You have actual figures to back that up? MTOW has nothing to do with empty weight. Anyone reading your statements will honestly LAUGH AT YOU.
38.8 MTOW is actually an emergency load (e.g. for example, possible use of nuclear device). The normal MTOW of the Su-30MK2 is the same as everyone else.
Su-30MK is not same as earlier Su-27. Sukhoi has made a very clear statement about it that modification of Su-27s have made the performance worse thats why they are going to original idea. and range figures on there website provies there point. So no point in debating.
BS. What kind of fantasy are you in? You must be lying out of your teeth to say that.
Go ahead and hang yourself in embarrassment.
“It was the first combat aircraft capable of sustained Mach 2 flight (not just a brief dash) and its speed and climb performance remain impressive, even by modern standards. I”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-104_Starfighter
I said F-104 came earlier than F-4. Prove this statement wrong. ur link has nothing to do with the issue.
What a piece of BS coming out of your ass. I decided to highlight your statements just to show the freaking stupidity you have degenerated.
If the plane cannot load that much, then it is not loaded for it, and the design provisions for such loading therefore is not there.
Having excess thrust has NOTHING to do with the structural reinforcement you need to lift extra weight. Thrust and structural reinforcement are two SEPERATE issues, yet must be MUTUALLY designed into the plane at the same time.
That’s what makes twin engined fighters even more complex.
they are not separat issue. when u have more thrust. u can be generaous about loading, fuel capacity and performance. it is the single engine that makes aircraft complex. Twin engine 777 is not less complex than 4 engine 747.
Safety measures in single engine design don’t actually take up much weight. Just higher quality standards after all. If someone is stupid to think that it makes the engine HEAVIER, weight increases in all rotating parts would actually make the engine nonfunctional, because the very weight of the moving components are all precisely calcuated to give you the high RPM (you cannot achieve high RPM with higher rotating mass.)
and those higher quality standards add to complexity.
You should take a mirror and follow YOUR OWN ADVISE. Twin engined planes indeed cost more to fuel and maintain.
what this has to do with design complexity.
You are still laughable for claiming that the F-16 is more expensive than the F-15 and the F-35 is more expensive than the F-22.
YOU DON’T KNOW ANYTHING BETWEEN CONTRACT AND FLYAWAY based on these statements alone.
As a matter of fact, F-18E is actually being sold to the USN and the RMAF—both of whom were previous Hornet customers.
and how much is super hornet common with Hornet? u have to understand Superhornet is developed in 90s with limited numbers compared to F-16.So Boeing has to recoup development costs. M2K-9 is not cheaper than Rafale in same year prices. Single Engine are just more expensive.
Poland and the UAE are actually brand new F-16 customers.
But they were buying aircraft essentially made in early 80s. Not something new like Superhornet/Rafale/EF. and it cost them alot without weopons.
And how much?
The PLAAF started to overhaul their Su-27SKs starting in 2004, with the first batch received in 1992 and 1003. The Su-30Ks cannot be upgraded because in 2006, they are already close to the end of the airframe life (over 1500 hours). These planes are received in 1998.
again nonsense. Su-30K became operational with IAF March 1996. It is already 10 years. and i would assume it has logged ~ 3000 hrs. Su-30K cannot be upgrades because it is more expensive and time consuming instead of just buying New which is much faster. Algeria will get Su-30MKA this year. Only 1.5 years after contract.
Where did that 1500 MTBO came from huh?
Read that person post. he came out with this kind of figures.
You can say the same with the Russian and WP fleet too.
And how many do you know actually? You can google MiG-21 accidents and most of it are coming out from the MiG-21bis fleet. Where your so called “two or three” so far eh? Early March this year already another MiG-21bis crashed.
and six or seven PAF F-7 crashed in 1 year or so. as J-7 becomes older there crashes are now more than MIG-21. It just show its quality.
Antonov is helping to do some tests independently, while tests are also being conducted independently in three other places around the world. What don’t you understand here?
I am only reffering to Design of the SuperCritical wing. Nothing to do with Tests. and those testsa are laugable they are not speeding up the Project but it has fallen Behind SSJ which is tested at one place.
Lol. Russian cockpits now starting to copy Western cockpits and suddenly you think they are innovative? Pot calling the kettle black.
do u think putting LCD makes it Western Cocpit. there is no other difference in information display?
GE engines are the most reliable in the world, and having this brand name behind your product helps sales. The various Chinese airlines cannot even use the Tu-154 or various other Russian airliners. The few Tu-154s ever procured were just turned into spy planes.
Those Tu-154 were built in 70s/80s. and it meets only that era regulatory environments.Show me how many Airbus/Boeing from that era actually flying in Civillian Service?. And in 90s only Banking System make Airbus/Boeing Bigger not the technical capacity.
Look at An-124 and compare it with C-5. it will take $50B to creat airaft comparable to 150ton load capacity in WEST. and Russia did modification with small amount of money An-124-150 in less than two years. They built world largest Civillian factory in 70s.
For China it is impossible.
http://www.aviastar-sp.ru/aviastar_en/index.htm
Aviastar-SP Aircraft Factory presents the unique transport Antonov-124-100 aircraft designed for intercontinental air transportation of unique outsize and super heavy cargo of up to 150 tons.
And BTW, ARJ-21 is already being assembled and will fly this year.
