Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

RuAF News and Development Thread part 11

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
Collapse
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • haavarla
    Rank 5 Registered User
    • Dec 2008
    • 6699

    Not so. Both Rafale And EF can carry the same total weight of weapons as the Su-35S, even though these figures are more teoretical than practical.

    And i even thing the Rafale can carry a big club(NC?) on its center hardpoint.

    Of cource the question is what usefull range each jet get with the same amount of ordinance..

    Not sure about the inner wing Hardpoints on Su-35S though. Can it mount Brahmos there?
    Thanks

    Comment

    • Tu 160
      Rank 5 Registered User
      • Jan 2013
      • 157

      Rafale and Typhoon catalog might show it carry the same weight but it will be to a much shorter distance,also remember that Su 35 thrust output of its 2 engines is 63,800 lbf is almost twice of Rafale which is 34,000lbf for its 2 engines so the much higher thrust of the Su 35 propelling a much larger fighter the effect of the same amount of external ordinace both air to air or air to ground whould have a much more negative impact on the the Rafale or Tyhoon performance in speed,climb,acceleration,manuverability and range and thats a huge advantage for the Su 35.
      Su 35 much more powerful engines and larger size allow a much larger and more powerful radar,ECM,jammers to be fitted and powered. Rafale and Typhoon much weaker engines do not have the power to operate a radar of the size and power like on the Su 35 or Pakfa.
      I also forgot to mention Su 35 is also good deal faster than the Rafale and Typhoon. Su 35 is said to be capable of supercruise at Mach 1.3, can the Rafale supercruise at all,with its weak engines it whould be hard to belive?
      Su 35 can carry the Kh31 just as the Su 33 so it might be able to carry the Brahmos-Russian designation Onyx as well.
      Originally posted by haavarla View Post
      Not so. Both Rafale And EF can carry the same total weight of weapons as the Su-35S, even though these figures are more teoretical than practical.

      And i even thing the Rafale can carry a big club(NC?) on its center hardpoint.

      Of cource the question is what usefull range each jet get with the same amount of ordinance..

      Not sure about the inner wing Hardpoints on Su-35S though. Can it mount Brahmos there?
      Last edited by Tu 160; 23rd January 2013, 02:17.
      TU 160 STATISTICALLY IS THE LARGEST,HEAVIEST AND MOST POWERFUL COMBAT AIRCRAFT AND BOMBER EVER BUILT

      Comment

      • MadRat
        Rank 5 Registered User
        • Aug 2006
        • 5033

        Be careful how you compare things, the Su-35 is largely a paper tiger at this point while the Eurocanards you downplay are both deployed in numbers and used in the real world.

        EJ 200 and M-88 are rated at their public specifications, which can be exceeded in wartime. The Rafale can essentially hot rod the motors at least 10% more than the published specs by using overrides. I don't think Typhoon allows the pilot to do so. But it has always been the case that both engines were measured conservatively.

        The Al-31 is a well understood engine by intelligence experts. You don't override the baseline Al-31 settings and for all it's ruggedness in maneuvers it requires much more hands on maintenance. It also breaks when it is abused.
        Go Huskers!

        Comment

        • Tu 160
          Rank 5 Registered User
          • Jan 2013
          • 157

          They are deployed in numbers only because they are fighters introduced earlier with older systems. There are currently 7 production Su 35 but 12 more are to be built this year and by the end of the year Su 35 should pretty much be operational and Su 35 is not a paper tiger as all its systems have been developed and functioning. And also Rafale and Typhoon were never prooven in any real air to air combat and never operated against a force with a working air defence network,Lybia air defence is a joke its mostly derilict and not working.

          First of all the Su 35 does NOT use a baseline AL 31 engine in case you didn't know,Su 35 uses a highly modernized and vastly improved AL 31 called 117S which has better acceleration,FADEC, and each engine produces 31,900 lbf in afterburner and 19,400lbf dry thrust thats more power in dry thrust than what the Rafale produces with its 17,000 lb engine in afterburner even if the Rafale overides its engines to 19,000lb. The highly modernized 117S can also be overriden to give %10 more thrust so cut the BS,not to mention overriding engines to give more thrust than what is standard operation is stupid as it severelly decreases engine reliability and service life and no one does that. The Rafale and Typhoon little Mig 29 sized engines don't even remotelly come close to generating 31,900 lbf of thrust no matter how you overide them you don't seem to get that?

