SU-57 deployed to Syria

Military aircraft - Post cold war aircraft, including for example B-2, Gripen, F-18E/F Super Hornet, Rafale, and Typhoon.
Elite 2K
Elite 2K
 
Posts: 2497
Joined: 12 Jan 2014, 19:26

by charlielima223 » 12 Jun 2018, 18:26

babybat{}.net wrote:Image
Image
Image


A good example is Russian electronic components and products. While Russia does produce and manufacture their own, compared to the United States, S Korea, Japan, and Western Europe; Russia isn't anywhere in the same league. A good example/question of this is how many major electronic consumer goods use Russian built electronic components. If we were to relate this to modern avionics and radar, Russia would seemingly fall behind the United States. Not saying that they are not effective, they just wont have the same level of quality.


Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 447
Joined: 31 Jul 2016, 01:09
Location: Slovenia

by juretrn » 12 Jun 2018, 18:46

After a week of searching, he finds 3 examples, and that's about it. Truth is, there is no real manufacturing base for semiconductors in Russia, and their best talent is "brain-draining" to the West (yet again). In case of relations with the West going downhill, who are they going to subcontract the designs they do have to?
What they do have is not competitive in the slightest, and could just barely (if at all) be considered adequate. There's a good reason why the early Zhuk AESAs were rejected by their air force and are about to field their first AESA sets with the Su-57: they are at least 20 years behind. So the next time you read about some super duper jammer or radar from Russia...
Russia stronk


Elite 5K
Elite 5K
 
Posts: 5319
Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
Location: Parts Unknown

by mixelflick » 13 Jun 2018, 14:03

juretrn wrote:After a week of searching, he finds 3 examples, and that's about it. Truth is, there is no real manufacturing base for semiconductors in Russia, and their best talent is "brain-draining" to the West (yet again). In case of relations with the West going downhill, who are they going to subcontract the designs they do have to?
What they do have is not competitive in the slightest, and could just barely (if at all) be considered adequate. There's a good reason why the early Zhuk AESAs were rejected by their air force and are about to field their first AESA sets with the Su-57: they are at least 20 years behind. So the next time you read about some super duper jammer or radar from Russia...


I thought the first Russian AESA was to be on their Mig-35's? Or is that what you were referring to, those were rejected? I didn't think Russia had even taken delivery of her Mig-35's yet...


User avatar
Elite 1K
Elite 1K
 
Posts: 1722
Joined: 02 Feb 2018, 21:55

by marsavian » 13 Jun 2018, 14:08

AESA, like TVC, on the MiG-35 is an option not standard. Apparently for cost reasons no customer, domestic or foreign, is currently taking up either option.


Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 447
Joined: 31 Jul 2016, 01:09
Location: Slovenia

by juretrn » 13 Jun 2018, 22:52

mixelflick wrote:I thought the first Russian AESA was to be on their Mig-35's? Or is that what you were referring to, those were rejected? I didn't think Russia had even taken delivery of her Mig-35's yet...

Indeed it was, but you know, the reality of MiG-35 is different to what was initially (and still is being) promised.
I am thinking of this thing:
http://www.deagel.com/Sensor-Systems/Zh ... 57005.aspx

I can't for the life of me remember where I read it was rejected by RuAF, but IIRC it was. Some one-off protoypes, at least.
Russia stronk


Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 299
Joined: 06 Sep 2015, 13:54

by gideonic » 14 Jun 2018, 08:20

The current Mig-35 is actually just a "land version" of the Mig-29K. So no thrust-vectoring nor AESA


Active Member
Active Member
 
Posts: 186
Joined: 20 May 2015, 02:12

by gc » 14 Jun 2018, 13:41

Russia, fanboys and press: Sukhoi fighters are invincible and affordable. US fighters are weak and expensive.
Reality: https://www.indiatoday.in/mail-today/st ... 2018-06-13


Elite 5K
Elite 5K
 
Posts: 5319
Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
Location: Parts Unknown

by mixelflick » 14 Jun 2018, 14:08

gc wrote:Russia, fanboys and press: Sukhoi fighters are invincible and affordable. US fighters are weak and expensive.
Reality: https://www.indiatoday.in/mail-today/st ... 2018-06-13


That's a very interesting point. You always hear about how Sukhoi/Mig's are perhaps 1/3 as expensive as western birds. You never hear about the fact they require 3x's the maintenance. I was always under the impression the Indians were very happy with the SU-30MKI, as it allowed them to go toe to toe with anyone (including USAF).

