F-22ski Just Got Later And More Expensive

Anything goes, as long as it is about the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

haavarla

Banned

  • Posts: 873
  • Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 19:36
  • Warnings: 4

Unread post04 Nov 2012, 13:02

VVS don't need/want any two seater Pak-Fa.
Sukhoi don't want to waste of time and expense of R&D and produce an two seater Pak-Fa.
This is the explanation to India.
And India has no other choice than to follow suite, and get the singel seater Pak-Fa.
Offline

1st503rdsgt

Banned

  • Posts: 1547
  • Joined: 23 Jan 2011, 01:23

Unread post04 Nov 2012, 13:36

haavarla wrote:VVS don't need/want any two seater Pak-Fa.
Sukhoi don't want to waste of time and expense of R&D and produce an two seater Pak-Fa.
This is the explanation to India.
And India has no other choice than to follow suite, and get the singel seater Pak-Fa.

I'm sure the Indians would be all too happy for you to set them straight. :wink: It's not as if they can buy a single-seat VLO fighter from anyone else given their vast investment in the PAK. Oh wait... you already said on another thread that "India's participation and funding on the Pak-Fa program is zippo, zero and nada!"

By all means, keep telling the customer for half the planes (the one that hasn't spent anything yet) to go jump in the lake. I'm sure that'll work out great for the program.
The sky is blue because God loves the Infantry.
Offline

haavarla

Banned

  • Posts: 873
  • Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 19:36
  • Warnings: 4

Unread post04 Nov 2012, 19:30

Finally i'm getting through to you.
Even if the F-35 is open for sale to India, LM cant give India anything close to what Sukhoi offer.
Cause there IS zippo chance for LM to export F-35 Kits to HAL, and 10000% certain that India will NOT get a liecens production of F-35. ;)

Oh and did i also say in the other thread that the Pak-Fa export deal with India will be signed before year end. It is expected that Putin forthcoming visit to India is the time and place, the deal will be signed, and when it does, any wet dreams of ever exporting F-35 to India will die.
Offline

1st503rdsgt

Banned

  • Posts: 1547
  • Joined: 23 Jan 2011, 01:23

Unread post04 Nov 2012, 19:55

haavarla wrote:Finally i'm getting through to you.
Even if the F-35 is open for sale to India, LM cant give India anything close to what Sukhoi offer.
Cause there IS zippo chance for LM to export F-35 Kits to HAL, and 10000% certain that India will NOT get a liecens production of F-35. ;)

Oh and did i also say in the other thread that the Pak-Fa export deal with India will be signed before year end. It is expected that Putin forthcoming visit to India is the time and place, the deal will be signed, and when it does, any wet dreams of ever exporting F-35 to India will die.

More likely Putin is gonna have to answer some hard questions about other issues India is having with Russian hardware. I almost fell off my chair when I found out India was ordering Chinooks and Apaches. What could possibly be next? There are some years to go yet, we'll just have to see.
The sky is blue because God loves the Infantry.
Offline

haavarla

Banned

  • Posts: 873
  • Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 19:36
  • Warnings: 4

Unread post04 Nov 2012, 22:18

Chinooks and Apaches are quite fine, the Mi-26 are too expensive in both cost and operational cost...
Who could have guessed.. Mi-26 being much larger(niche capability), larger engines and people don't under stand it will cost more to operate.. ;)

Apache are much more matured vs Mi-28, so no surprise there.
We got P-8, C-17 and C-130J. So sure India chooses their product as they see fit. But how does this connect with FGFA/Pak-Fa program, hmm?

I don't think Putin can answer anyting, its the Ceo on the different company that handle those deals.
Putin or Medvedev only sign the deals.
Offline

wilky510

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 2
  • Joined: 28 Oct 2012, 21:57

Unread post07 Nov 2012, 01:40

papakaz wrote:
munny wrote:
The US simply does not have the number of assets required to protect its own territory.


Huh? Last time I checked, the US had roughly 5 times the number of 4th generation + fighter aircraft than the world's number 2 - Russia, with less than half the land area to cover. Approximately 12 times the number of refueling aircraft, and 6 times the number of AWACS. Can't work out how your statement could be more incorrect.


:doh: Okay, here's what the US Air Force will look like when compared with the Russian Air Force in 2015.

