on which flanker u are referring to. Russians put 4++ for Super Flanker (Su-35BM) and by that definition Su-34 is also a SuperFlanker. Ruaf commander put put Su-27SM(upgrade) better than the Flankers exported to China/India. they refer MKI/MKM/MKA as 4+ generation and Su-30MK as 4th.
Malaysian airforce put Su-30MKM > F-18E.
so 4++>Su-27SM>-MKI/MKM/MKA>F-18E. ur typhoon is some where in the bottom of that league like IAF MRCA competition where it is i the company of F-16/Gripen.
star49There’s more to radar performance that just more power. PRF, Pulse length, aerial gain and receiver sensitively all count as well.
Typhoon radar would not be better than F-16/MIG-29. Flanker alteast has phased array. Super Flanker has the range on internal fuel and can escape the battle zone.
and read it 1 non- export Su-34>12 Su-27.
As far as firepower, electronics, and protection are concerned, a new T-90 is superior to ten obsolete MBTs,” Ivanov said.
The same holds true for aircraft, he pointed out. “A single non-export Su-34 is superior to a dozen Su-27s,” he said.
star49I can also ask: Why didn’t US fall after defeat in Vietnam War??? Everyone knows that Vietnam War was much more ferocious, bloody and fought on much wider scale than Afghanistan War!
For Soviets, their Afghanistan journey was simply a derision, not a war! If USSR had sent ten times greater army into Afghanistan, invaded Pakistan and regularly bombed Iran for example, only it would have been called a repetition of US “activity” in Indochina ten years earlier!
u cannot compare two wars simply based on air compaign. these are two totally different wars. there was unlimited amount of hard money working against SU in afghanistan from Middleast/West/drug warlords. Vietnamese opposition was poorman opposition.
star49Hmm, the A380 employs more than 10.000 highly skilled people by now. It attracts investments from all over the world (including Asia and USA) and once the investment is made, it will pay off slowly. It is an encouraging project which may change the way of travel (and BTW outclass the An-225 as heaviest aircraft).
Selling oil is nice, but if you don’t have oil? It’s like earning mony with you cute butt, not everybody’s option. History proved that countries with large oil reserves did not transform into winning societies, or if they did, they normally did despite the oil and not because of it. It is like with the cute butt, it helps you some years but … 😀
If production level is kept at 30 ac/year, the A380 will pay of in less than 10 years.
BTW: RRJ is smaller than 737. We will talk about that when the first one has flown is due for certification. RRJ will not really endanger Airbus and Boeing monopoly on large transport aircraft.
A-380 cannot pay itself even in next 20 years. it is cost of inputs like labor, metal, energy which goes into input to produce the out put and very little is left for profit margin and its dependence on export.
it is not the point of being rich but the point is economically independent.
Sign In
