Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
Given we need to rely on publicly available info and official quotes (sometimes apparently more than in common sense), the opinion can be defended, even when I don't agree.
They continue to upgrade the MiG-29KR and the Su-33, and the MiG-35 is being made carrier compatible, yet they clearly need arrested landing equipment to operate on the Kuznetsov... so even supposing they develop a VSTOL fighter in the next 20 years the MiG and the Su will likely continue to operate from the K.
like MiG-29k in 90s? no, not really. So far the only argument against new deck fighter is your opinion. Im afraid this is not enough for Russian MoD.
The Russian mod is talking about STOL aircraft with the possiblity of STOVL... it is your warped little mind that converts it to VSTOL.... nobody with any experience in the field wants vertical take off... it is like wanting someone who can jump.... people who jump with a run up can jump higher and further than people who jump from a standing position... if you need the best jumper it might be the one that jumps from a standing position, but in the interests of getting the best height and length of jump you tell him to run and jump and never try it from a standing position.
AWACS can be STOL or VSTOL (if tiltrotor) so what would be argument for money for emals besides?
The best solution is an airship for AWACS so you don't need any carriers at all... an airship mounted radar could also be equipped with photonic radar that will give a photograph like image of targets enormous distances away so you wont need fighter jets to fly out and inspect contacts... surface launched SAMs can use target data from the airborne airship operating at 30km plus altitude... safe from AAM and SAM attack and covered by the ships below it... no need at all for fighters or AWACS aircraft and it could keep station 24/7 with a small nuclear reactor to generate continuous electrical power for electric motors...
c'mon you are really intelligent guy. Why do you pretend to be moron? try to be serious.
BTW PSK-FA cost ~₽60bn so $1bn to to days prices (wiki says in 2010 ~$3bn). Of course now you have to pay people more but Engines, avionics, stealth "skins" all is there. to be reused. Factories have specialists and are up and running.
SO both time and costs can be reasonable.
The cost of a VSTOL fighter will not be cheap, you are deluding yourself... they have to design a new engine for goodness sake... that alone will take ten years and billions of dollars.
i assume you understand written language. Then read an interview with gen. Bondaryev.
And how long will he be in his position?
In an interview with an Army guy in the late 1990s, Russian armour is junk and Russia should get rid of the T-90 and buy Leopard tanks... we he right too?
No matter what anyone says the simple facts are that the Russian Navy has not got bottomless pockets... it wanted lots of carriers... on the smaller ones it was going to have MiG-33s and on the bigger ones it was going to have Su-33s.... and yes on both carriers it was also going to have Yak-41s, but there was no money for more than one carrier and the Yak-41 wasn't working properly so it was the first to be cancelled. The MiG-29K was fully multirole, which made it expensive for what it was... the Su-33 was cheaper and simpler because it was basically an Su-27 with a tail hook and folding bits... so AAMs and dumb iron bombs and unguided rockets was the extent of its capabilities. No ground or sea mapping radar... just an interceptor... which is all they wanted so they bought them.
An opportunity arose where they got the chance to tack an order for upgraded MiG-29KRs on an Indian order... the Indians paid for production and tooling to be set up and the Russian Navy got some MiG-29KR aircraft much cheaper than they ever could have otherwise.
You say that the boss has said the MiG and the Sukhoi are going even though the former are literally brand new... well I would say that this just means they are making a naval Su-57 to replace them, and they are working on a light 5th gen fighter that could also replace them but when push comes to shove they will make the same decision... go with the big plane... and not the smaller more expensive one that is more capable on paper but in practise they want an interceptor first and foremost... the rest can be done with missiles like Zircon...
The air component in the Navy are not powerful for a reason... the navy does not want air power taking over from ships because air power cannot hold water like a ship or sub can... just the same as the army don't want their air power to replace Iskander...
So you know better diagnose? dude what are you smoking after weekend?! or it as after wild night in "Blue Oyster" ?
Blue Oyster club? Never been to your house...
Let's return to facts: Irbis N035 X-band so doesnt "see " stealth that far. English wiki says 0,01m RCS is 90km while F-35 can see him form at least 240km.
Who cares what wiki says? When the Syrians got S-300, the Israeli F-35s stopped crossing the border... how far away does wiki say S-300 can see F-35s?
yo yo expert! yes and for adding a hook they need special programme,name Perspektivny Aviastionny Kompek Palubny Aviatsyi? PAK PA (vide: recent interview chief of naval AF) and 7-10 years?
Yo yo nigger... a programme name means they want a particular product but any design bureau can develop a contender... MiG and Yak might develop a light-medium STOVL fighter for the job, while Sukhoi might simply navalise the Su-57 for the role... which are you putting your money on?
MiGs you meant those 4 on Kuz that were actually flying? dont bother, risks? leave this to Russian MoD/OAK. They have real knowledge
Experience of Yak-36, Yak-38, and Yak-41 of crashing and burning...
Why ? Why do you think the Su 35 is far better than the Indian Su 30MKI ?
It uses 5th gen avionics that make it able to perform the roles with a single crew man...
UAE ??? How did they improve the Pantsir ? They only use an export version which cannot be as high tech as the Russian one.
It was the demands of the UAE that led to the Pantsir-S1... the Russian military was happy with the original much less capable model.
a) Yak-41 killed nobody as MiG-29k did. RIP pilots, good that this failed fighter is dead now.
The Yak-41 programme was killed before it could claim lives... the most humane kill.
Of course Rafale is better and made in bigger numbers ! you have no evidence but your gut feeling is ok.
My black friend, you think numbers on a spec sheet tell you which plane is best?
and over 300 F-35 delivered, so how many Rafale were delivered?
Hahahahaha... and when Serbia starts buying M4 carbines because America tells them to I guess the M4 carbine becomes better than any other rifle too...
F-35 is everything to do with politics and nothing to do with substance...
If Rafales were that good, by now India would've ordered many of them for her navy, esp. since they did for the AF!
If F-35s were all that good they would have ordered them for her navy and AF...
The new Russian STOVL fighter'll be at least as capable as the F-35B.
But how much will it cost?
Problem with Rafale is it is too expensive for what you get.
The problem for foreign customers... for France it is investing in its own MIC.
as I thought, no evidence just word of mouth. Well big black cock tv didn't say anything about harriers nor F-35 landing vertically ? no? well, CNN did neither. But Ruskies are baad. Ergo: only Russian VSTOL are damging runways US/UK ones dont thumbsup thumbsup thumbsup
Case closed as for me.
Harriers don't have afterburner, and the F-35 didn't exist in 1992.
BTW so how it goest with Rafale vs. F-35 intl sales comparison? dobt be shy provide numbers
Who gives a fuck?
Neither will enter Russian service... this thread is about Russian fighter development, not the crap France or the US try to ram down their allies throats...
you mean and twisting and bribery ? It India it ended up in big scandal. Arabs are more accustomed to palms greasing. But in every case it is easy to compare all Rafale history vs only F-35 made till now. Rafele is clear looser. An outdated looser good only in 3rd world countries bombing.
I am confused.... arm twisting and bribery regarding the Rafale, but the F-35 is a good aircraft?
I can smell your burning underpants from here...
F-35 is perhaps overpriced (cost of programme) but is not as bad as many of you think. At least not for Russian chief-in-commander AF.
Su-57 is very likely a better fighter but even if you can have 3 F-35 for 1 Su-57 Russians are on loosing side of business...
Of course because in war it is like dungeons and dragons and everyone puts their cards on the table so three F-35 cards go up against 1 Su-57 card every time... but let me ask you why Israeli and US F-35s wont enter Syrian airspace while Syria has S-300 and no Su-57s at all?
The fact is: none of Rafale clients could even dream to buy F-35. Besides Rafale is French only but F-35 has also industrial links to many other countries that is one of reasons why they buy.
UK, Italy, Netherlands, Canada,Australia, Turkey , Norway and Denmark. What they would buy old French fighter is they can buy the oe they invested in?
You wander so close to the truth... it is amusing... F-35 isn't a plane... it is an arms racket... a sham to separate western taxpayers from their hard earned cash for something that is obsolete before it is even declared operational...
They'll beat Russia & China to having naval STOVL fighters in the Pacific!
Good... that is not a race Russia needs to win...
The only country that should fear this carrier is north korea.
Not really... the short operational range of the F-35 means most coastal anti ship systems the Russians sell would obliterate these carriers.
Should the Izumo-class undergo a retrofit to accommodate the F-35B, the ships’ ASW capabilities would be somewhat curtailed, as numerous defense analysts have pointed out.
Like I said.... convert a helicopter carrier to operate STOVL fighters and it becomes less useful in its primary role...
What they really need are a couple of Ka-52Ks with R-77s and Kh-35s...
