J-20 goes operational again

Military aircraft - Post cold war aircraft, including for example B-2, Gripen, F-18E/F Super Hornet, Rafale, and Typhoon.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

madrat

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2351
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2010, 03:12

Unread post17 Sep 2019, 18:37

Don't try to apply macro economics to an argument. We hate when arguments are about logic and contain any semblance of a rational debate.
Offline

inst

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 110
  • Joined: 04 Jul 2015, 01:58

Unread post17 Sep 2019, 19:28

Corsair1963 wrote:
southerncross wrote:IMHO a domestic price of $40-45 million is indeed a possibility, mainly because the ruble lost half of its value vs the dollar in recent years. A normal market price for a plane in this segment would be clearly above $100 million (see latest contracts, i.e. F-35 for Poland), but in a sale to China it would ultimately depend on how far they take their increasing military cooperation and if it reaches the point of a proper military alliance. After the drills came the joint bombers patrols and joint aerospace developments, then rumours are being heard about Russia lending their AD cover and even strategic early warning expertise to China, which is essentially a priceless asset for a superpower. So I don't think it can be dismissed that Russia may sell the Su-57 at very reduced prices, if the conditions are right, even when now I admit it doesn't seem likely.



Absurd Russia isn't going build Su-57's for $40-50 Million. When they're building 8 per year....


It depends on who wants to get in on it; if the Chinese put in a 200 unit contract for skeet planes at 50 million for unit cost and 100-150mn for spares / support, all of a sudden, the Russians have export volume subsidizing their production when the RuAF itself is broke.

As for the Su-57's maneuverability, its wing area is slightly greater than the F-22's, with Izdeliye 30 it has greater total thrust than the F-22, it has off-axis 3D TVC, and it has LEVCONs. I think it's correct to say that the Su-57 has yet to demonstrate better maneuverability than the F-22, but it wouldn't be surprising if the Su-57 was eventually more agile than the F-22, given that the F-22 is now out of production. The F-22s could be re-engined for better performance, true, but the F-22 would need extensive and cost-prohibitive modification to get the EODAS of the F-35, although its MLU is finally giving it a EO sensor.
Offline
User avatar

botsing

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 862
  • Joined: 05 Dec 2015, 18:09
  • Location: The Netherlands

Unread post17 Sep 2019, 21:50

madrat wrote:Don't try to apply macro economics to an argument. We hate when arguments are about logic and contain any semblance of a rational debate.

:mrgreen:

inst wrote:
botsing wrote:A piece of metal does not care if it becomes part of a Su-57 or a South-Korean smartphone, in both cases however the economic impact is the same. If you sold it to the global market you made x amount of money, if you did not you lost out on x amount of money, x will be the same in both cases. So using that piece of metal for an Su-57 will have lost you out on the amount of x in your final bookkeeping.


I mean, if you were talking about China or Japan, you might have a point given that much of their resources are imported, but Russia is a raw material exporter.

If Russia is a raw material exporter then the global pricing applies to those exported materials.

Any material that you use yourself is material that is not sold for global prices, so in the end the price for the material that you use wil cost your economy the same as the global price. That is why the price for Russian cars is still the same as comparable foreign cars and not half that price.
"Those who know don’t talk. Those who talk don’t know"
Offline

southerncross

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 131
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2019, 17:09

Unread post17 Sep 2019, 23:45

@botsing:

your explanation does not make much sense to me but I am no economist and I am not here to discuss economy at amateur level either. In any case, according to you, Russia could not sell the Su-35 abroad for more than $80 million and buy for the VKS below $30 million, but they do.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5868
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post18 Sep 2019, 01:23

inst wrote:
It depends on who wants to get in on it; if the Chinese put in a 200 unit contract for skeet planes at 50 million for unit cost and 100-150mn for spares / support, all of a sudden, the Russians have export volume subsidizing their production when the RuAF itself is broke.


Sure if a country came along and ordered "hundreds" of Su-57's. Yet, that is "highly unlikely" at this stage. (if ever) So, all we can go by today is the ~ 8 per year that the Russian Air Force has signed on for....

As for the Su-57's maneuverability, its wing area is slightly greater than the F-22's, with Izdeliye 30 it has greater total thrust than the F-22, it has off-axis 3D TVC, and it has LEVCONs. I think it's correct to say that the Su-57 has yet to demonstrate better maneuverability than the F-22, but it wouldn't be surprising if the Su-57 was eventually more agile than the F-22, given that the F-22 is now out of production. The F-22s could be re-engined for better performance, true, but the F-22 would need extensive and cost-prohibitive modification to get the EODAS of the F-35, although its MLU is finally giving it a EO sensor.


