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

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Manish_P »

Their PR video showed whom they think to be the target Customers.

They still seem to consider India as their best bet. Even after the FGFA saga.

It is another thing that we seem to be quiet confident about the doability of the AMCA (be it a different class) and will not even look at this bird unless the RuAF first operates quite a good number of them, giving us a good idea of the capabilities (and issues) and they also have a very well defined future growth path for it.

As you have rightly pointed out, the MTOW, internal fuel capacity, the final engine etc details will be the key. Let's see how soon the Russians come out with the specifics or how cagey or ambiguous they choose to remain.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by brar_w »

Manish_P wrote:Their PR video showed whom they think to be the target Customers.

They still seem to consider India as their best bet. Even after the FGFA saga.
I think the PAKFA is still going to be appeal more to the IAF once it is fully developed and exists as a mature platform in numbers. That assumes that the IAF even wants to eventually replace the Su-30 with a heavy stealth fighter decades from now. One could argue that that mission (IAF specific requirements) can just as easily be met with a combination of AMCA and something like the Ghatak. Plus all those UAV's, small to large UCAV's and loyal wingmen types will consume resources and the manned fleets will be the bill payers (this is true the world over)

This one is aimed at the very lower end of the market and quotes coming from the design team seem to be quite optimistic in terms of project deliverables and timelines - $30 Million a pop (you probably can't even get a MiG-35 equipped with an AESA at that price) and available for production in 5.5 years. That is too good to be true and one can go back and compare that to what was being claimed of the SU-57 back in the 2010 timeframe to recalibrate some of the expectations. That said, A $50 Million - $60 Million price tag with a 2030 delivery will still appeal to a much larger customer base than the heavy SU-57 the export variant of which could easily cost them 2x to buy and that much more to operate. They were never going to be able to sell the Su-57 to many of the FSU Flanker/Fulcrum operators or even some of the smaller users in Africa, S America and Asia. This at least keeps them in the competition as the MiG-29 and Su-30 programs give way to something more modern. There was a risk of Chinese trying to corner that market with its smaller aircraft 10-20 years from now. Though how much of those combat aircraft are replaced with cheaper UCAV's remains to be seen.

But all that assumes steady and primary source of funding from the Russian MOD so that would be something worth tracking.
Last edited by brar_w on 20 Jul 2021 21:30, edited 1 time 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:...
This at least keeps them in the competition as the MiG-29 and Su-30 programs give way to something more modern. There was a risk of Chinese trying to corner that market with its smaller aircraft 10-20 years from now. Though how much of those combat aircraft are replaced with cheaper UCAV's remains to be seen.
Agreed that's the risk they run if they don't operate it themselves in numbers which a) will give buyers confidence in a more finished product and b) will get the scale to help bring the costs down.

Their existing customer base could well buy cheaper non-stealthy 4+ or even 5- aircraft from the aggresively selling Chinese. Then there is South Korea who seem to be keen for a share in this field.

Overall the Russians do really seem to have their work cut out for them, to retain their existing customers. Very interesting times ahead.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by brar_w »

Manish_P wrote:
Agreed that's the risk they run if they don't operate it themselves in numbers which a) will give buyers confidence in a more finished product and b) will get the scale to help bring the costs down.
That's the key. One lesson that stealth fighter manufacturing has shown is that there is a steeper learning curve to get to affordability and quality (ECOs). Look at the JSF learning curve in the first 10 production lots (cost) and then compare to something like the Super Hornet which began hitting deliverables (flyaway cost, delivery dates, milestones etc) much sooner. So this probably requires a 100+ fielded aircraft in the Russian AF to be a long term success before they iron out the glitches in testing and mfg quality and begin meeting cost and schedule in a produciton assembly line. If I'm a wealthy AF (like UAE or KSA) i probably won't even touch it w/o that upfront commitment though smaller users don't have a choice.
Manish_P wrote:Their existing customer base could well buy cheaper non-stealthy 4+ or even 5- aircraft from the aggresively selling Chinese.
The threat isn't just from the J-10's, and J-31's of the world. IMHO, the longer term threat is from the much cheaper, and still somewhat effective (and growing at a faster clip than a manned combat aircraft program) drones whether they are from China, Turkey or even Russia. I see a lot of the older Flanker and Fulcrum users, seeing what UCAV's today and 10 years from now are going to be capable of, simply buying themselves a fleet of those instead of a more expensive manned platform. Not that they will completely replace the bottom end of the market but it will likely diminish it size. So while traditional thinking may say that Russia needs both Su-57 and this light fighter to cover its export demand from existing Flanker and Fulcrum users, it may well be that the Orion UAV is the best bet for them in the future. Difficult to see a sizable chunk of the FSU 4 generation fighter replacement market not being taken over by Russian, Chinese or Turkish and other combat drones. The PAKFA already caters to the very high end of that replacement market.
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5383
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Manish_P »