US Air Force: 187 F-22A Raptors, 63 F-35A Lightning II's, 178 F-15C Eagles, 224 F-15E Strike Eagles, 450 F-16C/D Vipers/Fighting Falcons, 246 A-10C Warthogs/Thunderbolt II's. Total tactical strength: 1,348 aircraft of all types

VVS: 124 Su-34 Fullbacks, 188 MiG-31BM Foxfires, 241 Su-25SM Frogfeet, 553 Su-24M Fencers, 48 Su-35S Flanker-E's, 226 MiG-29SMT Fulcrums, 30 Su-30 Flanker-C's, 281 Su-27SM Flankers. Total tactical strength: 1,691 aircraft of all types. Strike one: VVS outnumbers USAF with viable legacy fleet prior to full-rate production of PAK FA and low-rate LMFS prototype production.

US Air Force: 418 KC-135 Stratotankers, 59 KC-10A Extenders. Total refueling capacity: 477 refueling aircraft of all types

VVS: 20 Il-86 Midas, plus buddy refueling stores on Su-24M Fencers (potentially 200 aircraft used in capacity with limited strike capability). Strike two: USAF tactical aircraft are unable to perform buddy refueling. The USAF does not possess over 12 times the number of aircraft, and if a common consensus exists, well over half the total Su-24 force (including other aircraft, such as older MiG-25s, which also can carry a heavy load, and can probably be modified to be buddy tankers).

US Air Force: 32 E-3B/C Sentries. Only AEW&C airframe in service with USAF

VVS: 20 A-50 Mainstays. Strike three. The VVS does not hold a significant disadvantage.

Conclusion: In a defensive war, the USAF has no real advantage over the Russian military. The USAF, further, has its slim advantage further reduced to the point where any additional attached air assets from the Marine Corps or Navy can be rather effectively attacked by Russian TACAIR, SAMs, or triple-A. Russian training dictates separate attacks that can be supported by a wingman lurking in a loose formation in an air superiority mission (as shown in an air-to-ground variant with the Frogfoot in Afghanistan), or alternatively, tight, line-astern formations ideal for passes on American strategic assets, while simultaneously disregarding individual losses for taking out higher-priority targets.

Defend against that, Munny.
Why leave out the US Navy numbers in this? I understand their a different overall branch. But they pretty much work in conjunction with the USAF nowadays. Don't see why noone ever puts US Navy aircraft in the US air power projection.
Offline

haavarla

Banned

  • Posts: 873
  • Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 19:36
  • Warnings: 4

Unread post07 Nov 2012, 11:18

Keep your hat on.
To be fair, Papakaz RuAF(VVS) inventory figures are waaay off..

Present figures:
Russia about 100 Mig-31, where some 50+ have been upgraded to Mig-31BM standard.

And about 120 of rag tags Su-24M/M2 and some Su-24MR scattered around different AB.

Flankers, about 60 Su-27SM/SM2, four Su-30M2 and +5 Su-35S. About Legasy Su-27S, i would guess 6 Sq scattered around Russia, many have been mothballed allready.

Su-34, Around 11 and counting, another six will arrive before year end.

Mig-29: 34 Mig-29SMT and approx 6 Sq of Mig-29, 9.12 version. A good deal have been mothballed! So total 100 operative Mig-29 today.

Su-25 are pretty good and is your most correct figures. Around 200 units in service.

All the figures are operative IMO In service figures and not about how many units placed on reserves, or scrapyard AB waiting to be mothballed..
This is the current status of the pending re-structure of VVS.
Some 20 AB have been laid down since 2007.
70000 air staff have been sacked or will be soon.

On the brighter side, VVS operational service cost are about 1/10 compaired to 2007.
After all, VVS stand to recieve new units forwards.
And one would think the VVS are much more robust, efficient and dynamic in term of readyness, reaction time to re-deploy, increased flight hours, better training facilities and resources etc etc.

Here is proof of that, VVS long range Bomber pilots have reached 150 flight hours a year and counting.

http://function.mil.ru/news_page/countr ... 633@egNews
Last edited by haavarla on 07 Nov 2012, 14:28, edited 1 time in total.
Offline

munny

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 585
  • Joined: 13 Jan 2010, 01:39

Unread post07 Nov 2012, 13:25

Damn right they are way off, pathetically so. There is a graph somewhere that shows force structure changes over the next 20 years as f-35's ramp up and at no point is the USAF short 700 or so light fighters. Just didn't bother responding as it was off topic.
Offline

haavarla

Banned

  • Posts: 873
  • Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 19:36
  • Warnings: 4

Unread post07 Nov 2012, 15:02

I would be carefull of predict what the future F-35 inventory holds..
Procurment plans have a nasty way of getting axed, as we'd seen lately, not just on the F-35 but most other procurment plans and fighter program too..

Take your bets on what the REAL procurment numbers for the Indian-French Rafale deal.. we should see the deal done soon. :)
Previous

Return to General F-22A Raptor forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests