The PAK-FA Saga Episode IV

[swerve]

What's F-15F?

A slip of the finger, with brain disconnected.

[Nick_76]

Yup, I saw that video about Russian stealth. But, it just appeared to be an RCS test/simulation.

This was what RSM55 had to say a few weeks back:
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/sho...&postcount=430

Theres some stuff in that post by RSM55 which to be frank, is nationalist handwaving, including that bit about EW fit and what not being far superior to that on the Raptor. First, let current RusAF fits get to whats being fielded by other nations in terms of compact packaging and DF accuracy. Also for instance, that bit about downgrades and what not about the Indians not being helpful (well gee! how nasty of them, they should have just handed over a blank check with no expected ROI!!), to be frank, the IAF knows enough details about the program and avionics, and India is involved in choosing and tailoring its specific fit precisely because the "oh so superior" Russian Tech needs to be tailored to IAF operational requirements. Meanwhile, India itself is fielding its own ESM pod for Kh31s and onboard RHAWS. And has its own towed decoy plans as well. All in all, if the PAK-FA comes upto then extant F-22 standards @ the time of induction, thats good enough. No need for taking maximalist positions.

[RyukyuRhymer]

Modernize the Flanker and produce a smaller more versatile aircraft with supercruise and stealth features, probably above those of the Typhoon. As I said, the full eye-level solution versus the F-22 will run into serious problems on either the cost side, or the time, or the technical performance, or the operational suitability. Remember how long the last aircraft that was aimed at a specific US design (F-15) needed to become operational. No operational PAK-FA before 2019?

On a national level it is more important to bring one new aircraft from requirement status to operational status in order to keep this capability within the industry.

had to quote an earlier thread since it is now locked.
what do you think of the Su-47 and MiG 1.42 (or 1.44 whatever it was). Probably not on the smaller side but has a bit more "stealthy" features than the standard flanker.

[star49]

This is what I am talking about Star49:



This clearly shows they want to make major components locally if they can... and if they designed the components in Russia then they certainly can make them in Russia too.

you are talking about making old engines. offcourse new engines will be built in Russia on new production technologies in much greater quantities

Regarding just having Sukhoi making planes in Russia and MiG disappearing... read this from the same article above:

Source link for both quotes: http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20070821/72922066.html

they are talking about engine manufacturers. Each manufacturer has different speciallity so they will exist independently.
while MIG and Sukhoi products role cross each other.

[GarryB]

you are talking about making old engines. offcourse new engines will be built in Russia on new production technologies in much greater quantities

I am talking about keeping competition alive in Russia. I am saying that only having Sukhois will leave those 4 engine making companies in trouble because what is the point in having 4 different companies make the same product. As the 4 companies are set up and get ready for the needed production capacity in Russia they can certainly do with funds for spares and support of existing engine types. Once they are ready for full production they can make new engines with their new production facilities and replace all the old model engines that are now obsolete. For example when the VK-2500 is in full production there is no reason to mass produce the older engine models it replaces, except for spares for in service models. Making them in small numbers will drive up the price/cost of older models and make newer models a more attractive option. This will immediately improve performance of aircraft like the Mi-8/-17/-14/-24/-35 series and the Ka-50/52/-27/-32/-31 etc series too. Better hot and high performance and better power margins.

they are talking about engine manufacturers. Each manufacturer has different speciallity so they will exist independently.
while MIG and Sukhoi products role cross each other.

Then why are they talking about competition? If each engine manufacturer will be making engine types that no other Russian maker is making there is no competition. The whole point of having 4 engine makers is to ensure that you will likely have at least two makers competing for engines in certain classes. By having 4 you increase competition but still allow for each company to survive. An aircraft industry can't survive with just 4 different types of engine. From cruise missiles, to light helos, medium helos, heavy helos, light transports, medium transports, heavy transports, light jet trainers, medium jets, heavy jets, light, and heavy bombers etc etc. That ignores MPAs, spyplanes, AWACs, seaplanes, etc etc but there can of course be engines in multi use. The engine of a light jet trainer might be good for a heavy long range UAV design for example. Currently the engine in the Mig-31 is related to engines in medium transports, AWACS, Tankers, and Elint aircraft and seaplanes.

Later on they might find they only need three engine companies... like P&W and GE... one of them must make the "best engine" and have the most "skilled personel".

[star49]

I am talking about keeping competition alive in Russia. I am saying that only having Sukhois will leave those 4 engine making companies in trouble because what is the point in having 4 different companies make the same product. As the 4 companies are set up and get ready for the needed production capacity in Russia they can certainly do with funds for spares and support of existing engine types. Once they are ready for full production they can make new engines with their new production facilities and replace all the old model engines that are now obsolete. For example when the VK-2500 is in full production there is no reason to mass produce the older engine models it replaces, except for spares for in service models. Making them in small numbers will drive up the price/cost of older models and make newer models a more attractive option. This will immediately improve performance of aircraft like the Mi-8/-17/-14/-24/-35 series and the Ka-50/52/-27/-32/-31 etc series too. Better hot and high performance and better power margins.

Sukoi factories are making both Civillian aircraft and fighters. Even Beriev is under Irkut and so is Yak.

Then why are they talking about competition? If each engine manufacturer will be making engine types that no other Russian maker is making there is no competition. The whole point of having 4 engine makers is to ensure that you will likely have at least two makers competing for engines in certain classes. By having 4 you increase competition but still allow for each company to survive. An aircraft industry can't survive with just 4 different types of engine. From cruise missiles, to light helos, medium helos, heavy helos, light transports, medium transports, heavy transports, light jet trainers, medium jets, heavy jets, light, and heavy bombers etc etc. That ignores MPAs, spyplanes, AWACs, seaplanes, etc etc but there can of course be engines in multi use. The engine of a light jet trainer might be good for a heavy long range UAV design for example. Currently the engine in the Mig-31 is related to engines in medium transports, AWACS, Tankers, and Elint aircraft and seaplanes.