If this is true, it spells big problems for Russian export aircraft. Because when your biggest (if not one of the biggest) customer isn't interested in procuring more of your aircraft... We may have reached the tipping point in Russia no longer being a major arms exporter of high performance military aircraft...


Elite 5K
Elite 5K
 
Posts: 5319
Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
Location: Parts Unknown

by mixelflick » 14 Jun 2018, 14:12

gideonic wrote:The current Mig-35 is actually just a "land version" of the Mig-29K. So no thrust-vectoring nor AESA


The whole Mig-35 upgrade is entirely misleading then. An up engined, thrust vectoring Mig-29 with 50% greater range and an AESA should be an incredibly capable aircraft. Yet, the Russians themselves are opting for no thrust vectoring and no AESA. It appears to have more wing area, a more robust frame and capable of carrying heavier loads further. But that comparison inevitably leads you to the Flanker family, and all of a sudden the Mig-35's range, payload and agility don't compare very favorably...,,


Active Member
Active Member
 
Posts: 159
Joined: 10 Jul 2016, 15:27

by collimatrix » 14 Jun 2018, 21:34

The Russian order of MiG-35s looks like welfare to keep the MiG design bureau alive long enough for it to develop something that people would actually want to buy.

Not only is the MiG-35 a fourth-generation aircraft, it's easily the second or third least capable fourth-generation aircraft after Gripen and FC-17, and it doesn't have the virtue as being as cheap as those two. I'm not counting advanced trainers that moonlight as fighters, obviously.

MiG-35s are conventionally stable, which usually works out to something like a 10% hit to lift/drag ratio, they're much heavier than earlier MiG-29 variants and their engines haven't been uprated enough to make up the difference, so it sacrifices the old Fulcrum's thrust to weight ratio which was one of the key strengths of the type. On the flip side, they do at least have a much better avionics fit and more internal fuel than the old MiG-29s, which partially remedies one of the big weaknesses of the type.

The price reductions Lockheed Martin announced for the F-35 are really putting the screws on the fighter market. Nations that have a choice between Western as well as Russian and Chinese fighters won't even pause in their decision. Nations that can't buy Western have the choice of various Flanker variants, and the Chinese FC-20 might be available soon, and both of those options are clearly more capable than the MiG-35.

MiG had better be working on something more impressive, because they're not going to stay in the game if this is their best shot.


Elite 5K
Elite 5K
 
Posts: 5183
Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
Location: Finland

by hornetfinn » 15 Jun 2018, 07:13

mixelflick wrote:
gc wrote:Russia, fanboys and press: Sukhoi fighters are invincible and affordable. US fighters are weak and expensive.
Reality: https://www.indiatoday.in/mail-today/st ... 2018-06-13


That's a very interesting point. You always hear about how Sukhoi/Mig's are perhaps 1/3 as expensive as western birds. You never hear about the fact they require 3x's the maintenance. I was always under the impression the Indians were very happy with the SU-30MKI, as it allowed them to go toe to toe with anyone (including USAF).

If this is true, it spells big problems for Russian export aircraft. Because when your biggest (if not one of the biggest) customer isn't interested in procuring more of your aircraft... We may have reached the tipping point in Russia no longer being a major arms exporter of high performance military aircraft...


