star49Apples to orranges . The F-35 wasnt designed to have supercruise because it really didnt need it for its Strike missions which are Supportive to the F-22 in AD role . Supercruise was ID’d as an expensve and as such the ability to go supersonic for prelonged intervals was not necc. for the type of mission the JSF was designed for .
why dont Strike missions not need Supercruise. Both Su-35/PAK-FA are fully multirole & Supercruise but one is more enhanced than other. One is using extensive titanium and other extensive composites. high altitude and high speed increase the range of strike weopons along with time critical targets.
star49Google is your friend.
J7
http://www.sinodefence.com/airforce/fighter/j7e.asp
Specs
http://www.sinodefence.com/airforce/fighter/j7_specs.asp
First these claims are not from tests at neutral countries. Second R-73 20 years ago was superior to anything in the world that includes Python 3 and Python 4. South Africa had access to both of them. So what makes u think PL-9C can come even close to newer R-73? when R-73 alone will be more than 10,000 exported.
http://www.saairforce.co.za/the-airf…-11r-73-archer
This Russian air-to-air missile revolutionised the short-range dogfight AAM market when it first appeared in the 1980s. With its high agility incorporating thrust-vetoring, excellent off-boresight performance and intergration with a helmet-mounted sight, no Western AAM came close.As a result of the ineffectiveness of the V3B missile and delays in service entry of the new V3C, the SAAF bought 18 of these missiles for evaluation and decided to test the Russian missile by intergrating it on the Mirage F1 in 1993. During these tests, SAAF pilots fired missiles from MiG-29 aircraft at MiG-21 drones. Despite the success of the project, the SAAF and Armscor decided to continued with the V3C and the V3S which were inferior missiles
star49LOL…. Don’t use Carlo’s work as “proof” of anything, especially when he’s comparing Flanker radar’s to US equivalents. Unless you want to kill me with laughter. That whole article only addresses hardware capability and power aperture product comparisons, and then he draws conclusions from said comparisons. There’s a lot more to contemporary radar design than peak power & aperture size.
yes there is alot more to radar design and performance.
As i understand it the huge power output of the single TWT in current gen Russian PESA’s does have a significant problem with internal EM leakage, and this issue is reduced in US 3rd gen systems. The phase shift loss isn’t relevant because we are comparing phased array radars.
Additionally i’d put my money on 3rd gen AESA’s having better side lobe performance and beam coherence.
ur putting money at wrong place. Time has changed
I’m sure NIIP has a very prestigious pedigree with passive array radars, but you have to look at this in context. Examine the R&D budgets of fighter radar technology, I wonder whether Raytheon or LM have more $$$ to play with than NIIP or Phazotron? Now i know there’s more to it than $$$, but more cash means more people (and in most cases better quality people), better quality equipment, more testing in and out of the lab in addition to more sophisticated testing. Now in terms of processor/software combinations the same rule applies. In addition to the money, the complexity of the software needed just to run an LPI AESA means that by default US designer have to be ahead in terms of software development. Also the software needed to employ advanced features like EA or extremely detailed SAR imagery is even more hideously complicated than the baseline code, and US designers are fielding some of these features now.
If money was the issue Russia would not be Ice hockey champions but Canadians/US. Germany is better in economics than US because Germany got Russian contracts. so why u even think NIIP has less money for equipment? when all the money in every field is enough for the kind of work they do. and there better are radars already in service than export oriented IRBIS like Radar on Su-34/MIG-31BM.
1st) you’re assuming the limiting factor in BVR engagement envelope is the platforms radar. All current gen BVRAAMS can use an of board sensor as a fire control device i.e. an AWACS. By the way as it stands now (or next year) the US will field the longer range AAM, AIM-120D vs R-27ER/EA.
2nd) with or without AWACS any target being tracked by an Irbis in most cases will know about it before the shooter gets accurate track data. The flanker on the other hand is only going to know its been fired upon when it actually detects the missile, which will be very late.
3rd) LPI AESA’s will be used in stealthy platforms.
4th) even with AWACS in a heavy EW environment the surveillance footprint of said system would be significantly limited. In that case ELINT is going to be a big resource.