Later on they might find they only need three engine companies... like P&W and GE... one of them must make the "best engine" and have the most "skilled personel".

so how is Saturn/Prem is going to compete with Klimov in helicopter engines when they dont have any experiance and product line to research on? Unlike West Russian engine manufacturers are separate specialized entities which is not the case with Sukhoi and MIG. they both do fighters as speciallity.

[Abhimanyu]

As per the following news report persons associated with the PAK-FA and former Air Chief S Krishnaswamy have questioned India's role in the PAK-FA project.



India’s role in Sukhoi project questioned

Price, investment for fighter jet still being discussed; design specs have been decided, first flight slated for 2009
K. Raghu



Bangalore: India is yet to begin work on a futuristic technology demonstrator plane, a single-seat, fifth-generation fighter it is jointly developing with Russia’s Sukhoi Design Bureau, that will take to the skies for the first time in 2009.
Some analysts are questioning the contribution of Indian aerospace research and development (R&D) engineers to the programme, given that the aircraft’s design specifications have already been decided and the first flight is set for next year.


In October, India and Russia signed an agreement for the joint development and production of the fifth-generation fighter aircraft, or FGFA, making a commitment to sharing resources and work equally. A team of officials from Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd, or HAL, the country’s military plane maker, was in Moscow in late May for discussions on the estimated $4 billion, or Rs17,160 crore, project.
“We are (still) talking about the price and investment costs,” said one person familiar with the development who did not want to be named because of the sensitive nature of the project. “(Also) the more we delay, the less work we will get. That is a fact.”
The fighter plane will havea so-called swept-forward wing—which increases an aircraft’s agility and gives it the stealth feature to reduce risk of detection by radar. The (technology demonstrator) aircraft being built by Sukhoi will use the engines, systems and avionics of the previous generation Su-30 plane.
“If something is going to come in one year, where could we have participation?” asked former air chief marshal S. Krishnaswamy. “That actually has a negative impact onour own R&D people and laboratories.”
Another former Indian Air Force (IAF) official, air marshal B.K. Pandey, said, “If the prototype is already decided, there is nothing original that Indian aerospace industry can contribute to the programme.”
A person familiar with the programme’s development said India would bring in its expertise in carbon-composite technology used in HAL’s Dhruv advanced light helicopter and Tejas light combat aircraft, both of which are homegrown programmes.
Russian, Indian firms will make an equal number of planes during the development phase
Once the technology demonstrator flies next year, Russia will work on developing more than six two-seater prototypes of the stealth fighter. Indian engineers will contribute to the design of the front fuselage, build composites for better stealth features and work on avionics.
“Once the front fuselage undergoes a change (to accommodate two pilots instead of one as in the technology demonstrator), the aircraft lift conditions will change, wings will change. This is where our learning will become useful,” said the person familiar with the development.
The new aircraft would be nearly a third lighter than the Su-30 and be able to fly longer than conventional fighters, besides possessing the stealth features. The aircraft is expected to be ready for induction in the Indian and Russian air forces by 2018.
HAL has in the past produced, under licence, Russian aircraft such as the MiG 21, which forms the bulk of the IAF’s strike fighter fleet. IAF also has in its inventory the Su-30 MkI, the India variant of the fourth-generation Russian fighter with avionics built by an India-led team which HAL will make under licence in the country.
The new Indo-Russian fighter is being designed to carry weapons in its fuselage, making it similar to the Joint Strike Fighter of the US.
While the components and systems would be built equally at the Komsomolsk-na-Amure Aircraft Production Association in Russia and HAL facilities in India, the engines would be made at a factory of NPO Saturn, the Russian engine maker. Both plane makers would build an equal number of aircraft during the development phase.
“Why did Russia want India to join (the programme)? Because they want money, they want (the) market,” said Pandey, a former head of IAF’s training command in Bangalore.“If we can get transfer of technology, HAL (will be) assembling the aircraft, then IAF has to buy the planes. So, they have an assured market”.
A majority of the planes in the IAF’s fleet are of Russian origin, with the rest from the UK and France. Although indigenous military plane programmes have been undertaken by the Defence Research and Development Organisation, or DRDO, and HAL, the Armed Forces remain dependent on imports.
India has floated a global tender to buy 126 multi-role combat aircraft that could cost a minimum of Rs42,000 crore, evoking the interest of aerospace companies such as Lockeed Martin Corp. and Boeing Co. of the US. It also plans to buy nearly 250 light- and medium-weight helicopters.
The Tejas fighter, conceived as a replacement for the ageing Russian-built MiG 21, is at least two years behind certification as it needs to achieve the so-called air staff requirements, or ASR, the standards set by IAF before induction. The military plane unit of Boeing has been asked to assist the Aeronautical Development Agency in certification of the LCA by 2010.
DRDO is now scouting for a foreign partner to build an engine for the Tejas fighter, after its unit Gas Turbine and Research Establishment failed to deliver the Kaveri engine even after nearly two decades of development.

Reference :-

http://www.livemint.com/2008/06/1723...-Sukhoi-p.html

[bring_it_on]

Many (on this forum) including myself have raised these questions before .

[Otaku]

Abhimanyu, no-offence but the statement of PAK-FA featuring FSWs, 2 seats etc.etc. completely obliterates its credibility.

Yes you've presented these arguments long-ago, and they've been debated ad nauseam- I think we settled on the term 'PAK-FA-MKI, so can we let it go now?

