Russian Weapons & Military Technology

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Post Reply
Maria
BRFite
Posts: 212
Joined: 15 Aug 2020 13:50

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Maria »

Is it my eyes or does that T-72 look very TFTAish/ARMATAish...
Igorr
BRFite
Posts: 697
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13
Contact:

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Igorr »

Maria wrote:Is it my eyes or does that T-72 look very TFTAish/ARMATAish...
There is a mix of vehicles in the video, including the last serial produced version of T-72, Armata, Sprut-SD etc. The APS Arena-2 was tested on the T-72 .
Igorr
BRFite
Posts: 697
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13
Contact:

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Igorr »

A new Russian 57mm gun for armored vehicles has been tested. At 27:45.
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5383
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Manish_P »

Teaser of new Single engined fighter is creating buzz on Twitter. To be unveiled at MAKs 2021.

Teaser shows an Indian looking pilot as well :D
Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1769
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Khalsa »

Image

The Russian Single Engine Fighter

More details @
https://hushkit.net/2021/07/14/first-co ... n-fighter/
andy B
BRFite
Posts: 1676
Joined: 05 Jun 2008 11:03
Location: Gora Paki

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by andy B »

Khalsa wrote:Image

The Russian Single Engine Fighter

More details @
https://hushkit.net/2021/07/14/first-co ... n-fighter/
A long time ago....in a cocktail bar in europe...a dejected x32 went to drown her sorrows after lossing the jsf comp. As the dry vodka martinis tallied up she eventually ran into a hunky pak-fa. Some more martinis and a long night and voila we have the genesis of a new addition to the fighter aviary :mrgreen:
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5383
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Manish_P »

Here is the teaser trailer...

My untrained eyes can barely make out a shape reflected in the water around the 0:17 mark

PS: Note how the Indian-looking fella is kept at the center of the group :wink:

rajsunder
BRFite
Posts: 855
Joined: 01 Jul 2006 02:38
Location: MASA Land

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by rajsunder »

Manish_P wrote:Here is the teaser trailer...

My untrained eyes can barely make out a shape reflected in the water around the 0:17 mark

PS: Note how the Indian-looking fella is kept at the center of the group :wink:

Now the journos who get paid by russians will write articles dissing LCA. They will invent parts not used in LCA to say that they do not work properly.

May be the not so dumb presstitutes will say that we are still working on a 4th gen design when everyone else is working on 6th gen.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by brar_w »

What happens with the MiG-35, which the Russian Air Force still hasn't ordered in serious numbers? Looking at the RuAF's fighter fleet, there does not appear to be a very larger recapitalization need for a smaller, single engine fighter. So then export is driving this? If so, who is going to pay up and then wait a decade or more to take deliveries (and the risk of delays and cost overruns associated with that)? Customers in Africa? Iran maybe? I don't think this going anywhere, any time fast unless the Russian MOD decides to pay a lot of money to see its development through testing. With readily available MiG-29's, and Su-30's, Chinese and Western aircraft, I don't see there being a very large market that wants to fund research.
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14331
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Aditya_V »

AMCA will arrive before the single engined Sukhoi
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12187
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Pratyush »

Can the Russians even afford to put this platform in service in the absence of foreign partners who would be ready to foot the development bill.
Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Vips »

Khalsa wrote:Image

The Russian Single Engine Fighter

More details @
https://hushkit.net/2021/07/14/first-co ... n-fighter/
Now just to find a sucker to fund this 4.99 Generation paper plane :lol:
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by brar_w »

andy B wrote:
A long time ago....in a cocktail bar in europe...a dejected x32 went to drown her sorrows after lossing the jsf comp. As the dry vodka martinis tallied up she eventually ran into a hunky pak-fa. Some more martinis and a long night and voila we have the genesis of a new addition to the fighter aviary :mrgreen:
Intakes feel more like what Boeing pitched for the ATF competition back in the late 80s. X-32 was probably a continuation of that but this image reminded me of the ATF intake more..

Image
kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6278
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by kit »

is it just me., or maybe the angle the pic was taken., the wing area looks a tad small compared to the fuselage ?... actually it reminds me of the Iranian "5th (6th?) gen fighter" :mrgreen:
Image
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5383
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Manish_P »

Some chinese style sneak peek 'photos'

Apologies for the large image (don't know how to resize them)

Image

From the rear?
Image

Shape Comparison (not to scale)

Image
John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3447
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by John »

Needless to say Pak-fa days are numbered they won't kill it out right but drastically reduce the development on it and the amount being procured. In other hand Mig-35 is done for.
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5383
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Manish_P »

^ And the proposed Mach 3+ replacement of the MiG 31 will (if it happens) probably be an evolutionary upgrade.. and not the hyped hypersonic fighter it is being made out to be
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by brar_w »

John wrote:Needless to say Pak-fa days are numbered they won't kill it out right but drastically reduce the development on it and the amount being procured. In other hand Mig-35 is done for.
I not totally sure of that though we'll know more next week. TAS has claimed that it has been a completely internally funded program with just some preliminary design work done by UAC and nothing more, and more importantly, nothing from the Russian MOD budget. IF this is true, then you are looking at a minimum 12 years to operationalization if this is indeed going to be an all round 5th gen design with modern production processes and production line. The RuAF is already behind the eight ball given the SU-57 development delays and needs to get going with inducting 5th generation platforms which it will begin shortly. Plus, the SU-57 is more suitable for their need and is a proper Flanker replacement given range and payload considerations which they need to account for given the size of Russia. If they are going to count on exports to get this project off the ground, then who is going to bank roll it? And who would want to do so if there isn't a higher commitment from the Russian MOD? I'm also trying to figure out when was the last completely new combat aircraft that Russia designed, produced, tested and delivered without the active participation of the Russian armed forces. This is also a major barrier.

I don't think anyone is going to knock out a true 5th gen fighter purely for export w/o host nation financial and operational backing in which case we would have to wait to see how much the Russian MOD has even committed to this project and what maturity has that resulted in. The last thing the RuAF would want to do is split investment between this and the PAKFA especially when they have had to cut PAKFA numbers and move the schedule to the right considerably. But if UAC/Sukhoi thinks this being smaller, single engine, and cheaper has more export potential then the RuAF interests could have been set aside by the MOD in favor of industrial base.
Manish_P wrote:^ And the proposed Mach 3+ replacement of the MiG 31 will (if it happens) probably be an evolutionary upgrade.. and not the hyped hypersonic fighter it is being made out to be
Is the MiG-31 even in production? If not then they may just overhaul and upgrade existing aircraft to keep them going for another 15 or so years.
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5383
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Manish_P »

brar_w wrote:
Manish_P wrote:^ And the proposed Mach 3+ replacement of the MiG 31 will (if it happens) probably be an evolutionary upgrade.. and not the hyped hypersonic fighter it is being made out to be
Is the MiG-31 even in production? If not then they may just overhaul and upgrade existing aircraft to keep them going for another 15 or so years.
No. I was referring to some hyped reports of the supposed 'MiG 41' which was posted by Philip (incidentally haven't seen him for some time now) and discussed some time back in the Int Aero thread (page 52) - posting.php?mode=quote&f=3&p=2491161
John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3447
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by John »

brar_w wrote:I not totally sure of that though we'll know more next week. TAS has claimed that it has been a completely internally funded program with just some preliminary design work done by UAC and nothing more, and more importantly, nothing from the Russian MOD budget. IF this is true, then you are looking at a minimum 12 years to operationalization if this is indeed going to be an all round 5th gen design with modern production processes and production line.
I agree We will see happens next week but IMO while PAK FA meets Russian AF requirement once all functionality is developed it is not well suited for export. They have realized that by now Russia military simply doesn't have $$ to buy it in large nos and sustain it's development.

Only chance they have is to pivot and develop more export focused AC which is cheaper and more "stealthier" (take a page out of Chinese playbook make it look stealthy with paint). They can also get Russian military to buy a few dozen to replace mig-29s. Cheap enough they can line up orders easily of few dozen from countries like Egypt, Iraq, Algeria, Indonesia etc
Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5128
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Manish_Sharma »

Pratyush wrote:The argument is about the threat posed by the system. The point being made is about the counters being available against the threats.

A big fat bomber or a fast missile can easily be intercepted when detected at sufficient ranges. Especially when the approach vector is well known and understood.
A supersonic bomber like Tu 160 isn't easy to intercept. Its 4 huge engines and boatloads of fuel allows it to go supersonic for long period, compared to fighters and their missiles.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by brar_w »

John wrote:
brar_w wrote:I not totally sure of that though we'll know more next week. TAS has claimed that it has been a completely internally funded program with just some preliminary design work done by UAC and nothing more, and more importantly, nothing from the Russian MOD budget. IF this is true, then you are looking at a minimum 12 years to operationalization if this is indeed going to be an all round 5th gen design with modern production processes and production line.
I agree We will see happens next week but IMO while PAK FA meets Russian AF requirement once all functionality is developed it is not well suited for export. They have realized that by now Russia military simply doesn't have $$ to buy it in large nos and sustain it's development.

Only chance they have is to pivot and develop more export focused AC which is cheaper and more "stealthier" (take a page out of Chinese playbook make it look stealthy with paint). They can also get Russian military to buy a few dozen to replace mig-29s. Cheap enough they can line up orders easily of few dozen from countries like Egypt, Iraq, Algeria, Indonesia etc
That sums up nicely why Sukhoi wants this and explains the whole marketing around it. But in the 2020s there is now competition, and competition that is investing in real designs, and real production lines. Like KF-21, and AMCA so a lot of the market is spoken for (Indonesia is partnered on the KF-21, and IAF is committed to AMCA). This leaves a bunch of smaller Flanker and Fulcrum users. Those won't have the pockets to finance this program and the RuAF would have to commit to it in way more numbers than just a token order to replace a few dozen Fulcrums. For example, a token order of MiG-35's wasn't enough to move turn that platform into an export success. Its competition with much stronger domestic backing has done better internally and externally.

If you look at combat aircraft programs around the world, they all have deep pockets that are financing them and that aspect is relatively assured. Tempest has UK and Italy with Sweden as a lesser partner. AMCA has an IAF requirement which is substantial for the decades to come. Korea is backing the KF-21 along with Indonesia. FCAS has French, German and Spanish support. I don't think you can run a program with a bunch of very small users financing its development. The risk for running out of cash is serious. So I don't expect it to go anywhere UNLESS the Russian MOD is fully backing it with equal or better backing than what it is giving to the PAKFA program. Difficult to see the RuAF supporting it over the Su-57 which suits its modernization better but the MOD may well overrule them given industrial interests. That is what I'll be interested in watching on this. Once you set aside all the PR stuff, what tangible investments are made into the platform and what the milestones are. The clock is ticking. LM will deliver its 1000 F-35 by 2023, KAI KF-21 expects to be operational by late 2020's / early 2030s, and the Euro 4+ gen birds are now selling in more markets than previously.
Last edited by brar_w on 17 Jul 2021 20:17, edited 1 time in total.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by brar_w »

Zephyr (Japan) has done a graphic based on the tarp covered mockup -

Image
John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3447
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by John »

brar_w wrote:Tempest has UK and Italy with Sweden as a lesser partner. AMCA has an IAF requirement which is substantial for the decades to come. Korea is backing the KF-21 along with Indonesia.
Oh yea forgot that Indonesia is part of KF-21 but looks like KF-21 is running into issues and no where close to first flight. If Russia can get this up in the air soon and show that it has internal hard points it can leapfrog KF-21.

They do need a big partner they probably need Brazil, India or Saudi Arabia partnership, I fear they can easily form a join partnership with private company in India and do full tech transfer (something they refused with PAK FA) . Under the guise of “Make in India” they can get $$ into this and seriously hamper LCA/MWF/AMCA.
rajsunder
BRFite
Posts: 855
Joined: 01 Jul 2006 02:38
Location: MASA Land

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by rajsunder »

brar_w wrote:Zephyr (Japan) has done a graphic based on the tarp covered mockup -

Image
I think the Russian jet looks more like a F-35, also it has a EOTS on the bottom side.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by brar_w »

John wrote:Oh yea forgot that Indonesia is part of KF-21 but looks like KF-21 is running into issues and no where close to first flight. If Russia can get this up in the air soon and show that it has internal hard points it can leapfrog KF-21.
The KF-21 is a real program, with real industrial participation, agreements, MOU's, funding, production facility, flight test plan, and real milestones for the ROKAF and Indonesian air force. Unless Sukhoi previews a real demonstrator it really doesn't compare since what they are presenting is just a pitch. You can bet that the KF-21 will run into issues, ALL programs do. But at least they have a serious Air Force in the ROKAF behind it, and have a multi national group of industrial players involved. So it will continue to make progress. So if they think they can pull Indonesia away with a paper proposal when the country is a partner on a very real project then that looks to me like an uphill task. Now add a couple of billion in Russian MOD funding, and a commitment from the RuAF to buy 100-200 then things start to look different. Still possibly not enough to pull a committed partner away from the KF-21, but now it begins to be competitive with other nations looking to modernize but not having access or enough funds to finance something themselves.
John wrote:If Russia can get this up in the air soon and show that it has internal hard points it can leapfrog KF-21.
Yes which would mean some serious financial backing, and a mature ready for production design. That's why we'll know whether anyone is putting serious money behind this project by the close of the air-show or if all this was just some PR play by UAC to see if they can get a foreign partner to pay for bringing it to life.
John wrote:They do need a big partner they probably need Brazil, India or Saudi Arabia partnership, I fear they can easily form a join partnership with private company in India and do full tech transfer (something they refused with PAK FA) . Under the guise of “Make in India” they can get $$ into this and seriously hamper LCA/MWF/AMCA.
They would need a Brazil or India as a serious financial backer. KSA seems unlikely since they operate larger, medium - large / heavier platforms and have pretty much phased out small fighters from its inventory. Plus KSA will have access to western equipment in the upgraded Typhoons, and even F-35 in the future. Heck either the UK or France would be happy to get them on their Tempest or SCAF projects so why would they want to go with a single engine light fighter? And add the risk of sanctions (depleting all the main systems of their military) and it is unlikely to be worth it for them.
Not for an unproven design. If anything they would sign up for the PAKFA instead since cost is not a concern for them and it can directly replace both their F-15's in the future.

Perhaps Qatar and Turkey could join. Qatar doesn't care about fleet diversity and how that may impact its readiness, training, doctrine etc. And they are in close partnership with Turkey and are even moving some of their Rafales there for training. Turkey is now firmly out of the JSF program, and its industry will be totally out of the supplier base by end of the year. But they do have their TFX which, despite the unlikely path to induction, they still keep on pursuing. Perhaps it will be an off ramp from the TFX which isn't really going anywhere and they could merge the two programs to save face?
rajsunder wrote:
brar_w wrote:Zephyr (Japan) has done a graphic based on the tarp covered mockup -
I think the Russian jet looks more like a F-35, also it has a EOTS on the bottom side.
The intake is closer to this design than it is to the F-35. Yes it could have an embedded targeting system. the mockup appears to have an intake that is closer to what Zephyr sketched up -

Image
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5383
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Manish_P »

How good is this Zephyr guy? Does he (they) have design experience or are they kind of like fan art guys...

I ask because their rendering looks close to some fan rendering of a future MiG single engine fighter...

IMHO I think the hushkit rendering seems to be more probable.
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5383
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Manish_P »

Well.... after looking at the below photo it seems that the Zephyr rendering might be more closer (especially about the intakes)

Image
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by brar_w »

A video of the mockup has become public. It looks/appears a lot smaller than the F-35/KF-21/AMCA class. Perhaps that was deliberate to target an unaddressed part of the market.
https://twitter.com/200_zoka/status/1416751162645172227

Image
hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4633
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by hnair »

brar_w wrote:A video of the mockup has become public. It looks/appears a lot smaller than the F-35/KF-21/AMCA class. Perhaps that was deliberate to target an unaddressed part of the market.
https://twitter.com/200_zoka/status/1416751162645172227

Image
Intakes look closer to the Hushkit one and that would be one wee radar on the adorable button nose

And indeed, it looks closer in size to Gagan/Indranil’s art of a potential “Silent LCA” than the bigger F35

Post

Image
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by brar_w »

Would be interesting to see who they sign up for it and if the Russian MOD is fully backing it financially (and operationally). If you chase an unaddressed part of the market you always run the risk of not doing well because there is usually a good reason why it has remained unaddressed (most users don't design/require replacements to aircraft they operate but rather take a mission focused decision that is forward looking) . I think South Korea looked at a single engine, light stealth fighter but changed that to a medium fighter instead and later added a twin engine design because they couldn't get a large enough single engine with the requisite performance and export clearance. Stealth aircraft demands larger than normal internal fuel and some sort of internal weapon carriage. Both those things put constraints on size and weight which correlates with cost. To sell, something like a light stealth fighter has to be at a $50 Million price point and with enough performance to at least meet air-defense needs for the next couple of decades if not more (Ground attack etc). But so far, be it the Japanese, Koreans, ADA/HAL, or the Turkish, almost all have gone for a medium sized configuration and the same appears to be true for the two 5+ generation European programs..

Image
Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5350
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Cain Marko »

The BIG question that comes to my mind is - What engine are they planning to use? Not sure the 117s of the Su-35 will do the trick for a stealthy (even if lighter) single engined bird. My guess is the Pakfa's izd 130 would be the definitive version at 16.5 kgf AB thrust. Empty, I expect the bird will weigh upwards of 10-11tons. So they would need a pretty powerful driver.
Thakur_B
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2404
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Thakur_B »

The new Russian bird looks beautiful. Hope the program sees eventual success.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by brar_w »

Here's a more detailed picture than the composite posted earlier. Still looks small so I wonder if the RuAF can even meet the MiG-29/35/K replacement need with this or if it is deliberately sized smaller to keep costs low and to attract export demand.

