F-16.net

Veteran Joined: May 26, 2008 Posts: 286 Status: Offline

This is good...

No, really, very good...

Oh, wait, my stomach hurts...

It's too good! LMAO

Isn't there one of these little guys rolling on the floor laughing???

From the Russian News and Information Agency Novosti, I bring to you this year's blockbuster comedy, "Su-35, a younger son of Su-27."

Quote:

MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti military commentator Ilya Kramnik) - The first demonstration fight of the Su-35 on July 7, 2008 attracted much attention to this aircraft, which has been undergoing tests since February. The latest addition to the large T-10 (Su-27) family is to become the interim fighter for the Russian Air Force before fifth-generation aircraft are launched into mass production.

The Su-35, more precisely the Su-35BM, is the second model of the T-10 family to carry that designation. The first Su-35 was manufactured 20 years ago, taking to the skies in 1988 under the designation Su-27M.

In 1991, it was decided to launch the Su-27M into mass production under the designation Su-35. The first serial aircraft took off in April 1992, though this model was never produced in large numbers. Due to the lack of funding between 1992 and 1995, only 12 Su-35's were delivered to the Air Force. These aircraft have been used for tests and demonstration flights.

Soon the Su-37 was developed on the basis of the Su-35. Often confused with the experimental C.37/Su-47 aircraft, the Su-37 was equipped with thrust-vectoring engines, which was the main difference between this model and the Su-35. The No. 711 Su-37 prototype impressed specialists greatly by its outstanding maneuverability, but remained one-of-a-kind.

In the late 1990's the Su-35 was given a new lease of life, as the issue of rejuvenating the Russian Air Force was raised again. To avoid excessive growth of designation numbers, the new aircraft was given the designation Su-35BM ("Big Modernization").

In 2008, the 117C engine was developed, enabling the designers to start the flight tests of the new aircraft, scheduled to be finished by 2010. The state armament program for 2006-2015, adopted in 2006, envisages mass production of the Su-35BM for the Russian Air Force, and the Defense Ministry is expected to purchase 182 of these aircraft. In addition, technology developed within the Su-35 project will be used to upgrade the Su-27s to the Su-27CM2 standard.

The creation of the Su-35 is an important step for the Air Force and the aircraft industry. Taking into account that a fifth generation fighter would not be in mass production in Russia before 2015, the Su-35BM will help to close the gap, replacing the older Su-27s, which will be decommissioned starting from the next decade.

The technical characteristics of the Su-35 are high enough to fulfill this task, outmatching all the modern American, French and EU generation 4+ fighter designs, including the Super Hornet, Rafale and Typhoon. The Su-35 is even able to withstand the world's only fifth-generation fighter now in production, the F-22, though it is much cheaper than the American fighter - its cost is around $40 million dollars compared with $300 million for F-22.

Regarding the Defense Ministry's plans, the question emerges whether the Russian industry would be capable of launching production in the required numbers within the scheduled period. The answer is more likely to be positive: the industrial capacities are beyond doubt, as the production of numerous modifications of Su-27s and Su-30s for export is on the rise. What the program requires is uninterrupted state funding.

With the Su-35 launched into mass production in 2011, the 182 aircraft ordered by the Defense Ministry would be delivered by 2020. By that time the Russian Air Force would have between 120 and 140 upgraded Su-27s and 30-40 fifth-generation fighters, enabling the Air Force to maintain its combat potential in the next 2-3 decades.

There have been many successful designs in the history of aviation, but only a few could match rising combat requirements for a number of years, like the famous Messerschmitt Bf-109 and P-51 Mustang fighters, the Tu-95 and B-52 strategic bombers, and the Su-27. The T-10 prototype made its maiden flight in 1977, and another flight in 1981 after major improvements.

The fighter went into mass production as late as 1984, and it still has the combat potential sufficient to remain one of the world's best aircraft. The Su-35BM, taking to the skies in 2008, showed even higher performance, an unprecedented improvement on a design developed 30 years ago.

It's not easy to forecast what lies ahead for the Su-35, but no doubt it will live through a few decades of service with gradual renewal of armament and avionics, until the moment when this fighter, along with more sophisticated aircraft, will be replaced by aerial vehicles based on new physical principles.

My favorite quote: "The technical characteristics of the Su-35 are high enough to fulfill this task, outmatching all the modern American, French and EU generation 4+ fighter designs, including the Super Hornet, Rafale and Typhoon. The Su-35 is even able to withstand the world's only fifth-generation fighter now in production, the F-22, though it is much cheaper than the American fighter - its cost is around $40 million dollars compared with $300 million for F-22. "

While I am no fan of the SH, the Rafale (deffinitely the prettiest of the bunch and the one I would take if I had to) and the Tiffy, I would opt for any of those three rather than the Su-35. The SH, in particular, would make mincemeat of waves of Su-35s with its superb AESA and much reduced radar signature, coupled with its maximum load of, yes, some 12 AMRAAMs at a time. And the notion that the Su-35 is "able to withstand" the F-22 is just so absurd as to make one wonder, did the writer mean withstand a facefull of AMRAAM? I particularly like how he claims the F-22 is worth $300 million (less than half of that is the case), while claiming that Sukhoi can sell the Su-35 for around $40 million. If that's true, what the hell are they making that beast out of, wood?

