ChromWell that is a point worth debating . Lets see the figures of each in subsonic , transsonic and supersonic regimes. .
Yes, it need debate. And that only fact – what it needs to debate – says it all. For 25 years earler platform….
I am not aware of a version of the r-77 currently in operation that is considered superior to the Aim-120C5or MICA and higher (USAF C7) please explain if there is one!!
.
Well, it most likely not superior to Aim-120C5 or MICA… but then again its not inferior much either, even if count only old version of R-77. Certainly, not by 25 years. Certainly not even by 10 years. We dont know much about new versions of R-77, but it doesnt meant what it doesnt ready for production.
.
Secondly How are the current Russian Su-27’s HMS different or better then the Ones on the rafale or EF ?? And is the R-37 comparable to the weapons like IRIS-T and ASRAAM interms of technology , offboresighting etc etc . And data links – how do they compare in terms of speed of transfer , distance , aircrafts per network etc etc etc .
.
Now, after 25 years, West technology JUST matched Russian one. And YOU call the Russian technology 25-years backward??? Well, in certain sence it is 25 years old technology…. for Russians.
20 years ago Russian datalink was the only one in widespread use – in each 1st class regiment.
10 years ago Russian datalink was STILL the only one in widespread use.
Yet, 6-7 years ago American fighters started to recive datalink on regular basis – not just for few selected planes like F-14.
Now, whatever you think, Su-30MKI datalink is at best world-class standards – and nobody knows how much further Russians developed datalink technoly for themselfes.
AS for HMS and IRST… hell, so much beloved F-22 EVEN NOW dont have one…
it is most likely half a generation ahead of the su-27 , mig-29 , f-15 and F-16 fighters as it employs some degree of fifth gen. airframe additions such as reduced RCS etc etc the Su-30,35 etc probably falls between the 4th and 4.5 generation mark whereas I’ll
Allthought that MAY be true(may be not), you are still comparing 25 years old airframe to new one. And most sources quote EF RCS at about 1 m3, whereas plain vanilla Mig-29 with RAM coating also quoted at about 0.3-1 m3. Basic Mig-29 without any RAM is 4-5 m3…
Russia is very secretive about their fighte developments therefore it is tough to gauge what is going on however as I make out India doesnt want to be a spender in the PAKFA and instead wants a fifth gen competitor to the JSF therefore russia is .
So is any other major power. Take for example USA – we didnt know much about F-22 until its going to production except some public advertisement. Now, 2 years AFTER its going to service we still dont know much about it except some official propaganda….
Chromoh sarcasm. Well,
There has been no recent flight of any new generation prototype jet in Russia.
All the Su-27/30 jets stem from the T-10 project which first flew in May 1977. Not to even mention the mig-29 family with radar images the size of a school bus.
USA, France, Sweden and the Eurofighter consortium have all in recent years rolled out real new generation jets.
Russia officially stated last month they plan to fly a first prototype using a current engine design by 2008. Operational introduction of this mystery jet can clearly not happen before 2018 at the soonest.
Sure it’s unpopular what I say among some people, but this is just the reality.
The current ones work fairly well and in some cases exceeed the performance of western old generation but can not seriously match what is now becoming operational in the US/Europe.And sure, this mig is nice for airshows that I will say.
Su-27 is year 1977 generation. Ok. Su-27 is more manevereuble than Eurofighter. Ok. So, who need 25 years to catch whom? Ok? Mig-31 have electronicaly scanned radar for 25 years. Ok? Su-30 – for at least 5 years – and that only due to chaos in Russia. Eurofighter… nah, you guess it, use old slotted array. Who need to catch whom? And i dont even started to speak about HMS, R-77, R-27ET, IRST, datalink, ejection seats, long range missiles and other gooddies.
Btw, Eurofighter by its nature is an early 80x airframe – its was just developed too long due to fund shortage and technical problems. Saying what it is somehow a “a generation ahead” of Su-27 and Mig-29 airframes just plain untrue. Not no mention what it still dont fly well and half it equipment still dont work….
ChromRussia need about 20 years of R&D to catch up to the US/Euro aviation industry.
Sorry but it’s a fact. The current sukhois stem out of 1970s design.
Ya. I especeally like Euro thingy. Sure, they presented so great airframes, so superior to both Mig-29 and Sukhoi… And Euro avionic and radars are so much better than these of Mig-29 and Sukhoi… ya-ya.
ChromIrkut and MiG are competitors!!!….
What talk??????????????
:confused: :confused:
Omg. That shows how little you know and how ignorant you are. The merging of Irkut and MiG is already on-going, and only miracle can change something.
Plans to merge Irkut, Mig, Sukhoi, Ilushin and Tupolev are already approved by russian goverment and talks are held mainly about who got how many action stakes and whese managers will remain. There is a big hype about merging since already 1 year, its rather impossbile to miss that.
