ChromThe Americans had much more advanced electronics, there is no way that Russia could have copied the electronics exactly at the time, so they mimicked the electronics the best they could and compromised. Most of the Russian aircraft at the time were using tubes, whereas the Americans were mostly using semi conductor’s. I suspect since Russia’s electronics were so primitive that the time, that is why they resorted to using SARH.
4
“Much more advanced” was in reality several years of advantage at best. So by the time USSR can get US missiles they could surery fully copy it. Still, the similarities between AIM-54 and R-33 are much less than similarities between Mig-25 and F-15. Still, i wouldnt call one the copy of another.
ChromMainly because the Russians don’t attach political strings to what they sell.
You certainly meant becouse Russian strings dont restrict India much? Becouse certainly there ARE political strings, its just happens what Russia and India have very little conflict of interests.
ChromWell the WS-13 seems to be well on its way in contrary. Still doesn’t explain why India doesn’t buy advanced Western weapons over Russian. All you said about the Chinese engine can be said of Russia in general on arms compared to the West.
Nope, we cant said that IN GENERAL neither for Russian, West, Chinese or any other equipment.
And note, i offered POSSIBLE explanations. They all might prove to be false, and China indeed developed an engine whats cheap, can be produced in number, and installed on FC-1 without problems.
P.S. In many cases its indeed price and costs. Few counties would buy arms which costs 3x as much as concurrents arms which is just as good.
ChromSo are you saying that whole laundry list of high-tech Western weapons India was thinking of buying they couldn’t actually afford? So it was a big show in itself?
It still doesn’t explain why Russia would go through this wishy-washy act about the FC-1 engine if they knew the WS-13 was going to be available for it.
There might be many reasons. To name the few:
1. Political – India-China relations, etc.
2. Legal/commercial – Russia dont want chinese export interfere with russian.
Where are same possible reasons why WS-13 could be much worse choice for FC-1:
1. It could be not completely ready.
2. China might have problems producing it in sufficient numbers.
3. WS-13 might be much more expencive to produce/maintain than Russian engine.
4. WS-13 might have some problems what didn’t alow easely using it for FC-1.
Any of these points – and you have major problem with FC-1 for Pakistan.
ChromWithout a doubt, India CAN contribute. Of course, the system integration , design and consultation for every part would be entirely russian, but neverless there is a possible niche for India help.
ChromTheoretically yes. But remember the Su-27 for example entered service 10 years later than the F-15. But was it better in most parameters?
Is there any doubt in that?
ChromSo Rust was lucky through a lack of alertness and no hero in my eyes.
By the way, before 9/11 none imaginated such a kind of terrorist attack and the White House was “overflown” in error numerous times. Even today there are sightseeing flights by small planes over Berlin, but under constant pressure to cease that or avoid the center. So that terrorist attacks destroyed much more, the most important for me is the freedom of movement.
You gave all the answers needed by yourself. Remember, it was romantic time in USSR when all peoples was thinking West is same kind of holy angels in paradise. As such, noone in they right mind would do something to Cessna. Again, USSR military was aware of that aircraft, allthought the info wasnt passed higher in chain due to chaos in USSR by that time and obvious lack of any danger from Cessna.
Either way, what are you trying to implie? What USSR radar posts couldnt spot that Cessna? That is obvious untrue, Cessna was spotted. What USSR PVO was in same kind of irritation by that time? Yup, thats it.
ChromOnly a little precisation: the R-27 (AA-10) entered service only in 1987; probably you meaned R-24 (AA-7)
bye
Nope, it entered service in the very same time as Mig-29 and Su-27 – i.e. about year 1983. By year 1987 the Soviet Airforce were already litterally full of them.
ChromYou must be reading crap from KANWA, who after discovering the existance of Type 1473, thinks its the only radar in China. 1473 (for the J-10) is a slotted array planar considered first generation for the Chinese, along with 1471 for the J-8II. This corresponds to the factory designation KLJ-3.
