star49Cheaper, we will see. Bigger means nothing. Quality of the radar is all important, the current CAPTOR radar fitted in the EF is better than F-16 ASEA, any normal radar out there, when they develope an ASEA it will be better. Payload size, in terms of useful payload, carring 12 missiles will not alllow the su-35 to supercrusie if it can consistently anyway. What loadout is the typhoon unable to carry?? As far as I know it can carry any possible loudout you would want. Check out some of the most recent typhoon pics involving the ATG weapons 😉
longer range without in flight refuleing, when would any airforce not use it 🙂 Oh yes russia, because they dont really have any. There is no need for the typhoon to patrol miles and miles as its the countries it is designed to defend are now where near the flipping size of Russia. Larger EW suit, how??? Again it is quality not quantiy and thats what the EF has alot of.
yes you can have two su-35 for a typhoon, if you can anyway :(, but whats the point when there exchange ratio is 4.5 to one?
12 BVR missiles are not big deal for Su-35 class fighter and most of it is very aerodynamically located. As Su-35 gain speed and altitude towards Mach 1. it will lose fuel. so 2 tons of extra BVR load will not make big difference to TWR. that exchange ratio is joke. u have seen Su-35 video when Sukhoi officially is shooting EF/AWACS combined with zero loss.
star49Pretty much confirm Supercruise from start. As more prototypes are built. Pilots will be allowed to fully exploit the flight profile
Saturn 117S engines ensure successful tests of Su-35 fighter jet
MOSCOW. July 8 (Interfax-AVN) – The Su-35 mutirole fighter, equipped with the experimental 117S engines, performed a supersonic flight in the non-supercharged mode during the recent flight tests.
It is the first time in the Russian history that a supersonic speed was reached during the tests without afterburning, i.e. in the max output mode of the engine, which is the characteristic available only to fifth-generation aircraft, reads Saturn research and production association’s press release received by Interfax-AVN on Tuesday.
According to the press service, the Su-35 aircraft, being developed by Sukhoi, has made 20 flights so far, all successful. No troubles with the engines have been reported.
“The 117S engine of the 4++ generation has a thrust of 14.5 tons, which is two tons plus to the baseline engine’s thrust,” reads the press release, saying also that before testing in flight, the engines passed the whole sequence of ground bench tests, with the total operational time reaching 100 hours, including 15 hours with the flight lab.
star49You are guessing around in a helpless way. 😡
For the benefit of the others. The first Flanker B had a NTOW of 22,5 tons.
22,500 kg -5,988 kg (standard payload) = 16,512 kg OEW.No pilot in gear (-100 kg) No rails for the AAMs (-150 kg) No ammo for the gun (-75 kg) No flares and …..
Under such conditions you can bring down a Su-27 to 16 tons. But doing so it is no longer OEW really. 😮Adding fighting capabilities to a fighter are not free in weight.
You can start with an unbiased YF-16 up to the latest Block 60.
Composite materials, more titanium or smaller avionics nothing will change the trend for a higher OEW. In the meanwhile the F-16 does seems to be the most densely packed fighter?! 😉
The F-15 is another example about that, where a lot of data for verification are available to make up the own mind about that claim. 😎
The Su-27 is no exception from that rule, all the nice to have things will add weight, which does itself add further weight to cope with the rising loads. 😮
F-15/F-16 weight gain examples does not apply here. Sukhoi have clearly stated that they went back to original idea of light weight flanker and make it comparable to F-18E.
star49😮 Trying dirty tricks?
No way for biased guessing about R-27 weight, Sukhoi is specific. :diablo:
2xR-27R1 + 2xR-73E
The R-27R1 is 253 kg each and the R-73E is 105 kg each.
All data are from trustworthy Russian sources. 😉
Su-27SK is old. try Su-27SKM weights with LCD but still anolog backup. Su-27SK mis heavier CRTs. Su-27SK>Su-27SKM>Su-35. Su-35 using new lighter radar and avionics without mechanical backups along with Fibre optics channels. Not to mention lighter materials in structure.
Su-27SKM 9.4tons fuel, 8tons weopon load, 33tons MTOW. Su-27SK is limited to 4.4 tons for 30 tons MTOW. Su-35 increases fuel capacity to 11.5 tons.
http://www.knaapo.ru/eng/products/military/su27SKM.wbp
The mainstays of the cockpit management system are two colour multifunction liquid crystal displays (LCD), colour multifunction display panel with push-buttons, and head up-display. These displays show all required digital and visual target designation, flight and navigation data as well as data on the aircraft systems status. Along with the multifunction LCDs, the instrument panel houses traditional electromechanical instruments, which act mostly as backups
star49Just guessing. The two Russian links are magazines, Lenta.ru from Rambler Media Group and aviaport.ru, both fed by the same journalist Pavel Sergeev.
:diablo:At least here an interested reader may notice, that the normal take-off weight of 25,5 tons is not with max internal of 11,5 tons. :p
Here a max TOW of 38,8 tons is given.
2600 km/h at height is Mach 2,45 when Sukhoi gives Mach 2,25 or 2388 km/h.
Maybe our journalist has not figured out the correct Speed of Sound at 11 km height?! 😮
Now the most interesting or boring part will come, which way the quoted one will choose to distract from that. :rolleyes:
Sukhoi data is not complete as they are wrong on range figures also
Mach 2.25 only at 11km height.
Only thing they said it is lighter than F-18E which is closer to OEW 15 tons with 30.5 tons MTOW.
star49price is $65m. they have never considered any euro-canards as competitor. I dont know why this thread exist.
http://www.russiatoday.ru/business/news/27178
Dmitry Vasiliev of ‘Military Export’ Magazine says its the best available on the international market.
In terms of technology the new jet is second only to the American fifth generation F22 Raptor. But the American jet was primarily for domestic use and not for export, leaving the SU 35 as the most cutting edge fighter jet available on the market.
star49Have you seen their Annual budget ? Plenty of revenue from selling energy to EU and other parts of the world , so they can afford to spend 15-20 billion dollars over 10-12 years to develop the PAKFA .
here some figures. u can easily collect 40% tax of US with 40% population. so it is pretty even on population terms. and this all with low flat tax rate and illiquid capital markets as less than 1% of population participate in it.
http://www.rbcnews.com/free/20080703144407.shtml
since PAK-FA will be good enough for next 50 years. i think they will spend as much money as needed and as quickly as possible.
star49hmm, there was no indication anywhere that RMAF was offered the latest super hornet with APG-79 and such.
su-35 has its advantages, but the missiles that it uses are just far behind what’s available in the Western planes. PLAAF will tell you that, lol.
Those evaluation were done in 2001-02. There was no APG-79. It just BARS MK1 that beat APG-73. TMC (tactcal missile corporation largest export customer is China untill 2007).
normally you want to get past the transonic period before stating that it has supercruise capability. wait until it reaches mach 1.3
In first flight it is very impressive feat. And after 20 flights they have pretty good idea where it stands. It is not some communist era product.
star49Sorry if this was already discussed, but I was wondering… Russia’s GDP is about 1/8th the GDP of the US, how they’re going to pay for the PAK-FA?
Thanks
Russia GDP is certianly not 1/8th of US.
Just look at Tax revenues with such low tax rates for Russia.
star49Unable to read data. :diablo:
All given max is not at the same time. 😉
Su-30MK is over 38tons with 9.4 tons fuel. So how come Su-35 with 11.5 ton internal fuel has 34.5 tons MTOW?. It Sukhoi specially mentioned greater use of titanium with much longer life
star49Quite a few jets have been able to do that clean. Even some old ones.
not on first flight.
The Su-35BM is >18 tons OEW.
The Su-30MK is close to 19 tons OEW.
The Su-30MKI is >19 tons OEW.
The Su-27SK is >17 tons OEW.Data from Sukhoi.
Su-35 havent released weight data. only MTOW of 34.5 tons.
All range calculations and normal take off are with 4 missiles with no mention of normal fuel load etc.
star49.
It is rather unlikely that a fighter could bring more than 4 BVR missiles onto a target, except targets are very plentiful and are somehow cooperative. When someone switches on his radar, the opponent will flee as soon he sees himself in disadvantage.
EF/Gripen/Rafale cant flee from Su-35.:p It is just superior range, acceleration, altitude and long range weopons.
star49The question is only, if the OEW is closer to 18 tons or 19 tons, which does dependent, if the 56% ratio is kept. 😉
that is the weight for Su-30MK not Su-35. First time service life of over 6000 hr with super agility. Su-35 range, weopons load, performance is estimated for now.
http://www.vesti.ru
Its vital difference are the completely new possibilities of the complex of avionics. The range of detection of aerial targets is increased more than two of times, is substantially increased a quantity of purposes, which it can strike this complex. The more powerful weapon, which is provided for the use on this aircraft, more powerful optical channel… This is the aircraft, which in the close battle will have a superiority due to the engine of the increased thrust and rotary electro-traction, which is used in control system of aircraft. This is the aircraft, which will have a service life of more than 6000 hours. This is fundamentally new complex. But undoubtedly we cannot realize in the aircraft of family Su-35 all technologies, which are laid into the 5th generation. the 5th generation – this first of all internal arrangement of weapon, is not simple the realization of the characteristics of low observability, but this low-observable aircraft. We cannot here, of course, entirely realize the use of composite materials of construction, because if we go for such solutions, this will require the sufficiently long cycle of finishing. Therefore this aircraft it will be contemporary beginning with 2010 and until 2020. The fifth generation will live to 40-50- X of the years of present century
Good guess.
We keep in mind, that the Russians do claim the firing of two AAMs against a single target as one shooting. Two AAMs or SAMs bringing down a single target are a 100% kill-rate, which does even make some sense, the limited number of firing opportunities in mind.
these are old claims. Nothing to do with newer missiles and training
star49No AAMs with 400KM range? KS-172 much?
I think the test pilot of the Su-35BM did state that only Super Hornet can be compared to the Su-35BM, and I bet that’s mostly because of the US weapons package. All of the Europeans fighters are behind he said.
He said it is close competitor based on consensus of Sukhoi specialist not equal like F-22/MIG-31
star49You rarely carry more than 8 missiles. Actually more is waste, especially for a nation like Brazil not awaiting the apocalyptic storm of hundreds of enemy jets. On a normal CAP you would rather see aircraft take off with 6 missiles. That suffices for two BVR runs with 2 missiles expended each. Afterwards the flight heads home, kill or not.
6 to 8 missiles will give even more advantage to Su-35. less drag relative to size.
A Suchoi cannot generate any advantage, as with 6 or 8 missiles it will have no range or endurance advantage versus an Eurofighter or an Rafale with external tanks (which are dropped in case the thing gets hot, which does not happen at 98% of all CAP missions).
drop tanks give more drag & weight stressed the airframe & less weopon stations for actual combat. and also lose money on drop tanks. so less range and more fuel.
So, the Eurofighter has same mission performance at 30-40% less OEW.
Supercruise is included, and I guess we refrain making claims on complicated things like radar performance versus hostile fighter size targets with electronic counter measures. Just that much: it is no linear function of the dish diameter.
yes it is linear function with same tech level.
By the way, what is the finest 4th generation fighter? :confused:
Those I know all come out at considerably less than 15t OEW.
Su-35 does have less than OEW of less than 15ton. just going by specification.
Sign In