They already put more than 200KM BVR missile on MIG-31 since this Year and two upgrades of R-77 are coming next year. and there is additional missile under Project 810.(500Km range class).
star49You are not going into anything. It is obvious that besides Lexis Nexis and google, you have not worked for a single day in your wonderful life. Enjoy the internets, yack yack yack blah blah blah on till you drop!!
surely. Why India is even discussing 5th generation fighter? u have to finish inducting MKI than LCA and than MRCA. So these are all three different aircrafts with different supply chians.
so financial/technical/Rawmaterials/Composites. India is not in position to add anything to PAK-FA project. So the end result will be licensing at best.
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2007-10/18/content_6903512.htm
“Our plans are not simply considerable, but huge. At the same time, they are absolutely realistic… Our armed forces will be compact and very efficient, and they will reliably guarantee this country’s security for years to come,” Putin said.
The Russian Air Force has started to receive the advanced Sukhoi Su-34 fighters and the new generation of fighters will be built by 2012-2015, Putin said, adding that Ground Forces have started to be armed with Iskander-M missile systems.
u have to consider this also between Export and domestic contracts.
http://www.russiatoday.ru/business/news/26437
The 30 rubles we got for every dollar China paid us 3 years ago is now 23. The cost of kerosene’s doubled, nickel and titanium prices are 2 to 5 times higher,” explains Chernyshev Military Engine Plant’s deputy chairman Gennady Arkhipov.
star49The Captor, the APG-77 and probably even the APG-79, never mind the APG-63 V(2) and 3 should be able to get similar performance.
so development cost of Captor/APG-77/APG-79 are the same as Irbis?. Irbis is low cost upgrade of previous PESA technology.
so let say Russia spend $10 to $15B on 5th generation fighter R&D than West has to spend $150 to $200B on R&D alone to match that. I am not even going into production prices.
star49Not really the same role. Not every western country could afford an F-15, so a lot of them bought F-16s instead. In the same vein not every country that buys fighter aircraft from Russia will want the largest most expensive fighter they can get. They will not even likely use it the same as Russia uses them… Russia will likely use the Su-27BM as a fighter/interceptor mainly. The Mig-29s will possibly be used for shorter range missions/interceptions like for engaging Georgian UAVs… 🙂
Not every client needs or can afford a Flanker. MIG gives them a smaller potentially cheaper alternative. MIG also has a 5th gen fighter project and even if the Russian AF doesn’t want it it might be good to have it for export for countries that can’t afford a PAK-FA. Russia certainly will not want every country in the world operating PAK-FAs. Brazil, and India are not potential threats to Russia, but they might think twice about selling PAK-FAs to China any time soon… and when PAK-FAs are ready I doubt China will keep wanting new Flanker upgrades.
How many countries can afford MIG-35 let alone 5th generation MIG? Dont count MIG-29K prices as they belong to 2004. and i have read Sukhoi president interview his further interested in selling licenses to China. I am sure there will be export model of PAK-FA for every country. It is not 90s anymore. Russia has alot of money and access to technology. they can built things faster and better for themselves. I can even see that when Civillian aircraft production reaches certain point they may ban Boeing/Airbus overflights over Russian terrotory. Airlines will have to use Russian aircrafts.
There is no competition now, that does not mean there will continue to be no competition in the future. If there were 2 engine companies or 1 engine company there would be less scope or even no competition at all. It doesn’t make sense to have 20 engine companies any more than it makes sense to have 2. 4 is probably the best compromise. There are enough new types of engines required and in production to keep 4 companies busy and self funded. Remember that Klimov might design engines but as that article clearly states they don’t have the production facilities to actually make them. Their first step will be to create such facilities… once they are in fully production the funding they get from those sales and any export sales they might be able to get will help fund upgrades of their existing products and new products and of course pay for the upgraded production facilities. They might invest it into making 5th generation type engines for helos or even tanks. Equally the engine company that makes the engines for the Il-76 and Mig-31 might decide to have a go at making helo engines. Many of the engines currently being developed for light helos are also being employed in light transport aircraft for example. The 2,500hp TV7 series engines for the Il-114 for example. The 1,500hp engine used on the Il-112 and Ka-60 etc etc.
Russia has already made production planes upto 2025. they may change alittle bit but not change enough that Saturn/Salyut/Perm all of sudden made helicopter engines or Perm make new fighter engine. Thats not going to happen.
star49it does not have to be European or American airline aircraft (at least American ones are obvious).. but I do believe the PRC has quite a few Russian airliners like the Il-86, and rumored to have 4 Il-96
China has Tu-154 and Tu-204 and they are more efficient than IL-76 (u dont need 4 engine aircraft for AWACS anymore).
but Russians havent put antenna over the top of it. so it will be costly modification.
star49So why do you call for the destruction of Mig? They make other military aircraft and civilian aircraft too.