Even better is the following: "There have been many successful designs in the history of aviation, but only a few could match rising combat requirements for a number of years, like the famous Messerschmitt Bf-109 and P-51 Mustang fighters, the Tu-95 and B-52 strategic bombers, and the Su-27. The T-10 prototype made its maiden flight in 1977, and another flight in 1981 after major improvements."

What the f#ck is this guy smoking? First of all, both the Bf-109 and P-51 were obsolete as soon as WWII was over, and their effective service lives laster for less than a decade. Hardly longevous, despite their phenomenal combat record when they were in service. Hats off to the Tu-95 and B-52 on the longevity account, although neither is exactly survivable in a high-threat environment. Now, to say that the Su-27 belongs in a category all its own as far as modern combat aircraft are concerned, excuuuuuse me, but has this wet fart ever heard of the F-15 (still in production) and the F-16 (still in production) both of which entered service long before the Su-27 and will be in service long after the last Su-27 or its derivative is shot down somewhere over Eritrea? Not to mention the F-4, which is still in service, or the Mig-21, also still in service, or the A-10, which will probably outlast them all. Bull sh!t like this guy's just gets me fuming...

And that's the thing, so typically Russian of him. Sorry to say, but without divulging my location, I live somewhere where I come into constant, daily contact with the nouveau riche, expatriate Russian community, most of whom are gainfully employed by their mafia, and they are among the most rude, arrogant, tasteless and vulgar group of people I have ever had the displeasure to meet. They have this bizarre combination of a huge inferiority complex balanced by an even bigger superiority complex, which was, incidentally, the profile of the German nation before Hitler took over and allowed the Nazis to take over. Which is why Russia scares the sh!t out of me with a tyrant like Putin in power. Yes, the same Russians who are on the record that they will "respond militarily" should the U.S. set up missile defense bases in Eastern Europe, and who keep roadblocking Europe and the U.S. from doing anything about Iran's nuclear program. Make no mistake about it: the Chinese may be getting very powerful, but they are educated and know they are tough sh!t. Can't say the same about the Russians, who are uneducated and wish they were tough sh!t again. The latter are far, far more dangerous to the future of U.S. interests.

F-16.net Sponsor

This message from our sponsor will disappear if you log on as a member.

Veteran Joined: Mar 11, 2008 Posts: 349 Status: Offline

I wouldn't blow it too much out of proportion, Ob... you know what I'm talking about?

They only claimed it would be able to 'withstand' the Raptor. No need to do back-flips over that statement.

And if you look at the noted estimates per se: 180 Su-35BM; 160 modernized Su-27; and 50 T-50s by 2020, it shouldn't make red-alarms go off around the world...

We all should respect great technology when it's developed, so hats off to the Su-, et al... we shouldn't have a problem with that. And it shouldn't be our collective focus.

Obamanite wrote:

This is good...

No, really, very good...

Oh, wait, my stomach hurts...

It's too good! LMAO

Isn't there one of these little guys rolling on the floor laughing?

Who cares what they say? We hear from them every couple of years about their newest, flashest, world dominating system that will make everything else obsolete and costs a pittance.

This thing has been in testing since FEBRUARY. Yeah, they'd have a CLUE about it's real capabilities so far. Apparently the F-35 is an unknown quantity due to it's limited testing to date, but this thing can "withstand F-22's"... Smile

They talk it up, but rarely if ever back their words with deeds and suprisingly enough their products, even when operated by Russian pilots, soldiers, sailors etc can be observed to have repeatedly failed to live up to the marketing claims.

And so despite the claims of the Eric Palmers, Carlo Kopp's etc of the world, I feel pretty safe knowing I'm protected by Western built military equipment... Smile

Let's face it guys, the Russians are proud people (as are many other nationalities). Do you think they will readily admit that they are almost a generation behind in some aspects of fighter design. Yes the performance of the Sukhoi's are "eye watering" and their performance in air combat is nothing to take for granted. When have the Russians/Soviets not stated their new products are not superior to any other country's comparable weapons?

Adrian

avon1944 wrote:

When have the Russians/Soviets not stated their new products are not superior to any other country's comparable weapons?

Adrian

If the phone's still not ringing, I assume it still ain't you. ??

regards, O.L.

One thing I do like about the SU-27 is its size. Like the Eagle, the Flanker has the size to incorporate a lot of future growth. For that reason it will remain viable well into the 2020s. However, it does suffer some serious design limitations. It's very large radar cross-section, external ordnance and the limitations of Russian technology put it at a distinct disadvantage compared to the current state of the art American technology. However against European and Chinese threats the aircraft is a competitive platform.

