Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

RuAF News and development Thread part 15

Collapse
X
Collapse
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (0 members and 2 guests)
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • paralay
    Rank 5 Registered User
    • Aug 2005
    • 1418

    A clean sheet project, single engined (NK-32 sibiling, why not?)
    A "Su-27" fighter with one engine? Who needs it?

    Click image for larger version

Name:	NK-32.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	191.7 KB
ID:	3676304

    Comment

    • sepheronx
      Senior Member
      • Jun 2015
      • 320

      Im curious. Do Russian MoD make orders for new jets based upon the capabilities of the manufacturer to produce x amount for y years? I am asking is because I noticed no new orders for Su-35, Su-30SM and Su-34's. I am assuming it is because current orders are not completed, correct?

      Comment

      • haavarla
        Rank 5 Registered User
        • Dec 2008
        • 6715

        Well yes and no. It is also a matter of allocated(aviable) funding. Unless you believe JSR nonsens that VKS will have tousands of fighters flying around..

        I'm speculating, in the short and medium term future, there will be some 200-250 Su-34 total and about 400 new Flankers. Russian MoD order small(compare to US) and try to stretch the production out in hope of getting export orders as well. That way they can have the Prod lines open as long as possible.

        I have no hope of seeing VKS replentish their Post Cold War fleet size of Mig-29, Su-24 and Su-27S/P fleet with a 1/1 Ratio of new Su-34 and Flankers. Its simply not doable with Russia's Defense budget.

        In the long term future, depending on how the PakFa program evolve, we might see further Flankers and Su-34 orders. The current Su-27SM fleet is starting to get a bit long in the thooth.
        Last edited by haavarla; 19th August 2017, 12:59.
        Thanks

        Comment

        • verbatim
          Rank 5 Registered User
          • Aug 2010
          • 261

          Originally posted by paralay View Post
          A "Su-27" fighter with one engine? Who needs it?

          [ATTACH=CONFIG]255346[/ATTACH]
          The same opting for Mig-29 as primary fighter aircraft, I suppose.

          My point is that Mig-29 has been judged by many as intrinsecally inferior to Su-27, no matter wich upgrade could be squeezed in.

          Main driver behind its selection should be ease of support, upfront costs, serviceability.

          In a word, what usually identify a "light fighter", something Mig-29 clearly is not.

          Obviously, being twin engined is only part of the characteristics being not in line with "being a light fighter".

          Still, a single engined "Mig-29", better to say a single engined multirole fighter in the class of Mig-29, could have far more appeal by potential and actual users, VVS included.

          And speaking of Mig-29 performances in a single engined airframe, that means a very powerful engine, well above even Al-31 iterations used in the Su-27.

          So, yes: I think that a fighter's engine derived from NK-32 would have made sense, and any upgrade to it would have generated some backport to the original bomber's engine variant as well.

          And customers would have benefited some savings servicing one engine instead of two.

          Comment

          • Marcellogo
            Rank 5 Registered User
            • Jun 2014
            • 1840

            @sepheronx

            It's mainly a question about how the procurement is made, Russsians usually order a batch at time, instead of pulling out total production figures for a program that could last 20+ years.
            During the periodical defense procurement program, covering usually 10 years but overlapping one with the other every five the MOD declare what are the needs for each category of military item before than specify with what specific item they would cover it, so it can happen that at the beginning they produce a modernized legacy plane like the Su-27SM3, after some time they start producing a totally new version of it like the Su-35 and in the end of the same ten years period they complete the PAK-FA program and begin to mass produce Su-57 instead.
            Or it happen, like it was, that the new gen program get a little late and they decide to modernize a batch of (not so) oldSu-27P into the SM3 standard to fill the gap.

            Comment

            • paralay
              Rank 5 Registered User
              • Aug 2005
              • 1418

              My point is that Mig-29 has been judged by many as intrinsecally inferior to Su-27, no matter wich upgrade could be squeezed in.
              MiG-29 - in its final form, this is the "average fighter". Same as F/A-18A, Eurofighter or Rafale. I agree that instead of a twin-engine fighter, it was necessary to do with one AL-31F engine.
              It's strange that Pogosyan thinks AL-31F is not reliable enough for a single-engine aircraft

              Click image for larger version

Name:	J-10a_zhas.png
Views:	1
Size:	1.25 MB
ID:	3676308
              Last edited by paralay; 19th August 2017, 12:33.

              Comment

              • haavarla
                Rank 5 Registered User
                • Dec 2008
                • 6715

                The debate about Russia fielding a singel engine fighter vs twin Engine light fighter is been discussed in detail in the past, and i'm for one is fed up with it.

                One one side you have the Usual suspect claiming Russia VKS are idiots that continue with the Mig-29 linage instead of developing a new singel engine 5th Gen fighter.
                The same side also claim they(Russians) cannot do this, imo lacks the knowhow.

                The other side says; - We don't need a Singel Engine fighters for our troops.

                I think the latter side is more correct than the first one.
                When you factor in the economy of Russia, It would be outright stupidity to at this stage favor a new Singel Engine fighter.
                Much better to stay its course with what you know, the MIG's.

                With the now heavier Mig-35 that somewhat overlaps the Flankers, is it optimal? Hardly..
                But Mig-35 will not be procured in Numbers anyway. VKS seems to build their core around their heavy and very heavy assets. Flankers, su-34 and Mig-31's.

                But IF the Mig-35 can get modernized engine aka RD-33mkm, better AESA and perhaps equally important a dedicated hardpoint for new sniperpod, or even better get it internally.
                You then have a jet fighter that have a decent range with + 9 Hardpoints. and some of them rigged for heavy stuff.

                Its not that idiotic is it..
                Last edited by haavarla; 19th August 2017, 13:06.
                Thanks

                Comment

                • verbatim
                  Rank 5 Registered User
                  • Aug 2010
                  • 261

                  Originally posted by paralay View Post
                  MiG-29 - in its final form, this is the "average fighter". Same as F/A-18A, Eurofighter or Rafale. I agree that instead of a twin-engine fighter, it was necessary to do with one AL-31F engine.
                  It's strange that Pogosyan thinks AL-31F is not reliable enough for a single-engine aircraft

                  [ATTACH=CONFIG]255350[/ATTACH]
                  I agree, Mig-29 is a "medium" fighter, with the original sin of being conceived as a point defence fighter.

                  I.e. a highly specialized tool developed for a very narrow set of requirements born in the 70ies.

                  Fast forward to 90ies and such a fighter become a strange beast: neither a cheap one, nor a top class one.

                  Hell, even some cash strapped third world country has preferred to purchase refurbished Su-27s instead of any Mig-29 variant.

                  Again, a fighter with costs and complexities of an heavy fighter, without at least similar performances has little to hope from the export market.

                  VVS too is still supporting Mig only on a political ground, this is my belief.

                  So, what kind of "medium" fighter could make sense?

                  My two cents: one offering savings on selected and costly items, but sporting electronics on par with heavy fighters.

                  Trading a little operating range for a smaller and lighter airframe, but with enough electric power generation, thermal dissipation capacity and internal volumes to employ the same full fledged electronic suites (radar, FCS, EW, ECM, IRST, datalink) of a top class fighter.

                  Think of a Saab 37 Viggen on steroids, with a little larger operating range (let's say 40% more then vanilla Mig-29A on internal fuel only) radar and electronics on the same class of Su-27, and a ridicully enormous dry thrust, enough to compete on higly subsonivc regimes with any other aircraft employing afterburners.

                  So I'm here speaking to have a single engine's dry thrust far exceeding a couple of Klimov RD-33, and a electrical power generating capability close or eequal to a couple of Al-31F.

                  Then, it would means maybe just a couple of potential candidates, an NK-32 derivative or a Soyuz R-79V-300 derivative as engine of choice.

                  Comment

                  • Scar
                    Senior Member
                    • Nov 2015
                    • 682

                    Sad news. The first chief-commander of RuAF, General of the Army Petr Deinekin, has passed away today at the age of 79.((


                    R.I.P. to this man who was in the head of RuAF in the most hard and grim times in its history.

                    Comment

                    • Levsha
                      Rank 5 Registered User
                      • Jan 2006
                      • 2856

                      Sad news. The first chief-commander of RuAF, General of the Army Petr Deinekin, has passed away today at the age of 79.((


                      R.I.P. to this man who was in the head of RuAF in the most hard and grim times in its history.
                      I remember him. As C-in-C he paid a visit to the USAF in the US in the early Nineties and flew the B-1B. RIP.

                      Comment

                      • JSR
                        JSR
                        Rank 5 Registered User
                        • Aug 2011
                        • 4982

                        Originally posted by paralay View Post
                        MiG-29 - in its final form, this is the "average fighter". Same as F/A-18A, Eurofighter or Rafale. I agree that instead of a twin-engine fighter, it was necessary to do with one AL-31F engine.
                        It's strange that Pogosyan thinks AL-31F is not reliable enough for a single-engine aircraft

                        [ATTACH=CONFIG]255350[/ATTACH]
                        Su-24 and Su-25 twin engine or single?. With twin engine airframe can be made stronger for repeated stress of loads over long period.
                        MIG35 nose also bigger and provide more power from two engines.

                        Comment

                        • JSR
                          JSR
                          Rank 5 Registered User
                          • Aug 2011
                          • 4982

                          Originally posted by haavarla View Post
                          Well yes and no. It is also a matter of allocated(aviable) funding. Unless you believe JSR nonsens that VKS will have tousands of fighters flying around..

                          I'm speculating, in the short and medium term future, there will be some 200-250 Su-34 total and about 400 new Flankers. Russian MoD order small(compare to US) and try to stretch the production out in hope of getting export orders as well. That way they can have the Prod lines open as long as possible.

                          I have no hope of seeing VKS replentish their Post Cold War fleet size of Mig-29, Su-24 and Su-27S/P fleet with a 1/1 Ratio of new Su-34 and Flankers. Its simply not doable with Russia's Defense budget.

                          In the long term future, depending on how the PakFa program evolve, we might see further Flankers and Su-34 orders. The current Su-27SM fleet is starting to get a bit long in the thooth.
                          It is not about extending production line but incorporating changes after Syria compaign. It will slow down the procurement .

                          Comment

                          • paralay
                            Rank 5 Registered User
                            • Aug 2005
                            • 1418

                            By the way, Peter Deinekin, one of the participants in the "bombing mafia". He made a decision to remove all single-engine aircraft (MiG-23, MiG-27 and Su-17) from the arsenal.
                            As a result, remained in the projects:
                            - the attack aircraft Su-137
                            - light fighter MiG 4.12
                            - combat trainer C-54, C-55 and C-56

                            Comment

                            • Arihant
                              Rank 5 Registered User
                              • Apr 2017
                              • 440

                              Nice photo essay from Sokol.

                              https://t.co/mOb96vNFZ0
                              Shows MiG-31BM modernization .


                              The original Saturn AL-41F for the MFI project developed around 40000 lbf wet thrust. 28 AL-41F was said to have been built for the MIG 1.44 program.
                              Inspite of having such an engine why did Sukhoi go for the uprated AL-41F1 based on the AL-31F as an interim option for the PAK-FA ?Why didnt they use the AL-41F instead?

                              And NPO Saturn and MMPP Salyut could have developed a new variant based on the original AL-41F which would have utilised new generation materials instead of going for a clean sheet design- Izdeliye 30 ??
                              Last edited by Arihant; 19th August 2017, 17:52.

                              Comment

                              • sepheronx
                                Senior Member
                                • Jun 2015
                                • 320

                                @marcellogo

                                That tends to make sense as the Su-35S was still undergoing trials until recently so they rushed it a tad bit and I think they realized that method isn't the best. Su-35S I supposed to undergo some changes since Syria campaign and rumors of Su-30SM1 would indicate that it also fixes the issues probably seen during the Syrian campaign. So until those are ready, they will have smaller number of orders. Contrary to what haavarla proclaims, Russias defense budget is well within the capabilities of fielding a large airforce since Russian jets are relatively cheap compared to competition. I don't see them fielding lots and lots of Su-57's but I do see them fielding a rather 1-1 Su-35S, Su-30's and MiG-35's to that of current aircraft fleet excluding Su-24 which they said they wont replace 1:1 ratio of.

                                I guess it is wait and see what will happen after the current orders are completed.

                                Comment

                                • TR1
                                  TR1
                                  http://tiny.cc/tp8kd
                                  • Oct 2010
                                  • 9826

                                  SM1 is not an official designation AFAIK, and it deals mostly with the earlier plans to replace foreign components with Russian ones.

                                  Unrelated pics:



                                  sigpic

                                  Comment

                                  • TR1
                                    TR1
                                    http://tiny.cc/tp8kd
                                    • Oct 2010
                                    • 9826

                                    Il-112V is making steady progress:







                                    sigpic

                                    Comment

                                    • sepheronx
                                      Senior Member
                                      • Jun 2015
                                      • 320

                                      Good to know TR1. Replacing the foreign components is the most ideal solution.

                                      Last I checked though, from recent sale of Su-35 to the MoD, it was about $27M per aircraft. How much for Su-30SM? If it is more expensive, then I doubt the need for so many Su-30SM's in service and purchase far more Su-35's.

                                      Comment

                                      • haavarla
                                        Rank 5 Registered User
                                        • Dec 2008
                                        • 6715

                                        @seph
                                        The Su-30SM partly happend due to Su-35S needed time to clear bugs. But also as a mean to field matured new fighters into service quickly. Both Flankers will see further order, but the limitation is there. There were reports about fighter pilot shortage a few year ago and that step were taken to deal with this. Don't think you can fix this on a few years notice..

                                        @arihant
                                        The AL-41F has a larger diameter. It simply does not fit on Flankers.
                                        Thanks

                                        Comment

                                        • sepheronx
                                          Senior Member
                                          • Jun 2015
                                          • 320

                                          @Haavarla

                                          Of course, hence why they are introducing woman as pilots too. I can see woman flying various forms of planes from jets to transport. But overall, I see that the shortage would then be in line to increasing number of Su-35S' compared to Su-30SM which is a 2 seater. A Su-30SM is a great plane but by all measures, I would rather bet the Su-35S is a far better jet especially once the targeting pod is in use for Su-35.

                                          Then there is MiG-35. I am still unsure how that jet will fit in with the airforce. So far, it seems MiG-35 has an integrated air to ground pod like system, has option for AESA and all this other good stuff, but ultimately, still not sure how it fits in.

                                          Comment

                                          Unconfigured Ad Widget

                                          Collapse

                                           

                                          Working...
                                          X