Forum: Modern Military Aircraft

Sure, i agree.
The only thing i've seen so far on price is this:

Aug 18/09:
The Russian government signs the SU-35’s inaugural production contract at the Russian MAKS 2009 air show. The Russian Defense Ministry has reportedly signed a contract with Sukhoi to deliver 48 SU-35s by 2015, plus an interim buy of 12 single-seat SU-27SM and 4 dual-seat SU-30M2 multirole fighters by 2011.

RIA Novosti cites “open sources” that estimate the flyaway cost an SU-35 at about $65 million. This contract should be larger, since it’s a new type that must carry the additional costs of training spares stocks, etc. Statements place the contract’s value at “over 80 billion” roubles, where RUB 80 billion is currently about $2.51 billion. The contract follows on the heels of RUB 3.2 billion (about $100 million) in capital injected into Sukhoi, and Vnesheconombank head Vladimir Dmitriyev said the national development bank would grant Sukhoi a 3.5 billion-ruble (about $109 million) loan to start SU-35 production.

ITAR-TASS | ITAR-TASS re: loans, contract value | RIA Novosti | RIA Novosti’s Russia Today | domain-b | Flight International.

Anyway, i'll leave you with this HD vid from Maks 2009.
Its clearly a fact that the responsivness on this Su-35S surpass the older Su-27PD.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQvnvIid ... re=related

F-16.net Sponsor

Extremely responsive, that's for sure. Not Worthy

Funny thing is, I used to love playing around with Su-35's high-alpha flying and TVC in an old flight sim called Janes FA, way back in 1998.. I even created a couple of theme-specific mission maps used for multi-play which were centered around a Su-35 theme. The jet back then ironically had that exact same camo paint scheme in the game. Cheers-

alaskanmarine1 wrote:

I'm sure Sukoi is working on something to challenge it.

Yes, as far as I know, they are:

I think they called it "Raptorsky" Laughing

Hi guys,

I think this article is very illuminating on the topic of s-35 vs f-35, and it is an entertaining read. I think the f22 question is a moot point.

[Link pending approval]

Ehhhhhh, APA is basically a joke around here. They are so ridiculously biased that their analyses are basically angry editorials.

APA... Lets not go there..

To give a response to this thread teme.
The Su-35S is a great platform indeed, get it to Red Flag with in the next 4 years and people will get my point.

But as to compair the Su-35S with F-22 and F-35 is a riddicules notion.
It is not fair, and it is completly different platforms within their different niche missions.. and not compairable cause its two completly different airforces with their own set of strategic, tactical and airial doctrines..

As for bang for the $, the Su-35S rules Not Worthy

Bang for $? Does that look at purchase price only or life cycle cost? Being 2nd best in the air is a waste of $ either way.

Uhu?
Second best(your words, i'm not claiming it is!) transform into waste of $..
Twist it and the same could be said about beeing on top, but with no future to get export or further orders..
yes i'm talking about F-22 now, perhaps not a fair case..
But seriously, this could happend if you aim high enough.

My point was the Su-35S is a good platform, its exportable, it will do for a transitional assets until something better comes along.

As for VVS status, the Su-35S will only make the future Pak-Fa more deadly/effective in its operational mission suite. They will no doubt operate an some kind of mix in the years to come.

Not saying it will be better than USAF capability, but it will kick a$$ and not ruin the prospect with some astronomical price.

As for life cycle cost, Sukhoi claim the Su-35S will rise both engine TBO and airframe life service from the older Flankers inventory.
Anyway its a somewhat moot point, with all the axes/cuts going on in RUAF these days the VVS do need new fighters NOW, and the Su-35S will have to do.

I know I'm very late to the party on this topic but I'd like to share a sort of metaphorical example. What is perfect to you is useless to me. Basically what I'm trying to say is that your wasting your time comparing the F-22 and SU-35. And that there is no such thing as the best plane ever made. The F-22 fits the niche for a low observable aircraft with 5th gen technologies. The F-22 is basically an aircraft for a country where money is no object (USA is the only valid example since the F-22 is unavailable for export.) The SU-35 on the other hand combines a cheaper and more reliable 4th gen design with 5th gen technologies. Some countries that purchase the SU-35 think of it as the most advanced aircraft in their inventory because it can take on any enemy the countries in question are facing. Now I'm in no way trying to be biased. The SU-35 and F-22 are my favorites. And Russia has no plans on fighting America. Last time I checked we are allied with Russia. Also if I had my own air force I'd prefer SU-35s because they get the job done at a much cheaper cost. I'd rather have three SU-35s instead one F-22.

alaskanmarine1 wrote:

I agree that the F-22 and F-35 should easily defeat any fourth generation fighter, but that doesn't mean someone can't get a lucky shot. The planes are great, but not invincible, never under estimate the opponent. The F-22 has already been killed by a Superhornet from VF-11 in a close in knife fight, now people will say that ROEs were out of bounds or something else was wrong or that shot wasn't long enough. I've seen the shot the F-22 is in a dive with the Superhornet coming down on it and the piper is down and in the real world a kill is a kill.

