>The final design contract, under which both sides were to contribute an initial $6 billion each for prototype development and production, has not been signed between India and Russia so far.
>Under the new offer, India will have to pay $3.7 billion, instead of $6 billion, for the technological know-how and three prototypes of PAK FA fighters. The proposal awaits a decision from Prime Minister Narendra Modi, when he meets Russian President Vladimir Putin for the annual India-Russia summit this week.
>Sources said the Russian offer is driven by Moscow’s cash crunch and lack of firm orders with its defence industry.
>But the Indian Air Force (IAF) remains opposed to the idea. A senior IAF official said, “We are not in favour of the FGFA. The PAK FA fighter is too expensive at even this rate, and we are not sure of its capabilities.”
>A senior IAF official said, “We are not in favour of the FGFA
>“We are not in favour of the FGFA
>http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-news-india/pm-modi-leaves-for-moscow-russia-offers-new-cheaper-deal-on-sukhoi-fighter-jets/
PakFA is official dead. A third wold nation doesn't even want it, and Russia is now too broke to afford it and has to beg.
>>28291546
Russia can and will develop PakFA on its own. Orders are already coming in 2016.
>>28291546
So what happens if Russia is forced to cancel the PAK FA.
Is Russia's status as a serious aerial threat finished?
>>28292359
Its about the twin seater India wanted/wants.
It has nothing to do with the single seater.
>>28292471
Without additional development money the entire program is pretty much bust.
RuAF isn't buying enough PakFA to sustain the program, and Moscow doesn't have enough cash to keep development continuing. This is a 1990s type scenario again.
For example, both single and double seat PakFA need to use new clean-sheet engines to achieve supercruise capabilities, which are vital 5th generation requirement and a huge boost from current 4th generation fighters. If Russia doesn't get the money from somewhere those engines will remain in cold storage somewhere.
>>28292530
>RuAF isn't buying enough PakFA to sustain the program
Let me guess, 12 right?
> and Moscow doesn't have enough cash to keep development continuing
How much do they have exactly then?
>PakFA
Try getting the name right...
>new clean-sheet engines
And guess what?
These threads are always worse than even F-35 threads.
>>28292577
You didn't offer a single counterpoint except with regards to how much cash Moscow has on hand to fund this thing.
First off, yes, they cut their orders from 55 jets in 2020 to 12. On top of that as this article shows, Russia slashed their price for the PAK FA tech to India by 2 billion dollars.
Russia isn't doing this price reduction because they're charitable, you simple fuck. This, plus the reduction of military orders to 12 aircraft, proves the program is in deep trouble financially.
Now go shill on a Putin thread on /pol/ or something.
>>28292577
>Let me guess, 12 right?
Yes, for the current iteration that has a segmented canopy, non-S shape inlets, old engines, and non-hidden IRST pod.
This is not a 5th generation fighter. RuAF knows it and so does the IAF. IAF has such little confidence in the program that they are simply going to walk away.
A partner nation backing out of development phase doesn't really bode well for the overall program.
>>28291546
>US Air Superiority goes unchallenged for the next 30 years
No surprise here
>>28292689
Murrifat here, I have to admit it's disappointing.
WIthout a competitor, all the 6th generation voodoo black magic that our aerospace companies are cooking up will probably stay shelved for decades.
>>28291546
>India will have to pay $3.7 billion, instead of $6 billion
Wouldn't that still be many more roubles than it was when the contract was first thought up?
>>28292678
>took me about 2 minutes to realize that is half a PAK FA and half an SU-30.
>>28292740
Literally same airframe.
>>28292646
You aware about the ruble devaluation?
>>28292723
The contract is dead.
Russia wouldn't give such a hefty price-cut in these dire economic times if they weren't worried about the entire project going underwater.
This is a last ditch attempt to get the Indians to sign and the money flowing. India rejected the MiG-35, and will probably do the same with the PAK FA, they are tired of slavshit engines that break after just 90 hours of flight time.
>>28292740
Yup. They are using the exact same production facilities and all they did was merge the canards in with the main wings, add 2 hatches for internal missiles, and increase the size of the inlets. Even the frame is still titanium.
>>28292708
China.
>>28292839
They haven't even been able to properly copy the F-35, and their engines can't compete with the ones found on US 4th generation jets.
By the time they start induction any real numbers of the J-20, US Navy 6th generation fighters will be out.
>>28292678
Well, it's going to have the AL-31, because that's the best engine the Russians will ever be able to produce.
>>28291546
>Sources said the Russian offer is driven by Moscow’s cash crunch and lack of firm orders with its defence industry.
>A senior IAF official said
lemme see, anonymous sources and only this rag reporting it... Jesus Christ its F-35-tier shitnews.
>>28293214
They'll make some random changes to it, and call it a '''''new''''' engine.
Typical slaveshit will probably still break down after 90 flight hours.
>>28291546
>Half the price
>even fucking India doesn't want it, and is unsure if its good
solid gold
>>28291546
>India is pulling out any time now
>Only 12 units will be built
>T-50 is just an upgrade kit for T-10S
>Same airframe
>T-50 is not even 5th generation
>T-50 is made of titanium
>Izdeliye 30 will never be build and is the copy of AL-31 anyway
"Daily burgerclap T-50 thread" bingo when?
>>28293495
Its not 5th generation, senpai
>>28293508
Burgerclap, please.
>>28293525
Much like an F-117 isn't 5th generation because it lacks core features of a 5th gen, the PAK-FA isn't.
>>28293495
You forgot rivets, s-ducts, engine smoke, segmented canopy and to note it's at most as stealthy as a Super Hornet
>>28293545
The idea of a bingo card is to have obvious fallacies, you stupid shit
If you put things on it that are categorically true, you're missing the point
>>28293495
>Implying Russians can build anything better then an AL-31.
They won't even be able to keep building those once China starts building them domestically.
where the fuck did this 12 plane bullshit came from anyway?
>>28293599
Someone from the Russian MOD supposedly saying they're only ordering 12, and then reviewing how many they're actually going to need after that
My face the PAK FA is now the F-35 will never make it into service joke.
For fuck's sake.
It seems to be the same guy starting the threads each time.
>>28291546
The Russians are going ahead without the Indians or not. This is basically early access except on a fighter jet scale.
>>28293678
Going ahead on what? They have never demonstrated any engine able to power the PAK FA.
>>28293625
That's called evaluation batch.
New tanks and APC's for the ground force had 20 piece evaluation batches you could see in 9th may parade, and their production is already in full swing.
those are ground vehicles, however and a completely diferrent story compared to fighter jets.
Russian aviation production isn't exaclty fastest in the world and they can't afford to keep dragging prototype numbers into triple digits like LockMart for example, so they will have to actually finish up the development, before full scale production.
That is with Ai Force actually winting the plane in the first place, but nothing suggest that they don't, since whatever gen the jet actually is, it's better than anything they have right now.
They will only have to decide whether it's worth rthe money.
>>28293599
The end phase of acquisition process for military hardware in Russia goes like this: once the plane is nearing completion RuAF orders a small batch for state trials, once state trials are passed they kick it to full production and start gobbling them complete planes ("FOC" if you want to use the murican terms).
The plan for PAK FA has been to get 60 something by 2020 into service use, AFAIK that plan hasn't changed but that number hasn't been signed on paper yet either. Now the first order for the 12 planes for the state trials was announced by some official, one fringe news site picked on that, miss interpreted the words of the official and even added their own unsourced quotes backing their assumption that only 12 will ever be bought; that story got picked up by Western press in their anti-Russian fervor copy pasting it as-is without fact checking and here we are.
>>28293691
The entire program you mong. How are they flying then you nerd?
The initial production models will use the current AL-41s and the later ones will be powered by a new engine, to created tested later this decade.
The Indians aren't integral to anything. They pay money to get workshares, tech transfers and a production line out of this.
If the deal falls through, tough for the Russians, they'll just lose out on the potential windfall in capital.
>>28293831
>The entire program you mong. How are they flying then you nerd?
With the same AL-31 as ever, meaning they don't have the performance or stealth they are supposed to and will lose in apples to apples contest with their own thirty five year old Su-27.
Oh god these threads are hilarious. Almost reads like pre-2010.
Before 2010:
>B-b-but it d-d-doesn't exist!!!!
>The Russians d-d-don't have the f-f-funds!!!
Then on January 29th, 2010 the Russians officially show the machine and the massive American/European butthurt of aviation forum pseudo-experts ensues. I still remember that.
Now history seems to repeat itself and you bet your ass I'll be around when the RuAF finally releases a fully developed SU-50 while the F-35 is still plagued by software issues and the engineers are still trying to find out how to fit bombs inside the jet LOL.
>>28294382
Did you just ignore the new engine section entirely?
If that program fails feel free to deride the program then.
That said, the AL-41 is still a pretty good engine. Not projected performance but it does well for a old platform, interested to see if the new engine has different ducts too.
>>28294521
>interested to see if the new engine has different ducts too.
They have to redesign the airframe. I don't think that is going to happen, and neither does the IAF.
It is about project confidence, and we already have a developing partner starting to question the ability of Russian Aviation industry to deliver a 5th generation fighter.
>>28293831
It doesn't matter. With any sort of large orders, prices will be high and we will have a MiG-35 scenario all over again, which was a complete flop.
>>28294966
>MiG-35 scenario
>He tries to act as if he knows shit
>He fails
Try again.
>>28294984
MiG-35 is pretty much a failure.
Russia's only main fighter export now is the Su-30 and Su-35, which are both Su-27 variants.
>>28295106
>Mikoyan's design and engineering team will never quit en-masse due to lack of funding in Russia
>they will never restart Mikoyan in the United States
>the osmosis of American engine/avionics technologies, and increased quality control, will never result in the production of a new breed of high performance American super-MiGs that we can field in our own military, but more visibly sell and export to other countries as the air force equivalent of the Right Arm of the Free World.
I have very strange dreams.
>>28295176
MiG has nothing to offer anyone right now. Their designs are all suck on the MiG-29, which is an 80s era fighter.
Russia needs to make a cheap single-engine fighter for export and mulit-role capabilities, but their engines just aren't reliable enough.
>>28291546
So Russia is offering India the PAK-FA at half price, and India still doesn't really want to buy it.
>>28295399
That being said, I've never met an Indian who didn't try to lowball me.
>>28295359
>Russia needs to make a cheap single-engine fighter for export and mulit-role capabilities, but their engines just aren't reliable enough.
It's not because of engines, it's because Europe has already filled the market with this piece of crap.
>>28295451
No, it really is because Russian engines are unreliable.
You don't think the Russian aviation industry isn't desperate for sales?
>>28291546
Russhits confirmed lower caste than people that prefer to shit in the street
>>28295460
You're aware even the Su-30 is superior to anything Europe can field right?
>>28295485
It's amazing the fantasy world you vatniks live in.
>>28295485
I'm sure he's "aware" of that pure Vatnik point of view, but that doesn't make it relevant, seeing as how it isn't true
>>28295504
>>28295509
So these threads are made by British or French, countries with weak military who have no chance against Russia. It's not even Americans.
>>28295537
What? The Russia airforce is really weak these days. It's nothing more than a defense force. There is no way they could handle a fight against the EU.
Look. The big question is, can Russia even afford to continue this fighter's development?
>>28295576
What's left to develop. It's using old engines. It's made out of titanium, it's avionics are the same as the SU-35, and so is it's base frame.
>>28295106
MiG-35 pretty much doesn't exist on the first place. That's why it is obvious you have no idea what the fuck you are talking about.
>>28292359
>Is Russia's status as a serious aerial threat finished
It has been since the 80s m8
>>28295537
kek, what?
Why the segue from aircraft v aircraft to country vs. country?
Is it because you can't argue the Su-30s actual superiority?
>>28295595
Russia should just shelve their pride and buy some Chinese 5th generation fighters, because they obviously can't do it on their own.
>>28295537
Please.
French Rafale could easily destroy anything the Russians can field. UK F-35s would also be able to crush RuAF as well.
>>28295620
I'll take an SU-35 over any of the chinese "5th gen" garbage.
the problem is that neither of them can make a reliable modern jet engine, nor are they very good with composites.