Oh, yes. Completely skipped thinking about the quality assurance and maintenance parts in the excitement of the new launch. Maybe partly because I somehow don't expect the design parameters to be as tight or the tolerance levels to be as low as the US F-35. But still Mea Culpa.

With regards to the drones, yes I agree about part by part replacement of the inventory by UCAVs but I am quite a bit over conservative about the time lines, especially for the middle to lower end of the Client spectrum (Africa certainly but even S America). But then both the pace of technology advance and lowering of costs (for that which the latest replaces) has surprised me time and again..

I wonder then if it would have been better if the Russians had approached designing this bird from the outset as optionally manned. Would the design criteria for such an aircraft then be very different?
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by brar_w »

Optionally manned is all the buzz these days but it doesn't really make a lot of sense on a light fighter aircraft. You pay the design penalty of having 1 or 2 humans in there and then don't get any of it back when it is flying unmanned. On larger aircraft, like bombers, having that capability doesn't impact design as much (not as high a penalty). The only place where optionally manned has marginal utility is for UAV and other applications where you need to have a human fly it through restricted space and have it reach point from which it will fly unmanned ops (like that Northrop UAV prototype). But with modern SAA technology and airspace deconfliction that utility isn't really that important. If you've designed in the ability of a pilot to perform combat missions you've made all the tradeoffs of that and have passed up on all the advantage of designing a truly unmanned supersonic aircraft.
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5383
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Manish_P »

Understood. A succinct explanation. Thanks.
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5383
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Manish_P »

Some initial release info

(perhaps Gurus might be able to compare with the Su 30 / Su 57 and compute some back of envelope guess-timations about the MTOW, thrust?)

Putin hails Russia's air power as new fighter goes on view
The prospective warplane, marketed under the project name Checkmate, has one engine and is designed to be smaller and cheaper than Russia’s latest Su-57 two-engine stealth fighter, also built by Sukhoi. It can fly at a speed of 1.8-2 times the speed of sound, has a range of 3,000 kilometers (1,864 miles) and a payload of 7,400 kilograms (16,300 pounds), the jet's makers said.

Russia's Deputy Prime Minister Yuri Borisov voiced hope that the new fighter could be sold to India, Vietnam and African nations, adding that foreign customers are expected to order at least 300 such aircraft. Borisov noted that one foreign customer he didn't name has already expressed a strong interest in the new jet.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by brar_w »

Manish_P wrote:(perhaps Gurus might be able to compare with the Su 30 / Su 57 and compute some back of envelope guess-timations about the MTOW, thrust?)
Too generic and not many specifics included. For example, only range, top speed and payload but not the combination of what payload it can take and how far. Also, I believe nothing on internal fuel or whether it will be able to carry external tanks. I think given its just a marketing effort at the air show we might have to wait for the Russian MOD to provide some official data if and when they sign up for the project. Right now it appears to be nothing more than what Sukhoi seems to be pitching primarily for export.
rajsunder
BRFite
Posts: 855
Joined: 01 Jul 2006 02:38
Location: MASA Land

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by rajsunder »

bakis sure must be looking at this jet and Russia will not think twice before selling this jet to bakis.
sankum
BRFite
Posts: 1150
Joined: 20 Dec 2004 21:45

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by sankum »

My estimate is
MTOW 24 T
External payload 6T
CTOW 18T (Stealth)
Engine 176 kn afterburner thrust
Internal main weapon bay similar to front internal weapon bay of Su 57 with 2*700 kg missiles or 3 R77 BVR AAM.
2* R 74 CCM internal side bays
Empty weight 11T
Internal fuel 5T
8g
1.8 mach top speed
2800 km range (ferry)