Image
Cain Marko wrote:The BIG question that comes to my mind is - What engine are they planning to use? Not sure the 117s of the Su-35 will do the trick for a stealthy (even if lighter) single engined bird. My guess is the Pakfa's izd 130 would be the definitive version at 16.5 kgf AB thrust. Empty, I expect the bird will weigh upwards of 10-11tons. So they would need a pretty powerful driver.
It makes sense to base an operational Checkmate version on the Izdeliye 30 for commonality sake. But then there is some risk in taking a new, still in development and testing engine and putting it straight into a single engine fighter so they may decide to power the earlier versions with the AL-41. I suppose it all depends when they want this thing built which will be based on whether they are successful in generating internal or foreign demand.
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21233
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Prem »

https://www.yahoo.com/news/russia-repor ... 51027.html
Russia reports successful test launch of hypersonic missile
MOSCOW (AP) — The Russian military reported another successful test launch of a new Zircon hypersonic cruise missile on Monday.
Russia's Defense Ministry said the missile was launched from an Admiral Groshkov frigate located in the White Sea, in the north of Russia.
The ministry said the missile successfully hit a target more than 350 kilometers (217 miles) away on the coast of the Barents Sea.Russian President Vladimir Putin has said the Zircon missile would be capable of flying at nine times the speed of sound and have a range of 1,000 kilometers (620 miles).An earlier test launch took place in October, on Putin's birthday. Russia's leader hailed it as a “big event” for the country.
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5383
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Manish_P »

Thakur_B wrote:The new Russian bird looks beautiful. Hope the program sees eventual success.
What a sea change of difference in reception from just a decade ago !

I remember those heady days in BRF, just before the release of the PAK-FA.. that thread would move so fast as we eagerly waited for pics and details :)

I guess that it is our growing confidence of our capabilities post Tejas, and partly some disappointment in the slow progress on the PAK-FA, which is behind this rather luke-warm reception to this new Russian bird.

Hope it lives up to it's moniker and doesn't end up as a Stalemate :(
RishiChatterjee
BRFite
Posts: 125
Joined: 19 Jun 2021 09:15

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by RishiChatterjee »

https://twitter.com/ale_ducat/status/14 ... 1276103682
At 1st I thought this was a design by Yakovlev Design Bureau... Given the design & that it would be to compete with F-35, would we expect this jet to be a STOVL?.. It has the shape of one.

Image
Image
Image
Image
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by brar_w »

RishiChatterjee wrote:At 1st I thought this was a design by Yakovlev Design Bureau... Given the design & that it would be to compete with F-35, would we expect this jet to be a STOVL?.. It has the shape of one.
I doubt it will "compete" with the F-35. It appears (lets wait for actual specs on designed performance) that it is catering to a requirement for a lighter fighter which will put it in a different range/payload to the F-35A which has an internal fuel range of more than 2,800 km in air-air loadout, and about 2,500 km in air-ground configuration which is closer to the heavies than it is to light or even medium fighters. If it is actually built, I suspect it will primarily interest those who can't get or can't afford the F-35 or those existing Su-27 and MiG-29 family users who don't require a larger, heavier and more expensive fighter and want the replacement to be smaller and less expensive. Just having a PAKFA could potentially force that installed base to focus on Chinese or other designs that were perhaps smaller and more affordable compared to the Su-57 which is just about the largest stealth fighter anyone is currently building (and we know building to the "ATF" like requirements is expensive, and complex which is not the best for export).
Last edited by brar_w on 20 Jul 2021 17:00, edited 2 times in total.
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5383
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Manish_P »

brar_w wrote:... If it is actually built, I suspect it will primarily interest those who can't get or can't afford the F-35 or those existing Su-27 and MiG-29 family users who don't require a larger, heavier and more expensive fighter.
Brar_w ji, Also those who can't afford Rafale's :wink:
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by brar_w »

Yes basically any western fighter that is in the $70-$100 Million range fly-away (you can expect Rafale or Typhoon to be in this price point through their remaining production life). If Sukhoi can build these at volume and achieve a fly away unit cost that is closer to $50 Million then this has the potential to do well. This is easier said than done because mission systems do cost a fair bit on modern aircraft and anyone in the market for a true stealth fighter would demand these type of things (LPI/LPD, computing power, data links etc). However, with stealth aircraft you do tend to see a dip in range/payload if you set weight as a constraint (and weight directly impacts cost) so it may be trading fuel for a decent enough multi-role IWB or Vice versa . I'm waiting for the MTOW specs and of course any MOU's or signed customers or RuAF commitment. Without that it is just a PR exercise.
Post Reply