[Hyperwarp]

Theres some stuff in that post by RSM55 which to be frank, is nationalist handwaving, including that bit about EW fit and what not being far superior to that on the Raptor. First, let current RusAF fits get to whats being fielded by other nations in terms of compact packaging and DF accuracy. Also for instance, that bit about downgrades and what not about the Indians not being helpful (well gee! how nasty of them, they should have just handed over a blank check with no expected ROI!!), to be frank, the IAF knows enough details about the program and avionics, and India is involved in choosing and tailoring its specific fit precisely because the "oh so superior" Russian Tech needs to be tailored to IAF operational requirements. Meanwhile, India itself is fielding its own ESM pod for Kh31s and onboard RHAWS. And has its own towed decoy plans as well. All in all, if the PAK-FA comes upto then extant F-22 standards @ the time of induction, thats good enough. No need for taking maximalist positions.

Hmm.....Interesting Nick. I guess we will have to wait and see, until the thing flies, well ..... actually not just fly but when the Russians decide to declassify some of the specs.

On a side note:

The 1st flight of the PAK-FA scheduled sometime next year (2009). The F-22 1st flew in late 1997 and the YF-22 1st flew in late 1990! (MiG-1.44 in 2000, Su-47 in 1997).

It would be surprising/disappointing if the Russians are incapable of producing a 5th gen fighter by 2009 which atleast in some ways superior to the YF-22.

[Gavin.O]

Yup, I saw that video about Russian stealth. But, it just appeared to be an RCS test/simulation.

Of course we have no way of knowing if this RCS test/simulation was related to the real PAK FA design. I was simply trying to suggest that the Saturn drawing and this RCS model are closely related, based on the same design. And the RCS model seems entirely plausible . . . the size, the planform alignment, the proportions, the shape of wing, etc. -- there's nothing to make me think it CAN'T be the real deal. That's not to say it IS the real deal.

The fighter plane will have a so-called swept-forward wing

Please tell me this is some kind of translation problem. I would bet a year's salary that the PAK FA won't have a forward-swept wing.

[GarryB]

Sukoi factories are making both Civillian aircraft and fighters. Even Beriev is under Irkut and so is Yak.

So why do you call for the destruction of Mig? They make other military aircraft and civilian aircraft too.

The reality is that there is no one single product except Su-27 derivatives or Mi-8 derivatives that could allow a focus on one type of aircraft to be built by one company and have the company survive with no other product. (and even then they could not continue for more than a few years before the world passes them by).

so how is Saturn/Prem is going to compete with Klimov in helicopter engines when they dont have any experiance and product line to research on? Unlike West Russian engine manufacturers are separate specialized entities which is not the case with Sukhoi and MIG. they both do fighters as speciallity.

There are going to be 4 engine companies and many of their products will overlap. There may be areas where there is plenty of healthy competition. Traditionally in Helo engines with Mi-8s, Mi-14s, Mi-17s, Mi-24s, Mi-28s, Ka-32s, Ka-27s, Ka-29s, Ka-31s, Ka-50s and Ka-52s all potentially using the same engine there is still room for competition. The new VK-2500 engine offers superior performance, but it would be silly to think just because it offers better performance all current users will upgrade to the new engine. This means that production and improvement of the older engine still makes sense. The Russian Army is replacing Hinds with Havocs. They will certainly need new engines for the Havocs but for the upgraded Hinds they might save a little money by keeping the old engines.
With the engine used by the Mig-31 and the Il-76 the new PS-90A might be good for the Il-76 but will not fit the Mig-31. There are upgrades of the engine that improve thrust slightly, slightly improve fuel efficiency and greatly reduce engine noise to allow use at European airports where there are noise restrictions on cargo aircraft. The PS-90A is a better engine but it is about $3 million per engine. An improved basic model D30 that only costs $250,000 might still be a better choice for some uses... especially in aircraft with four engines.
With the number of new Helo engines required... not just 10-12 ton class engines like the VK-2500, but also light engines for the Mi-34 and the ANSAT and the Ka-60, and improved engines for the Mi-26 etc the will likely need a lot of factories and the work might be subcontracted out between the four main engine companies anyway simply to keep up with demand... certainly for the next few years when a lot of helos and transports need replacing.

[Nick_76]

Of course we have no way of knowing if this RCS test/simulation was related to the real PAK FA design. I was simply trying to suggest that the Saturn drawing and this RCS model are closely related, based on the same design. And the RCS model seems entirely plausible . . . the size, the planform alignment, the proportions, the shape of wing, etc. -- there's nothing to make me think it CAN'T be the real deal. That's not to say it IS the real deal.Please tell me this is some kind of translation problem. I would bet a year's salary that the PAK FA won't have a forward-swept wing.

The journalist has mixed up three things :-

1. Interview quotes with rtd IAF personnel - only ones who'll go on the record with criticism and open commentary - but who are not aware of the current status of negotiations and program, so are speaking in generics.

2. Online copypaste- hence the bit about FSW, so he could talk about the PAKFA history

3. The actual stuff - which is interesting, about the Indian involvement in the program and what India is planning to do. I believe his source is someone @ HAL. Unless he has copied from Force magazine, which would make what the article says trash

Hyper,

The Russian test programs are quite efficient and well coordinated and proceed fast. Partly because they tend to reuse a lot of existing engineering and components instead of designing everything from scratch. But the PAKFA is going to be their first all new operational project of this size ever since the fall of the Soviet Union. So please dont expect any miracles and it will be a miracle if it is ready before 2018-20, to say the least. India for one will as usual see the specs of what Russia can do and substitute its own avionics and international systems, giving another year or two, minimum to the test integration complexity.

[RSM55]

There's some stuff in that post by RSM55 which to be frank, is nationalist handwaving,

To be frank, I get the impression that if your analysis capacity is matched by your ability to commit two factual errors at the very beginning of a post (i.e. labelling me as a)nationalist b)probably Russian), there is a fair chance that the rest of the post is similarly flawed. I personally get much more upset about Indian chest-banging and baseless claims, for example, but I would never label anyone as nationalist just like that.

including that bit about EW fit and what not being far superior to that on the Raptor.