The current J-10 radar is now KLJ-7, representing the second generation slotted array planar design. The array itself is not important but more importantly, the COTS based systems behind it. Newer radars simply avail of faster CPUs and DSPs than their predecessors, and even without any change of the array design, still results in better range, signal processing, tracking and resolution. Frankly, what’s behind the antenna is more important than the nature of the antenna itself.
Even in the post SU era, Russian radar designers still insist on using their own outdated homegrown processors and DSPs (Baguet etc,.) as they are used to working on them or because their assembly language code are so tied to these processors, but these are so outmoded by commecial Western equivalents. By the time the Russians figured out how to use COTS, the Chinese were already way ahead of them using such in walking down this convenient route.
A search distance of 150km is actually typical of a radar as you might expect with an array of 700mm. APG-68, Zhuk, EL 2032 should meet that easily. The APG-67, a smaller radar, used on the F-CK-1, goes up to 147km.
The thing, is, do you know that search and tracking radar distances are not the same? It is tracking ranges that are often most quoted, not search. The N001 might have a tracking range of 100km against a 3m2 RCS target, but the search range may be double of that against a 5m2 RCS target and larger. Note the examples above should have correspondingly shorter tracking distances. A radar with a search distance of 150 to 160km, should have a tracking range of 80 to 100km depending on the target RCS, higher if its a larger target. It also depends on alttiude and the movement of thei aircraft relative to the target, higher altitude gives better range than low, head on gives better range than receding.
Yet again, 8 targets attacked for planar array… doesnt matter which fancy generation it is – downright lie. And if you want to suggest what chinese somehow building AESA… well, thats another wishfull disinformation. COTS will not help here at all. Moreover, the proccesors what are used in russian radars are very comparable to western ones in power, lagging may be 4-5 years behind at MAX – and only in some products. For example, the US fighter radars of later 90x origin use 486x equivalent processors – same as 2001-2002 origin Baguet. In most cases COTS dont work as well as you might think due to various reasons. But whats more important, many key technolgies used in radars just isn’t available as COTS. For example, phase shifters for PESA. Or ESA elements for AESA. You must remember, processors itself are only like 10% of entire radar, and many other elements are just as impoprtant. In same of these areas Russians are world leaders, even ahead of USA. As such, its very unlikely what Chinese could develop something what surpass current Russian technology, or even match it. And the current state of russian fighter radars is pretty well known – its advanced PESA in production and AESA in later development/testing stage.
P.S. But, without a doubt, J-10 is a big step in Chinese aircraft buildings. Its on-par with most widespread aircraft types in other 1st rate airforces which posses F-16, F-18, F-15, Mig-29, Su-27, etc. The only problem what these airforces have these types for almost 20 years in stock, and Chinese only started to produce something comparable. Another note what J-10 cant be named as fully indigenius as it use the engine of russian origin, and weapons partially are also of russian origin.
ChromBacking Israel into any corner would be a very dangerous undertaking indeed and Iran has come close with the backing of some terrorist groups in Lebanon and elsewhere. If, for example one of these groups supported by Iran would attack Israel with Weapons of Mass Destruction and these weapons cause a great lose of life! The retaliations by Israel could be on a Biblical Scale that the world has never seen! So, the continued spread of Nuclear Weapons only increases the likely hood that they will be used again and the World has thousands of them………..So, countries beware………….terrorist in your country that attack other could very well be your doom!!!!!