          I also forgot to mention that Su 35 has thrust vectoring and Rafael and Typoon obviously don't. Rafael and Typoon manuverability in sustained turn rate is comparable to baseline Su 27 and less manuverable in instantenious turn rate to basic Su 27. Su 35 with thrust vectoring and 8,700 lbf more thrust than baseline Su 27 is much much more manuverable than the baseline Su 27 or the Rafael or the Typhoon. There are many videos of Su 35 901 displaying its supermanuverability the Rafale and Typhoon don't even remotelly come close to the manuverability of the Su 35.
          Originally posted by MadRat View Post
          Be careful how you compare things, the Su-35 is largely a paper tiger at this point while the Eurocanards you downplay are both deployed in numbers and used in the real world.

          EJ 200 and M-88 are rated at their public specifications, which can be exceeded in wartime. The Rafale can essentially hot rod the motors at least 10% more than the published specs by using overrides. I don't think Typhoon allows the pilot to do so. But it has always been the case that both engines were measured conservatively.

          The Al-31 is a well understood engine by intelligence experts. You don't override the baseline Al-31 settings and for all it's ruggedness in maneuvers it requires much more hands on maintenance. It also breaks when it is abused.
          Last edited by Tu 160; 23rd January 2013, 04:08.
          TU 160 STATISTICALLY IS THE LARGEST,HEAVIEST AND MOST POWERFUL COMBAT AIRCRAFT AND BOMBER EVER BUILT

          Comment

          • Rii
            Rii
            Senior Member
            • Oct 2010
            • 3449

            Originally posted by Tu 160 View Post
            I also forgot to mention Su 35 is also good deal faster than the Rafale and Typhoon.
            [citation needed]

            Comment

            • MadRat
              Rank 5 Registered User
              • Aug 2006
              • 5033

              You do realize the orders for Su-35 are dictated by engine production limitations more than budget concerns. They will not hot rod Al-31in any form, even it's new 117 offshoots. Su-35 has a big problem with complexity and that is going to be its vulnerable heel. The Typhoon and Rafale will always out number it and they have a plethora of spare parts. Russian aviation doesn't enjoy much in the way of spare parts.

              As for the raw energy delta, the Eurofighters begin with lighter relative airframes. They carry the big external fuel tanks so that they can dump them in an emergency. They also use a2a missiles more potent than the problem riddled R77. Battle proven missiles. What is the last proven Russian aam, R27?
              Go Huskers!

              Comment

              • Tu 160
                Rank 5 Registered User
                • Jan 2013
                • 157

                Well Su 35 is no slower than the Su 27,Su 35 is capable of Mach 2.3+ while the Rafale and Typhoon are capable of Mach 1.8+
                Su 35 is said to be capable of supercruise at M1.3
                What is the Typhoon supercruise speed and can Rafale supercruise at all?
                Originally posted by Rii View Post
                [citation needed]
                TU 160 STATISTICALLY IS THE LARGEST,HEAVIEST AND MOST POWERFUL COMBAT AIRCRAFT AND BOMBER EVER BUILT

                Comment

                • paralay
                  Rank 5 Registered User
                  • Aug 2005
                  • 1411

                  Originally posted by haavarla View Post
                  Trident@
                  About the Su-34 vs Su-35S cost. Do we have anything to go by?
                  Su-30MKI
                  for the Russian Air Force - 1.2 billion rubles / $ 40 million
                  for the Indian Air Force - 2.6 billion rubles / $ 87 million

                  Su-34
                  Russian Air Force to 0.9 - 1.1 billion rubles / $ 37 million

                  Comment

                  • Rii
                    Rii
                    Senior Member
                    • Oct 2010
                    • 3449

                    Originally posted by Tu 160 View Post
                    Well Su 35 is no slower than the Su 27,Su 35 is capable of Mach 2.3+ while the Rafale and Typhoon are capable of Mach 1.8+
                    Su 35 is said to be capable of supercruise at M1.3
                    What is the Typhoon supercruise speed and can Rafale supercruise at all?
                    The leaked Swiss evaluation had Typhoon recorded at M1.4 without afterburner. No doubt this is under near-optimal circumstances as we can assume the Su-35 figure is.

                    I'm not aware of any hard numbers for Rafale, but given the report here of Mach 0.9 at 50% throttle and full ordinance load I think we can assume that it has at least limited supercruise capability in less demanding configs.

                    For all that Su-35 is an impressive aircraft the basic airframe design is still a generation behind Typhoon/Rafale/Gripen and this is reflected across the flight regime. If you like I'll grant that Rafale probably isn't any faster on military power than Su-35 and likely has inferior top speed and similar acceleration characteristics -- accomplishing by design elegance what Su-35 does with raw horsepower. In the case of Typhoon, though, I'd put good money on it flying rings around Su-35 -- and anything else bar F-22/T-50.
                    Last edited by Rii; 23rd January 2013, 04:43.

                    Comment

                    • Tu 160
                      Rank 5 Registered User
                      • Jan 2013
                      • 157

                      Actually its the Rafale and Typhoon and Gripen are a generation behind the Su 35 in aerodinamic design and Su 35 is aerodynamically superior in many respects,for one it does not have those drag causing canards, the Rafale and Typhoon are little more than 2 engined Ye 8 without horizontal stabilizers,Gripen also like Ye 8 with side intakes thats about all for its aerodinamic inovation. Ye 8 first flew in 1962 by the way. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan-Gurevich_Ye-8 The eurocanards are very old fashioned their airframe designs are of the 1960 design phylosophy,Su 35 design is more modern which is a combined wing-body lyfting body design which is also what the Pakfa is. Gripen is a light fighter and is a little Mig 21 sized toy with 1 F18 engine compared to the Su 35 and you say its aerodinamically superior why because its much smaller and less capable lol what rubbish.
                      I also highly doubt that figure for the Rafale.
                      If you think that the Typhoon or Rafale can fly rings around Su 35 which has thrust vectoring you must be either truly deluisional or have never seen a video of Su 35 demonstrating its supermanuverability. I suggest you look up some vidoes of Su 35 in action.
                      Originally posted by Rii View Post
                      The leaked Swiss evaluation had Typhoon recorded at M1.4 without afterburner. No doubt this is under near-optimal circumstances as we can assume the Su-35 figure is.

                      I'm not aware of any hard numbers for Rafale, but given the report here of Mach 0.9 at 50% throttle and full ordinance load I think we can assume that it has at least limited supercruise capability in less demanding configs.

                      For all that Su-35 is an impressive aircraft the basic airframe design is still a generation behind Typhoon/Rafale/Gripen and this is reflected across all kinematic characteristics. If you like I'll grant that Rafale probably isn't any faster on military power than Su-35 and likely has inferior top speed and similar acceleration characteristics -- accomplishing by design elegance what Su-35 does with raw horsepower. In the case of Typhoon, though, I'd put good money on it flying rings around Su-35 -- and anything else bar F-22/T-50.
                      Last edited by Tu 160; 23rd January 2013, 05:00.
                      TU 160 STATISTICALLY IS THE LARGEST,HEAVIEST AND MOST POWERFUL COMBAT AIRCRAFT AND BOMBER EVER BUILT

                      Comment

                      • Tu 160
                        Rank 5 Registered User
                        • Jan 2013
                        • 157

                        engine production limitations lol,Saturn plant has excellent production capabilities and like I said 12 Su 35 are to be made in 2013 this year and production rate is going to increase next year,there is a current order for 48 and another order of 48 is planned so at least 96 Su 35 are to be made. Like I said no air force hot rods engines as it severly decreases service life and engine reliablity,engines are operated by what their official stats are. Su 35 so far has not any serious problems in reliability and Typhoon and Rafale have quite a few reliability problems so no advantage in that area to them.
                        ahaha lol,Russia dosen't use the R77, Russia is currently developing a R 77M based missle which is vastly improved from original R77 with 68 mile range vs 53 miles of old R77 and better manuverability called the RVV SD,im sure you are not aware of that still as also you think Su 35 is powered by baseline Su 27 engines,go figure.
                        R27 of which there are many variants is still a very capable and potent missle no worse then the current euro missles. An active radar guided version of the R27 was introduced way back in 1989/1990 thats before the amraam. The current euro missles are hardly battle prooved and inferior to R27 in many ways including range and manuverability,did you mean that old crap euro missles that are now pretty much obsolete used in Gulf War 1 or where else?
                        Originally posted by MadRat View Post
                        You do realize the orders for Su-35 are dictated by engine production limitations more than budget concerns. They will not hot rod Al-31in any form, even it's new 117 offshoots. Su-35 has a big problem with complexity and that is going to be its vulnerable heel. The Typhoon and Rafale will always out number it and they have a plethora of spare parts. Russian aviation doesn't enjoy much in the way of spare parts.

                        As for the raw energy delta, the Eurofighters begin with lighter relative airframes. They carry the big external fuel tanks so that they can dump them in an emergency. They also use a2a missiles more potent than the problem riddled R77. Battle proven missiles. What is the last proven Russian aam, R27?
                        Last edited by Tu 160; 23rd January 2013, 05:19.
                        TU 160 STATISTICALLY IS THE LARGEST,HEAVIEST AND MOST POWERFUL COMBAT AIRCRAFT AND BOMBER EVER BUILT

                        Comment

                        • haavarla
                          Rank 5 Registered User
                          • Dec 2008
                          • 6699

                          Originally posted by paralay View Post
                          Su-30MKI
                          for the Russian Air Force - 1.2 billion rubles / $ 40 million
                          for the Indian Air Force - 2.6 billion rubles / $ 87 million

                          Su-34
                          Russian Air Force to 0.9 - 1.1 billion rubles / $ 37 million
                          Is this in 2013 figures?
                          And is this for the Super Su-30 or from an earlier MKI deal?

                          Originally posted by Rii View Post
                          The leaked Swiss evaluation had Typhoon recorded at M1.4 without afterburner. No doubt this is under near-optimal circumstances as we can assume the Su-35 figure is.

                          I'm not aware of any hard numbers for Rafale, but given the report here of Mach 0.9 at 50% throttle and full ordinance load I think we can assume that it has at least limited supercruise capability in less demanding configs.

                          For all that Su-35 is an impressive aircraft the basic airframe design is still a generation behind Typhoon/Rafale/Gripen and this is reflected across the flight regime. If you like I'll grant that Rafale probably isn't any faster on military power than Su-35 and likely has inferior top speed and similar acceleration characteristics -- accomplishing by design elegance what Su-35 does with raw horsepower. In the case of Typhoon, though, I'd put good money on it flying rings around Su-35 -- and anything else bar F-22/T-50.
                          Just keep in mind that the Su-35S has passed the first State Trials, which include both Engines and structural performance on the Airframe.
                          The Second State Trials are primaly for Weapons and system software(new weapons testing). Perhaps a bit more work on debuging Radar and other self protection sensors as well. It will finnish in late 2014, early 2015.

                          So what ever the 117S engines performance is, its parameters(thrust, TBO and life hours) are allready carved in stone, and by the official figures, it is impressive both on Mil power and AB power.
                          Last edited by haavarla; 23rd January 2013, 05:26.
                          Thanks

                          Comment

                          • haavarla
                            Rank 5 Registered User
                            • Dec 2008
                            • 6699

                            Originally posted by Tu 160 View Post
                            engine production limitations lol,Saturn plant has excellent production capabilities and like I said 12 Su 35 are to be made in 2013 this year and production rate is going to increase next year,there is a current order for 48 and another order of 48 is planned so at least 96 Su 35 are to be made. Like I said no air force hot rods engines as it severly decreases service life and engine reliablity,engines are operated by what their official stats are. Su 35 so far has not any serious problems in reliability and Typhoon and Rafale have quite a few reliability problems so no advantage in that area to them.
                            ahaha lol,Russia dosen't use the R77, Russia is currently developing a R 77M based missle which is vastly improved from original R77 with 68 mile range vs 53 miles of old R77 and better manuverability called the RVV SD,im sure you are not aware of that still as also you think Su 35 is powered by baseline Su 27 engines,go figure.
                            R27 of which there are many variants is still a very capable and potent missle no worse then the current euro missles. An active radar guided version of the R27 was introduced way back in 1989/1990 thats before the amraam. The current euro missles are hardly battle prooved and inferior to R27 in many ways including range and manuverability,did you mean that old crap euro missles that are now pretty much obsolete used in Gulf War 1 or where else?
                            The Upgrade or evolution road map of older missile design like R 77(RVV SD), and never mind the R27, is not really something to brag about..
                            The Euro, MBDA Meteor, however is impressive.

                            By now one would have thought Russia would have designed completly new A2A missiles..?
                            Last edited by haavarla; 23rd January 2013, 05:34.
                            Thanks

                            Comment

                            • dionis
                              Rank 5 Registered User
                              • Sep 2004
                              • 1878

                              Originally posted by haavarla View Post
                              The Upgrade or evolution road map of older missile design like R 77(RVV SD), and never mind the R27, is not really something to brag about..
                              The Euro, MBDA Meteor, however is impressive.

                              By now one would have thought Russia would have designed completly new A2A missiles..?
                              They have. All classified for now and slated for the PAK-FA.

                              This was in the news numerous times.

                              I'd suspect the same weapons will find their way onto the Su-35S, maybe even Su-34 and Su-27SM.

                              Comment

                              • MSphere
                                Senior Member
                                • Feb 2010
                                • 8983

                                Originally posted by paralay View Post
                                Su-30MKI
                                for the Russian Air Force - 1.2 billion rubles / $ 40 million
                                for the Indian Air Force - 2.6 billion rubles / $ 87 million

                                Su-34
                                Russian Air Force to 0.9 - 1.1 billion rubles / $ 37 million
                                One needs to be careful with the quoted numbers, most of the time they are not directly comparable. Do we know what exactly the Indian deal consists of?

                                I can remember the first batches of Indian AF Su-30MKI (Mk.1 standard without the Hyderabad upgrade) were sold from Irkutsk at $37.5mil a pop. HAL built Sukhois were cheaper ($22.5mil, most likely flyaway)

                                Comment

                                • paralay
                                  Rank 5 Registered User
                                  • Aug 2005
                                  • 1411

                                  Originally posted by haavarla View Post
                                  Is this in 2013 figures?
                                  And is this for the Super Su-30 or from an earlier MKI deal?
                                  Su-30 "Super Flanker" for India $ 92.5 million apiece.

                                  Comment

                                  • haavarla
                                    Rank 5 Registered User
                                    • Dec 2008
                                    • 6699

                                    Ouch.. sorry, i find that very hard to believe.
                                    Surly it must contain other stuff like surpluss of engines and weapons?
                                    Last edited by haavarla; 23rd January 2013, 17:25.
                                    Thanks

                                    Comment

                                    • paralay
                                      Rank 5 Registered User
                                      • Aug 2005
                                      • 1411

                                      http://www.defence.pk/forums/indian-...dia-visit.html

                                      Comment

                                      • Trident
                                        Rank 5 Registered User
                                        • May 2004
                                        • 3965

                                        Originally posted by haavarla View Post
                                        Trident@
                                        About the Su-34 vs Su-35S cost. Do we have anything to go by?
                                        Yes - logic. Although I suspect that's not the answer you are looking for, it'll do in absence of any compelling evidence which would contradict the conclusions from a comparison of typical cost drivers.

                                        The burden of proof is certainly on anybody who, against all conventional wisdom, argues that the Su-34 is cheaper.
                                        sigpic

                                        Comment

                                        • Trident
                                          Rank 5 Registered User
                                          • May 2004
                                          • 3965

                                          Originally posted by paralay View Post
                                          Su-34
                                          Russian Air Force to 0.9 - 1.1 billion rubles / $ 37 million
                                          I don't buy that for one second - that figure must exclude one or more significant items that on the other hand are included in the Su-30 price, such as development cost or production plant re-tooling. The Su-34 took *much* longer to develop, will likely never achieve a comparable production run, *no* funding was provided by foreign customers, it features *far* deeper structural changes compared to the basic Su-27, is noticeably larger physically and required an upgrade to the manufacturing plant for series production. It just isn't going to be cheaper on a like-for-like basis.

                                          Would you believe somebody who told you the F-15SA was cheaper than the F/A-18E (even allowing for carrier capability and that in this case it's the SH that is further removed from the basic airframe)?
                                          Last edited by Trident; 23rd January 2013, 18:51.
                                          sigpic

                                          Comment

                                          Unconfigured Ad Widget

                                          Collapse

                                           

                                          Working...
                                          X