Dear Nick, I don't know why, but I suppute you're not an expert in Soviet/Russian EW/RWR doctrine and capability. Because if you were, you would know that the bloody Russkies have been aware of the importance of the latter since at least the Zapad 1977 maneuvers (notwithstanding Ogarkov's ramblings about strategic depth etc and his traditional unrequited love for everything armoured). I also suppute you don't have any ideas about the results of the Zapad 81 maneuver (because it's still classified), and you've never heard of the results of a series of tests conducted in the late 80's and involving a Tu-95 with its EW suit switched on and a Foxhound bound to intercept it. Without giving up boring details, the MiG-31 got a "launch authorised" on his HUD when the bomber was in sight (that might explain why the Bears still retain their tail guns btw). Of course, you may argue that it doesn't prove anything but that the tracking/lock-on capability of the 31 is just s**t, but that would deny the results of another series of tests involving the 31 which I might elaborate upon later if you need it.
Just to sum my argument up: your focus on compact packaging and DF accuracy is absobloodylutely irrelevant when one talks about the efficiency of an EW suite. Radio-wave propagation rules can be learned at college level, but the algorithms permitting the said efficiency of an EW suite is quite another thing - and you won't argue that the Sovs/Russkies were/are bad at math. And for heaven's sakes, we're talking about 80's/90 tech vs. 21st century tech here!

Also for instance, that bit about downgrades and what not about the Indians not being helpful (well gee! how nasty of them, they should have just handed over a blank check with no expected ROI!!)

You didn't get the irony in using the term "helpful", that's all. I was only saying that India did want to get involved in the design process, and the Russians duly said no way. That's all. Everything that happens (see above) and will happen in and around this project has till now met my prediction - India will remain a junior partner, do some build-it-yourself job and provide some money. Period.

to be frank, the IAF knows enough details about the program and avionics

The IAF does know what it needs to know - i.e. they haven't even seen the shape of the aircraft - and I know that for sure. Avionics are classified anyway. The Indians were shown the specs the Russian set for themselves.

India is involved in choosing and tailoring its specific fit

Of course, as any foreign customer would be.

precisely because the "oh so superior" Russian Tech needs to be tailored to IAF operational requirements.

No, just because the "oh so superior" Russian Tech has been denied to them and because they want to produce their own avionics suites with Russian backing.

Meanwhile, India itself is fielding its own ESM pod for Kh31s and onboard RHAWS. And has its own towed decoy plans as well.

I am sure India has plans galore (remember the Trishul?). But would you please enlighten me what kind of ESM pod India is developing for the Krypton? I'm extremely interested. Because what I've heard is that the Russians don't want to to give away their AR tech and certainly not their RW recognition codes, especially since the Kh-31 electronic suite shares components with almost all Russian anti-radiation missiles (when talking about the "P" version), and some guidance components from Moskit and Granit ASMs. So India is getting what's India's getting, meaning a Russian electronic suite with Indian algorithms and threat profile databases.

[Nick_76]

RSM 55,

Thanks for your response. Didnt think what I wrote deserved histrionics of that caliber, but I remain to be surprised etc.

To be frank, I get the impression that if your analysis capacity is matched by your ability to commit two factual errors at the very beginning of a post (i.e. labelling me as a)nationalist b)probably Russian), there is a fair chance that the rest of the post is similarly flawed. I personally get much more upset about Indian chest-banging and baseless claims, for example, but I would never label anyone as nationalist just like that.

Hmm...I dont personally give a damn about nationalist claims from any nations supporters as long as they dont troll or flame, so I dont know why Indians would offend your sensitive nostrils so much? But given your claims about Russia and some obvious factual errors- I can very much say that you are doing some nationalist handwaving. "Mine is best, everyone else better watch out"...irrespective of whether you are Russian or somebody who worships Mother Russia being from "a lesser clime"..etc.

Dear Nick, I don't know why, but I suppute you're not an expert in Soviet/Russian EW/RWR doctrine and capability. Because if you were, you would know that the bloody Russkies have been aware of the importance of the latter since at least the Zapad 1977 maneuvers (notwithstanding Ogarkov's ramblings about strategic depth etc and his traditional unrequited love for everything armoured). I also suppute you don't have any ideas about the results of the Zapad 81 maneuver (because it's still classified), and you've never heard of the results of a series of tests conducted in the late 80's and involving a Tu-95 with its EW suit switched on and a Foxhound bound to intercept it.

More irrelevant stuff, and without a relevant bit of information. Its like me stating, in 1984, the IAF conducted a secret exercise Vajra Shakti and the results were classified and blah blah blah ...etc ...blah blah..and adding a bunch of winks..impressive, eh?

Lets get to the point shall we?

That your claims of Russias airborne EW suites outmatching whats available today in the west, elsewhere, are - hyperbole.
As simple as that.
Nothing more, nothing less.
I am well aware of how marketers across the world brag and talk - "Air Force General, we have given you most modern aircraft". Yeah sure. And before you burst a capillary, let me tell you the above was said by someone to someone else, who promptly replied - "first give me what you promised, then we will talk about tomorrow".

Without giving up boring details, the MiG-31 got a "launch authorised" on his HUD when the bomber was in sight (that might explain why the Bears still retain their tail guns btw). Of course, you may argue that it doesn't prove anything but that the tracking/lock-on capability of the 31 is just s**t, but that would deny the results of another series of tests involving the 31 which I might elaborate upon later if you need it.

You can keep the details to yourself RSM. Unfortunately, at my age I have little patience for prima donnas. If you want to share information and learn from ideas which add to yours, your call. If you want to act pricey - your call as well. Least bothered.

Basically, I am keenly aware of what Russia has achieved in terms of airborne suites for avionics, and while impressive, it is by no means worthy of irredeemable handwaving. No country is at that stage, and nor is Russia.

For every statement you make - I can point out several facts in the other area, namely that the Zaslon @ 81, was anything bar what we have today, and what Russia is aiming for today, and what others have also shot for.

Just to sum my argument up: your focus on compact packaging and DF accuracy is absobloodylutely irrelevant when one talks about the efficiency of an EW suite. Radio-wave propagation rules can be learned at college level, but the algorithms permitting the said efficiency of an EW suite is quite another thing - and you won't argue that the Sovs/Russkies were/are bad at math. And for heaven's sakes, we're talking about 80's/90 tech vs. 21st century tech here!

More handwaves. What I was getting at, is simple. Walk the talk. The BAe team which developed the ALR-94 has demonstrated their competence, and the rest of the world acknowledges it. For you to come and state that Russia will do better because...well they are Russians...I like it (I like Russia) but can I accept it w/o proof, hardly.

you didn't get the irony in using the term "helpful", that's all. I was only saying that India did want to get involved in the design process, and the Russians duly said no way. That's all. Everything that happens (see above) and will happen in and around this project has till now met my prediction - India will remain a junior partner, do some build-it-yourself job and provide some money. Period.

You can hope so. But given you aint investing, you aint running the project and you aint even Russian and you are already wrong (about what India knows about the project and doesnt) - I can also tell you this, India will get its ROI one way or the other, thats the way it works. And frankly, the PAK-FA developers know this, and which is why they have been after Indian participation since 2001. Surprise!!
And the Indians- also told them this - get the MKI functional, we'll see if it meets our requirements - and then we'll talk. It did, everything went well, rest is all well and fine. Thats how things work.

The IAF does know what it needs to know - i.e. they haven't even seen the shape of the aircraft - and I know that for sure. Avionics are classified anyway. The Indians were shown the specs the Russian set for themselves.

Please, please dont make me laugh RSM. I can tell you sincerely, that all your braggadacio apart, you dont know anything that the folks at HAL and AHQ know. They have seen detailed presentations, they are drawing up plans for industrial participation and wait, they dont even know what the PAK-FA looks like! Even if that wasnt silly enough, frankly if you think that a customer as tough as India would commit Billions of $$ without even seeing the shape of the aircraft (how silly can your rhetoric get?) than please do pass me what you are smoking, because its luverly & I'd appreciate it. FYI, the Indian Def Min & AHQ both got detailed briefings, and HAL has been roped in along with the SA (Sci Advisor) to RM (Def Min), who represents the entire Indian def R&D. And about avionics, more hilarity - the Indians *have* to be told the specs because they intend to integrate the PAK-FA with their own perspective plans & India operates a variety of systems. And WHICH IS WHY, the Indian SA to RM recently revealed details about choosing which EW fit from Russian firms etc.

Of course, as any foreign customer would be.

Gee, which is why every foreign customer gets a deep license, makes their own weapons integration rigs and integrates their own items on their own, even without OEM involvement. ..which btw, is what India is doing.

No, just because the "oh so superior" Russian Tech has been denied to them and because they want to produce their own avionics suites with Russian backing.

Please dont make me grin again!! The Pastel RWR was rejected on grounds of obscolescence! And what the Russians offered for the MKI was also not good enough in terms of EW. So much so that the Elta 8222 SPJ was chosen! And it was remarked upon by non lesser than the State Auditor General. And the Indians, have never bothered with what Russia "denied to them" - as facts have been, the Russians have offered a lot, only that the Indians have chosen exactly what is capable enough. Which is why - FYI, even Algeria and Malaysia are using Indian processors for their MKIs.
And no, India is not producing its avionics suites with "Russian backing" - its doing so on its own, has had considerable success (and one prominent holdup) so far, and is retrofitting them to whatever it inducts. The benefits of the LCA program and non OEM upgrades.

I am sure India has plans galore (remember the Trishul?).

Well I dont know! Given that India has a far better track record of implementing its "plans" than post Soviet Russia (Chechnya anyone?), your jibe was rather self defeating! For all the tough talk the likes of you do, Russia supporters like me, are dismayed at how much remains to be done to bring Russia upto what it could be viz its conventional forces.

But would you please enlighten me what kind of ESM pod India is developing for the Krypton? I'm extremely interested. Because what I've heard is that the Russians don't want to to give away their AR tech and certainly not their RW recognition codes, especially since the Kh-31 electronic suite shares components with almost all Russian anti-radiation missiles (when talking about the "P" version), and some guidance components from Moskit and Granit ASMs. So India is getting what's India's getting, meaning a Russian electronic suite with Indian algorithms and threat profile databases.

Your attitude speaks for itself. In the world that you inhabit, the incompetent Indians cannot obviously make their own systems superior to what Mother Russia fields, or more tailored to their own needs! Please please wake up. The world isnt where you thought it was.

And FYI not "developing", but developed and validated for the Krypton and general ESM already. Kindly google for the DRDO Shiv/ Siva High Accuracy Direction Finding Module pod. Its intended for both ESM and cueing Krypton missiles fielded by the MKI. And India has no plans to introduce any Russian RWR on its MKIs - the R118 set from DRDO has already been selected as the standard fit. Not only does it provide better direction finding accuracy & several other features than the standard Russian RWRs, its far more flexible and has already gone three block upgrades. Oh btw, in case you dont think the pod exists:
http://img258.imageshack.us/my.php?i...scn0014eq1.jpg

Regards!

[Samudragupta]

FWIW, I suspect that when the PAK-FA finally gets into the IAF, it will probably be kitted with a (by then) MLU'd DARE/Elisra Mayavi EW suite.

That's probably not going to be a slouch by any measure; Mayavi ("The Illusionist") is being jointly developed for Israeli F-35s and India's LCA.

[Levsha]

I always thought the AN/ALR-94 EW fit on the F-22 was highly classified/secret, certainly as regards its technology and capabilities. I don't see how anyone can start making comparisons - especially not with the EW fit of an aircraft that hasn't even been built yet... shadow boxing indeed.