Questionable at best if the Su-57 would have any real performance advantage over the F-22/F-35. Yet, hardly matters because the latter two have a big advantage over the Russian Stealth Fighter in both STEALTH and SENSOR FUSION. This will give the American Fighters "FIRST LOOK, FIRST SHOT, and FIRST KILL"

Honestly, don't know anyone with any real knowledge of the subject matter. That thinks the Su-57 is a serious threat....Of course much the same could be said of the J-20. Though likely the margins are more narrow.
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5453
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post18 Sep 2019, 14:00

Corsair1963 wrote:Honestly, don't know anyone with any real knowledge of the subject matter. That thinks the Su-57 is a serious threat....Of course much the same could be said of the J-20. Though likely the margins are more narrow.


First time I saw the T-50 I thought, "meh". Thought it looked cool but it was an obvious kludge. First time I saw the J-20 I thought, "damn" and was super pissed that we'd been (and continue to be) so lax when it comes to security. China stole us blind.
"There I was. . ."
Offline
User avatar

botsing

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 862
  • Joined: 05 Dec 2015, 18:09
  • Location: The Netherlands

Unread post18 Sep 2019, 16:07

southerncross wrote:@botsing:

your explanation does not make much sense to me but I am no economist and I am not here to discuss economy at amateur level either. In any case, according to you, Russia could not sell the Su-35 abroad for more than $80 million and buy for the VKS below $30 million, but they do.

Where did I say that "Russia could not sell the Su-35 abroad for more than $80 million and buy for the VKS below $30 million"? If Russia likes she can even ask 10 or 100 times that amount, she will not sell much with that price but she can. We are talking here about the price to create a Su-57, not the price on which it can be sold.

So what I did state is that if Russia uses it's own raw material to build the Su-57, the final impact on it's economy would be the same as the total price for those materials on the global market. Due to this, you cannot use a devaluation of your currency to magically lower the price of your resources. So there is no magically lower price to create the Su-57 due to the rubel loosing out to other currencies.
"Those who know don’t talk. Those who talk don’t know"
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3532
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post18 Sep 2019, 16:32

What is true is that IF the SU-57 gets substantial foreign orders, they (the Russians) can make a go of it.

That does NOT mean it'll be the end all/be all of 5th gen (or if you like, 4+++ gen) fighters. It's is technologically lagging in too many areas, and no amount of $ is going to fix that.

What additional (foreign) money will do is give them a "base" to work from, allowing them to be sold both domestically and internationally. The quantity will never approach F-35 like numbers, but possibly approach F-22 like numbers. Those numbers however, will never allow them to make up for the qualitative disadvantage from which they operate.

It is too little expertise, too late for the Russians. What the Chinese will be able to do by modifying the "base" Russian SU-57 is another matter, and the real national security threat that the SU-57 represents...
Offline

milosh

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 869
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 23:40
  • Location: Serbia, Belgrade

Unread post18 Sep 2019, 18:53

Well now when India is out of picture, Russia and China could work on naval variant of Su-57. It would be lot easier to develop naval Su-57 then to shorten J-20. Also Su-57 will get more powerful engines so added weight wouldn't be problem.
Offline

inst

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 110
  • Joined: 04 Jul 2015, 01:58

Unread post18 Sep 2019, 23:02

My PoV regarding the Su-57 is that it'd be an impressive fighter if it were 4th gen, it'd probably be able to outmaneuver Eurocanards, F-18s, F-16s, etc. Against 5th gen, it'll outmaneuver F-35s and probably will outmaneuver the F-22.

However, the weakness in stealth and lack of sensor fusion, as others have said, is a critical failing that prevents it from being able to compete with 5th gen in a 1v1 fight.

The trick is, though, if the Su-57 is as cheap as the Russians make it out to be, it doesn't have to be that stealthy. It could very well use true stealth aircraft to cover its approach, then kill and get killed with HOBS missiles in short-range fights and still win strategically.

Of course, as a pilot, you definitely wouldn't want to be in an Su-57, and if you were, you'd probably be fed some nostrum about how your maneuverability will save you from being bad at stealth and you'll believe it because the alternative is knowing you're cannon fodder.

That's the angle the Su-57 comes from, i.e, it's a heavyweight fighter that costs less than a middleweight fighter and has acceptable stealth characteristics. Think back to T-34 vs Tigers, as well as the fact that T-34 were supported by SU-152s and other SPGs that specialized in killing Nazi heavy tanks.

The Su-57 doesn't have to be good, provided the Russians crank enough out of the Sukhoi factories.

As for "raw materials cost to the Russian economy", the actual economics term is opportunity cost, but as I've stated before, markets mean that the opportunity cost is effectively nil because the Russians have so much difficulty getting people to uptake the raw materials.

The one last possibility about Su-57 is that the Chinese went full hog on 3D-printed titanium for their J-20s and J-31 prototypes. The advatage of 3D-printed titanium is that it both reduces weight compared to traditional titanium and cost compared to both carbon fiber and traditional titanium. Aerospace-grade carbon fiber costs between 45,000 to 220,000 per ton. Titanium powder on Alibaba can be obtained for the equivalent of 30,000 per ton.

