Maybe not Russian customers but the UAE definately felt like pouring billions on the Block 60 and other airforces have bought the Block 50/52 in great ammounts since it was offered for export .

I am not going into this discussion. UAE also very high price for M2K9. $150m in today prices.

Price has nothing to do with this , we are merely talking about radars and your claim that US doesnt export advanced radars . US tech is always more expensive as opposed to russian tech. That has been true historically yet with regards to our current discussion it really doesnt make any difference as we are talking about radars only and not which fighter is the better one or cheaper one etc etc etc

ur comparing communist times when things were cheaper. even Su-30MK2 is $62m in 2006 prices. Su-35 will be much more comparable to F-18E price without AESA.

You seem to be either UNDERESTIMATING THE SU-34 or OVER-ESTIMATING the block 60 F-16. The Block 60 is good but it is still a single engined fighter with not so good T2W ratio when laden with huge CFT’s and munition , given its wing loading it is still not @ the level of the flanker series let alone the modern Su-34. Yet as a bomb truck it is quite good given its advanced weaponry which is second to none and AESA radar and targetting suite (IRST,FLIR etc) . The F-16 block 50/60 is a sort of POOR MAN’S F-15E/Su34 as you get F-15E like bomb halling and PGM delivery (At ranges) capability but at fraction of the maintaince cost .

there is price-capability. Russians arent stupid that they pay more for less capability. 1 Su-34 is better than 12 Su-27.

The Su-34 is more comparable to a F-15E with yet another upgrade by the USAF (which isnt planned just hypothetical scenario) with Apg-63 (V3) , IRST , newer engines , RCS-reduced features etc etc etc. The Block 60 or even the Block 70 will find it tough to match the Su-34’s performance specially if the 34 gets the AESA radar like the PAKFA .

ur not getting the point. u can put same avionics tech into MIG-29 as in Su-34 but still it will be less capable.

But you in your previous posts said to TAKE ONLY OPERATIONAL RADARs (we’ll see when the Apg-81 flies etc etc) so USING THE SAME LOGIC the IRBIS is out since it aint operational while the Apg-79 is in the block 2.0 Super hornet.

but APG-79 hasnt been export delivered yet just like MIG-31 and SU-34 radars.

But the Apg-81 when it goes operational is OFFERED FOR EXPORT . The LRIP examples of F-35’s being purchased by the UK and other partners will all come with the radar.

there is big time lag between signing and delivering a operational fighter.

The problem is that you wont know the true range performance for radars such as the Apg-79 and Apg-81 for some time . I see no information on range on brochures .

The IRBIS aint operational as per my knowledge and all AESA radars offered by US manuf. (NG and raytheon) are working , operational examples .

The problem is that Bars have been exported since 2002 and Malaysian evalated in 2001 and found it superior to anything available at that time. Once u Actually deliver APG-81 to customer than u can talk. APG-80 is not in Bars performance.

Pathetic attempt to distort the facts. How many years did it take the Americans and Europeans, who are far better at radar and avionics then the Russians, to move from the twist cassegrain to PESA? :rolleyes:

US/EU is behind than Russian radar tech interms of fighter PESA. when first MKI was exported in 2002 what was US/EU actual exporting? pretty much useless Slot array radars. when 400KM IRBIS is offered for export what is EU/US counterpart ready for export. Probably F-18E/F-15 Aesa radar with 200 to 250KM range at most.

So what is your point? If there is no law suit, then there is no issue is there? :rolleyes:

there is issue.

America buys bras from China, does that mean America can’t design and manufacture bras? :rolleyes: The L15 is clearly heavily influenced by the Yak130, so why bother wasting years and millions designing your own FBW when you can just buy a ready made version off the shelf today and for a lot less?

Besides, I’m still waiting of that proof that the FBW of the J10 and FC1 are imported.

Americans clearly made modern Bras before China which is not the case with trainer aircraft. u basically dont know how to do things first time.

So in four years the Russians went from SK to MKI standard? :rolleyes:

So do u think they need 40 years to upgrade avionics of same airframe.:rolleyes:

Idiotic response. You quoted one of my paragraphs and made a big rant about how the Russians had better tech when I was talking about China supplying itself that had nothing to do with exports. The J11B is made by the Chinese, and unless they put it on the market, then its not for export. That does not change just because some newspaper meantioned ‘export’ of J11s. :rolleyes:

And just because some newspaper mentioned Law suit it does not mean there is an actual law suit.

Can you not even read?

So what you call this law suit claim then?

Read that again and repeat until you can understand what tha sentence means.

where is the claim?

Baseless drivel.

nope.

I asked for proof, not for you to repeat yourself.

Proof is pretty obvious when u cant design FBW for low end aircraft a decade after the high end.

Russia really screwed the pooch wrt the Flanker deal with China. In a way, it was a self fulfilling prophicy created by Russia’s own greed and pananoia.

The Russians were so afraid that China would rip off the Su27 that they only agreed to give China an out-dated and watered down version of the Su27, while offering better equipment to India to the quiet fury of Chinese generals and leaders. Then their servicing of the Flankers China did buy was poor by forcing the PLAAF to send engines back to Russia to be overhauled as the Russians did not want to establish such a facility in China. That made the Flanker availability pretty poor to start with, as well as adding a lot to operating costs.

It has never been mentioned that they offer water down when Su-30MKI was not ready untill 2004. and China paid $2.5B for 200 Flankers vs $3.3B for 140 for India. and Ruble was more valuable before 1998 crises than after. China got alot cheaper deal.

All that pretty much forced China to seek to go with domestic gear, which had become more capable, cheaper, and probably more reliable then anything the Russians were willing or able to provide, so it really become a no-brainer to choose Chinese kit to install on the Flankers. What could have been a successful long-term partnership has turn sour, and Russia’s attitude is almost certain to have played a big part in China’s decision to go with its own XXJ instead of joining the PAK-AF project.

Capable, reliable? that must be a Joke. Cheaper i can understand. as Wage has been risen tremendously in Russia. Su-35 with $70M price tag will still win a export competition vs $35M J-11B.

Now it would seem that the Russians are getting awefully concerned and threatened by the J11B, because why else would they make noise about IP infringement and trying to rubbish the plane without actually making a legal claim? Because so long as China does not export the J11B, then the Russians would be really had pressed to make their case.

I havent seen they are concerned by anthing Chinese atall. They are more than willing to supply engines, parts to any single engine fighter made in China.

Hell, unless you have a copy of the contract telling you what is allowed or not, then you simply can’t know if Russia has a case at all, at least for production for internal use. It would be a different matter if SAC tried to sell the J11B on the international market as I don’t think there is an icecubes chance in hell of the Russians ever allowing that in any contract. But it is not doing that, and unless it does, then that is a moot point.

First China should try to sell those L-15/K-8/FC-1 with its own engines and FBW.

star49, I agree with your view fully. In my view, nothing more need be concluded after the statements of Mr. Pogosyan and Mr. Alexei Fedorov themselves, who have said that India is just a financier and that India will not play any any role in the finalized design of the PAK-FA.

The PAK-FA has been under development since 2002 — without an Indian “whiff” so far — and has begun prototype production, with India formally still out of it. All its design, engine, avionics and weaponry have been frozen i.e. digitalized by Russia.
IAF’s initial QSRs were sent back to India (rather rejected) on the grounds that it is too late to incorporate them. The PAK-FA is to be inducted in Russia, in just 6 years after its first flight in 2009. In this scenario, it may be subjectively very difficult for the PAK-FA to be called a “joint venture”.

It must be observed that there is often not even a passing mention of India in the various news Russian reports about the PAK-FA. At the “eleventh hour” before its first flight next year, Brazil is also being invited to the project. Thus, the claim of PAK-FA being a 50-50 joint partnership or 50-50 IPR between India and Russia now stands false.

I think it would be naive to believe that Sukhoi is in “dire” need of HAL. It can be safely stated that Sukhoi is well equipped and capable of making a 5 G fighter plane by itself, but for lack of funds.
At most, HAL will be outsourced testing and reportage, and “mundane” R&D work like analysis/process consultancy/info mining, thats it.

I dont think Sukhoi is looking for development money thats why they are in no hurry. they have to just dig the ground to find money.

http://www.moscowtimes.ru/article/1009/42/362306.htm
In a further blow to the economy, companies cannot develop 23 large deposits of natural resources because they lack access roads, Levitin said, according to his ministry’s web site

they are just looking at customers by hooking them up in the begining. PAK-FA develoment will be finished before IndiaBrazil could sign for it. and there are other customers like Kazakistan they are going to become very rich with uranium/Gas deposits. so there will be customers for PAK-FA in time. and they will make various modification for each customer.

IF i have to write some thing about J-11. it will be along this lines. obsolete fighter with LCD displays.

http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20080425/105928822.html
China copies obsolete Russian fighter
17:17 | 25/ 04/ 2008

MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti military commentator Ilya Kramnik) – Earlier this year reports appeared in the media that China had copied Russia’s Sukhoi Su-27 Flanker fighter, and that its J-11 version, now manufactured in China, would be sold to third countries, undermining Russia’s positions on the global arms market.

Although China has made some progress in adapting Russian designs and technology, it is still far from posing either a military or commercial threat to Russian aviation.

The Chinese aircraft industry evolved in the late 1950s with Soviet assistance, and soon mastered production of the Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-15 Fagot and MiG-17 Fresco fighters, the Ilyushin Il-28 medium-range bomber and other warplanes. Later China got more modern aircraft from the U.S.S.R. – Tu-16, MiG-21, An-12 and others.

By cooperating closely with the Soviet Union, China managed to create a modern air force by the mid-1960s. However, this progress was squandered, and the national aircraft industry began to stagnate, after the beginning of the Cultural Revolution in the late 1960s.

Throughout the 1960s and the 1970s, China failed to develop any new aircraft, instead manufacturing the Q-5 and J-8 – revamped versions of the MiG-19 Farmer and MiG-21 Fishbed fighters.

Meanwhile, both the Soviet Union and the United States were developing fourth-generation fighters by that time. By the mid-1980s, the Chinese Air Force was lagging behind Russia and the United States by some 15-20 years.

Beijing mostly sold its obsolete warplanes to the poorest Third World countries, including Albania, Uganda and Bangladesh. China also exported its aircraft to Pakistan, a potential ally against India.

Chinese leaders eventually resolved to rectify the situation by purchasing up-to-date aircraft production technologies. In 1988, China bought production forms and records for Israel’s Lavi multi-role fighter. Sixteen years later, in 2004, China mastered production of the Chengdu J-10 – an essentially Israeli warplane featuring Russian avionics.

Moscow and Beijing mended relations in the late 1980s, leading in 1989 to the signing of several military-technical cooperation agreements that facilitated technology transfers.

Most importantly, Beijing received production forms, records and assembly kits for the Su-27, as well as several Su-30-MKK fighters from Russia. By mastering these advanced warplanes, China obtained superiority over its neighbors and gained an insight into the latest aviation technologies.

Nevertheless, Chinese engineers have so far failed to master production of the Su-27’s AL-31F power-plant. Its Chinese copy, the WS-10A, is less fuel-efficient and has a shorter service life. On the other hand, the J-11B, an upgraded J-11 version, has a pilot-friendly cockpit with color LCD screens.

A new Su-27 radar reportedly developed by China has better specifications than the Soviet-made N-001 radar, but is inferior to Russia’s more modern Irbis radar.

To sum up, China has managed to copy an aircraft developed in the early 1980s 15 years after the initial Su-27 deliveries, and 10 years after the first Chinese-assembled Su-27 performed its maiden flight.

But the prototype Su-27 and the J-11 are no match for the revamped Su-27SM fighters now being adopted by the Russian Air Force and the new Su-35BM, which has entered its testing stage.

Although the J-11 will carve out its own market niche, this does not mean that Russian-made aircraft will lose their popularity. Nor will China pose a greater military threat to Russia. It is evident that neither Moscow nor Beijing wants an open military conflict. Even if such a hypothetic conflict ever flared up, it would be decided by weapons other than advanced fighters.