Please post a pic of the Su-34 with such ETs. So far I saw none. A further future option or paper-claim?

There a very few Su-34 pics at all. In all-day usuall service drop-off tanks are not required. Either way, i see absolutly zero reason to doubt the Su-34 abilty take drop-off tanks. Manufacturer definitly says 7000km with drop-off tanks, they are also included in armarment chart. They are not that super-high-tech-wonder you know. Moreover, the maximum take-off weight of Su-34 (44.5t) compared to maxiumum take-off weight of Su-30MKI (33.5t) nicely curresponds to drop-off tanks installed. Otherwise its just IMPOSSSIBLE to reach max take-off weight.

The An-72 is designed & built by Antonov – based in Kiev & Kharkov, Ukraine.

They were Soviet – when there was a USSR – but since the breakup, they are not technically Russian.

Ken

But they would need to redisign it from scratch IF they want to actually produce An-72 without russian assistance. Many components for An-series are made only in Russia, and as such for all securty purposes An-72 in the current form must be considered as much russian as ukrainian.

The currently accepted wisdom is that the R-27T(E) do not have the command datalink of their SARH guided cousins for midcourse guidance. Thus they do not provide a true BVR capability because seeker lock-on of the target is required prior to launch, however they are intended to enable tail-chase shots where the performance of conventional IR SRAAMs would be hopelessly insufficient kinematically.

Sofar, it looks like Mica IR is the only IR missile with a credible BVR capability.

As much as i know thats not complete picture: R-27T have inertial guidance and so can be launhed against targets what dont change its course (much) without IR seeker locking it prior to launch

Interesting news:

…And what does “slow growth in labor productivity” actually mean?

It mean how much each worker produce.

You mean the russian victory in Afganistan?:rolleyes:

Like you meant USA victory in Iraq? :dev2:

Or , for that matter, in Afganistan also?

…in which case you’d have to be the first person to admit that possibly the most successful air defence system in the cold war period could have have been the Mujhahadeen’s in the Soviet-Afghan war of the 1980s.

When the Soviets found out that the Mujahadeen had been supplied with Stinger missiles in 1986, the minimum allowed altitude that strike aircraft had to fly above was 4500 metres (15,000ft). But even before the arrival of ‘Stingers’ every effort was made by Soviet pilots to keep either above or outside the perimeter of the Afghan guerillas’ AD fire, i.e. 12.62/14.62mm machineguns or SA-7/Redeye MANPADS regardless of the detrimental effect this had on accuracy

The Soviet airforces were not reknowned for their bombing accuracy in the Afghan war…

Hmm, you completely missed my words. Reread them again. PART OF air-defence. NOT a whole air-defence by itself as it was in Afganistan case. Btw, for 80x technic level Soviet airforces done good in Afganistan.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I have several Gen3 night vision devices at home. Now, according to your logic that means my country, Slovakia, has access to Gen3 GaAs night vision technology… :rolleyes:

Ya, evil amerikas transfered technology of Pentium Core Duo and newest Stingers to Iran. How dared they?

Which self proclaimed experts might they be? The Tor deal has been common knowledge for quite some time now. What some folks (including myself) have an issue with is assertions that S-300 has been purchased and is in service with the Iranians. There is no evidence of such a transfer.

Daniel

True. Military sales are common between Iran and Russia – its very open, noone can doubt that. But technology transfer is a whole another thing and i didnt saw anything about it.