So it's actually a riff off the MiG-25 brouhahaha, the MiG-25 was originally expected to be composed of titanium, making it an extremely agile fighter due to low wing loading. The Soviets, of course, decided to cut costs and were looking for interception anyways, so went with nickel steel instead. The Su-57, if it were using composites aggressively, would be quite lightweight and expensive. But if say, they went with titanium as a composites replacement, they'd would gain some weight but also significantly reduce costs.

The problem with this hypothesis is that it's the Chinese who have the 3D-printer technology, although it wouldn't be that challenging for the Russians have that as well.
Offline

milosh

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 869
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 23:40
  • Location: Serbia, Belgrade

Unread post19 Sep 2019, 09:39

@inst

Of course Su-57 have sensor fusion, how else its sensors would work without fusion?!?

You have multi band radars (X and L maybe even S) bands, you have UV and IR optical sensors and advanced RWR. Su-57 in 2017 had over 4 million lines of code.

Su-57 have noticeable less titanium then Flankers, it have less then 20% of titanium, ~25% composite and 40% aluminum. Reason to use less titanium is price and weight.
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3532
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post19 Sep 2019, 12:02

milosh wrote:Well now when India is out of picture, Russia and China could work on naval variant of Su-57. It would be lot easier to develop naval Su-57 then to shorten J-20. Also Su-57 will get more powerful engines so added weight wouldn't be problem.


Shrewd observation...

The SU-57 does indeed have more potential for carrier ops. It's size and weight are considerable, but much less so than the J-20. Overall a much better fleet air defense/strike platform, requiring some but less modification. The Chinese/Russians/Indians really don't have the option - they must carry smaller amounts of one, air to everything platform vs. American CVN's. Who ironically chose that same model in fielding an (almost) all Hornet Navy.

If the reports are true that the SU-57 is getting an anti-ship capability, it would seem to fit the bill nicely. The Chinese have the $, and the combined Russian/Chinese expertise is probably there. That would indeed present a potent air wing, one which the F-35C will be relied on to counter.

Let's hope 2 squadrons per CVN is enough...
Offline

charlielima223

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1078
  • Joined: 12 Jan 2014, 19:26

Unread post19 Sep 2019, 19:22

milosh wrote:@inst

Of course Su-57 have sensor fusion, how else its sensors would work without fusion?!?

You have multi band radars (X and L maybe even S) bands, you have UV and IR optical sensors and advanced RWR. Su-57 in 2017 had over 4 million lines of code.



I believe what most people here are skeptical about the PAKFA is how good all those sensors and systems will be. Russia isn't exactly known as the technological hub of the world. People here have noted that the Typhoons PIRATE sensor and F-35s EOTS to have higher resolution and better capabilities then the OLS-35 found on the Su-35. Another example is radar tech. This will be the first AESA radar that will be on a Russian fighter jet. US pretty much mastered AESA radar tech at this point as AESA radars are mass produced and can be seen on almost every frontline fighter now.

Just because it has 4million lines of code doesnt really mean anything. How good is the hardware and software. Sure it can multiple sensors but how good is the software and hardware is at crunching the information and then communicating that back to the pilot?
Offline

milosh

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 869
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 23:40
  • Location: Serbia, Belgrade

Unread post19 Sep 2019, 20:30

charlielima223 wrote:I believe what most people here are skeptical about the PAKFA is how good all those sensors and systems will be. Russia isn't exactly known as the technological hub of the world. People here have noted that the Typhoons PIRATE sensor and F-35s EOTS to have higher resolution and better capabilities then the OLS-35 found on the Su-35. Another example is radar tech. This will be the first AESA radar that will be on a Russian fighter jet. US pretty much mastered AESA radar tech at this point as AESA radars are mass produced and can be seen on almost every frontline fighter now.

Just because it has 4million lines of code doesnt really mean anything. How good is the hardware and software. Sure it can multiple sensors but how good is the software and hardware is at crunching the information and then communicating that back to the pilot?


I was writing about sensor fusion. Most folks here believe that PAK-FA pilot will switch between sensors trying to get useful info which is nonsense. We can debate how good sensors are but no sensor fusion is joke.

I wouldn't worry about software if something Russians know to write it is software for electric scan arrays, NIIP is writing software for airborne radars of that type for almost half of century.
Last edited by milosh on 20 Sep 2019, 07:58, edited 1 time in total.
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1793
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore

Unread post20 Sep 2019, 00:52

Just to highlight that there are also various grades of composites. Up to a short while ago, Russian aircraft manufacturing was still reliant on composite imports (until sanctions kicked in) for higher grades. That is a limiting factor for production.

China also suffers from import sanctions but have been smart enough to structure requirements for JVs to set up in China. Hence such JVs provide IP knowledge transfers, besides local R&D, enabling local firms to set up higher tech composite manufacturing. Several Chinese firms are now performing T-1000 production.
PreviousNext

Return to Modern Military Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests