Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2?

Better philosophy because their aircraft keeps very good manouevrability and are nit overloaded of work. Su-35 will take care of air threats while su-34 attack land targets.

Western multirole fighters replace usually 4 or 5 type of aircraft but thry also have 4 or 5 times less aircraft than thry had. France had 600+ Mirage and lot of other types in big numbers and they replaced all that with around 100-200 rafale.

India paid 800 million to upgrade 80 or so mig-29 to SMT level.

They also paid 2 billion to upgrade 30 or so Mirage 2000.

Cost maintenance is still cheaper for russian aircraft. Russian spare parts are far cheaper and not in danger if US sanctions.

Su-35 is much better. Longer range, more type of missiles and having 3 of them for 1 rafale gives you number advantage. EW systems are secret and export models are not the same as original ones for both.

RTN wrote:Propaganda piece? Ruslan Pukhov is a employee of the Russian government. You think Russian government employees are carrying out propaganda against the Russian MIC?

And do you think that what a journo says in an odd interview is the last word about Russian aeronautic technology? He is basically talking bollocks in regards of the engines and in regards of weight and size, Sukhois have way longer ranges than the "Western planes" he is talking about. The best of them, a F-15 with CFTs has still less range and is weighting similarly to a Su-35, not even talking about a F-22 which is substantially heavier for way less range and payload.

Off the shelf price yes. But Maintenance, Repair, Overhaul (MRO) of Russian fighter, helos is almost 2x as expensive as western ones. Russian after sales support is below average compared to U.S and Germany.

My info says it is closer to half of the Western price, maybe you can provide yours

That's the reason why countries like Egypt, India etc who purchases Russian fighter also procure western fighter.

Evidence?

It has EW systems a generation ahead of anything that Su 35 has.

I wonder how do you know that when data about EW systems are extremely difficult to come by, even in the West, and completely secret in Russia. Those "eye watering" EW capabilities some general of yours reported are BS but what the Russian journo says is the ultimate truth. Very solid research indeed.

GarryB wrote:My position is that you focus too much on cross section area like the US focussed too much on stealth and nothing else and ended up with a dog.

Without knowing the downsides it is difficult to make that assessment, specially since what I did is just a layout exercise and nothing more. Excess power is directly related to cross sectional area and both parameters are key elements of any good fighter. Su-57 has internal bays and everything you can imagine and still has less frontal area than a Flanker, so any engine gain will transform directly into performance. F-35 has almost twice the cross sectional area of a F-16, now imagine how different powering needs those two planes have. The same engine technology that allows the F-35 to more or less match the F-16 (in supersonic flight is not even the case) with an inferior airframe would allow a potential rival that keeps drag and weight low to totally crush it in terms of kinematics. When you are the only in the market with a 5G plane this is not so apparent, as more and more rivals appear it is going to hurt badly.

5th gen fighters need internal volume for fuel and weapons so they are never going to be the sleek super low drag cheap and simple fighters you want them to be. That ship has sailed... the closest anyone got was probably the F-5 in the west or the MiG-21 in the east.

Yeah we discussed this before. 5G needs planes that are a bit bigger (probably 10 t empty or more), unless they start using very small weapons for UAVs...

F-35 has shortcomings (like issues related to supercruise) is true. But to suggest that Russian fighter are a  technological marvel is absolute drivel. The Rafale is almost half the size of the Su-30 and yet for its size it carries far more weapons.

In video game land the plane that carries hundreds of AAMs and thousands of AGMs is the best plane.

The Rafale is a very good plane but it is not magic... look at photos of it operationally and you will see it probably carries a similar weapon load to an Su-30 except the Rafale is probably carrying a couple of external fuel tanks or needs refuelling tanker support for most missions, while the Su-30 generally does not.

If two R-77s and two R-73s wont get the job done then carrying 6 R-77s and 6 R-73s is not going to help...

For the same weight class most U.S/Western fighter carry far more weapons than Russian fighter. Besides, western engines are more advanced. Explains why Russian fighter have two engines.

With the exception of F-35, Gripen, and F-16 most western aircraft have two engines too... in fact during the end of the cold war period with the Su-17, MiG-21, MiG-23, MiG-27, and Su-11s the Soviets probably had more single engined aircraft than HATO did.

Even CAST head Ruslan Pukhov accepts the superiority of Western fighter in this video.

What is WELT? Who funds them?

Mirage 2000 had a very good and powerful engine that could have been used for Rafale with a new version.

The 1980s was a while ago, but I remember in military books the first version of Rafale was basically a twin engined Mirage 2000... in fact I think it was called Mirage 4000 for a while.

The choice is understandable because modern fighters cost much more than 2nd, 3rd or 4th generation which were produced in thousands. So you don't want to loose aircraft because of engine failures that can happen on any engine no matter how good it is or because of foreign object damages that can also happen any time they fly.

It is cheaper to put two 8 ton thrust engines into the Mach 2.4 MiG-29 than to find one 16 ton single engine to get similar performance...

Smaller lighter engines are cheaper... they put a single more powerful engine in the F-5 and called it an F-20, but the two small engines on the F-5 were what made it cheap and simple and easy to operate...

Best means nothing. Any fighter can loose against any other if you fly it the wrong way.

And fighters like tanks or any other piece of equipment needs to be used with the help of other asstets to be good.

The game war thunder tries to simulate armour protection levels and armour penetration of weapons and if you have ever watched it or played it you would very quickly see how important tactics are with every vehicle and that no vehicle can go out in to the middle of an open area and just fire at everything with no fear of being destroyed... even Leopard2A7s with their made up 2.5m thick frontal turret armour can easily be destroyed from the side or the rear even by late WWII vehicles.

The reason the Russians invested in 300km range AAMs like R-37M and their new longer ranged missile is because situational awareness is critical to how a pilot fights and taking down AWACS and JSTARS breaks HATO IADS and their pilots situational awareness.

Syria can buy 50 su-57 they will still loose against israel that is much better trained and have everything to use their aviation (ELINT, AWACS, AD, radars, datalinks...).

Exactly... If Saddam had 5,000 M1A2 Abrams tanks in Desert Storm the Americans would have just use B-52s to bomb the shit out of them and they could not defend themselves.

Propaganda piece? Ruslan Pukhov is a employee of the Russian government. You think Russian government employees are carrying out propaganda against the Russian MIC?

WELT is not a Russian government component, and if you read some of the comments by Patriot Vostok I suspect it is mostly HATO bullshit... they are the ones that fund such documentaries...  either Russia is shit so we can feel good about all the trillions of dollars wasted competing with them, or they are the most dangerous thing in the universe... which means we need to spend more money to defeat them/counter them.

Why do you think Russians have better philosophy?

They are not spending themselves into oblivion with increasingly prohibitively expensive equipment... an American S-500 would be trillions of dollars worth and it looks like they are buying their Su-35s for a quarter of what the US will likely pay for their new F-15s...

Off the shelf price yes. But Maintenance, Repair, Overhaul (MRO) of Russian fighter, helos is almost 2x as expensive as western ones. Russian after sales support is below average compared to U.S and Germany.

Where on earth did you get that idea from? If the Russians spent two times more on maintenance of their fighters they wouldn't have any.... the west spends vastly more than 20 times more than the Russians spend on weapons... the US alone spends ten times and then add all the other HATO countries into the mix... there is no way Russia could afford to spend as much on their aircraft as the west does.

Russian support for exported items is paid for by the customer... and they get what they pay for... save a bit of money on cheap or no service and it will bite you in the ass later. The Russian military service and support their own aircraft and there are no problems there at all.

That's the reason why countries like Egypt, India etc who purchases Russian fighter also procure western fighter.

But wait a minute... if Russian fighters cost twice as much to operate surely those expensive western fighters must work out cheaper... why would they even look at Russian fighters?

These days the US imposes economic sanctions on countries that buy S-400 missiles and Su-35 fighters so they must have some pretty amazing features to make countries risk such dire consequences just to get some Russian planes.

It has EW systems a generation ahead of anything that Su 35 has.

The Russians were able to detect US stealth fighters (F-35s) along the Iranian border using ground radar based in Russia... which suggests in terms of anti stealth technology they are actually doing rather well... do you think the Americans could track their own F-35s independently with ground based radar?

I would say one of the reasons the Egyptians will buy Russian fighters is because as long as they pay for it the Russians are likely to sell the weapons they want... unlike the US.

When you are the only in the market with a 5G plane this is not so apparent, as more and more rivals appear it is going to hurt badly.

When the enemy is the third world just being able to point your nose and fire a missile directly at the target without it having to pull a 180 degree turn off the rail to line the target up... I would think TVC engines will render dogfighting less important... look first, turn first, kill first...

Hello guys. I need your help.
At the question Is Russia safe from F-22, B-2, B-21, F-35 etc...? It is reasonable to answer yes definitely.
Since the date when this topic was launched we were not aware of the real state of Russian's technology. In fact, for nearly 20 years, Russia worked on a new kind of secret radars. In the middle of the 2000's they successfully adapted the new variants of S-300, and the new incoming S-400 acting the end of any kind of stealth aircraft, including F-22, B-2 but SU-57, and J-20. This radar relies on Radio Photonic Radars.
https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a28818232/quantum-radar/
The stealth aircraft are definitely obsolete, for that reason R. Gates decided to close the production of F-22 in 2009, and now US Air Command decided the shut down the F-35 program.
I found too many interesting books on this subject, however too much mathematic oriented, I am looking for a couple of simple schemas explaining the radio photonic radar technologies, can somebody help me?
Thx for any help.

^ ROFAR substitutes the RF up and down conversion based on electronic circuits with photonic ones which have way bigger dynamic range and noise characteristics, they also appear to use wide band antennae. They will provide bigger sensitivity, resolution and immunity to jamming. They will be very difficult to fool.

You have some nice links about the developments in that area in the Russian radars thread

Speaking from a physics perspective, "quantum radar" can be a thing all on its own without the current photonics-centric improvement
of existing radar technology. Designed to remove wasteful signal conversions that limit bandwidth and sensitivity.

A fully new approach would be based on pure quantum mechanics for detection. In particular, quantum entanglement. All systems
entangle and this entanglement may not even be limited by the speed of light. (Those who think this is tin foil hat science can go
and buy a clue, Popular Mechanics will not inform you of it). So we are talking about non-local detection without beams and
antenna reception of EM emissions. This is not a trivial area of development. But there have been all sorts of pure physics
research type advances than may be enough to think about application to technology.

kvs wrote:Speaking from a physics perspective, "quantum radar" can be a thing all on its own without the current photonics-centric improvement
of existing radar technology.   Designed to remove wasteful signal conversions that limit bandwidth and sensitivity.

A fully new approach would be based on pure quantum mechanics for detection.   In particular, quantum entanglement.  All systems
entangle and this entanglement may not even be limited by the speed of light.  (Those who think this is tin foil hat science can go
and buy a clue, Popular Mechanics will not inform you of it).   So we are talking about non-local detection without beams and
antenna reception of EM emissions.   This is not a trivial area of development.   But there have been all sorts of pure physics
research type advances than may be enough to think about application to technology.

There have been quite a few news released about Chinese developments in the area. To be clear, I was just talking about ROFAR, not quantum radar

"Even CAST head Ruslan Pukhov accepts the superiority of Western fighter in this video"

Pukhov does not work for the Russian govt , nor does CAST. He is basically a Russian version of Pierre Sprey except not as blatant. He did some work for the Atlantic. He showed up to speak at a CIS (think tank) event. If the Western think tank complex wants someone to badmouth Russian gear but sound credible , Pukov gets a phone call.

Backman wrote:"Even CAST head Ruslan Pukhov accepts the superiority of Western fighter in this video"

Pukhov does not work for the Russian govt , nor does CAST. He is basically a Russian version of Pierre Sprey except not as blatant. He did some work for the Atlantic. He showed up to speak at a CIS (think tank) event. If the Western think tank complex wants someone to badmouth Russian gear but sound credible , Pukov gets a phone call.

And above all, he is not an aerospace or military professional, he can say whatever the fvck he wants as any of us can...

Arrow wrote:So China is in advanced work on quantum radar? This is even more progress than in the case of ROFAR technology?

Two different technologies, I cannot say who is "stronger" of the two... pretty much every advanced country will develop both.