Talking bollocks thread #2

I personally believe there should be sweet spot between socialism and capitalism. There should be social protection for native working force so they won't be replaced by cheap alternatives from abroad. There should be social incentive to support development according to marked realities and weed out unwanted professions, career paths from colleges.
Women should be able to raise children and home and men should be able to earn money to sufficiently support the family.
Deviants, gays, single incels should be marginalized and flushed down the toilet.

Hard and dirty jobs like diver/welder on the rigs now could earn a worker 300-500k per year for few dives. There's a risk of getting bends or getting crushed, but work that involves risk of life should be well rewarded.
Working class should be encouraged to spend money and put it back in circulation.

Basically, my utopia is 70s USSR mixed with 60s US.

Regular wrote:I personally believe there should be sweet spot between socialism and capitalism. There should be social protection for native working force so they won't be replaced by cheap alternatives from abroad. There should be social incentive to support development according to marked realities and weed out unwanted professions, career paths from colleges.
Women should be able to raise children and home and men should be able to earn money to sufficiently support the family.
Deviants, gays, single incels should be marginalized and flushed down the toilet.

Hard and dirty jobs like diver/welder on the rigs now could earn a worker 300-500k per year for few dives. There's a risk of getting bends or getting crushed, but work that involves risk of life should be well rewarded.
Working class should be encouraged to spend money and put it back in circulation.

Basically, my utopia is 70s USSR mixed with 60s US.

not a bad idea, the problem is the large part of the population in EU states that have been brainwashed, and now even by law you're not allowed to protect more the natives compared to immigrants.

Also the EU forced integration is excessive. There are entire political parties that want to throw in the bin all of the national histories and substitute the national ideas, cultures and values with a blend of pseudotolerant multi culti, genderfree, borderfree new value, of course replacing all of our national languages with English and relegating them to a sort of second rate dialect.

Many new-left parties want to appear good, or better and more tolerant than the others, destroying in the process everything built until now in our countries. They are a sort of western version of Gorbachev, that I still do not understand if he was just a traitor or a pathological person that was ready to destroy the future of all the nations in USSR just to be acclaimed as an hero in the west, as when he visited Italy and immensely enjoyed being "loved" from the crowds...

Rodion_Romanovic wrote:

Regular wrote:I personally believe there should be sweet spot between socialism and capitalism. There should be social protection for native working force so they won't be replaced by cheap alternatives from abroad. There should be social incentive to support development according to marked realities and weed out unwanted professions, career paths from colleges.
Women should be able to raise children and home and men should be able to earn money to sufficiently support the family.
Deviants, gays, single incels should be marginalized and flushed down the toilet.

Hard and dirty jobs like diver/welder on the rigs now could earn a worker 300-500k per year for few dives. There's a risk of getting bends or getting crushed, but work that involves risk of life should be well rewarded.
Working class should be encouraged to spend money and put it back in circulation.

Basically, my utopia is 70s USSR mixed with 60s US.

not a bad idea, the problem is the large part of the population in EU states that have been brainwashed, and now even by law you're not allowed to protect more the natives compared to immigrants.

Also the EU forced integration is excessive. There are entire political parties that want to throw in the bin all of the national histories and substitute the national ideas, cultures and values with a blend of pseudotolerant multi culti, genderfree, borderfree new value, of course replacing all of our national languages with English and relegating them to a sort of second rate dialect.

Many new-left parties want to appear good, or better and more tolerant than the others, destroying in the process everything built until now in our countries. They are a sort of western version of Gorbachev, that I still do not understand if he was just a traitor or a pathological person that was ready to destroy the future of all the nations in USSR just to be acclaimed as an hero in the west, as when he visited Italy and immensely enjoyed being "loved" from the crowds...

You ignore the massive rise of far right in the EU and that the left is more and more marginalized.

Regular wrote:I personally believe there should be sweet spot between socialism and capitalism. There should be social protection for native working force so they won't be replaced by cheap alternatives from abroad. There should be social incentive to support development according to marked realities and weed out unwanted professions, career paths from colleges.
Women should be able to raise children and home and men should be able to earn money to sufficiently support the family.
Deviants, gays, single incels should be marginalized and flushed down the toilet.

Hard and dirty jobs like diver/welder on the rigs now could earn a worker 300-500k per year for few dives. There's a risk of getting bends or getting crushed, but work that involves risk of life should be well rewarded.
Working class should be encouraged to spend money and put it back in circulation.

Basically, my utopia is 70s USSR mixed with 60s US.

Lots of people miss the Communist period in Poland, but these are predominantly people who lived during that time, and they are fewer and fewer in number.

On the other hand, those who never lived under Communism, or were extremely young at that time - or the young and dumb generation - are often the most anti-Communist. But there is lots of anti-Communist brain-washing in Poland.


You tell me who is more correct? People who lived under Communism clearly know better than those who did not.


Many people in Poland say that the Communist-era generation is being condemned to a quick extinction, because they are very inconvenient witnesses.

Terrible health care, very high suicide rate, extreme poverty, bad food quality. Yes, the inconvenient witnesses are being eliminated.

Odin of Ossetia wrote:

Regular wrote:I personally believe there should be sweet spot between socialism and capitalism. There should be social protection for native working force so they won't be replaced by cheap alternatives from abroad. There should be social incentive to support development according to marked realities and weed out unwanted professions, career paths from colleges.
Women should be able to raise children and home and men should be able to earn money to sufficiently support the family.
Deviants, gays, single incels should be marginalized and flushed down the toilet.

Hard and dirty jobs like diver/welder on the rigs now could earn a worker 300-500k per year for few dives. There's a risk of getting bends or getting crushed, but work that involves risk of life should be well rewarded.
Working class should be encouraged to spend money and put it back in circulation.

Basically, my utopia is 70s USSR mixed with 60s US.

Lots of people miss the Communist period in Poland, but these are predominantly people who lived during that time, and they are fewer and fewer in number.

On the other hand, those who never lived under Communism, or were extremely young at that time - or the young and dumb generation - are often the most anti-Communist. But there is lots of anti-Communist brain-washing in Poland.  


You tell me who is more correct? People who lived under Communism clearly know better than those who did not.


Many people in Poland say that the Communist-era generation is being condemned to a quick extinction, because they are very inconvenient witnesses.

Terrible health care, very high suicide rate, extreme poverty, bad food quality. Yes, the inconvenient witnesses are being eliminated.

Hahaha, Poland is not that bad!
It's much much better than Romania, Serbia, Slovakia and it's pretty much most stable Eastern European country.
You have shit wages, reliance on EU and US and Ukrainian immigrants, but it's much much worse for other countries.

I remember when poles used to come to Lithuania with their Polski fiats and buy snaige fridges and put it on their roofs.. fridges were bigger than their cars. And now Lithuanians go to Poland to shop and buy food, LG electronics and clothing.
Belarussians now have it worse as well.

miketheterrible wrote:Tr modules are in the casing behind the mini antennas.

Goes to show what you know.

Su-57 in Syria has nothing to do with radar at all.  It's not there for sky patrol but launching missile tests on air to ground.

That MiG-35 you are referring to are test unit, not actual production.

https://www.defenseworld.net/news/25357/MiG_35_Shows_Off_New_AESA_Radar_at_MAKS_2019#.XXvi8D_F1-E

Can you prove that there are modules in the antennas ? AESA can be made with many small antennas like that instead of modules. And it seems to be the case here.

Can you prove it tested only a missile ? They sent it there to test many things. Missile launch could have been done from russia with IFR as the kh-59 has 500km range.

Just like I said airborne aesa in russia are only being introduced now and the first mig-35 delivered to russia don't have them.

Your quote doesn't say it was only tested for missile launch. It says they tested the stated capabilities of the jet. So many things were tested and the radar for sure as all the nato jet types were in Syria at that time including rafale, f-22 and f35. And according to Vladimir79 it had bad ground mapping result there.