When Finland did last fighter competition in early 1990s, MiG-29 was one candidate and was seriously considered and also seriously offered by Russia. Others were F-16C, F/A-18C/D, JAS Gripen and Mirage 2000-5. It was found that MiG-29 was the most expensive aircraft to buy and operate. It was about 10-20 percent more expensive to buy and about twice as expensive to operate. Another serious problem would've been that it had half the service life of other candidates (15 yrs vs 30 yrs). So it would've been twice as expensive aircraft with half the service life meaning it would've cost 3-4 times more in real life. It also had easily the least capable avionics and electronics with limited capabilities and no real multi-role capability.

It's likely that Su-27 derivatives have similar problems. Sure later versions of both MiG-29 and Su-27 have made improvements in all areas, but are still not up to western standards in many areas. It's likely that maintenance requirements and costs are still higher than in Western equipment. Service lives are also shorter even with the latest kit.


User avatar
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
 
Posts: 681
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 03:44

by rheonomic » 18 Jun 2018, 05:18

collimatrix wrote:MiG had better be working on something more impressive, because they're not going to stay in the game if this is their best shot.


I've been under the impression that, domestically, MiG has lost out to Sukhoi, and that export-wise their only strength has been that the MiG-29K is a bit more carrier-suitable than the Su-33 seems to be.

LMFS seems to be all but dead from open sources.
"You could do that, but it would be wrong."


Enthusiast
Enthusiast
 
Posts: 93
Joined: 08 Sep 2017, 19:16

by babybat{}.net » 22 Jun 2018, 10:20

rheonomic wrote:
I've been under the impression that, domestically, MiG has lost out to Sukhoi, and that export-wise their only strength has been that the MiG-29K is a bit more carrier-suitable than the Su-33 seems to be.



The question of which aircraft is better suited for an aircraft carrier is not so unambiguous. Su fighters occupy slightly more space in the hangar than the mig-29k due to a different folding mechanism. But Su fighters have better characteristics.
The choice was made in favor of Mig-29k, because it was already created for Indian NAVY.
The new version of the Su-33 was supposed to be created for PLA NAVY, but the Chinese created it themselves (j-15), buying a prototype of the Su-33 in Ukraine. For this reason, a new version of the Su-33 was not created, and the fleet of existing machines underwent a modernization under the «Hephaestus» program.

rheonomic wrote:LMFS seems to be all but dead from open sources.


The LMFS program, as well as the PAK-DP program (replacement of Mig-31, and possibly Tu-22m3) is continued at the expense of the company's own funds. Last year, it was announced that the first prototype LMFS will make the first flight until 2025.


Elite 5K
Elite 5K
 
Posts: 5319
Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
Location: Parts Unknown

by mixelflick » 22 Jun 2018, 13:43

I really hope Mig gets it in gear with this LMFS. I've seen several artist concepts, but it's hard to believe the rubles are going to be there for it, given so many other supposed big ticket items.

Had Russia pursued an LMFS type circa 2000 vs. the PAK FA, they'd be in a much better place today. Perhaps still lacking in stealth, but at least the cost/logistical footprint would be a lot more manageable. This concept below looks intriguing, but it's been a long time since the Russians have opted for a single engine bird (Mig-23?) I wonder if they have the confidence to do it, especially given the presumed supercruise requirement?
Attachments
Mig LMFS.jpg
Mig LMFS.jpg (31.88 KiB) Viewed 29445 times


Elite 1K
Elite 1K
 
Posts: 1154
Joined: 28 Sep 2009, 00:16

by vilters » 22 Jun 2018, 13:45

Face it: Russia, with all its drinking and corruption issues placed itself out of the market.

If you "invest" 15 dollar over there?
5 go to alcohol,
5 go to pay off some "friends" (or to keep friends as friends)
3 for yourself in bad times
1 is left for material cost
1 is left for R&D.

Oh, they get something done?
Well, they would not get their next 15 dollar if they left you with nothing, right?

Their 6th gen fighter is probably build out of wood mixed with some gas and oil left-overs.
Ach, they can always cut down the Siberian forest and sell the wood to N-Korea.

In brief : Russia's "great times" are over, and done with.


PreviousNext

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 9 guests