The reality is that there is no one single product except Su-27 derivatives or Mi-8 derivatives that could allow a focus on one type of aircraft to be built by one company and have the company survive with no other product. (and even then they could not continue for more than a few years before the world passes them by).
u cannot run a separate design bureau based on updating products for long term. MIG and Sukoi products have same role.
There are going to be 4 engine companies and many of their products will overlap. There may be areas where there is plenty of healthy competition. Traditionally in Helo engines with Mi-8s, Mi-14s, Mi-17s, Mi-24s, Mi-28s, Ka-32s, Ka-27s, Ka-29s, Ka-31s, Ka-50s and Ka-52s all potentially using the same engine there is still room for competition. The new VK-2500 engine offers superior performance, but it would be silly to think just because it offers better performance all current users will upgrade to the new engine. This means that production and improvement of the older engine still makes sense. The Russian Army is replacing Hinds with Havocs. They will certainly need new engines for the Havocs but for the upgraded Hinds they might save a little money by keeping the old engines.
With the engine used by the Mig-31 and the Il-76 the new PS-90A might be good for the Il-76 but will not fit the Mig-31. There are upgrades of the engine that improve thrust slightly, slightly improve fuel efficiency and greatly reduce engine noise to allow use at European airports where there are noise restrictions on cargo aircraft. The PS-90A is a better engine but it is about $3 million per engine. An improved basic model D30 that only costs $250,000 might still be a better choice for some uses… especially in aircraft with four engines.
With the number of new Helo engines required… not just 10-12 ton class engines like the VK-2500, but also light engines for the Mi-34 and the ANSAT and the Ka-60, and improved engines for the Mi-26 etc the will likely need a lot of factories and the work might be subcontracted out between the four main engine companies anyway simply to keep up with demand… certainly for the next few years when a lot of helos and transports need replacing.
whether it is 4 engine company or 10 there is no competition. VK-2500/VK-800/VK-1500/VK-3500 these are all Klimov products and they have monoply over Helicopter engines. Similar in new civillianengine projects like PS-12 Perm will have monoply.
Saturn/Salut are more verstile but still they have there own areas of strenghts.
MIG/Sukhoi products have similar role unless MIG comes up with UAVs.
star49RSM 55,
Thanks for your response. Didnt think what I wrote deserved histrionics of that caliber, but I remain to be surprised etc.
Hmm…I dont personally give a damn about nationalist claims from any nations supporters as long as they dont troll or flame, so I dont know why Indians would offend your sensitive nostrils so much? But given your claims about Russia and some obvious factual errors- I can very much say that you are doing some nationalist handwaving. “Mine is best, everyone else better watch out”…irrespective of whether you are Russian or somebody who worships Mother Russia being from “a lesser clime”..etc.
If BMW claims that only they can built best sports sedans (perfect 50/50 weight distribution on rear wheel drive) would you doubt that?
That your claims of Russias airborne EW suites outmatching whats available today in the west, elsewhere, are – hyperbole.
As simple as that.
Nothing more, nothing less.
Without Russians World will be still using 585 microprocessors and Sun Micro System would not have become best internet firm of 90s.
Basically, I am keenly aware of what Russia has achieved in terms of airborne suites for avionics, and while impressive, it is by no means worthy of irredeemable handwaving. No country is at that stage, and nor is Russia.
how can you aware of something which is not allowed for export and discuss? just try to find some information about deep drilling technology that Russians is developing for Arctic. Certain things are not even for discussion let alone for export.
More handwaves. What I was getting at, is simple. Walk the talk. The BAe team which developed the ALR-94 has demonstrated their competence, and the rest of the world acknowledges it. For you to come and state that Russia will do better because…well they are Russians…I like it (I like Russia) but can I accept it w/o proof, hardly.
BAe systems have demonstrated its competence? let them do it infront of Russians
You can hope so. But given you aint investing, you aint running the project and you aint even Russian and you are already wrong (about what India knows about the project and doesnt) – I can also tell you this, India will get its ROI one way or the other, thats the way it works. And frankly, the PAK-FA developers know this, and which is why they have been after Indian participation since 2001. Surprise!!