Your second part doesn't prove they use the same t/r as airborne radars.

These are what T/R modules from Russia looks like that you will find in such boxes or any other box containing modules for T/R except in larger housings like in Nebo-M they are bigger PCB's and housing overall

Like I said bigger is easier to make and to cool down. The hard part is to make them small and usable for long time without burning them. Ryssia is achueving this in 2019 whike US achieved it 15 years ago or so.


Anyway my point was that russia is making aesa for its new jets and they are making those jets stealth while some here critisizing aesa and stealth.

First off, they wouldn't use radar in Syria when right all around them they have sniffers trying to pick up signals. So yes, they didn't test the radar in Syria. You are assuming while I provided news.

As well, yes, I proved that those are the modules. I also showed how you don't even know modules and how they work since you showed the radar at the front not knowing the modules are behind them.  So once again you assume I'm wrong when I'm not.  You proved you didn't know what you were talking about yet you dance around the concept thinking you are correct when you didn't get even the basics correct.

So your point is disregarded.

Moving onto real matters.

Too many patronizing clowns in this forum who think Russia "cannot into X". Because NATO has a monopoly on human intelligence.
In the real world, Russian educational focus on had science and mathematics pays off. The west is full of losers who are obsessed with
their feelings and the level of "fun" in any activity. The rot of child-centered learning.

What is wrong ? There are 3 claim in my last post : US have deployed aesa since more than 10 years ago. Russia is still dev them and has none deployed ( I was talking about airborne ones). Having modules doesn't mean you have the radar ready as the reality shows it because 2 years ago they had none ready.

All my claims are clear and not made up at all. You just invent claims and put them in my mouth.

And he has said that the Russians are not as far behind and you try to make out, they understand AESA radar technology and chose not to introduce it the way the US has introduced it. They have worked on improving the technology and developing it to reduce the price. The US will happily spend taxpayers money and money it prints, Russia is not that stupid or selfish and tries to get value for money.... existing Russian fighter radars are not AESA, but are also very capable at doing what they need to be able to do... Su-57 at less than 40 million an aircraft, and Su-35s for a similar price compared with over 100 million dollars for F-35s and Rafales and Typhoons are really not that much cheaper to be honest... you do understand there are consequences for just spending like it is someone elses money...

When the Russians start putting some of the technology they are working on into service they will create a generational gap with western equivalents because their new AESAs combined with IRSTs and of course photonic radar designs will give them capabilities the west simply doesn't have... and then where will those super stealthy western aircraft and weapons be?

Are those T/R the same for you ? They work the same but they are not the same. And the radars are not the same. Nevo has t/r that are antennas of ~80cm each and airborne modules are few cm. For such tech, bigger is easier to make. The complicated part is to make them small.

Hahahahaha... T/R are the same for the same frequency... to transmit and receive you need an antenna that operates in that frequency... that truck mounted antenna is a long wave radar VHF frequency AESA radar and would not be placed in the nose of an aircraft because there is simply not enough room. The best you could do is the L band radar with an array one element high and multiple elements long.

Just like I said airborne aesa in russia are only being introduced now and the first mig-35 delivered to russia don't have them.

They haven't got them in service because their performance didn't justify the enormous cost of AESA radars... in many areas they are no better than PESA types but vastly more expensive and complex to place in an operational aircraft. They have waited till the technology matures and becomes affordable... their existing Radar systems are good enough so they were not in a hurry to introduce them.

Currently however they are introducing them rather widely with AESA radar antenna even being fitted to helicopters and armoured vehicles as well as SAM systems and Ships of a range of sizes and also on missiles too.

Anyway my point was that russia is making aesa for its new jets and they are making those jets stealth while some here critisizing aesa and stealth.

Of course... the west never makes any mistakes and everything it does is perfect and must be followed otherwise you are wrong... I am old enough to remember Phantoms going in to service able to carry gun pods but not fitted with internal cannon because missiles will do everything.

Currently with their amazing stealth and amazing AESA radars Israeli F-35s wont enter Syrian airspace because they are afraid they will be shot down by S-300s and older missiles the way the F-117 was shot down in Europe.

The US has amazing wild weasel aircraft, but considering they are going to an all stealth fleet of fighters and bombers why would they even need Growlers... surely they could just ignore enemy SAMs completely with their super stealth planes, and they should have no problem with Turkey having F-35s and S-400s... Turkey will realise what value for money they will be getting when their S-400s can't detect their F-35s and will probably buy more...

And he has said that the Russians are not as far behind and you try to make out, they understand AESA radar technology and chose not to introduce it the way the US has introduced it.

Oh really ? I have the feeling they want aesa radar for everything now. Jets, ships, EW... Just like the US.

The US will happily spend taxpayers money and money it prints, Russia is not that stupid or selfish and tries to get value for money.

Their products are bought in huge quantities by the richest countries. They take back ecery singke dollars invested and more. While russians can't satisfy an order of 40 mig-29 for Algeria and give rusted jets.

. Su-57 at less than 40 million an aircraft, and Su-35s for a similar price compared with over 100 million dollars for F-35s and Rafales and Typhoons are really not that much cheaper to be honest...

First su-57 is way more expensive than su-35.

Second western aircrafts are more expensive because it more costly to produce them (workers are paid 3 to 4 times what russian workers are paid). Not the same economy.

When the Russians start putting some of the technology they are working on into service they will create a generational gap with western equivalents because their new AESAs combined with IRSTs and of course photonic radar designs will give them capabilities the west simply doesn't have... and then where will those super stealthy western aircraft and weapons be?

Western AESA and IRIT are better. Rafale already combines that. They also have datalinks and are developing L band radars that can guide their weapons.

Hahahahaha... T/R are the same for the same frequency... to transmit and receive you need an antenna that operates in that frequency... that truck mounted antenna is a long wave radar VHF frequency AESA radar and would not be placed in the nose of an aircraft because there is simply not enough room. The best you could do is the L band radar with an array one element high and multiple elements long.

So you agree with me to say bigger radar are more easy to be made ?

The reality is that their airborne aesa are only ready now in 2019. Contrary to what you say if PESA is so good and photonic is the future why do they spend money on aesa like the stupid westerners ?

Of course... the west never makes any mistakes and everything it does is perfect and must be followed otherwise you are wrong

that's what happened. All russian fanboys criticized stealth and aesa, but now russia is introducing this technology everywhere it can.

Currently with their amazing stealth and amazing AESA radars Israeli F-35s wont enter Syrian airspace because they are afraid they will be shot down by S-300s and older missiles the way the F-117 was shot down in Europe.

Why bother with f-35 ? Their f-16 came in front of Hmeimim air base bombed the shit out SAA, ambushed an il-20 into SAA airdefence and even s-400 didn't answer. And they are still bombing the shit out of Iran and SAA.

The US has amazing wild weasel aircraft, but considering they are going to an all stealth fleet of fighters and bombers why would they even need Growlers... surely they could just ignore enemy SAMs completely with their super stealth planes, and they should have no problem with Turkey having F-35s and S-400s... Turkey will realise what value for money they will be getting when their S-400s can't detect their F-35s and will probably buy more...

You are confusing your opinion and L&M marketing ads with the US/Israeli generals opinion. The last are not stupid abd will never focus on stealth only. It will be an overwhelming number, barrage of cruise missiles and hyge jamming if they want to destroy something protected by S-300.

Isos wrote:Western AESA and IRIT are better. Rafale already combines that. They also have datalinks and are developing L band radars that can guide their weapons.

But...you have more than 1000 sources with more than 1000 infomations! For PIRATE the german army list the detection range up to 80 km, other sources list 150 km for the IRST. The OLS-35 has only a range of 50 km, source is RAND, but other sources indicate a range of 90 km and more.

Western AESA built in fighters are better, because there are no russian counterparts now. With the Su-57 the gap will be closed!

