Why can't Russia make good airplanes anymore?
Because they're not incredibly rich, and can't afford to throw the GDP of a small country at building one.
Who needs airplanes if you have a dozen thousand nuclear weapons.
>>28029273
Because every conflict in the Cold War was settled with nukes.
>>28029273
Russia does, hence why they keep making them.
However >>28029268 is correct, they are just too poor to do so properly.
So is it basically a fox and the grapes scenario with Russia where since they can't have an Air Force they build SAMs and call them the greatest?
>>28029456
it's how russia has ALWAYS worked.
>>28029456
They are the only one who build SAMs, so they has rights to call them greatest. As for where did it started - it started 1 May 1960, when U 2 was shoot down by SAM.
>>28029652
>They are the only one who build SAMs
>>28029268
This is pretty much /thread
>>28029256
Because all the Jewish engineers and scientists left Russia.
>>28029268
This. It all comes down to the almighty shekel.
If Russia could throw around the sheer amount of cash that the US could, they'd already the PAK FA fully developed with 200 aircraft operational by now.
The fact that the US could even get the F-35 going is a testament to how much fucking money they can afford to burn.
>>28029256
they're poor and spend their money on shills now
>>28029865
But the pak-fa is trash
>RCS between 1 and .1
>2015
>>28029652
The U-2 was only expected to last for about two years of active service over the USSR before the Russkies learned to shoot it down.
It did like twice that.
>>28029256
Because our political block fell apart. Without cooperation among such a large area, whether it's simply arms purchases, or some other countries handling development of a portion of the range of technology, it's not possible to justify or scheme out the same level of development.
>>28033468
Just looked up the meaning of RCS and found this website.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/stealth-aircraft-rcs.htm
>yfw the F-22 has a smaller radar signature than an insect
>>28029865
Yeah, I hear S-ducts are really expensive shit, anon!
![PAKFA[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/DsYQomG.jpg "PAKFA[1].jpg")
>>28034130
there's 2 explanations for that
a) either the airframe is designed to accommodate the next-gen engines, which may be shorter without exposed blades
or
b) they decided that stealth wasn't a priority
the mig 1.44 and su47 had s-ducts with hidden engine faces, so it's not like they're incapable of making them
>>28029256
They can, just not expensive ones.
>>28034255
Achoo!
>>28029256
The collapse of the Soviet Union
>>28033884
I honestly think that Russia should have joined the EU.
If you're a mid-tier power, it's better to join a group, and be the most powerful player in that group, than to strike out on your own.
>>28033468
Bullshit amerikansky kid
Give proofs
No seriously stop bullshitting
>>28034356
Russian official figures on the PAK-FA's RCS.
>>28034298
They would not be the largest economy in the EU.
>>28029748
>Jewish engineers and scientists
Weak bait anon.
>>28029256
They don't have access to western engines and they really don't have much money.
>>28034734
Hell, they wouldn't even be in the top 3. They'd almost be tied with Spain for fucking 5th place.
>>28034244
Actually it's
C) the Pak-fa is yet another flanker derivative and adding S-ducts works require a clean sheet design.
>>28034464
Link
>>28034845
http://archive.defencenews.in/defence-news-internal.aspx?get=&id=kNhG6J8F3yE=
It should be noted that that estimation is made with the assumption of S-ducts, so the actual figure may be higher as of right now.
>>28034356
http://in.rbth.com/blogs/2014/01/16/patent_analysis_shows_how_pak-fa_differs_from_f-22_in_air_combat_philos_32309
>the intention of the designers is to reduce the radar cross-section (RCS) of the aircraft to an “average figure of 0.1-1 square metre”. At this range the aircraft appears like a bird on enemy radar and becomes difficult – though not impossible – to spot.
>>28034933
Yes but that's an average figure calculated by averaging cross sections at different angles. That's how the Russians publish their RCS figures.
American RCS figures are basically the full frontal RCS of that plane.
We need to know the frontal RCS of the PAK FA before comparing it to any American 5th Gen aircraft
>>28034933
Um, so, where's the link to the patent?
>>28035005
http://195.208.85.248/Archive/PAT/2012FULL/2012.01.27/DOC/RUNWC1/000/000/002/440/916/document.pdf
>>28035018
>http://195.208.85.248/Archive/PAT/2012FULL/2012.01.27/DOC/RUNWC1/000/000/002/440/916/document.pdf
Ooh, thanks!
>>28035005
http://195.208.85.248/Archive/PAT/2012FULL/2012.01.27/DOC/RUNWC1/000/000/002/440/916/document.pdf
It's in Russian if you can read that.
That said, many sites have cited this patent and all agree on the same figure, so it's not a matter of translation.
>>28029256
Define good.
If you mean compete with the US military aviation industrial complex, no they haven't the money to compete. They can keep up with the older gen aircraft we sell NATO members though.
The US made keeping up too expensive but then again the globalization of economies made conventional war between US/EU/China/Russia many magnitudes more expensive.
Soooo they do AA misiles pretty well and that's good enough to give the US trouble against people low enough on the totem pole to go to war with.
Because the US pays them not to
>>28034764
*pre-sanctions
They had a bright future and were widely expected to have the largest economy before 2025.
Then Ukraine happened.
>>28035543
Christ.
Though it looks like most of those economies shrank. America and China are too stronk of course. Also good for Britain.
>>28035543
>>28035543
It has almost nothing to do with sanctions and almost everything to do with oil prices dropping 2.5-fold, ruble exchange rate followed oil prices almost linearly.
>>28035598
UK was smart enough to not go full EUtard like other European countries. You never go full EUtard.
Nevertheless these past few years have been a soft recession. Fed rates have gone up, and overall global stability and market volatility right now isn't making the investment Jew very happy.
USA, China, and India were the only major economies to have actually grown.
>>28035600
That was a huge part of it.
But look at other oil countries like SA, commodities have fallen sure, but Russia is an entirely different case. Sanctions have stopped investment nearly altogether, and other countries are looking for different sources of oil and gas other than Russia, it is not just about the crude prices. You need to look at large, long-term deals that have now been scrapped and renegotiated.
>>28035719
Yea russia is a case of exchange rates not being accurate indications of anything.
>>28035791
It matters when the majority of nations Russia deals with conduct international business in Euros or Dollars.
>>28029256
That implies they ever made good planes
>>28035719
Fed rates have not gone up.
>>28035060
Oh, I don't intend to argue the translation, just haven't seen the patent.
>>28035543
Fucking fucklebucks, I didn't realize they'd grown smaller than fucking Spain.
Nah, Russia is not as oil dependent as it often caricatured. The issue is that they have never give a fuck about the economy. They are the champions of currency depreciation. Other oil-producing countries that are doing better is because they are more diversified, have huge foreign reserves and a lot of people owns them money, or are truly desperate burning their reserves in the hopes of higher oil prices. It's not even because they are incompetent, it's because they don't give a fuck.
>>28034298
It would have turned the EU into a nightmarish superpower with the resources of Russia and industries of Germany.
>>28035719
Holy shit. They literally make nothing. Their entire economy is based on sucking things out of the ground.
>>28037934
>Russia is not as oil dependent as it often caricatured.
Take a look at >>28035719 and try again.
>>28037977
>The entire economy is exporting.
>>28037990
Exporting is only 10-15% of their GDP.
>>28029652
It kind of ended in 1966 when the US fielded an aircraft that evaded more than 4,000 Soviet/Russian SAMs.
>>28038015
Except you have only faced modern SAM in training exercises since Vietnam.
>>28035543
M E X I C O
E
X
I
C
O
>>28034736
The Soviets were pretty anti jew.
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1110.1556.pdf
>>28038015
you mean an aircraft that only flew along the periphery for fear of getting shot down in deep soviet territory?
btw i'd love to know how you came up with that 4k number
>>28037999
28.3%, actually.
>>28038015
>Muh bullshit statistic
If that figure doesn't immediately fail the smell-test for you, you really need to check your perception of reality.
It's unbelievable the amount of mythic nonsense surrounds the SR-71.
>>28034356
>>28037999
According to the World Bank exports made up 28.6% of their GDP in 2013. Russia's GDP in 2013 was 2.097 trillion dollars giving us roughly 600 billion in exports. Using the export map posted earlier and restricting it entirely to oil, natural gas, coal, and their byproducts puts those specific exports at approximately 19.6% of Russia's total GDP.
>>28029652
>russia built SAMs first
I never knew the MIM-7 was a Russian Missile
2 decades of brain drain
>>28038108
I sure love how people claim that Russian missiles are the best and quote S-400's 400km range.
When new SM-3 has a range of 2500km and new Aster 3000km.
Russia is horribly behind.
>>28038135
Anti-ballistic missile.
>>28038135
>SM-3 has a range of 2500km and new Aster 3000km.
WOAH there, cowboy.
>>28029652
I don't even
>>28038149
That can be used against planes. At least Aster sure as hell can.
>>28038135
teh sm-3 is an ABM you moron, it can hit ballistic targits and satelites in teh upper atmosphere and space, but to my knowledge has never been fired at an aerodynamic target.
its also navally mounted only so it doesnt factor into ground engagments
>>28039127
>S-400 range: 400km
>aster 15 range: 30km
>aster 30 range: 120km
check your fact before you post you complete fucking idiot
>>28039156
Aster Block 1 has range of 600km. And they are working on Block 1NT that will increase it to 1000km.
Also, S-400 range is pure bullshit and propaganda. Arrow could intercept targets up to 300km but even Jews have the decency to list it's range as 150km because they know the hit probability beyond that is shit.
I bet S-400 can't reliably hit beyond 200km.
>>28039183
Russia always lists the maximum range that oncoming non maneuvering targets can be hit as max range.
The USA has spent more than 1.5 trillion dollars on the F-35 which can't even fly properly. Even if it was going as planned, this shitplane was still going to be far behind any of it's competitors in performance. On the other side Russia has T-50 PAK FA which is working great for now. Also with the new khibiny system and the almighty SU-35 I don't think anyone can challenge them at this point. Just look at the size of that thing
>>28039321
>The USA has spent more than 1.5 trillion dollars on the F-35
>>28039337
http://www.cnbc.com/2014/07/31/how-dods-15-trillion-f-35-broke-the-air-force.html
>>28039356
>people who dont understand this figure still exist
holy fuck
how are people so fucking stupid
>>28029256
if you are referring to their plane being shot down buy turkey, it's because the RU plane was a bomber(less maneuverable/equipped) and the turkish jet was a fighter. also the fact that russia thought turkey wasnt a bunch of smelly dicks
>>28039357
Could you explain it? Genuinely interested.
>>28039147
>Aegis ashore
>>28039420
Look at the break down. Its only 300bn to develop and buy all the aircraft, the rest of the money is operating and maintaining the aircraft over their fifty years of service.
Russia's main problem is the fact that we literally cannot into effective PR. Case in point - RCS figures for F-22 and PAK FA. F-22's published RCS figure is the minimal frontal RCS, while PAK FA's is the average of all projections. Of course retards on the internet never read anything further than the headline before jumping to retarded conclusions. USSR-style secrecy (pretty much nobody even suspected current issue Club-K are that long ranged, or that X-101 are in use) also doesn't help.
Of course secrecy is important, nobody argues that, but we're no longer in the cold war and no longer preparing to assault/defend Fulda Gap. Presenting a good face can bring you more investment and profit in the long run than having an actually better performing product.
Same goes for literally everything - worst things you've heard about Russia can usually be attributed to nobody in Russia caring enough to refute them.
>>28039447
No. Russians refuse to publish minimal frontal RCS because they know it's horrible. Otherwise they'd be crowing about it and playing it up like every single other weapons system they make.
>>28035543
Largest by 2025 my ass, China alone would crush that dream
>>28039460
That's not the point. Our defense industry (especially the major decision making positions) is mostly staffed by older guys, who probably have been doing it since the 80s. Back in those days secrecy was absolutely paramount, so it was drilled in their heads to pursue it to the detriment of everything else.
Also, until recently the majority of defense industries was directly funded by the government, so they really never had to have any PR at all - all they had to do is butter up some high ranking generals to receive more funding.
>>28039493
It's a pretty theory but utter horseshit. The Soviets and then the Russians have been overselling their capabilities with nearly every weapons system since the 50's.
>>28039493
Actually, most Russian defense companies publish nice brochures for their products these days.
>>28039519
Gee, it's as if you can prove your point.
>>28039566
Keyword being "these days". They didn't have to actually SELL their product until early 2000s.
>>28040241
>They didn't have to actually SELL their product until early 2000s.
So the Soviets/Russia haven't been in worldwide arms sales since the 1950's? Good to fucking know.
Moron.
>>28029268
>and can't afford to throw the GDP of a small country at building one.
this is funny considering Russia spend more on their military per GDP than the US
>>28040529
Stop it with inconvenient facts
>>28040529
That really only serves to put into perspective the size of the US economy. A marginal increase in military spending relative to our GDP is may as well be waterfall of liquid gold.
Hell, we have one of the lowest tax rates in the developed world, so we have plenty of wiggle room. If we need to go bigger, we can get fucking huge, and that's something a lot of people forget, particularly those who are undereducated on the issue and think America's sole strength is our military and don't consider our economic dominance.
>>28037934
Not giving a fuck about really important stuff is the height of incompetence.
>>28034766
>C) the Pak-fa is yet another flanker derivative and adding S-ducts works require a clean sheet design.
>Actually believing this.
The F-35 is clearly another F-4 Phantom derivative.
>>28040802
>If we need to go bigger, we can get fucking huge, and that's something a lot of people forget, particularly those who are undereducated on the issue and think America's sole strength is our military and don't consider our economic dominance.
I'm a Slavaboo and I have to agree - The smartest thing the US ever did was to basically monopolise world banking and make their dollar the Du Jour trading currency.
It's money for nothing.
>>28029256
Corruption in general. Everything is about to steal and fucked up. Every research ends up with stolen money and zero result.
t. russian dog
>>28039447
>Russia's main problem is the fact that we literally cannot into effective PR.
Literally the largest propaganda misinformation machine in the world.
>>28040851
>implying it isn't
>implying it has s-ducts
cmon mang
>>28034734
They'd be huge. They'd probably have migrant workers bringing back cash, they'd have lots of German immigrants, they'd be exporting Flankers, or a new customized Mig, and who knows what else they'd inevitably be doing differently that would imply the economy going like a steamroller.
>>28034244
c) they used intake radar blockers instead of s-ducts to save internal space for fuel and avionics
>>28043832
>they'd be exporting Flankers, or a new customized Mig,
But that would require that they actually be good, and not just paper tigers.
Plus if they were a real democracy they be less interested in empire building and subsequently army building.
money money money money MONEY
money money money money MONEY
money money money money MONEY
money money money money MONEY
>>28043875
you can literally see the fan blades when viewing the aircraft head on.
Unless it's invisible radar blockers
>>28044344
IS RADAR BLOCKER
>>28044121
What, you don't think flankers are good enough that they would have found some clients among western europe, if they had been allied?
Or a MIG tailored to western european desires, and of course updated a bit. Especially one like Germany, which already had all those Migs.
With Russia in there as a potential jet provider, how could you expect to be seeing anything like enough of a market for the Typhoon and the Rafale?
>>28029865
>The fact that the US could even get the F-35 going is a testament to how much fucking money they can afford to burn.
It also costs fucktons of money to keep existing raptors operational. The stealth coating thing is apparently a bitch to maintain. Also applies to the spirit, but that bomber is more strategically important.
>>28035719
>You never go full EUtard.
What is that?
>>28040274
I don't think they had to make brochures for t55s and ak47s. The third world bought whatever they could
>>28029256
Why can't U.S. make good airplanes anymore?
>>28035543
>>28035543
>Never seen this chart before
>Immediately notice US is fucking tens of thousands higher then everyone else
>People riding our ass for bullshit.
>We've essentially become the fucking Galactic Republic.
>China mostly got where it's at building fucking ghost cities, citing it's growing population and expanding middle class. Whom I'm pretty sure still isn't expansive enough to populate said ghost cities.
This is fucking ridiculous. Unilaterally.
>>28039447
>pak-fags is averaged!
>meanwhile they patent says their frontal RCS is between 1 and .1
>>28050071
EU put together has a larger economy though. USA is simply much larger than Japan or individual EU countries.
>>28050185
>>28050185
That's an irrelevant comparison.
We aren't a union of member nations.
We are a content of united states.
>>28029256
They're literally poorer than Mexico.
>>28029256
That would imply that they ever did make good airplanes.
Russia never made an airframe the equal to the versatile F-4 for example.
the real question is why can't anyone make planes as good as america?