And the Indians- also told them this – get the MKI functional, we’ll see if it meets our requirements – and then we’ll talk. It did, everything went well, rest is all well and fine. Thats how things work.
Let first India get return on investment on Gorskhov/T-90/Brahmos/MKI projects than talk about PAK-FA. u are out of touch with reality.
And WHICH IS WHY, the Indian SA to RM recently revealed details about choosing which EW fit from Russian firms etc.
thats good point.
Gee, which is why every foreign customer gets a deep license, makes their own weapons integration rigs and integrates their own items on their own, even without OEM involvement. ..which btw, is what India is doing.
Not with Weopons and Radar.
Please dont make me grin again!! The Pastel RWR was rejected on grounds of obscolescence! And what the Russians offered for the MKI was also not good enough in terms of EW. So much so that the Elta 8222 SPJ was chosen! And it was remarked upon by non lesser than the State Auditor General. And the Indians, have never bothered with what Russia “denied to them” – as facts have been, the Russians have offered a lot, only that the Indians have chosen exactly what is capable enough. Which is why – FYI, even Algeria and Malaysia are using Indian processors for their MKIs.
And no, India is not producing its avionics suites with “Russian backing” – its doing so on its own, has had considerable success (and one prominent holdup) so far, and is retrofitting them to whatever it inducts. The benefits of the LCA program and non OEM upgrades.
Algeria/Malaysia is using what is certfied. They wont be getting anything related to Su-35 based on Su-30MK money.
Well I dont know! Given that India has a far better track record of implementing its “plans” than post Soviet Russia (Chechnya anyone?), your jibe was rather self defeating! For all the tough talk the likes of you do, Russia supporters like me, are dismayed at how much remains to be done to bring Russia upto what it could be viz its conventional forces.
India has far better track record? try to compare India internal problems with Russia. u will get the answer. I am not even going into Budget surpluses. and super efficient government system.
You are person in serious delusion trying to compare Russia with India. where even Japanes/Chinese cannot do what Russians can do.
http://www.uomz.ru
The structure of the enterprise is Central Design Bureau, service and extensive network of sales and engineering subsidiaries in the Russian regions, as well as in Switzerland, China and Belarus. Sci-tech potential UOMZ allows modern apparatus and equipment, certified by European standards of quality and satisfying the most demanding requirements of customers.
Currently the company operates 120 project teams, which employs more than 900 employees. . A more than 80 projects to develop and put into serial production of high-technology products both civilian and military purposes. . Growth in R & D annually account for about 30%. . As a result of timing of developing products for military use declined from an average of 5 years to 2.5 years, on civilian goods to 1 year
Your attitude speaks for itself. In the world that you inhabit, the incompetent Indians cannot obviously make their own systems superior to what Mother Russia fields, or more tailored to their own needs! Please please wake up. The world isnt where you thought it was.
India hasnt made anything superior to Russia as far as Aviation/electronics/software field. copy and paste does not work here.
And FYI not “developing”, but developed and validated for the Krypton and general ESM already. Kindly google for the DRDO Shiv/ Siva High Accuracy Direction Finding Module pod. Its intended for both ESM and cueing Krypton missiles fielded by the MKI. And India has no plans to introduce any Russian RWR on its MKIs – the R118 set from DRDO has already been selected as the standard fit. Not only does it provide better direction finding accuracy & several other features than the standard Russian RWRs, its far more flexible and has already gone three block upgrades. Oh btw, in case you dont think the pod exists:
http://img258.imageshack.us/my.php?image=dscn0014eq1.jpgRegards!
what India do or dont is irrelevant as far as Russia is concerned. They got license for thales Catherine TI , Domocles pod and 3rd Generation night vision system from Sagem. Russian has all the money in the World to buy the stuff which they are interested but surely they wont be buying anything worth while from India.
star49back on topic
PARIS. June 18 (Interfax-AVN) – In a bid to improve the quality of after-sale servicing of multi-purpose police vehicles, Tigrs, the VPK company is going to deploy a broad network of service centers.
“We are deploying the Tirg service network now. As for the time being, we have representatives at all units where such vehicles are operated, who provide us with on-line update on the life of every vehicle,” said company’s COE Dmitry Galkin at the Eurosatory-2008 arms show in Paris, noting that VPK’s products are exported to ex-Soviet nations, Arab states, Africa and South East Asia.