Against an F-22 however the aircraft is completely outclassed.

-- DarthAmerica

Veteran Joined: Mar 11, 2008 Posts: 349 Status: Offline

Good post DA.

But perhaps Sukhoi as with Boeing (w/ F-15), could develop a tailless and LO-designed future Su-27 upgrade? Complete with infamous LO weapons pods? Really can't doubt anything these days..

IMHO, the possible Su- doctrine consists of superior number attackers combined with diversions, high EW/ECM and decoy attempts in order to get closer-in to within radar/sensor range of all current deployed and aircraft in development?

IMO, F-15 block III (and older AESA-upgraded Eagles) should be armed with both standard and IIR seeker variants of AIM-120D (and even longer range mods ASAP) to counter the latest SU-XX/Mig-35 potential.

Veteran Joined: Dec 15, 2006 Posts: 439

Why yes it is laughable in some ways to consider an SU-35 much of a threat to an F-22. However also remember it is unwise to underestimate an enemy and to laugh at an enemy. Though I consider the F-22 to be superior in most respects; I still consider the SU-35 as well as other adversary aircraft to have some threat and still deserves some respect.

Remember that (disrespect can sometimes empower and enemy) arrogance and complacency. Remember Pearl Harbor. Remember September 11. Remember that before Pearl Harbor many people considered the Japanese to be a laughable threat. Remember before September 11, some people considered Islamic terrorists to be a laughable threat; I think many people are still underestimating the threat. Before Pearl Harbor; many thought of the Japanese as backward, incapable monkeys; but Pearl Harbor proved otherwise. ( please understand that my racist comment does not support racism; on the contrary; it points out that racism was part of the problem of underestimating the Japanese)

Remember that during the (early) Cold War; much of the world scoffed/laughed at the Soviets were still using tubes; while most of the free world had switched to modern semi-conductors; then we realized that there “primitive” technology could actually give them an advantage under some circumstances; such as they were more resilient against EMP; so more likely to have fighting capability after a nuclear strike.

Remember that during the Cold War much of the world scoffed/laughed at the Soviets primitive and simple equipment. However it then was realized that we were overly dependent on technology and that the Soviets might have a better capability after a first strike because their weakness was their strength.

Remember that repeatedly we have even underestimated even their basic firearms. In many ways the AK-47 is primitive; though in the harsh conditions of combat is often the superior weapon in comparison to the M-16.

Be careful about underestimating a potential enemy. Keep in mind we often get tunnel vision: technology, tactics and conditions have many branches and ways of being employed. Though I do like to laugh at message board braggarts; be careful not to underestimate or laugh at a potential enemy.

Don’t let overconfidence and arrogance lull you into a false sense of security. Though I think the F-22 is superior; I still think that the SU-35and other potential adversaries still command our respect.

That F-22’s weakness is lack of numbers and dependence on funding and technology.

Even though the F-22 is the most advanced fighter now days: don’t let that lull you into a false sense of security; it is just a question of time before a more advanced fighter is developed. Remember it may not take as long or cost as much for an adversary to develop technology similar to the F-22, because they can capitalize on the public information and possibly from espionage. The US economy is waning; while some other foreign economies are booming; so it may be just a question of time before the torch of the most advanced fighter is passed to another country. Tomorrow’s super powers may be the likes of China, India, the former Soviet bloc, etc….

geogen wrote:

But perhaps Sukhoi as with Boeing (w/ F-15), could develop a tailless and LO-designed future Su-27 upgrade? Complete with infamous LO weapons pods? Really can't doubt anything these days.

I'm sure they could, the question is would they? The Flanker and Eagles RCS are the results of their physics. It's a technical barrier that would not be easily overcome and would provide only marginal benefit unless the aircraft was extensively redesigned to such an extent that it would be a different aircraft all things considered. Like the Super Hornet for instance which is derived from the Hornet but a completely different aircraft all together. To add emphasis on this point I'll remind you that the Super Hornet program cost ~50 billion for about 500 aircraft. The Russians operate a similar number of Flankers of all types. So that gives you an idea of the magnitude of such an effort just to bring it into the same class as the Super Hornet in terms of overall capability. Of course Russian aircraft typically don't cost as much as their western contemporaries but even at half the cost it would be a tremendous investment that would not see operational service in significant numbers until the end of next decade at the earliest.

Meanwhile the United States and allies would be flying two vastly superior VLO desgins(F-22/35), an at least equivalent Super Hornet and be well into the development and/or testing of those aircraft's replacements. If you have 25 to 50 billion to invest in a fighter, that just doesn't seem like a very smart way to spend the money IMHO.

I expect to see the Su-27 fleet gradually absorb technologies from the Su-35 while the real effort goes into PAK-FA, unmanned systems, advanced SAMs and new concepts that could change the entire nature of air combat.

-DA

F-16.net

Forum: F-22A Raptor

Su-35 a Raptor killer?