Based on various reports. What is actual will have to wait for official data
Last edited by sankum on 21 Jul 2021 20:04, 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 »

rajsunder wrote:bakis sure must be looking at this jet and Russia will not think twice before selling this jet to bakis.
They will love the Checkmate until they have a look at the size of the check they'll have to write to finance its development and get it into production. :D
sankum
BRFite
Posts: 1150
Joined: 20 Dec 2004 21:45

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by sankum »

They are saying a price of $25-30 m / unit . It will easily be double at $50-60 million/fighter.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by brar_w »

sankum wrote:They are saying a price of $25-30 m / unit . It will easily be double at $50-60 million/fighter.
Yes. $50-60 Million would be a good (internal) target to achieve but still comes with some risk. Russia has yet to mass produce any stealth design so that is a risk. And if they think about 300 export orders are possible there will be a higher allocated fixed cost as well so will push up the total cost even more. They may ask early adopters to directly fund development like what the JSF partners did (as opposed to FMS customers who later bought jets post development funding was secured).

$20 Million is where an advanced next generation trainer lands at (like the TX or a NG version of T-50 etc) so if they think they can convince foreign customers that they'll deliver a light-medium weight 5th gen stealth fighter at $25 Million than I think that is not going to have any believers amongst the informed air forces of the world. There is also the requirements creep that is bound to happen as real customers begin impacting design decisions (this appears to have been an internal Sukhoi program until now). On the JSF, one customer's requirement (USN/F-35C) added design weight, mission system enhancements (larger EW antenna coverage, and EOTS/DAS on every fighter), and size to the final design which is probably single handidly responsible for the F-35A costing $77 Million fly-away vs the original JAST target of closer to $55 Million (in today's dollars).
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5383
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Manish_P »

rajsunder wrote:bakis sure must be looking at this jet and Russia will not think twice before selling this jet to bakis.
Just why will the Chinese pay the Bakis to buy Russian jets?

Now a coup-paranoid Sultan Erdogan might want to do a barter deal - Turkey finances the jets on lease basis, Pakistan supplies the pilots... :mrgreen:
Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1769
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Khalsa »

Vips wrote:
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:
Exactly Vips.
the fact this is happening reinforces my faith in our decision to pull out of Su-57. I thought I was just bitter after Vikramaditya but no this is proof that Felon is not working and they come up with another single engined product from the same house.

Good luck to them (genuinely) in actualising this product. I truly hope our addiction to the western engine remains an effective antidote to the Russian HASHISH.

The first one is always free right
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5383
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Manish_P »

Khalsa wrote:....this is proof that Felon is not working and they come up with another single engined product from the same house.
That would be stretching things a bit too far sir.. by that logic the F-22 was a failure because the Americans followed it up with the single engine F-35 :)
mody
BRFite
Posts: 1362
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by mody »

Some youtube channels are reporting that Egyptian airforce conducted their own internal air exercises with their multitude of modern platforms participating and the Rafael was able to overcome the Su-35 everytime. The Spectra EW suite was able to jam the Su-35 radar or prevent it from getting a lock-on and Rafael then managed to do the rest. Egypt is now considering additional purchase of Rafael.
The Su-35 Irbis-E radar is the most high powered PESA radar on a fighter aircraft and if the Spectra EW suite could overcome the same, it would be really good.
Makes a good case to upgrade the Su-30MKI's with the indigenous AESA radar then go for Irbis-E as part of the Super Sukhoi project.

By the way, just does Egypt fund the purchase of all the different aircrafts for its airfoce. They operate the F-16s, Mig-29M/M2, Su-35, Mirage-2000 and Rafael. They also operate 46 nos each of Ka-52 and AH-64 Apache attack helicopters.
Over the past few years since the Muslim Brotherhood government, the Egyptian economy has been down. Also, tourism has been badly affected since the covid outbreak. Yet they now plan to buy another upto 72 Rafael to go with their existing fleet of 24 Rafael aircrafts. Just how they they fund all these purchases?
Bharadwaj
BRFite
Posts: 457
Joined: 09 Oct 2006 11:09

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Bharadwaj »

If that is the fate of the Irbis against the spectra, the j-20's radar will be toast. The price tag is hefty but the Rafale may just be worth every euro.
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5383
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Manish_P »

I still don't get how egypt has the money for as wide a zoo as ours. Mirage 5s, MiG 29s, Mirage 2000s, F-16s, Rafales, Su 35s...