P.S. Btw, exact contract volume with Chavez is not disclosed, its simply “over a billion”. How much over – you guess it….
ChromDidn’t they win the bid in Algeria aswell?
.
As much as i know its Irkut for Algeria. Moreover, there are talks about MIG joining Irkut corporation, meaning what both Mig-29 and Su-30 orders for Algeria will be executed by same corporation.
Chromuse MANPADs led to the Soviets relying more on artillery than airpower. This was less accurate and led to a lot more collateral damage.
Err. Pretty much doubt it. 80x style artillery is very precise weapon. The only problem is what it cant reach that far. What is REALLY affected collateral damage is high-flying helicopters and jets. There is a big difference between bombing from 1000m and 5000m, especeally for Su-25. There is even bigger difference between helicopters precisely aimed S-8 fired from 500m and “precisely” dropped FAB-1500 from SU-24 flying at 7000m….
P.S. IF we look at number of sorties flown per year we will notice they are increasing each year…
ChromW For one we should all start calling them plain and simple killers or militants .
Yup. That would be right. But then US coudn’t pretend what it somehow save the whole word from terrorist (commy) danger. Suddently it will turn out what said “terrorists” want to kill americans cuz americans wants to kill them to get they oil/gaz/distract from Monica Lewinki / whatever. It will turn out what Germany dont have anything against, for example, Iran or Yoguslavia. But if they are terrorists (commy,dictators)… thats a whole another matter! THEY ARE EVIL!
ChromAlthough In a completely different way !! Communism was atleast 1 vs another but this is something completely different . You could atleast
I think he was meaning what now started another “witch hunt” and every
undesirable man/political group are named “terrorists” instead of “commy” like 30 years ago.
ChromIts KNAAPO. That plant finished chinese contracts and was short of orders. Now it have time to wait for next big chinese contract.
ChromMoreover, as much as we know, 90% of all accidents in Iraq occured during the daytime. Simply as that.
P.S. Almost all SAM’s fired in Afganistan against russian helos was Stingers. Stingers solely forced Soviet Airforce to change its tactic – i.e. Su-25 forced to fly higher that 5km and helos also as high as possible.
Chromlets see the Soveits Afgan sorties per annum or per month ..Not that I am not agreeing with anything you say but I just wanted to see how much they were flying , as far as US sorties are concerned you can probably find a figure if you look really hard .
Well, now its your turn to look really hard. We are waiting for US figures. Sorties, losses, number of SAM’s fired, etc.
Chrom.
Is it because they think it’s not worth the effort or simply because they have no money?
Cheers,
Sunho
Huh, thats actually the very same thing. Obviously, Europa and Russia have enouth money to develop “stealth” aircraft, but they think what these money are better spent elsewhere. However, that doesnt mean what “stealth not worth the effort”. Its simply the question of priorities.
Chromque?
iraqi brought iranian arms? sure about that? seems mighty odd
Black market, terrorists, etc. There was reports about that, but it might be just american sabre ratting against Iran. Like lie about russian “Kornet” in Iraq, or other russian modern weapons. Allthought obviosly Iran modifications (if any) are in minority, some as SA-16.
ChromAllthougt Iraqi mostly used various soviet and chinese/iran modified SA-7, there was some SA-14 and SA-16. Most newest Iraqi SA-16 had old type seeker (i think same as Strela-2M). Its comparable to early Stingers used in Afganistan, may be slightly worse. But, american helos and planes should have 25 years newer ECM suite which should be very effective against these old SAM types. Addidtionally, most Iraqi SAM’s and RPG’s have expired date, and many also had bad storage.
Chromlets see the Soveits Afgan sorties per annum or per month ..Not that I am not agreeing with anything you say but I just wanted to see how much they were flying , as far as US sorties are concerned you can probably find a figure if you look really hard .
Opps. I was wrong.
Here is statistic what i have from a book E. Niketenko “Afganistan”:
40th Army Air force combat sorties – 794680
Losses to all causes:
Helicopters lost – 226
Airplanes lost – 87
There are no separate combat statistic there, but Su-25 made about 60.000 combat sorties (23 lost to all causes). We can safely assume what all other planes made less than that. And, i can remember from other book what helos made 600.000+ combat sorties. Althought almost all troops in Afganistan was belonging to 40th army, some still wasnt (mainly transport planes and long range bombers, also there was few special service planes) . Soviet aviation in Afganistan made about 1 million combat sorties total. Either way, with these numbers we can recive a very good estimation for combat sorties/losses ratio.
P.S. Its unclear when a sortie in Afganistan counted as “combat”, but i assume what at least almost all helo sorties was “combat”.
P.P.S. Its also unclear if planes destroyed on ground by enemy fire counted.
Sign In