Flying does not mean it is certified right away. this thing has alot of distance to cover before it becomes indigenous. it is mere collection of foreign parts and design expertize.
I am asking you how MUCH is that heavier, not that it is heavier. You understand English?
Alteast by 20% percent compared to Su-30MK2. Just look at range and speed figures with lower fuel. so if Su-30MK2 is 20~tons class (38.8MTOW). Su-27SK is 16 tons(3530km range) and Su-27SM (4000km range)would be in 15 tons class due lighter avionics. and it nicely fit into 30 ton MTOW of Su-27SK(4tons payload) and 33 tons for Su-27SKM(8 tons).
What an idiot. The Starfighter came into service in 1958, the Phantom in 1960. Don’t give me your freaking excuses about rapid pace. Like the Phantom, the Starfighter is a true Mach 2 fighter. It uses the same engine, and its wing is actually more advanced than the Phantom when it comes to efficiency at supersonic speed.
Starfighter came definitely early and It is not just Mach 2. u have to look at how much load it can lift under the wings. that also adds to complexity. Twin engine are aircraft are more simple to design because of excess thrust. no need for expenisve weight reduction and Safety measures in single engine design. Now dont start to compare twin engine supersonic bombers with fighters.
You have just shown your complete ignorance. You really are a fool are you?
Have you ever figured out why the USAF bought a lot more F-16s than F-15s? Because it is CHEAPER. The USAF wanted a fighter it can afford enough in the first place.
have u ever consider the fuel and maintainance cost of twin engine fighter interms of life cycle before making affordability decision.
What is the contract price of the Polish F-16s, tell me. The ROK F-15s are 80 million. The UAE Block 60s were already 60 million, including contract support and the cost of an AESA radar.
UAE contract price is $6.4B for 80 aircraft in 1998 dollars. Two billion extra for weopons. F-15K contract price reduced by Boeing to $3.6B for 40 aircraft in 2002 dollars.
Oh please claim in whatever lala land you are that the F-35 is more expensive the F-22.
offcourse when F-35 goes on full development cycle with 183 airframe than come back and see which one is more expensive.
You want to say that again? HUh? You apparently don’t know what is the difference of flyaway price and contract price. Put it among the long collection of your embarrasing idiocies that include modern warfare don’t use shrapnel and computing empty weight by MTOW.
The contract price of an F-18E is at least 80 to 100 million by now. Ask how much the Malaysians bought theirs. Sometime in 2003, the USAF asked LM how much the flyaway cost of a Block 52, and it turned out to be only 20 million.
I can surely know the difference between contract and flyaway. Most of F-16 are repeat customers with already infrasctructure in place. F-18E is new addition. F-16 is definitely more expensive for new customers.
The MiG-21 is not that much smaller than an F-16. They are almost in the same length. The MiG-21 has a better structural design than the MiG-19 due to the delta wings. But it does not make the MiG-21 any simpler than the MiG-19. Part of the MiG-21 being a better design was that it was simpler.
It is definitely smaller than F-16 with lighter engine.
Which is actually pretty good, given its usage. PAF pilots average well over a hundred hours a year. While the original spec of the MiG-21F was supposed to be 1500 hours, that is best case basis, and most don’t last in that region without an overhaul. In 10 years of usage, Su-27SKs and Su-30Ks are already in need of overhaul.
where is the need for Su-27SK and Su-30 overhual?. It has been 16 years already incase of Su-27. and Flanker needs alot more flight training initially than MIG-21. Just look at Su-30K how much they are used. Russian claimed they arlready in beyond 200hr per year. Somewhere in 300 hr region beyond warrant.y
where u got original specification for MTBO for MIG-21F.
Longer life oh boy. What don’t you understand? MiG-17 based airframes, no longer made since the mid sixties, are still in active service in the PLAAF today as trainers. Some J-7Bs, built before the eighties, are still in active service, and J-8As, which preceded the J-8II, are also in active service. These things now have at least 20 to 30 years in them.
and how many time per year these fighters are overhauled. when u have large fleet. u can afford down times.
That is quite BS really, given how many of the F-7M are still in service in relation to the time span of the MiG-21F, FL and PF.
and how many intitally are crashed for F-7M and need overhauled.
You are the one who don’t understand a single thing. Antonov only provided verification and suggested modification of what is basically a Xian designed wing. Since the wing is supercritical, ACAC had an unusual approach—it had the wing design verified INDEPENDENTLY in four countries—representing Russia (using Antonov), the USA (using Boeing), Europe (Holland testing facility), and China. Each independently tested the wing using wind tunnels, and each center, independent of each other, suggested design modifications on the wing.
I clearly understand what different sources posted including Ukranain. they cleary referred to [b]Design{/b] not testing alone.
The only testing done in Russia was the wing, and the wing was also tested in the US, Holland and China. Everything else was tested in China. ARJ-21 sources Western parts, thats good, Western parts are much more thoroughly tested in the civilian field than Russian parts.
It is called dependence on Airlines. when Airlinese entire fleet is based on GE engines for maintainance and particular cockpit design for pilot training. Since Chinese are not the innovators and all the time saving money. u can hardly expect anything different from them. Russain cockpit design and Engines use different procedures although they have recently started Western style not sourced Cockpits for commonality mostly for exports.
Sign In