[over G]

You guys are going too far inside the ..."uncertainly lands"

More less like the LCA/Tejas radar/weight disscussions or the f-22 electronics stuff, one can discuss with some safety degree about power systems (radar basic concepts , EM concepts, etc), but when you go in to the ECM, procesing stuff, and fancy systems descriptions (XYZ-123, etc...) is really hard to say "im right!" even if you have the basic performance parameters...

Also...we already have 2 walltext warriors here....(garry and star -that actually ..should get a rest-)...i think we dont need more..

And with out news....the thread remains alive...

[star49]

RSM 55,

Thanks for your response. Didnt think what I wrote deserved histrionics of that caliber, but I remain to be surprised etc.

Hmm...I dont personally give a damn about nationalist claims from any nations supporters as long as they dont troll or flame, so I dont know why Indians would offend your sensitive nostrils so much? But given your claims about Russia and some obvious factual errors- I can very much say that you are doing some nationalist handwaving. "Mine is best, everyone else better watch out"...irrespective of whether you are Russian or somebody who worships Mother Russia being from "a lesser clime"..etc.

If BMW claims that only they can built best sports sedans (perfect 50/50 weight distribution on rear wheel drive) would you doubt that?

That your claims of Russias airborne EW suites outmatching whats available today in the west, elsewhere, are - hyperbole.
As simple as that.
Nothing more, nothing less.

Without Russians World will be still using 585 microprocessors and Sun Micro System would not have become best internet firm of 90s.

Basically, I am keenly aware of what Russia has achieved in terms of airborne suites for avionics, and while impressive, it is by no means worthy of irredeemable handwaving. No country is at that stage, and nor is Russia.

how can you aware of something which is not allowed for export and discuss? just try to find some information about deep drilling technology that Russians is developing for Arctic. Certain things are not even for discussion let alone for export.

More handwaves. What I was getting at, is simple. Walk the talk. The BAe team which developed the ALR-94 has demonstrated their competence, and the rest of the world acknowledges it. For you to come and state that Russia will do better because...well they are Russians...I like it (I like Russia) but can I accept it w/o proof, hardly.

BAe systems have demonstrated its competence? let them do it infront of Russians

You can hope so. But given you aint investing, you aint running the project and you aint even Russian and you are already wrong (about what India knows about the project and doesnt) - I can also tell you this, India will get its ROI one way or the other, thats the way it works. And frankly, the PAK-FA developers know this, and which is why they have been after Indian participation since 2001. Surprise!!
And the Indians- also told them this - get the MKI functional, we'll see if it meets our requirements - and then we'll talk. It did, everything went well, rest is all well and fine. Thats how things work.

Let first India get return on investment on Gorskhov/T-90/Brahmos/MKI projects than talk about PAK-FA. u are out of touch with reality.

And WHICH IS WHY, the Indian SA to RM recently revealed details about choosing which EW fit from Russian firms etc.

thats good point.

Gee, which is why every foreign customer gets a deep license, makes their own weapons integration rigs and integrates their own items on their own, even without OEM involvement. ..which btw, is what India is doing.

Not with Weopons and Radar.

Please dont make me grin again!! The Pastel RWR was rejected on grounds of obscolescence! And what the Russians offered for the MKI was also not good enough in terms of EW. So much so that the Elta 8222 SPJ was chosen! And it was remarked upon by non lesser than the State Auditor General. And the Indians, have never bothered with what Russia "denied to them" - as facts have been, the Russians have offered a lot, only that the Indians have chosen exactly what is capable enough. Which is why - FYI, even Algeria and Malaysia are using Indian processors for their MKIs.
And no, India is not producing its avionics suites with "Russian backing" - its doing so on its own, has had considerable success (and one prominent holdup) so far, and is retrofitting them to whatever it inducts. The benefits of the LCA program and non OEM upgrades.

Algeria/Malaysia is using what is certfied. They wont be getting anything related to Su-35 based on Su-30MK money.

Well I dont know! Given that India has a far better track record of implementing its "plans" than post Soviet Russia (Chechnya anyone?), your jibe was rather self defeating! For all the tough talk the likes of you do, Russia supporters like me, are dismayed at how much remains to be done to bring Russia upto what it could be viz its conventional forces.

India has far better track record? try to compare India internal problems with Russia. u will get the answer. I am not even going into Budget surpluses. and super efficient government system.
You are person in serious delusion trying to compare Russia with India. where even Japanes/Chinese cannot do what Russians can do.

www.uomz.ru
The structure of the enterprise is Central Design Bureau, service and extensive network of sales and engineering subsidiaries in the Russian regions, as well as in Switzerland, China and Belarus. Sci-tech potential UOMZ allows modern apparatus and equipment, certified by European standards of quality and satisfying the most demanding requirements of customers.
Currently the company operates 120 project teams, which employs more than 900 employees. . A more than 80 projects to develop and put into serial production of high-technology products both civilian and military purposes. . Growth in R & D annually account for about 30%. . As a result of timing of developing products for military use declined from an average of 5 years to 2.5 years, on civilian goods to 1 year

Your attitude speaks for itself. In the world that you inhabit, the incompetent Indians cannot obviously make their own systems superior to what Mother Russia fields, or more tailored to their own needs! Please please wake up. The world isnt where you thought it was.

India hasnt made anything superior to Russia as far as Aviation/electronics/software field. copy and paste does not work here.

And FYI not "developing", but developed and validated for the Krypton and general ESM already. Kindly google for the DRDO Shiv/ Siva High Accuracy Direction Finding Module pod. Its intended for both ESM and cueing Krypton missiles fielded by the MKI. And India has no plans to introduce any Russian RWR on its MKIs - the R118 set from DRDO has already been selected as the standard fit. Not only does it provide better direction finding accuracy & several other features than the standard Russian RWRs, its far more flexible and has already gone three block upgrades. Oh btw, in case you dont think the pod exists:
http://img258.imageshack.us/my.php?i...scn0014eq1.jpg

Regards!

what India do or dont is irrelevant as far as Russia is concerned. They got license for thales Catherine TI , Domocles pod and 3rd Generation night vision system from Sagem. Russian has all the money in the World to buy the stuff which they are interested but surely they wont be buying anything worth while from India.