Not to go on the attack here. Just wanted to point out the SHornet kill was a dead Growler that regenerated behind the Raptor for a lucky shot in red flag. This is the only one I know of at red flag by SHornet. I hear there was a winder kill too but haven't seen it my self. Could only happen once or twice in an entire war. More likely the Raptor would just fall out of the sky for no reason. That has happened for real. My two cents. Tell me if I'm wrong. TSFG

My favorite Raptor kill story is the one of 1 v 3 WVR. Three F-16C with JHMCS/AIM-9X vs one F-22 with AIM-9M and cannon. The result is that the first two Vipers went down and the third was able to score the kill while the F-22 was scoring the kill on it, so it was an even 3-1 death ratio in a phonebooth against superior armament.

I honestly wondered how that was possible though. I think it may have had something to do with how F-22's stealth allowed it to not be effectively tracked at the upper end of the engagement envelope of the AIM-9X by the Vipers and their radars which were what the -9Xs may have been slaved too. As such the Raptor still got first "look" and first shot against two of them despite having a weapon with an inferior WEZ.

It's just that it is hard to believe the Raptor can beat the AIM-9X that easily once it has been launched via defensive maneuvering and flares alone.

Back on topic such advantages in stealth held by the F-35/F-22 will only mean that the WEZ of the Su-35's missiles in both BVR and WVR engagements will be reduced to the point of almost being useless as highlighted by the possibility above. As such, so long as the US gets their appropriate numbers of F-35s there's nothing to worry about.

tacf-x wrote:

It's just that it is hard to believe the Raptor can beat the AIM-9X that easily once it has been launched via defensive maneuvering and flares alone.

I don't think it was so much beating the AIM-9X, as keeping the F-16 pilots from getting a good position/lock. That demonstrates several things.
A- the extreme kinematic capabilities of the F-22 in WVR
B- the difficulty of locking weapons onto the F-22

sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:

My favorite Raptor kill story is the one of 1 v 3 WVR. Three F-16C with JHMCS/AIM-9X vs one F-22 with AIM-9M and cannon. The result is that the first two Vipers went down and the third was able to score the kill while the F-22 was scoring the kill on it, so it was an even 3-1 death ratio in a phonebooth against superior armament.

Thanks for the read! I like it. Even when the Raptor dies it wins! That's great. Cheers

TSFG

falcon17 wrote:

I know I'm very late to the party on this topic but I'd like to share a sort of metaphorical example. What is perfect to you is useless to me. Basically what I'm trying to say is that your wasting your time comparing the F-22 and SU-35. And that there is no such thing as the best plane ever made. The F-22 fits the niche for a low observable aircraft with 5th gen technologies. The F-22 is basically an aircraft for a country where money is no object (USA is the only valid example since the F-22 is unavailable for export.) The SU-35 on the other hand combines a cheaper and more reliable 4th gen design with 5th gen technologies. Some countries that purchase the SU-35 think of it as the most advanced aircraft in their inventory because it can take on any enemy the countries in question are facing. Now I'm in no way trying to be biased. The SU-35 and F-22 are my favorites. And Russia has no plans on fighting America. Last time I checked we are allied with Russia. Also if I had my own air force I'd prefer SU-35s because they get the job done at a much cheaper cost. I'd rather have three SU-35s instead one F-22.

If you think you can have three Su-35's for one Raptor you should read this. http://www.rediff.com/news/2000/nov/17ashok.htm

Quote:

Why is the maintenance and life support to Russian aircraft so expensive and complicated? First, the engine life is short and the TBO (Time Between Overhauls) low. After every 300 hours of flying, a lifespan of 3,000 hours, the engine has to be changed. The Su-30MKI has two engines. This gives it immense power and aerodynamics, which depend on canards and thrust vectoring for superb agility. After every 300 hours of flying, two engines, each costing $5 million, will need replacement.

That's not cheap. That's 100 mil. in the 6000 hours life of the airframe. The tbo of the Su-35 is said to be 500 hours, but that's what they said the Su-30 would have and it dosn't. Plus try adding the cost of three SU-35's and compare it to the price of a F-22. To top it off the F-22 could likely beat three Su's without them ever seeing him.
Edited to add. A quick google and you can find the TBO of the F-119-PW-100 in the F-22 is 4000 to 6000 hours. The 4000 is if you supercruise alot.
My Two Cents

TSFG

Forum: Modern Military Aircraft

SU-35... does it match up with F-22/F-35?