“We are reopening Latin America for us now: Venezuela, Columbia, Brazil and Uruguay. These nations are buying our APCs of various modifications, as well as thin-skinned and unarmored vehicles. The Tirg is the most popular topic now. We have signed a contract with China for the supply of 600 such vehicles, including 500 complete sets for assembly in China under a license agreement. We have delivered the first batch under the contract. We have a similar deal with Indian Vectra, for which we made two Tigrs with the steering wheel on the right, and we expect that Brazil will follow suite,” he said.
PARIS. June 17 (Interfax-AVN) – The VPK defense company is to supply Tigr multi-purpose all-road heavy police vehicles, which are to be equipped with U.S. automatic transmissions, to Afghanistan, company’s CEO Dmitry Galkin told journalists at the Eurosatory 2008 international arms show in Paris.
“We have joined efforts with Rosoboronexport over the U.S. application to buy Tigrs for the Afghan mission. The U.S. has offered to equip our vehicles with their automatic transmissions,” he said, noting that sees no problems with integrating U.S. transmissions into Russian vehicles.
“BTR APCs and Tigrs are adjusted to accommodate automatic transmissions. The Tigrs we are selling to India have such ones. We will gladly satisfy such requests of other customers, too. However, the price will also grow,” he said.
Automatic transmissions are not built in Russia, he emphasized, adding that all vehicles for the national application are equipped with mechanical transmissions.
When asked about the possible mounting of remotely controlled weapons on top of the armored vehicle, he said that there are some projects of unmanned, robotized fighting compartments and turrets, where only weapons and ammunition are accommodated. “A remote control panel inside the vehicle or even outside it is used to control these weapons. For instance, we placed such kind of turrets onto the tank support fighting vehicle, and the Ukrainians integrated it on their BTR-3E, which is a replica of our vehicle.”
The new-generation Tigr vehicle can carry a variety of weapons. It is a very maneuverable vehicle that can cruise on paved roads at a speed of 140 km/h. Its top cross-country speed is 80 km/h. As for its cross-country capabilities, it has no rivals in the world, including the world-famous HMMWV.
Depending on configuration, the Tigr can carry from seven to ten personnel. Its weight is 720 kg. The vehicle’s armor protects the crew from 7.62-mm shots and mine and hand grenade fragments.
star49That’s just it, though; the airframe and engines are not mostly titanium. In fact, the only production military aircraft that I know of that can make that claim is the SR-71.
All you’ve been able to show thus far is that the newer members of the Su-27 family make more extensive use of titanium than earlier members, which was never disputed.
Logan Hartke
They dont have to show the exact of alloys/composites/titanium in Su-35 as it will be secret.
but u cannot make a claim that aircraft is mostly made of Aluminium like Second world war aircraft. i have read that Russia has introduced newer methods of exctracting Iron Ore so it is not hard for them newer methods of large scale production of Titanium with new methods. which will justify large use of titanium in aviation products.
star49Large-scale use of titanium is not disputed. I understand that, but the aircraft is still mostly aluminum. My truck uses a lot of rubber. It’s still mostly steel (old truck, not plastic). Find a source that says it’s mostly titanium. Or, just consult Yefim Gordon’s bible on the Flanker and discover you’re wrong yourself.
Logan Hartke
Mostly aluminium? when engines/airframe is not mostly aluminium so do u think electronics are aluminium? and we are not discussing 1970s era Flanker.
http://www.sukhoi.org/files/su_news_29-08-07_eng.pdf
So, what is new in the Su-35’s design?
Firstly, the fighter shall be given an improved
airframe featuring more titanium alloys,
which is to result in a sizeable extension of
the plane’s service life up to 6,000 hours or 30
years of operation, with the time before the
first reconditioning and between overhauls
growing to 1,500 hours or 10 years of opera-
tion. The Su-35’s aerodynamic configuration
is the same as that of the Su-27. Unlike the
Su-30MKI, it will not have the canards but
will feature the pitch, yaw and roll fly-by-wire
control system without any mechanical con-
trol linkage. The fighter’s flight performance
and manoeuvrability is to hike owing to
the advanced KSU-35 fly-by-wire system
under development by the MNPK Avionika
company and handling the job used to be
done by several individual systems on board
the Su-27 – fly-by-wire system, automatic
control system, stall warning and barrier, air
data, landing gear wheel braking and nose-
wheel control systems. At the same time, the
KSU-35 will handle proactive safety func-
tions.Of the Su-35’s design features, mention
also should be made of the lack of the Su-27’s
typical upper air brake, due to its functions
taken over by the differentially deflected rud-
ders. Owing to an increase in the Su-35’s
takeoff weight, its landing gear has been beefed
up, with the nosegear made twin-wheel. The
airframe embodies the radar abruption tech-
nologies slashing the fighter’s X-band radar
cross-section within the ±60° sector.
The redesigned airframe internal volumes
allowed an increase in the Su-35’s fuel capac-
ity by more than 20 per cent to 11,500 kg
star49Have anything that says the Flanker is mostly titanium? It uses some, but is still mostly aluminum.
http://www.vectorsite.net/avsu27_1.html
Ice and coal are also abundant in Russia, neither of which the Su-27 is constructed from.
this wrong information recirculating through various websites.
http://www.sukhoi.org/eng/planes/military/su27sk/history/
The airframe was significantly lightened through compact configuration and optimization of the design structure, as well as large-scale use of titanium alloys in the design.
even in engines it is titanium
It was only possible to achieve such characteristics by harnessing promising new materials and technologies: new titanium alloys, heat-resistant steels, single-crystal vanes, special coatings, and other new features;
star49It’s weight increased because of the uprated engine, the larger wing, and the additional mission equipment added to the plane, not more structure as you asserted was necessary. The point still stands. Also, the P-47 wasn’t constructed of wood or plastic…at all. It was, like the Sukhois, primarily aluminum. The principles still apply.
so Sukhoi is made of aluminium. ever thought about Titanium which is so abundant in Russia.
Very simple explaination.
http://bicycledesign.blogspot.com/2006/06/aluminum-vs-carbon-fiber-vs-titanium.html
Aluminum-vs-Carbon-fiber-vs-Titanium
Litespeed. Brad, the company’s chief engineer, narrates the video as Scott drives a big crew cab pickup truck over a carbon tube, an aluminum tube, and finally a titanium tube. I won’t spoil the ending for you, but I am pretty sure you can guess which tube emerges intact
That was the only one you mentioned in your earlier statement. You’re trying to change the scenario to fit your assertion rather than consider the possible that your assertion isn’t always correct. A plane’s structural weight doesn’t have to increase as it adds fuel space.
So do u think Sukhoi engineers are so one dimensional that they only think about increase in fuel capacity without any other parameters taking into account
star49I am talking about keeping competition alive in Russia. I am saying that only having Sukhois will leave those 4 engine making companies in trouble because what is the point in having 4 different companies make the same product. As the 4 companies are set up and get ready for the needed production capacity in Russia they can certainly do with funds for spares and support of existing engine types. Once they are ready for full production they can make new engines with their new production facilities and replace all the old model engines that are now obsolete. For example when the VK-2500 is in full production there is no reason to mass produce the older engine models it replaces, except for spares for in service models. Making them in small numbers will drive up the price/cost of older models and make newer models a more attractive option. This will immediately improve performance of aircraft like the Mi-8/-17/-14/-24/-35 series and the Ka-50/52/-27/-32/-31 etc series too. Better hot and high performance and better power margins.
Sukoi factories are making both Civillian aircraft and fighters. Even Beriev is under Irkut and so is Yak.
Then why are they talking about competition? If each engine manufacturer will be making engine types that no other Russian maker is making there is no competition. The whole point of having 4 engine makers is to ensure that you will likely have at least two makers competing for engines in certain classes. By having 4 you increase competition but still allow for each company to survive. An aircraft industry can’t survive with just 4 different types of engine. From cruise missiles, to light helos, medium helos, heavy helos, light transports, medium transports, heavy transports, light jet trainers, medium jets, heavy jets, light, and heavy bombers etc etc. That ignores MPAs, spyplanes, AWACs, seaplanes, etc etc but there can of course be engines in multi use. The engine of a light jet trainer might be good for a heavy long range UAV design for example. Currently the engine in the Mig-31 is related to engines in medium transports, AWACS, Tankers, and Elint aircraft and seaplanes.
Later on they might find they only need three engine companies… like P&W and GE… one of them must make the “best engine” and have the most “skilled personel”.
so how is Saturn/Prem is going to compete with Klimov in helicopter engines when they dont have any experiance and product line to research on? Unlike West Russian engine manufacturers are separate specialized entities which is not the case with Sukhoi and MIG. they both do fighters as speciallity.
Sign In