PS oops just saw same question asked by another poster :oops:
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by brar_w »

Manish_P wrote:
Khalsa wrote:....this is proof that Felon is not working and they come up with another single engined product from the same house.
That would be stretching things a bit too far sir.. by that logic the F-22 was a failure because the Americans followed it up with the single engine F-35 :)
The F-22 became an insurance policy for the USAF/Pentagon post Soviet Union collapse. The debate then became about what number of air wings is a good insurance policy with the USAF wanting around four and the Pentagon leadership not willing to give in to more than 2. In the end it became a choice between the F-22 and the next bomber and the bomber won (F-22 production termination decision was made in 2009, and LRS-B was stood up in 2010). The F-35/JSF would always have been needed since the need to replace the F-16 and F/A-18 A-C was not addressed by the F-22A. Yes it is unfair to characterize the Su-57 as a failure. However, that program does not appear to be going anywhere really fast despite starting out nearly two decades ago. So one could question why the Russian AF wouldn't just want to accelerate the SU-57 and get its production rate into the double digits and try to acquire more than just 80-90 aircraft over the 8-9 years as is currently the plan.

But then the Checkmate is an internal industry project and not an official Russian MOD funded effort a (yet) so one can't really accuse the RuAF of splitting focus without first setting the Su-57 up for success. With hundreds of international Flankers, and hundreds of Fulcrums needing replacement over the next 15-20 years, I think it became clear to Sukhoi that the SU-57, a large, heavy and expensive stealth fighter, could not meet that requirement (affordability) perhaps forcing many of its existing customers to look elsewhere which is not good if it wants to maintain its long term status as a producer of combat aircraft. Had programs like the MiG-35 been successful then this could have been different (perhaps delaying Checkmate by a decade) but since that platform (even minus an AESA) has barely found any takers the company had very little choice but to introduce something fresh, more modern than the MiG-35 and Su-30, and more affordable than Su-57. Its clear why this would be beneficial to Sukhoi and the Russian combat aircraft production base at large. But we will have to wait and see whether the MOD funds it and if so how does that funding compete with resources already committed, and required, to stay on even the watered down path to PAKFA induction and operationalization.
ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2616
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by ldev »

Manish_P wrote:I still don't get how egypt has the money for as wide a zoo as ours. Mirage 5s, MiG 29s, Mirage 2000s, F-16s, Rafales, Su 35s...

PS oops just saw same question asked by another poster :oops:
Of the 275-290 fighters that the Egyptian airforce possesses, more than 200 are F-16s given by the US since 1980 under the Israeli-Egyptian peace accords of 1979 for which Egypt has not paid any money. (Egypt continues to get annual military aid of $ 1.3 billion from the US). However, a precondition of these supplies, to ensure Israeli primacy in the region was that these F-16s would not be equipped with long range BVR missiles. So Egypt has never got AMRAAM missiles but have had to make do with older AIM-7 Sparrow and Sidewinders. Over the years Egyptian requests for more potent US military hardware has not been approved including requests for F-15s (sold to Saudi Arabia and Qatar e.g.), F-35s, Patriot missiles etc. There was also an interruption of US military supplies to Egypt after the crackdown on the Muslim Brotherhood in 2013-14. After years of Egyptian angst at being denied more potent equipment sold to the Gulf Arabs Egypt decided to order 24 Rafales from France to overcome the lack of BVR missiles for it's F-16s. France however blocked the Egyptian request for the longer range Meteor missile as part of the weapon's package and restricted the package to the shorter range Mica. And so Egypt turned to Russia and the SU-35 in 2018 to get the R-77 and R-27 AAM's as part of the weapon's package and ordered 26 I think? Although one can't confirm it, it is likely that Egypt has received some financial assistance from Saudi Arabia for it's Rafale purchase. So in reality the only fighter aircraft that Egypt paid for from it's own funds are likely the SU-35s.
ArjunPandit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4053
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by ArjunPandit »

brar_w wrote:
rajsunder wrote:bakis sure must be looking at this jet and Russia will not think twice before selling this jet to bakis.
They will love the Checkmate until they have a look at the size of the check they'll have to write to finance its development and get it into production. :D
brar what amazes me is their ability to churn things around so fast..on one hand they always are late on deliveries..and here they surprised everyone with this single engine near fighter jet. May be its the legacy soviet eco system may be its the danda of putin or may be we are in our learning curve and have a slow way of doing things..i dont know but would be worth hearing perspective that how Russia leapfrogged us here wrt amca and their drone projects...and most importantly what we can do right
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by brar_w »

ArjunPandit wrote:
brar_w wrote:
They will love the Checkmate until they have a look at the size of the check they'll have to write to finance its development and get it into production. :D
brar what amazes me is their ability to churn things around so fast..on one hand they always are late on deliveries..and here they surprised everyone with this single engine near fighter jet. May be its the legacy soviet eco system may be its the danda of putin or may be we are in our learning curve and have a slow way of doing things..i dont know but would be worth hearing perspective that how Russia leapfrogged us here wrt amca and their drone projects...and most importantly what we can do right
I don't necessarily think they are doing things very quickly. The Sukhoi marketing is certainly doing that (but some of the claims and marketing stuff can be discarded and will be by potential buyers as well as they do their own analysis on maturity and timelines). However ground realities don't gel well with what they've promised. One can look back at PAKFA its developmental and serial production timelines and what they actually delivered. Development, testing and manufacturing of advanced combat aircraft is tough. Add stealth designs, materials, production processes and quality tolerances and you have a few very significant industrial challenges that did not exist in previous generation of combat aircraft. I would have to check but I think Sukhoi plans on delivering just 3-5 SU-57's in 2021. And something like 80 additional aircraft over the next 7 years for a production rate of roughly 10 a year on average. It takes a lot of time and effort to get each of these steps right and they haven't yet been able to do it on the SU-57 but continue to work on these things. Checkmate will certainly be faster but you are still looking at 10-15 years before this thing enters any sort of rate production (like more than 8-10 prototype or pre-serial production aircraft a year).

AMCA likewise is going to take 15+ years to fully field and be in production in numbers. That's just how long it has taken everyone else do overcome the challenges and unless there is evidence that these programs possess technical capabilities or other things that are superior to what previous 5GFA programs had or continue to have we can't really say that it will happen in 5-10 years time.

Even for Next gen so called 6th gen programs..France and Germany have set a 2040 timeline and they've developed the Rafale and Neuron and have an advanced and highly skilled aerospace design and mfg. workforce. There is a lot of invention that needs to happen on next-generation systems and unless you've got large design teams that are constantly working on advanced program after program, you will need a lot of time to structure the technology development and maturation process. Some of the risk cannot be reduced by just money. It needs both time and money to do the basic tech development, and validation..
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5383
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Manish_P »

ldev wrote:...
Of the 275-290 fighters that the Egyptian airforce possesses, more than 200 are F-16s given by the US since 1980 under the Israeli-Egyptian peace accords of 1979 for which Egypt has not paid any money. (Egypt continues to get annual military aid of $ 1.3 billion from the US)...
Thanks for the info. Typical ummah behavior.. demand or beg for hand outs with a gun to own head or the head of others.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Rakesh »

This is a diversification strategy by Egypt. Tomorrow if one of those countries turn south, at least the others will stay in their good books. That is their hope. Russia can always be depended on to do anything that is anti-American anyway.
ArjunPandit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4053
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by ArjunPandit »

Manish_P wrote:[

Thanks for the info. Typical ummah behavior.. demand or beg for hand outs with a gun to own head or the head of others.
Location too, sits on Suez.. Built by someone else didn't pay them just reaping benefits out of predecessors through pyramids
Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Vips »

^^ Egypt got a 10 year loan from France for purchasing the Rafales.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Rakesh »

What we know about Russia’s new ‘Fleabag’ stealth fighter
https://hushkit.net/2021/07/20/what-we- ... nic-smith/
20 July 2021

Image
Samay
BRFite
Posts: 1167
Joined: 30 Mar 2009 02:35
Location: India

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Samay »

The rusis did a F16 X before US could in the market, that why checkmate.
Although it would lack a powerful engine for 7.5 t plus AESA with supercruise. Otherwise Jap/Korean TX is better to invest.?
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5383
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Manish_P »

Rakesh wrote:What we know about Russia’s new ‘Fleabag’ stealth fighter
:(( Admiral saar, a humble request, since you are known to be a connoisseur of beautiful shapes (flying).