Man, the only problem here is what Iran didnt do anything what ALL other major world countries also didnt do. Supporting terrorists you say? Well, i’ll name few countries what support terrorists to a far large scale: USA, France, Saudi Arabia, Russia, China, Pakistan, Israel, Turky, etc, etc, etc. And i dont even mention what many of these countries are behave much worse than terrorists…
ChromDo you really believe that bull**** about Type-1473 ? I remember even 2-3 years ago chinese advertised it with “An assessment of potential multi-function fire-control radar systems for
the new stealth fighter is also under way, with candidates including Chinas
indigenous Type 1473 design. According to an industry source, this has a
search distance of 150km and can track up to 15 targets, attacking between
six and eight of them simultaneously. The design is currently undergoing
upgrade to allow for the integration of a phased-array antenna. “
So, planar array radar with 8 target attacked? The disinformation starts right there. I could have believe it about phased array, but planar… As such, any chinese claims about Type-1473 perfomance dont worth the papier they are written. Moreover, even IF chinese somehow managed to develop Type-1473 with PAR in the last 2 years, it will be still inferior to MKI (and MKK3) radar for obvious reasons like size and general constructing expertise. Please, bring some more believiable lie here.
ChromSeems like you need to do a seriously logic check mate.
Putting this in the most simplistic formate I can fathom:
1) Pakistan wants F16s.
2) US says take a hike.
3) FC1 and J10 becomes available.
4) US says to Pakistan, ‘want some F16s?’
5) Pakistan says, ‘thank you very much, let me think about that.’
6) Pakistan STILL wants J10 and FC1 even with F16 offer.FC1 can be explained because Pakistan wants to use it to build up its aviation industry, but they want J10s because of performance regardless of the availablity of F16s and the cost of J10s compared to FC1s.
Nope, you got it wrong. They want it DESPITE bad (compared to F-16)perfomance of J-10. Sometimes supply reliability and political strings mean much more than perfomance.
ChromI’ve followed PAF quite a bit lately and I think you are quite wrong here. It seems like due to the availability of J-10, PAF actually cut the number of F-16s they were looking to purchase. It went from 55-75 new units to 18 with 18 option. That’s a drop of 37 F-16s. Guess how many J-10s they were reported purchasing in the initial batch? 36. And yes, Pakistan got all of the weapons you mentionned like JDAM, AIM-120C5 and a bunch of precision munitions. Also, it seems like J-10 is the winner of the “plus-one” competition in Pakistan between J-10, F-16 and Gripen.
Again, even IF Pakistan indeed will become all that, it will just support my point what Pakistan wants to break off USA over-dependence. They are not very happy about these 10 years when they was denied to buy modern weapons, and rightfully expect what USA might pull that trick again in future. Moreover, with F-16 Pakistan is never sure if they become addidional supply of ammunition and spares for they F-16 in case of any conflict, there as in case of J-10 they could be much more confident, and may even partially produce spares&ammunition they need.
ChromI must admit I have not looked into the latest PAF F16 deals very closely, but from what I gather, its very likely the exact reverse of what you are suggesting. Washington has been denying Pakistan new F16s for a decade, so what’s suddenly changed? The FC1 and J10 thats what.
The US was quite happy to shun PAF interests in new F16s until something similar or better became available.
it).
And now with all that you support my points. USA denied the selling of F-16 to Pakistan. Yes, Pakistan got it in the end. May be, even partially cause of J-10 offer. But what it says us about J-10 export potencials and Pakistan dependence of USA? Simply thing: J-10 have a chance only if Pakistan desides to break off USA or USA desides to completely deny any modern arms selling to Pakistan. Obviosly, Pakistan is not that happy about such over-dependence and as such J-10 might have a chance there.
ChromIs there any reliable source of information at all? I would like to learn about any Su-27 against Mig-29 combat. Both aircraft built by the same source, pilots trained similar, and most likely the same weapons too. Chrom or anybody if some one has an idea how to research this please let know, thanks.
Nope. Many peoples around the word have interest in Mig-29/Su-27 behavior in that unique conflict, many forums discussed it. But nowhere was any informations with same degree of reliability. I.e. you cant track these rumors back to some credible sources – Mig / SU officials, Russian goverment / Army officials, Ethiopean / Eritrean officials , independent researcher who actually made it there , asked people 1st – hand and can show some documents… There was NO claims from these groups. Only rumors sourced from unknown yellow papers by unknown (or very well known, heh) journalists.
Sign In