[star49]

So why do you call for the destruction of Mig? They make other military aircraft and civilian aircraft too.

The reality is that there is no one single product except Su-27 derivatives or Mi-8 derivatives that could allow a focus on one type of aircraft to be built by one company and have the company survive with no other product. (and even then they could not continue for more than a few years before the world passes them by).

u cannot run a separate design bureau based on updating products for long term. MIG and Sukoi products have same role.

There are going to be 4 engine companies and many of their products will overlap. There may be areas where there is plenty of healthy competition. Traditionally in Helo engines with Mi-8s, Mi-14s, Mi-17s, Mi-24s, Mi-28s, Ka-32s, Ka-27s, Ka-29s, Ka-31s, Ka-50s and Ka-52s all potentially using the same engine there is still room for competition. The new VK-2500 engine offers superior performance, but it would be silly to think just because it offers better performance all current users will upgrade to the new engine. This means that production and improvement of the older engine still makes sense. The Russian Army is replacing Hinds with Havocs. They will certainly need new engines for the Havocs but for the upgraded Hinds they might save a little money by keeping the old engines.
With the engine used by the Mig-31 and the Il-76 the new PS-90A might be good for the Il-76 but will not fit the Mig-31. There are upgrades of the engine that improve thrust slightly, slightly improve fuel efficiency and greatly reduce engine noise to allow use at European airports where there are noise restrictions on cargo aircraft. The PS-90A is a better engine but it is about $3 million per engine. An improved basic model D30 that only costs $250,000 might still be a better choice for some uses... especially in aircraft with four engines.
With the number of new Helo engines required... not just 10-12 ton class engines like the VK-2500, but also light engines for the Mi-34 and the ANSAT and the Ka-60, and improved engines for the Mi-26 etc the will likely need a lot of factories and the work might be subcontracted out between the four main engine companies anyway simply to keep up with demand... certainly for the next few years when a lot of helos and transports need replacing.

whether it is 4 engine company or 10 there is no competition. VK-2500/VK-800/VK-1500/VK-3500 these are all Klimov products and they have monoply over Helicopter engines. Similar in new civillianengine projects like PS-12 Perm will have monoply.
Saturn/Salut are more verstile but still they have there own areas of strenghts.
MIG/Sukhoi products have similar role unless MIG comes up with UAVs.

[Arkali106]

F-22 production is drawing to a close. In several months a point in acquisition of long lead materials will be reached whereby ordering more F-22s will become much more expensive than if another batch was ordered say, today.

Does anyone imagine the Russians intentionally delaying the unveiling of the PAK-FA until after the F-22 becomes more expensive to re-order? With a new F-22 buy more difficult to swallow, F-22 rivals will have less competition than a monster US Air Force with 381 F-22s. And after the price increase you can probably count Japan out from ever owning F-22s. I imagine that if the Russians unveiled a reasonably capable and "scary" PAK-FA right now politicians in Washington would be much more willing to fund more F-22s.

[GarryB]

u cannot run a separate design bureau based on updating products for long term. MIG and Sukoi products have same role.

Not really the same role. Not every western country could afford an F-15, so a lot of them bought F-16s instead. In the same vein not every country that buys fighter aircraft from Russia will want the largest most expensive fighter they can get. They will not even likely use it the same as Russia uses them... Russia will likely use the Su-27BM as a fighter/interceptor mainly. The Mig-29s will possibly be used for shorter range missions/interceptions like for engaging Georgian UAVs...
Not every client needs or can afford a Flanker. MIG gives them a smaller potentially cheaper alternative. MIG also has a 5th gen fighter project and even if the Russian AF doesn't want it it might be good to have it for export for countries that can't afford a PAK-FA. Russia certainly will not want every country in the world operating PAK-FAs. Brazil, and India are not potential threats to Russia, but they might think twice about selling PAK-FAs to China any time soon... and when PAK-FAs are ready I doubt China will keep wanting new Flanker upgrades.

whether it is 4 engine company or 10 there is no competition. VK-2500/VK-800/VK-1500/VK-3500 these are all Klimov products and they have monoply over Helicopter engines.

There is no competition now, that does not mean there will continue to be no competition in the future. If there were 2 engine companies or 1 engine company there would be less scope or even no competition at all. It doesn't make sense to have 20 engine companies any more than it makes sense to have 2. 4 is probably the best compromise. There are enough new types of engines required and in production to keep 4 companies busy and self funded. Remember that Klimov might design engines but as that article clearly states they don't have the production facilities to actually make them. Their first step will be to create such facilities... once they are in fully production the funding they get from those sales and any export sales they might be able to get will help fund upgrades of their existing products and new products and of course pay for the upgraded production facilities. They might invest it into making 5th generation type engines for helos or even tanks. Equally the engine company that makes the engines for the Il-76 and Mig-31 might decide to have a go at making helo engines. Many of the engines currently being developed for light helos are also being employed in light transport aircraft for example. The 2,500hp TV7 series engines for the Il-114 for example. The 1,500hp engine used on the Il-112 and Ka-60 etc etc.

[star49]

Not really the same role. Not every western country could afford an F-15, so a lot of them bought F-16s instead. In the same vein not every country that buys fighter aircraft from Russia will want the largest most expensive fighter they can get. They will not even likely use it the same as Russia uses them... Russia will likely use the Su-27BM as a fighter/interceptor mainly. The Mig-29s will possibly be used for shorter range missions/interceptions like for engaging Georgian UAVs...
Not every client needs or can afford a Flanker. MIG gives them a smaller potentially cheaper alternative. MIG also has a 5th gen fighter project and even if the Russian AF doesn't want it it might be good to have it for export for countries that can't afford a PAK-FA. Russia certainly will not want every country in the world operating PAK-FAs. Brazil, and India are not potential threats to Russia, but they might think twice about selling PAK-FAs to China any time soon... and when PAK-FAs are ready I doubt China will keep wanting new Flanker upgrades.