Let's not call this good looking new born bird with the derisive nickname given by this capitalist rag. Let her be referred to as Checkmate for now.

If and when the Russians do put her in production, the USAF (or whichever dept does the nicknaming) will probably give her a cooler reporting name.

Yours humbly.

Edit: I have just been made aware that it is also the screen name of a talented, tall but rather erm 'flat' British actress. If that's the case (unlikely though it seems) then I suppose I can see the point..
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5383
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Manish_P »

Noob question. Looking at the dimension of the engine inlet, the undercarriage and the exhaust nozzle, doesn't the space for the internal weapons bay look like it will be quite small?

https://www.airliners.net/photo/Russia- ... te/6498111

Image
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Rakesh »

Manish_P wrote:.....
Sirjee, I copied the title of the article verbatim from the link I posted :)

The term fleabag is not mine, but by the authors who wrote that article.

I heard about this aircraft just a few weeks ago. It would be erroneous on my part to call her a fleabag or a F-35 killer at the other end of the spectrum. But I like the name the Russians gave her - Checkmate :mrgreen:
Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Vips »

Manish_P wrote:Noob question. Looking at the dimension of the engine inlet, the undercarriage and the exhaust nozzle, doesn't the space for the internal weapons bay look like it will be quite small?

https://www.airliners.net/photo/Russia- ... te/6498111
Got to admit the quality of Cardboard used for the mock-up is really good :P
rajsunder
BRFite
Posts: 855
Joined: 01 Jul 2006 02:38
Location: MASA Land

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by rajsunder »

Vips wrote:
Manish_P wrote:Noob question. Looking at the dimension of the engine inlet, the undercarriage and the exhaust nozzle, doesn't the space for the internal weapons bay look like it will be quite small?

https://www.airliners.net/photo/Russia- ... te/6498111
Got to admit the quality of Cardboard used for the mock-up is really good :P
I read on one of the articles that the model was a prototype.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Rakesh »

The news articles that I read also said prototype. But what Sukhoi *actually* means by prototype, has yet to be verified. Unsure if this display is a mockup or an actual working prototype. First flight is expected in 2023. Her official designation is Su-75, a reversal on the Su-57.

It would be a coup for Sukhoi/Russia if this bird eventually ends up with the IAF. I don't see the MRFA deal panning out. Too late for it now. Additional Rafales will be likely, but anything beyond 2 - 3 more units of the Rafale will be cost prohibitive for the Govt.

That first flight date (2023) and the planned induction date (2026) is optimistic, but even if the dates are stretched to around 2030...it could turn out (by some weird twist of fate) that the IAF may give it a second look. I honestly hope not, but weirder things have occurred --- remember the Mirage 2000 and MiG-29 induction of the 1980s.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Rakesh »

This is what is concerning...I really hope we don't waste money on this, like we did with the PAK-FA. India is better off focusing on the AMCA, but the import lobby is hard to kill. Like a multi-headed snake. Cut one head off and two others take its place.

Who’s Going To Pay for Russia’s Checkmate Stealth Fighter? Probably Not Russia.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2 ... 74475621ff
ArjunPandit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4053
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by ArjunPandit »

Even our old comrade phillips hasnt promoted it yet. So why is a sale to India being discussed? Is that due to the High value target on 17.30 in the image rakesh sir?
rajsunder
BRFite
Posts: 855
Joined: 01 Jul 2006 02:38
Location: MASA Land

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by rajsunder »

I think this SU-75 is going to be russian equivalent to F-36 King Snake(not in the capabilities but idea wise).
F-36 with its 5- Gen design would easily beat this so called "stealthy" fighter.
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5383
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Post by Manish_P »

F-36 King Snake? Is that even an official project?

I thought that it was just a ideation of a concept (purely on paper) put forth by some 'independent experts' being promoted by a aviation magazine (Hushkit).

I am no aviation engineer but even then i am willing to bet that if the US goes for developing a new 'cheaper' single engine fighter (unlikely as that seems) then it will give the design contract to the big boys (Lockmart, Boeing et al) and their designs will probably look quite different to the one in the Hushkit article

As far as this bird is concerned, it has come from the official Sukhoi (UAC) corp. Whether it even goes past this concept phase and into actual production is unclear and too early to predict.
Post Reply