Russian IRST are not worse, than their western counterparts, because the USSR was using IRST since the 60ies. Here collides western fanboyism with russian fanboyism. We just don't know the real stats of the IRST's. We just know that Su-35 was able to track a F-22 with IRST.

Isos wrote:
Why bother with f-35 ? Their f-16 came in front of Hmeimim air base bombed the shit out SAA, ambushed an il-20 into SAA airdefence and even s-400 didn't answer. And they are still bombing the shit out of Iran and SAA.  

You forget Netanyahu and Putin are really big buddies IDF and Russian Forces communicate before the strikes. Many IDF officers were praising the Russians in Syria for the good work they do together.

And Russia want to keep Iran out of Syria, with less success. They can't act open, because Iran is more or less an ally, but they are not all happy with Iran help in Syria. Don't forget the role of Iran against USSR and Russia in the past!
Israels want Russia to kick Iran public out of Syria, but this will not happen.

Azi wrote:

Isos wrote:Western AESA and IRIT are better. Rafale already combines that. They also have datalinks and are developing L band radars that can guide their weapons.

But...you have more than 1000 sources with more than 1000 infomations! For PIRATE the german army list the detection range up to 80 km, other sources list 150 km for the IRST. The OLS-35 has only a range of 50 km, source is RAND, but other sources indicate a range of 90 km and more.

Western AESA built in fighters are better, because there are no russian counterparts now. With the Su-57 the gap will be closed!

Russian IRST are not worse, than their western counterparts, because the USSR was using IRST since the 60ies. Here collides western fanboyism with russian fanboyism. We just don't know the real stats of the IRST's. We just know that Su-35 was able to track a F-22 with IRST.

They are also used by western jets starting from the f-4. In terms of pure technology they had better irst than russians but didn't deployed them like russians. There is no fanboyism. Ols-35 is said to have 35 km max range against a fighter coming in front and 90 from rear against a su-30 which is a huge IR target. French rafale have more than 100km range and can identify with its cameras at 50km and even guide missiles.

You think russia will do better than US and French who have nearly 20 years of AESA dev and couple tens of times the russian budget with its very first aesa radar ? If we switch the roles you, KVS abd Garry would be the first to say it's fanboyism and stupid.

Russia is just smarter when it comes at using those technologies.

You forget Netanyahu and Putin are really big buddies Wink IDF and Russian Forces communicate before the strikes. Many IDF officers were praising the Russians in Syria for the good work they do together.

And Russia want to keep Iran out of Syria, with less success. They can't act open, because Iran is more or less an ally, but they are not all happy with Iran help in Syria. Don't forget the role of Iran against USSR and Russia in the past!
Israels want Russia to kick Iran public out of Syria, but this will not happen.

What I see is Syrian and Russians dying and no response from any of them. Well, they called some isreli staff in Moscow to say them it was bad...

The only one responding is Iran.

Listen child there is a difference between what is claimed and what is proven. OLS-35 proved itself. Nothing of Rafale was proven. The Rafale Specter de whatever OLS is up to 100km but doesn't state target. OLS-35 was against fighter sized target. Very big difference.

And France doesn't actually have working AESA for fighter jets either. Rafale AESA was tested but never fielded.  Guess add that in with MiG-35 if you so wish.

And there is no such thing as not being able to surpass because it was never fielded before.  If the tech outmatches then it does. Or it doesn't.  But since you had no idea how AESA modules worked before, your entire argument is worthless.

Oh really ? I have the feeling they want aesa radar for everything now. Jets, ships, EW... Just like the US.

If they urgently wanted AESA radar no matter what then are they bothering wasting their time developing new modules made of different elements and materials to get the best possible performance... the MiG-31 is huge... they could easily have put an early model AESA on there in the late 1990s and early 2000s if they were desperate to get them in to service... but as they likely realised, the PESA it already uses is powerful enough and cheap enough and it makes more sense spending a little bit of money upgrading it and improving it, and also spending money on the much more immature AESA technology so that when they introduce an AESA it will be a generation ahead of existing types instead of slightly better.

It is like a transition from pencil to pen... they are waiting till they have perfected erasable ink so when they do introduce pens that they will get the best pens available rather than just a pen that smudges and doesn't work properly at some angles... compared with a pencil that works at any angle and can be corrected.

Their products are bought in huge quantities by the richest countries. They take back ecery singke dollars invested and more.

Most of their international purchases are via US aid, so it is being payed by US taxpayers anyway. Expensive shit is more expensive when it does not do what it is supposed to do properly or reliably.

While russians can't satisfy an order of 40 mig-29 for Algeria and give rusted jets.

Hahahaha... Sukhoi offered them Su-30s for the same price they were paying for MiG-29s so Algeria disputed the definition of new aircraft in the contract so they could get out of it. And those rusted jets were used by the Russian air force just fine BTW. If you are so dumb you can't work out what happened there you can PM me and I will explain it to you in easy small words so you can understand.... Honestly lost a bit of respect for you over this.

First su-57 is way more expensive than su-35.

The amount being spent and the number of aircraft they are getting suggests either a serious mistake in some of the numbers or that the Su-57 is actually cheaper than most western 4th gen fighters.

Second western aircrafts are more expensive because it more costly to produce them (workers are paid 3 to 4 times what russian workers are paid). Not the same economy.

Hahahahahahaha.... yeah... I hear that excuse a lot... either that or... they can afford it... thing is that they didn't get rich paying a fair price for things... cheap coffee beans from country x where the farmer gets barely enough to survive, farm machinery or other goods made in another country that has low labour costs and no labour protections, the thing is that the priority is profit and therefore distributed weak workforce means the owners become very wealthy very quickly but can have offices anywhere and if things go bad in the UK like Brexit... they can move easily enough... or if there is a financial catastrophe in the US... they already own big estates all round the world that they can run away to...

Western AESA and IRIT are better. Rafale already combines that.

Assuming that is true, was that 3,000 Rafales in NATO?

They also have datalinks and are developing L band radars that can guide their weapons.

Like the wing mounted ones the Russians already have?

So you agree with me to say bigger radar are more easy to be made ?

No.

An L band radar needs an antenna to match the size of the frequency.... if you made those ZEBO radars with your super dooper western technology... well they haven't because western technology at that frequency range doesn't exist on land based systems, their might be something on ships perhaps... but emitters and detectors rather than arrays used as a radar that can scan an area.

The reality is that their airborne aesa are only ready now in 2019. Contrary to what you say if PESA is so good and photonic is the future why do they spend money on aesa like the stupid westerners ?

Because they are not stupid westerners... if westerners were having the success with photonic equipment the Russians are clearly having they would likely drop all work on AESAs and focus on developing these new systems and when they are ready they will replace all their airborne AESAs with these new types, no matter the cost.

The Russians are much more realistic, various ground based SAM systems have AESA radars... but only where it makes sense... they have not replaced all radars with PESAs or AESAs and they likely wont. They will use long and medium and short wave antenna as well as thermal optics and digital optics and sound and anything else that is useful because they know a combination of sensors can be combined to provide a much more information rich data set.

The US used Chobham armour on its early Abrams tank, then upgraded using Dorchester armour. They didn't really bother with ERA even though it is relatively cheap and light and increases the performance of the existing armour by quite a bit simply by being fitted. They also ignored active self protection systems too... they just relied on good base armour.

The Soviets and Russians had composite armours since the T-64, but they also used ERA and then NERA armour and cage armour and APS systems as well as self defence ESM suites like Shtora... and even with their newest vehicle they use all those technologies... in fact their tanks (armata) actually use two different types of APS system... you can clearly see Drozd tubes and Afghantsi boxes too.

The Russians are using stealth, but they are not going all stealth, they are keeping all the other things like a gun and missiles and self defence avionics and jammers and decoys and towed jammers and anti missile missiles and datalinks etc etc.

All russian fanboys criticized stealth and aesa, but now russia is introducing this technology everywhere it can.

No it isn't. The MiG-31 is currently still the most capable interceptor in the world and still uses a PESA and is not even nearly stealthy.

The Su-57 is stealthy but the MiG-35 and Su-35 are not, and nor is the Tu-160M2 which has not started production yet and being a from scratch upgrade of the Tu-160 they could easily have made serious design changes to make it stealthy if they wanted to.

Russia had MMW radar sensors on some of its tanks in the 1980s, but am looking forward to hear how the US invented APS systems when the abrams gets one that works.

Their f-16 came in front of Hmeimim air base bombed the shit out SAA, ambushed an il-20 into SAA airdefence and even s-400 didn't answer. And they are still bombing the shit out of Iran and SAA.

You know full well that the Israelis notified the Russians about the F-16 attack to get them to divert the Il-20 in the area to where the attack actually took place so they actually used the Il-20 as cover for their attacks, and the Il-20 was shot down by the defences at a time when they didn't have an IADS and Israel could violate their airspace at will.

The Russian systems are not there to defend Syrian targets or Iranian targets, they are there to protect Russian bases and Russian forces.

The S-400 system would probably have shot those F-16s down if they had realised what the Juice were doing, but to actually shoot those aircraft down was not part of their mission and would not bring back the Il-20.

What they did instead was introduce a full IADS for Syrian forces and connect them to their network in the area so they could better identify and track targets and since that happened no Israeli aircraft has flown over Syrian airspace as Israeli aircraft. I do remember one attack where they flew over US controlled areas using US codes and the US told them off because it makes US aircraft vulnerable to attack if the Russians or Syrians think they might be Juice.

But brilliant question... why F-35?

Before the incident they probably could have used Mustangs, and afterwards even their F-35s can't operate openly... so why bother paying 120 million per aircraft that can't even enter enemy airspace even just for a minute...

The last are not stupid abd will never focus on stealth only.

But they have... F-35s are supposed to replace everything... only the US Navy doesn't trust them... but then the US Navy is the only part of the US military with anything like a decent IADS... so of course they would have a better understanding of things.

It will be an overwhelming number, barrage of cruise missiles and hyge jamming if they want to destroy something protected by S-300.

Their cruise missiles are slow, don't really have enormous range, and are not stealthy so even a MiG-21 could shoot down quite a few, let alone something more modern.

Western AESA built in fighters are better, because there are no russian counterparts now. With the Su-57 the gap will be closed!

Especially if they are made of the new materials they have developed that will give them much better performance than western AESA produce.

You forget Netanyahu and Putin are really big buddies Wink IDF and Russian Forces communicate before the strikes. Many IDF officers were praising the Russians in Syria for the good work they do together.

Lots of wounded ISIS fighters get treated in hospitals in Israel...

And Russia want to keep Iran out of Syria, with less success. They can't act open, because Iran is more or less an ally, but they are not all happy with Iran help in Syria. Don't forget the role of Iran against USSR and Russia in the past!
Israels want Russia to kick Iran public out of Syria, but this will not happen.

I would say Russia would rather kick the US out of Syria... at least Iran is fighting to keep syria stable and a single country... Israel and the US want to Balkanise the country.

In terms of pure technology they had better irst than russians but didn't deployed them like russians. There is no fanboyism.

Interesting you say that but reject the same claim regarding Russian AESA technology... you are being very selective...

Ols-35 is said to have 35 km max range against a fighter coming in front and 90 from rear against a su-30 which is a huge IR target. French rafale have more than 100km range and can identify with its cameras at 50km and even guide missiles.

With a closing target it makes more sense to use radar anyway, and with receeding targets the Soviets had missiles that could be used... unlike the US.

The Su-35 also has a thermal imager included... probably also used Thales technology...

You think russia will do better than US and French who have nearly 20 years of AESA dev and couple tens of times the russian budget with its very first aesa radar ? If we switch the roles you, KVS abd Garry would be the first to say it's fanboyism and stupid.

You claim Russia is in the shit because the US has more stealth fighters in service... you are the one that is claiming stealth is significant and that AESAs are significant, pointing to the fact that the Russians are working on both as proving your case.

As we have seen in Syria an IADS is more important than what individual systems you have. NATO has interesting data link systems but has only ever fought third world countries that are unable to fight back... Russia is different and what I and others are saying is that Russia does not need to have NATO numbers of aircraft or forces to deter NATO... less than 100 Su-57s along with a few hundred Su-35 and MiG-35s along with thousands of radars and tens of thousands of SAM sites and hundreds of thousands of SAM missiles is more than enough to defend Russian airspace. If they fight takes place outside Russian airspace that is fine too... only a couple of Zircon or Iskander missiles to obliterate targets along Russias border and when that escalates those missiles can carry cluster munitions and nuclear warhead payloads.

I said before that the US has had AESA radars in service for a while and that they are a mature technology, but despite not having AESA radars deployed throughout their air force they have plenty of experience with individual AESA systems and their new systems will be based on materials that make them fundamentally more powerful and cheaper and lighter... if a war broke out tomorrow AESA technology will mean squat.... it will be all about the nukes and their are just as good as yours.

Russia is just smarter when it comes at using those technologies.

If they had spent all their money on old AESA module technology they might have all AESAs in all their fighters by now... but honestly what actual difference would it even make?

Not blowing their budget on AESA radars that might have boosted detection and tracking range by a bit, while demanding redesigns in the electronics and electrical components of aircraft to supply enough power to run these new radars... what technology should they have given up to provide the funds for that?

I would say they are making much better choices than the west, which is why I am pretty sure the current western way is not going to continue for much longer...

What I see is Syrian and Russians dying and no response from any of them. Well, they called some isreli staff in Moscow to say them it was bad... Rolling Eyes

The only one responding is Iran.

Are you drunk?

Syrian airspace is largely closed off to the IDF.... the Israeli air force officials started squealling like stuck pigs and then they claimed they would destroy those S-300s before they could be set up... which didn't happen by the way... hell even Turkey wants S-400s now... even if it is instead of F-35s and they make parts for the F-35.

miketheterrible wrote:Listen child there is a difference between what is claimed and what is proven. OLS-35 proved itself. Nothing of Rafale was proven.  The Rafale Specter de whatever OLS is up to 100km but doesn't state target. OLS-35 was against fighter sized target.  Very big difference.

And France doesn't actually have working AESA for fighter jets either. Rafale AESA was tested but never fielded.  Guess add that in with MiG-35 if you so wish.

And there is no such thing as not being able to surpass because it was never fielded before.  If the tech outmatches then it does. Or it doesn't.  But since you had no idea how AESA modules worked before, your entire argument is worthless.

Guess who is wrong again ? You.

Rafale are deployed with AESA. In french army and in export models. Firsts were deliver in 2013. Like 7 years before russia make its first serial one. The Egyptian case represent the difference btw Russia and rhe west. Egypt could bought a radar with small rcs, new and very good missiles, and with an AESA radar to the west. And mig coukd only offer the outdated mig29M with no reduced rcs, no aesa radar and no new missile and even russian airforce wants to get ride off their SMT. That's the reality. Abd now they won't have anyone who will buy the mig-35 because they sold mig-29M to the few country able to buy mig35 India, algeria and Egypt.

If they urgently wanted AESA radar no matter what then are they bothering wasting their time developing new modules made of different elements and materials to get the best possible performance... the MiG-31 is huge... they could easily have put an early model AESA on there in the late 1990s and early 2000s if they were desperate to get them in to service... but as they likely realised, the PESA it already uses is powerful enough and cheap enough and it makes more sense spending a little bit of money upgrading it and improving it

Why Mig-31 ? It's not a new model. I never said PESA sucjs. I'm just saying that most russian fanboys criticized stealth and AESA as shit and usekess technology but now russia use it everywhere. And guess who will be stelthy with aesa radar ? The mig-31 replacement.

Hahahaha... Sukhoi offered them Su-30s for the same price they were paying for MiG-29s so Algeria disputed the definition of new aircraft in the contract so they could get out of it

They disputed nothing. The plane sucked and buying more sukhoi is not good for Mig. Russian didn't even tried to deny.

Most of their international purchases are via US aid, so it is being payed by US taxpayers anyway. Expensive shit is more expensive when it does not do what it is supposed to do properly or reliably.

Their aids are limited and far less than what customer pay. They know how to make money, don't worry for them.

thing is that they didn't get rich paying a fair price for thing

Western product have a better quality. That's proven in every field. But if you are happy with your chinese stuff, it's ok for me.

Like the wing mounted ones the Russians already have?

Like the one mounted on their ships and awacs.

The Russians are much more realistic, various ground based SAM systems have AESA radars... but only where it makes sense... they have not replaced all radars with PESAs or AESAs and they likely wont.

Mig-35, su57, corvettes, frigates, cruisers ... they are all getting aesa and stealth. So yeah they are replacing a big part of their radars with aesa and are using stealth everywhere they can. Something US did a long time ago.

Replacing old radars by new aea ON old stuff won't happen because it would be too much expensive. But the new designed stuff have aesa and stealth.

No it isn't. The MiG-31 is currently still the most capable interceptor in the world and still uses a PESA and is not even nearly stealthy.

The Su-57 is stealthy but the MiG-35 and Su-35 are not, and nor is the Tu-160M2 which has not started production yet and being a from scratch upgrade of the Tu-160 they could easily have made serious design changes to make it stealthy if they wanted to.

Again mig-31 is not a new design neither are su35, mig 35 or tu-160. Su57, pakda, mig-41 are and they will use stealth and aesa radars.

Tu-160 will launch missile from 2000km away. It doesn

d stealth. Its a supersonic aircraft.


[quote]Russia had MMW radar sensors on some of its tanks in the 1980s, but am looking forward to hear how the US invented APS systems when the abrams gets one that works.

T-64,T-72, t-80 and t90 never had APS neither. Abrams will use israeli proven trophy or iron fist. But it's not the topic for tanks.

Era, nera are add on. US and nato tank can have them if they want and they are gettig them. An abrams is already protected against russian rounds in the front without them.

What they did instead was introduce a full IADS for Syrian forces and connect them to their network in the area so they could better identify and track targets and since that happened no Israeli aircraft has flown over Syrian...

...But they have... F-35s are supposed to replace everything... only the US Navy doesn't trust them....

...Their cruise missiles are slow, don't really have enormous range, and are not stealthy so even a MiG-21 could shoot down quite a few, let alone something more modern.

Israel still attack Syria and SAA.

SAA has even better than mig 21, the mig-29. And they intercept nothing. And those israeli slow missile hit their targets.
Israeli are not replacing f-16i and f15 with f-35. They only ordered 50 to replace old f16A and b.
Maybe in your head it's different but reality is reality.

Interesting you say that but reject the same claim regarding Russian AESA technology... you are being very selective...

My claims were for airborne aesa radar. Western use EO and IR cameras in they pod since long time ago they have experience with them. Russia never used airborbe aesa radar and russian fanboys still think they will do better with their first one.

You claim Russia is in the shit because the US has more stealth fighters in service.

No I claim russia is following the US path after 20 years. They introduce aesa and stealth everywhere they can now just like US 20 years before.

Hole wrote:Reason No. 1 why the geniuses at the Potomac switched all radar production to AESA: much higher cost = more money for the MIC.

Reminds me of the discovery of stealth by superior western lifeforms in the USA from a 1960s Soviet manual. Giving us the F-117A a flying coffin and
other one-track mind and one-note Johnny solutions.

kvs wrote:

Hole wrote:Reason No. 1 why the geniuses at the Potomac switched all radar production to AESA: much higher cost = more money for the MIC.

Reminds me of the discovery of stealth by superior western lifeforms in the USA from a 1960s Soviet manual.   Giving us the F-117A a flying coffin and
other one-track mind and one-note Johnny solutions.

This same manuel was considered useless by the soviet. And it wasnt about stealth but about mathematics and physics of signal refraction. The one who implemented it in plane design were the US.

Why Mig-31 ? It's not a new model. I never said PESA sucjs. I'm just saying that most russian fanboys criticized stealth and AESA as shit and usekess technology but now russia use it everywhere. And guess who will be stelthy with aesa radar ? The mig-31 replacement.

Because it is doing the most important job in Russia and needs the best radar they can shoehorn in to it to get the job done of watching for bombers and their munitions and destroying them. It is why it had an electronically scanned radar before any western fighter.

Most Russian fanboys criticised Stealth and AESA for being fucking expensive, and in the case of stealth... it worked against radar and weapons of the time but over time new systems have been developed to render their enormous cost a total waste of time and money.

The F-117 is a great example... mediocre flight performance, and a payload of two laser guided bombs, and a flight range less than modern Russian cruise missiles.

They spent enormous money on a plane that can't operate during the day time, and certainly couldn't penetrate the defences of any country with a decent IADS... which is exactly what it was for.

In Desert Storm it hit a lot of targets that didn't need to be hit again like targets hit by other aircraft, but it still needed helicopters to fly in and take out certain large radar installations and other cruise missile attacks before it could start operating behind enemy lines... if they spent a quarter of what they spend on that aircraft on making their cruise missiles better they could have saved a fortune and actually had improved capability and not had to worry about losing aircrew.

I have yet to see evidence of where an AESA equipped aircraft has managed to defeat an aircraft with a conventional radar because it had an AESA radar and the other aircraft didn't, so how can you justify having to pay such an enormous difference in price to get something not really that much different in practical terms?

Most western aircraft operate using radar information from AWACS platforms, and most Russian aircraft get radar information from ground based radar and the IADS they operate within.

Stealth is OK if it is not so expensive that you can't afford to buy many... Poland will be getting 32 F-35s but I doubt they will even be able to afford to fly them at about 80 grand US per hour flying costs... which I fully support... they should ask for more in fact.

AESA is the way of the future probably for all radar including the new photonic designs, but you need to work out which material gives you the best power and performance at the most reasonable cost... something the west cares little about clearly.

Russia has a much tighter budget, and it is amusing you see that as a negative, because that is what is killing the west...

They disputed nothing. The plane sucked and buying more sukhoi is not good for Mig. Russian didn't even tried to deny.

Of course... they were rusted old crap so the Russian Air Force put them in service... because the RuAF like rusted old crap aircraft like the Su-35 and Su-57...

Their aids are limited and far less than what customer pay. They know how to make money, don't worry for them.

They have their customers by the balls... they "give" them aide for free and then dictate what they can or cannot buy with that money, but the shit they sell usually costs more than they give so the customer ends up paying for shit they don't need and probably don't want either... I am not worried about them at all... either of them... if you are a customer and take this shit then man up and grow some balls and say no to the poisoned charity. If you are the US arms producer, I wonder how you sleep at night knowing you are forcing your inferior crap down the throats of countries you call allies, and making your own tax payers pay top dollar for it...

But Russia and China are the bad guys...

Western product have a better quality.

It says so in their colour brochures...

That's proven in every field. But if you are happy with your chinese stuff, it's ok for me.

Hahahahaha.... love it... your 100 gender all inclusive homo loving superior western civilisation... all western stuff is quality and all chinese stuff is cheap crap... keep drinking the kool aide.... we have seen the wonderful influence the west has had on the world, and quite frankly we are not interested.

WWII was about the west defeating both Nazism and Communism all at once... history is what we write it to be right, so it makes sense that reality can be ignored or distorted to suit the current situation and requirement.

Like the one mounted on their ships and awacs.

But hang on, the Russians and Soviets have been working much longer than the west on longer wave radar technologies for anti stealth roles, but are you still claiming western long wave radars are better?

Mig-35, su57, corvettes, frigates, cruisers ... they are all getting aesa and stealth. So yeah they are replacing a big part of their radars with aesa and are using stealth everywhere they can. Something US did a long time ago.

Yeah, the Soviets have had supersonic anti ship missiles for decades... over half a century actually and some new US designs that have been planned for a while might get in to service.

MiG-35 and Su-35 are not stealth, but when the new radar designs they have been developing are ready of course they will get them you idiot, but they wont become stealthy and they don't need to.

The plan for the F-35 is to have internal weapons only for the start of the conflict and then as the enemy defences are weakened and all their aircraft and major SAMs are defeated they convert to non stealthy roles with external weapons.

Stealth is only intended for the start of a conflict and even then most platforms wont benefit very much from it anyway... stealthy AWACS anyone?

Replacing old radars by new aea ON old stuff won't happen because it would be too much expensive. But the new designed stuff have aesa and stealth.

See and that is where you really don't understand the Russians. It is mass production and wide deployment that will make AESA elements affordable and much more useful than if they were only fitted to a few platforms.

That is why their corvettes have UKSK launchers... because all their upgraded and new build platforms will have the same... it is called standardisation... and really something NATO knows very little about... what is the standard NATO 5.56mm rifle for instance... even the ammo from different countries has a slightly different loading...

Again mig-31 is not a new design neither are su35, mig 35 or tu-160. Su57, pakda, mig-41 are and they will use stealth and aesa radars.

Why do you think the MiG-41 will be stealthy? And how stealthy do you think it could possibly be with an enormous radar scanning for aircraft and incoming weapons flying very low and very high... it will probably track hypersonic missiles flying at more than 40km altitude and also ballistic missiles outside of the atmosphere too... and cruise missiles hugging the terrain... what part of that do you see as being stealthy or needing to be stealthy?

Tu-160 will launch missile from 2000km away. It doesn

Actually closer to 5,000km, and possibly rather more in the near future.. but if you agree the White Swan doesn't need to be stealthy then why do you think the MiG-41 interceptor needs to be stealthy?

T-64,T-72, t-80 and t90 never had APS neither.

They can be fitted with them if they felt they needed them, the T-55s of the naval infantry had them and tested both Drozd and Drozd-2 in Afghanistan during the 1980s.

Abrams will use israeli proven trophy or iron fist. But it's not the topic for tanks.

Era, nera are add on. US and nato tank can have them if they want and they are gettig them. An abrams is already protected against russian rounds in the front without them.

US and NATO tanks needed them all along because Soviet weapons could penetrate NATO tanks... something they only worked out after the cold war ended and they got to test some of the things the Soviets had in service. If the Abrams was protected against Russian rounds why are they now adopting APS systems? If Abrams rounds were good enough why have they updated their tank gun ammo several times and Germany introduced a longer gun for their tanks?

Israel still attack Syria and SAA.

They do, but they don't climb the fence and get into Syria like they used to, they often climb the fence to the next door neighbour that has a lot of big bushes to hide in and they throw water bombs and rocks from there and then scamper back to their own property immediately afterwards.

It seems that these bullies who used to climb the fence and hit the neighbours kids with impunity are not liking the neighbours kids big uncle living there because he would kick the shit out of them if they climbed the fence and tried to beat up his little nieces and nephews again.

SAA has even better than mig 21, the mig-29. And they intercept nothing.

Which just goes to show who the aggressor actually is. Syria is interested in defending itself because it has other problems right now. Israel is a bunch of who will bomb and attack anyone they please... well they used to be able to do as they pleased... now it is much harder and they only have themselves to blame for that.

And those israeli slow missile hit their targets.

They seem to get lucky occasionally when they launch enough...

Or are you a fanboy that things an air defence system either stops everything or it is useless...

Israeli are not replacing f-16i and f15 with f-35. They only ordered 50 to replace old f16A and b.
Maybe in your head it's different but reality is reality.

And now they have them they probably only want 10 for airshows and parades.

My claims were for airborne aesa radar. Western use EO and IR cameras in they pod since long time ago they have experience with them. Russia never used airborbe aesa radar and russian fanboys still think they will do better with their first one.

Their materials are better and should offer significantly better performance with fewer problems.

No I claim russia is following the US path after 20 years. They introduce aesa and stealth everywhere they can now just like US 20 years before.

No they are not. The Su-57 would probably not even count as stealth in the US because they have not compromised the entire design to get the smallest possible RCS that they can. And the AESA radars the Russians will introduce will be much better performing, lighter, and cheaper... the F-22 doesn't even have high off boresight AAMs for goodness sake... the standard Soviet Fighters of the late 80s and 90s all had helmet mounted cueing systems and high off boresight AAMs.

Indians are stupid. They don't know what they want. The deal was 126 rafale to be produced in india with off-sets, and rafales to be build in india. But they also wanted Dassault to be responsible of the quality, so if the rafale build by indian suck then dassault pays the reparation. French told them to go fuck themseleves. And then ended up buying rafales directly from dassault.

You could argue that, but then you could say the French entered an aircraft in a 10 billion dollar aircraft competition that they could never have delivered for anything like 10 billion... even 25 billion would have been a push and that would be French built planes not more expensive locally built ones.

It is just annoying to read how US stealth and aesa suck but when Russia uses the exact same tech 20 years after it becomes a wonderful technology.

US Stealth and AESA radars do suck... the former is eye wateringly expensive and the latter is based on an inferior technology base that limits its performance potential... and was also expensive too.

The US military budget could be 500 billion and its aircraft inventory could be brand new F-16 and F-15 aircraft, and nothing would be different except the US debt would perhaps be 18 trillion instead of 22... but the US wants the best 10,000 dollar toilet seat they can buy... and good on them... they are destroying themselves better than Russia or China ever could.

Justification that 187 F-22 can do the work of 700+ F15 A to D is just ludicrous, if it would hold any ground they would have been permanently deployed some of them in almost one between Kadena, Lakenheath and Incirklik or Ahmad al-Jaber not at Langley or Eglin.

I remember in the late 80s when the cold war was still officially going they said they wanted 1,500 F-22s. With the end of the cold war of course in the 1990s they said 750 would do and that was the plan because that was what they needed... but when they realised there was nothing to justify even F-15s let alone F-22s they stopped production and decided to build what they thought would be the F-16 to the bigger more expensive plane because there was really no other international platform that could threaten even legacy aircraft (ie Su-27 was a simple aircraft at that time with inferior radar to the F-15) so the F-35 started development... and two things destroyed it. First was the demand that it replace everything... land based fighters, conventional sea based fighters and vertical takeoff sea based fighters. This required a lot of internal space for a huge lift fan but also puffer jets around the place for control in the hover which ruined the design balance.

To put it short they were probably over-engineered and deliberately pushing too much above the tech possibilities of their time, resulting in something having over the top performance but at expense of reliability and operational flexibility.

If only...

The second thing that killed it was the idea to make it congress proof was to spread the locations where parts were built to economically depressed areas in states where the senator had sway over the pentagon and funding for military programmes. So for instance the job of making the tires would go to a place where they never had factories before.... everything had to be imported... the factory built, workers trained, material imported from other places and production requires the final products being sent to all sorts of different places... the logistics was terrible, but the chance funding would be cut was zero and the chances funding would be increased to solve problems was pretty much 100%.

This model was first used on the C-17 and it was enormously successful... despite being fairly ordinary, and enormously expensive, the pentagon found that even when they didn't ask for any that the committee that provided money for production would order more, so they didn't bother asking for any fairly quickly but they kept production going for as long as they could because it got them re-elected to have high paying skilled jobs in depressed areas...

The results were bad... despite being very very expensive it wasn't because they were made of top quality components or were particularly well made, they were often badly made of cheap materials.... not something to learn from at all. And while funding was thrown at them, problems persisted and were covered over rather than solved...

And not, a simple modernization program of existing airplane is not a viable option: their frames are just too old and overused to allow such a refurbishing, let alone to enhance their performances in order to match those of existing 4+ and 4++ planes.

With talk of the failure of the f-35 programme, they often suggest new build F-15 and new build F-16s with newer technology... basically copying the Russians with their continuing to use the Su-35 and MiG-35 together with their Su-57, which was their model all along to not depend on a few more expensive stealthy fighters to replace the workhorses.

And he has said that the Russians are not as far behind and you try to make out, they understand AESA radar technology and chose not to introduce it the way the US has introduced it.

That totally ignores the arguement of Europe... America is right and they do everything the right way, so there is the American way and the wrong way... it is funny to say the US adopted stealth and AESA radar 20 years ago, and so the Russians are just catching up now, but as the post above from marcellogo states the US was going for an all stealth fighter fleet made of F-22s to begin with and when that became too expensive they went for a new stealth fighter to replace all 4th gen fighters in the form of the F-35, but now that they are clearly not that good and expensive they are not planning to put 4th gen fighters into production... so if you are trying to argue that the Russians are behind... it is pretty clear they were right all along and ahead of the US because Su-35s and MiG-35s are being exported and produced for domestic use, while their stealth fighter is starting production and should be able to be produced and exported for a decade or more... so who is ahead of whom?

This same manuel was considered useless by the soviet.

No, it wasn't. Of course it wasn't considered a new bible like in the US where penetrating airspace to murder people is considered more important than anything else.

And it wasnt about stealth but about mathematics and physics of signal refraction.

It was a math model to predict signal refraction and reflection... without which stealth design was hit and miss... you make a scale model and you direct radar waves at it and you measure the results... and then you build another model and repeat. You don't understand how the waves reflect and refract so it is all based on guesses and making scale models is slow when you have no basic understanding of how it all works.

With the Soviet paper they could build a model and use a computer to test thousands of shapes and designs... early computers required simple shapes with flat fractal surfaces, but later faster computers with more power and more memory meant curves could be processed.

Most Russian fanboys criticised Stealth and AESA for being fucking expensive, and in the case of stealth... it worked against radar and weapons of the time but over time new systems have been developed to render their enormous cost a total waste of time and money.


The F-117 is a great example... mediocre flight performance, and a payload of two laser guided bombs, and a flight range less than modern Russian cruise missiles.

It is still expensive even for russians. But russians like you say don't even go at full stealth.

F-117 is a very good bomber. You will say it was destroyed by old s-125 but Tu-22M with it supersonic speed and wonderfull weapon was also destroyed by Georgian air force.

And guess who is making a flying wing bomber 20 years after the americans ? The russians.

Of course... they were rusted old crap so the Russian Air Force put them in service... because the RuAF like rusted old crap aircraft like the Su-35 and Su-57...

Yes they got that rusted mig and put them in service.

They have their customers by the balls... they "give" them aide for free and then dictate what they can or cannot buy with that money ...

Number 1 in arms production. Control the richest countries. Spend the more in R&D. They are in a very good situation for them.

It says so in their colour brochures... Rolling Eyes

It's not the french or the american who sold rusted migs.

But hang on, the Russians and Soviets have been working much longer than the west on longer wave radar technologies for anti stealth roles, but are you still claiming western long wave radars are better?

They have better electronics so better radar computing. As a proof, russia is using Texas Instrument products in their S-400. Well not in your head but in our reality it is.

Yeah, the Soviets have had supersonic anti ship missiles for decades... over half a century actually and some new US designs that have been planned for a while might get in to service.

And when they saw how good was exocet they hurry up making the kh-35.

MiG-35 and Su-35 are not stealth, but when the new radar designs they have been developing are ready of course they will get them you idiot, but they wont become stealthy and they don't need to.

Well su35 was not in my list. It has no stealth and no aesa. It's a plane that bets everything on row power.

The other will get them (aesa and stealth) just like the americans 20 years ago.

See and that is where you really don't understand the Russians. It is mass production and wide deployment that will make AESA elements affordable and much more useful than if they were only fitted to a few platforms.

That is why their corvettes have UKSK launchers... because all their upgraded and new build platforms will have the same... it is called standardisation... and really something NATO knows very little about... what is the standard NATO 5.56mm rifle for instance... even the ammo from different countries has a slightly different loading...

See that's where you are biased. Aren't US mass producing stealth and aesa ? Yes they are. Aren't the US navy and french standardized ? Yes they are.

Why do you think the MiG-41 will be stealthy? And how stealthy do you think it could possibly be with an enormous radar scanning for aircraft and incoming weapons flying very low and very high... it will probably track hypersonic missiles flying at more than 40km altitude and also ballistic missiles outside of the atmosphere too... and cruise missiles hugging the terrain... what part of that do you see as being stealthy or needing to be stealthy?

It was said so by an official in an article posted here. It's not me guessing (something you do a lot).

but if you agree the White Swan doesn't need to be stealthy then why do you think the MiG-41 interceptor needs to be stealthy?

I just look what is done, how it's used and what they are doing. Officials said it will incorporate stealth.

Their materials are better and should offer significantly better performance with fewer problems.

Then why are they offering su30 with western made components ? Why did they beg for french Catherine cameras for their t-90 ? Why did they beg for Thales components for their su-30SM ? Why are they using US electronics in their S-400 ?

They do, but they don't climb the fence and get into Syria like they used to, they often climb the fence to the next door neighbour

Everytime it is successful.

I remember in the late 80s when the cold war was still officially going they said they wanted 1,500 F-22s. With the end of the cold war of course in the 1990s they said 750 would do and that was the plan because that was what they needed... but when they realised there was nothing to justify even F-15s let alone F-22s they stopped production

Those 187 F-22 would have destroyed the russian fleet of su27. That's why they quikly made the su35 and s-400.

No, it wasn't. Of course it wasn't considered a new bible like in the US where penetrating airspace to murder people is considered more important than anything else.

They didn't even knew it could be used to make stealthy aircraft. They never used those maths. It was only theory for them. It's the US who had the idea of implementing it into aircraft design.

But russian fanboys are happy because it was a soviet guy who made the book

It is still expensive even for russians. But russians like you say don't even go at full stealth.

They could have gone for US level stealth if they wanted to, but that would cost 1,000 times more and perhaps might have been an extra 3-4 years of being useful before the enemy found a way to defeat it, so instead of going hard on stealth they went hard enough to make something useful but still affordable.

F-117 is a very good bomber. You will say it was destroyed by old s-125 but Tu-22M with it supersonic speed and wonderfull weapon was also destroyed by Georgian air force.

F-117 is out of service and its performance results could have been achieved with rather less money invested in better cruise missile technology... and investment they could still be benefiting from today, unlike the benefits from the F-117.

The Tu-22M was either destroyed by a BUK or a Spyder... the fact that the Israelis are not crowing about it suggests a BUK, which is a modern up to date SAM system against a rather old unupgraded bomber like the Backfire... unlike the ancient S-125 against the state of the art super stealthy F-117 they should not have even known was operating over their airspace if you believe the pamphlet...

And guess who is making a flying wing bomber 20 years after the americans ? The russians.

Who made theirs 40 years after the Germans... what is your point?

Actually the Soviets developed and built a flying wing design during WWII from memory.... just a prototype, but still.

Yes they got that rusted mig and put them in service.

Of course, if it is not gold plated it must be useless, but the amusing thing is that recent figures seem to show very little performance difference between Flankers and Fulcrums, but there is a significant difference in operational costs. Something NATO will find out as more F-35s enter service no doubt... the amusing thing is that western fanboys are starting to realise what a real dog these aircraft are and what an economic burden they are going to put on Americas allies... Turkey has really dodged a bullet here to be honest... even if they end up buying MiG-35s.

Number 1 in arms production. Control the richest countries. Spend the more in R&D. They are in a very good situation for them.

No they are not. They charge the most for their weapons so their sales figures are the best, and they blackmail their so called allies to buy their products... which tells you immediately how good their products are. They spend more on anything and are deeper in debt than they know how to fix and getting deeper all the time.... no this is not a good situation for them unless they are in denial... and they are so they are ignoring the problem and hope the next president will fix it... the current one has made things much much worse... will he get a chance to finish America off or will another person get the priviledge to fight the people who actually run the US or should I say are running the US into the ground.

It's not the french or the american who sold rusted migs.

No, they make products and get paid and then refuse to deliver to customers like Mistrals and F-35s...

They have better electronics so better radar computing. As a proof, russia is using Texas Instrument products in their S-400. Well not in your head but in our reality it is.

Not any more, the US has been banned from providing such electronics to Russia for quite some time and Russia has been using Russian substitutes... which is good for the Russian economy and export potential for Russian products because they own them fully.

And when they saw how good was exocet they hurry up making the kh-35.

Would be better if they actually ever exploded. The SS-N-25 was developed for export, and was first used on an East German ship in the 1980s.

But otherwise it was rather a huge improvement on the original it was actually nicknamed Harpoonski.

Well su35 was not in my list. It has no stealth and no aesa. It's a plane that bets everything on row power.

It is being exported widely and will be a significant part of the Russian Air Force... and it as AESA radars start being widely deployed on Russian aircraft it will be fitted to Su-35s.

The other will get them (aesa and stealth) just like the americans 20 years ago.

You can't give a design stealth, and if it carries weapons externally then it is not stealthy... even the F-35 is not described as stealthy with external weapons fitted... only a moron or a European marketing department would call a fighter plane with external weapons stealthy because otherwise they would have to develop an actual stealth plane with internal weapons bays like a real stealth plane.

You bollock on about Russia not having a stealth plane, but Europe don't have anything even near service... interesting that...

See that's where you are biased. Aren't US mass producing stealth and aesa ? Yes they are. Aren't the US navy and french standardized ? Yes they are.

The US mass producing Stealth and AESA does not make NATO standardised unless all NATO allies are using only US Stealth aircraft and US AESA radar elements... and they are not. How many F18s and F35s does the French Navy have in service to standardise with the US Navy?

How many Rafales does the US Navy operate?

You do understand what standardisation actually means don't you?

It was said so by an official in an article posted here. It's not me guessing (something you do a lot).

Lots of officials say lots of things that don't turn out to be correct, are you going to listen to them or are you going to use common sense?

If Su-35s and MiG-31s are not stealthy, why would MiG-41s need to be?

Except if they are supposed to operate over Europe or the US...

Then why are they offering su30 with western made components ?

Because India and some other countries request foreign items to be included.

Why did they beg for french Catherine cameras for their t-90 ? Why did they beg for Thales components for their su-30SM ?

Beg? Didn't they pay for them? Perhaps if they begged for Mistral carriers it would make more sense why they were not delivered...

Why are they using US electronics in their S-400 ?

If they did it was probably because they were available at the right price. I realise all American stuff is all American... their tanks have Belgian machine guns and British armour and German main guns, and electronics with components made in China or South Korea...

Everytime it is successful.

No it isn't.

Those 187 F-22 would have destroyed the russian fleet of su27. That's why they quikly made the su35 and s-400.

So why do they want 3,500 F-35s?

They didn't even knew it could be used to make stealthy aircraft. They never used those maths. It was only theory for them. It's the US who had the idea of implementing it into aircraft design.

It was just an interesting idea and the US turned it into a way of murdering people... you are quite right, the US contributions to civilisation are enormous... Hitler and Goebbels would be so jealous to see their toys to control and to spy and I would like to say they would not understand why they have such self control in limiting their use, but they clearly do not and wontonly murder civil rights activists and popular politicians that refuse to be bought by the west on a daily basis... I am sure Hitler would be jealous of the creativity and effort put in to developing weapons to kill ethnic groups around the world, and their expanding ability to collect information. I mean the US doesn't tell the EU to do what they are told because the EU respects them... they do so because the NSA likely has folders full of photos and recordings and evidence of overseas bank accounts.... like an American wikileaks and cayman island papers all rolled into one huge database at the fingertips of those in the Whitehouse... the last place you would want it to be.

But keep cheering for the people destroying the real American dream and indeed the western ideals of human rights and family values... how is that going by the way...

But russian fanboys are happy because it was a soviet guy who made the book.

No, the Russian Fanboys are happy because the Americans were too stupid to work things out for themselves and in effect are no better than they claim those stupid Chinese are that can only copy and can't invent for themselves.

I mean with stupid Russians making rusty planes and stupid Chinese that can only copy... why are people talking about the threat Russia and China pose to the west... it just does not make sense... unless the western view of the world is wrong...

@Isos you are not neutral anymore and I have always valued your neutrality and your expertise!

Isos wrote:It's not the french or the american who sold rusted migs.

I remember rusted Humwees and ships for Ukraine and other east european allies

Isos wrote:Those 187 F-22 would have destroyed the russian fleet of su27. That's why they quikly made the su35 and s-400.

In open unprotected area...YES! Combined with russian IADS...NO!

Isos wrote:Then why are they offering su30 with western made components ? Why did they beg for french Catherine cameras for their t-90 ? Why did they beg for Thales components for their su-30SM ? Why are they using US electronics in their S-400 ?

I think you don't get the point of technology transfer! USA is using in the F-35B russian technology of Yak company, american fanbois don't talk about it but it's true.

If someone has a good product or technology you just want to get it as fast as you can, sometimes you steal the thechnology and sometimes you just buy the technology. The Catherine cameras were good for their time, so Russia buyed the technology. The same for F-35B and Yak company.

If russian equiptment is soooo extreme crap...why China and other countries buy it? Turkey preferred S-400 over F-35...this should give a reason to think.

Isos wrote:The other will get them (aesa and stealth) just like the americans 20 years ago.

And again you forget the 10 lost years of economic disaster. Russia had simply no money in 90ies to afford a 5gen fighter, good AD systems, new cruisers etc. they had enough money to feed their soldiers...Yeltsin was a traitor!!!

Now Russia is back again and with a more aggressive military role. Combined with IADS Su-27/35 is good enough to defend the homeland, but a scenario outside of Russia requires different equiptment. Russia now tries to project power, for that you need a special amount of "stealth".

Isos wrote:

but if you agree the White Swan doesn't need to be stealthy then why do you think the MiG-41 interceptor needs to be stealthy?

I just look what is done, how it's used and what they are doing. Officials said it will incorporate stealth.

Mig-41 will have NO STEALTH! It's not possible. The Mig-41 will be optimized for aerodynamic, low drag and nor for stealth...combining both is real problem. At Mach 4 no stealth coating will survive the heat at the edges of the aircraft.

Whatever bullshit officials are talking about...no stealth!

Isos wrote:What I see is Syrian and Russians dying and no response from any of them. Well, they called some isreli staff in Moscow to say them it was bad...

The only one responding is Iran.

Not a SINGLE russian soldiers died due to IDF strikes! Only due to complete incompetence of SAA AD-Specialists.

Russia and Iran, both compete for influence in the region. Russia needs iranian sponsored milita, because SAA is incompetent and Iran needs russian air-support. But you can't trust Iran...NEVER and NEVER. Iran is ruled by a religious dictatorship, with a few small democratic elements...sooner or later they want to spread influence of Islam in Russia. Russia want to keep Iran out in Syria, but it's not possible, due to complete incompetence of SAA, so they tolerate the Iranians.

If you keep an eye at the situation you will recognize that the relation between Russia and Iran is not very close. The Alawites in Syria are not really Shi'ites, only some far relatives. For Russia it would be a disaster to have the Alawites religious indoctrinated like the Shi'ites in Iran. At other hand they don't want to see Iran destabilized, because it's a neighbor, so the devil they know is a good devil

Syria is really complicated!