How many countries can afford MIG-35 let alone 5th generation MIG? Dont count MIG-29K prices as they belong to 2004. and i have read Sukhoi president interview his further interested in selling licenses to China. I am sure there will be export model of PAK-FA for every country. It is not 90s anymore. Russia has alot of money and access to technology. they can built things faster and better for themselves. I can even see that when Civillian aircraft production reaches certain point they may ban Boeing/Airbus overflights over Russian terrotory. Airlines will have to use Russian aircrafts.

There is no competition now, that does not mean there will continue to be no competition in the future. If there were 2 engine companies or 1 engine company there would be less scope or even no competition at all. It doesn't make sense to have 20 engine companies any more than it makes sense to have 2. 4 is probably the best compromise. There are enough new types of engines required and in production to keep 4 companies busy and self funded. Remember that Klimov might design engines but as that article clearly states they don't have the production facilities to actually make them. Their first step will be to create such facilities... once they are in fully production the funding they get from those sales and any export sales they might be able to get will help fund upgrades of their existing products and new products and of course pay for the upgraded production facilities. They might invest it into making 5th generation type engines for helos or even tanks. Equally the engine company that makes the engines for the Il-76 and Mig-31 might decide to have a go at making helo engines. Many of the engines currently being developed for light helos are also being employed in light transport aircraft for example. The 2,500hp TV7 series engines for the Il-114 for example. The 1,500hp engine used on the Il-112 and Ka-60 etc etc.

Russia has already made production planes upto 2025. they may change alittle bit but not change enough that Saturn/Salyut/Perm all of sudden made helicopter engines or Perm make new fighter engine. Thats not going to happen.

[1MAN]

RSM 55,

















For every statement you make - I can point out several facts in the other area, namely that the Zaslon @ 81, was anything bar what we have today, and what Russia is aiming for today, and what others have also shot for.

Well when you find a non-Russian Radar that can: "detect a 0.3 m2 RCS cruise missile at 35 nautical miles range."
You let me know o.k.

[Schorsch]

had to quote an earlier thread since it is now locked.
what do you think of the Su-47 and MiG 1.42 (or 1.44 whatever it was). Probably not on the smaller side but has a bit more "stealthy" features than the standard flanker.

Both aircraft seem to be stuck in the test stage. In order to develop a new fighter it needs consistent effort on all fronts. A new stealthy fighter is useless without the right avionics (rather put the new avionics into the old aircraft). In the end, Russia was unable to afford any new fighter program in the 1990, only able to keep the capability by financing prototyping and modernization efforts, interestingly only for one manufacturer.

We'll see how the PAK-FA finally looks like, I think today's best fighter is about 10-12t empty and a careful compromise between stealth and cost. Something like a Eurofighter with some more stealth features integrated (while the problem with stealth is that you can hardly go half the way: either you reduce RCS by at least 90% (rather 99%) or you can skip that totally).

[RyukyuRhymer]

Both aircraft seem to be stuck in the test stage. In order to develop a new fighter it needs consistent effort on all fronts. A new stealthy fighter is useless without the right avionics (rather put the new avionics into the old aircraft). In the end, Russia was unable to afford any new fighter program in the 1990, only able to keep the capability by financing prototyping and modernization efforts, interestingly only for one manufacturer.

We'll see how the PAK-FA finally looks like, I think today's best fighter is about 10-12t empty and a careful compromise between stealth and cost. Something like a Eurofighter with some more stealth features integrated (while the problem with stealth is that you can hardly go half the way: either you reduce RCS by at least 90% (rather 99%) or you can skip that totally).

Hi schorsch, thanks for the reply!

although from what you said, wouldn't the Rafale design fit your description.. since its roughly the size and capability of the Eurofighter with more attention on lowering its RCS than the Typhoon. Or perhaps a larger Mako

[ink]

Seems to me that the problem, for the US and Russia, with a stealthifed Eurocanard is that its legs are bound to remain short... Both the USAF and the RuAF need a long-legged fighter (for slightly different reasons of course).

[Schorsch]

Hi schorsch, thanks for the reply!

although from what you said, wouldn't the Rafale design fit your description.. since its roughly the size and capability of the Eurofighter with more attention on lowering its RCS than the Typhoon. Or perhaps a larger Mako

Possibly. None of the present fighters is a bad choice. Rafale is a very good aircraft, as is the Typhoon. The Gripen is perfect for smaller operators. The F-22 the dominant long-range fighter, and the Super Hornet the do-it-all but nothing really perfect aircraft. The F-16 is still a very good aircraft and fulfills all duties a smaller country could ask from a combat aircraft.
The Asian fighters possibly cannot compete and are primarily meant as starting point for future developments.

The Russians have the ability, the key question is: did they set the requirements right so that they produce an aircraft that fits the conflicts of the future.

[Sens]

Hmm.....Interesting Nick. I guess we will have to wait and see, until the thing flies, well ..... actually not just fly but when the Russians decide to declassify some of the specs.

On a side note:

The 1st flight of the PAK-FA scheduled sometime next year (2009). The F-22 1st flew in late 1997 and the YF-22 1st flew in late 1990! (MiG-1.44 in 2000, Su-47 in 1997).

It would be surprising/disappointing if the Russians are incapable of producing a 5th gen fighter by 2009 which atleast in some ways superior to the YF-22.

No, after the collapse of 1990. It will be enough, when it does challenge the air-dominance of the F-22/F-35 in some way. Much to the pleasure of LM and much to the displeasure of the tax-payers.

[Sens]

When the Russians are clever, they will skip something like a "F-22" and aim for something like a "F-35" at all, which is the future yardstick.