>>28295608
There is no point in arguing. It's like arguing if Honda or BMW is better.
I would only argue with American because USA has strong military industry, but Europe is a joke.
It's times like this I wish the Su-35 was an American plane.
It's too beautiful a craft to be stuck in a failed state like Russia.
>>28295600
It depends on who you ask.
MiG has been re-branding their MiG-29 planes to make them sound new who knows how many times. At one point they did try to call it the MiG-35.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan_MiG-35
>>28295636
Europe would stop being a joke if it would get off its ass and seriously commit to military infrastructure.
>>28295636
What? The Rafale and Eurofighter are both better than anything Russia can field.
Shit, Russia can't even build more than a handful of jets a year as it is.
>>28295620
>French Rafale could easily destroy anything the Russians can field.
My ancestors have heard this talk for many centuries. Keep waving that stick, little kid.
>UK F-35s would also be able to crush RuAF as well.
Europe failed so badly it's having to buy American aircraft. I can die knowing that no matter how bad it gets, Russia will never buy American aircraft.
>>28295639
>At one point they did try to call it the MiG-35.
>At one point
It is once again obvious that you have no idea what the fuck you are talking about, since they called their shitty MiG-29 rebrands MiG-35 more than once.
>Wiki as a source
Please. There is no such thing as MiG-35, at least as in what MiG claims it should be. As of now these is just MiG-29M2 with MiG-35 painted on it.
>>28295650
Russia's so economically decrepit we could buy Sukhoi for a buck 95.
>>28295650
>The Rafale and Eurofighter are both better than anything Russia can field.
Sure it can, and my dad can beat yours, and i can run faster than you etc. But we're not in the kindergarten anymore. Why don't you speak like an adult?
>>28295663
Jesus christ. This nonsense. Russians surrendered all the fucking time to European powers.
If the RuAF attempted to attack the EU, they wouldn't stand a chance. At this point they aren't capable of doing anything but defense.
>>28295663
>Europe failed so badly it's having to buy American aircraft. I can die knowing that no matter how bad it gets, Russia will never buy American aircraft.
If you live long enough you will see Russia buying Chinese fighter jets.
>>28295635
Chinese at least know how to make fighters with S-shape inlets. You are right about the engines though. Chinese tried to copy Russian engines, but their designs are fundamentally flawed.
>>28295692
You can get the airframe right, but if you aren't using composites and you are stuck with a heavy ass airframe and underpowered engines, what's the point?
>>28295692
Technically Russia's aircraft industry is in trouble.
Its biggest customer by far is China, and China is stealing Russian tech whenever it can.
So either way, Russia is screwed.
There won't be a Russian aircraft industry soon enough.
>>28295724
I can see Boeing buying Sukhoi in the not to distant future. They have already helped them with the superjet small passenger jet, and Boeing does have offices in Russia already.
>>28295734
Sukhoi is owned by mafia boss oligarch. He will only give up on Sukhoi if you kill his entire family and break his legs, Russian mafia style.
The company is what gives him power in Russia, without it he is just another rich guy running away to London.
>>28295734
>Northrop Grumman
>Lockheed Martin
>now Boeing Sukhoi
Hawt
>>28295692
I will give China points for unilaterally upgrading the J-11 (specifically the J-11D) on its own, which means it's preparing to compete with Russia on the Flanker export market.
>>28295752
Or Boeing throws enough money at him. And they have enough money.
>>28295734
I've always wanted to see an American version of the Flanker. I'm curious what upgrades we'd make to it.
>>28295776
The pentagon wants stealth, so it would have to be completely redesigned.
Or Boeing could go after an easy international market. Throw a AESA radar into an SU-35 with some F414 engines and you can sell a jet on the international market easy.
>>28295800
>The pentagon wants stealth, so it would have to be completely redesigned.
So you're saying they'd be building a PAK FA, except it not sucking.
>>28295800
Personally I'd use it as a reserve fighter, confining it to home territory. Let's face it, 5th generation fighters are expensive and we'll never be able to build as many as we'd like.
>>28295815
Why does everyone want to drive up unit costs? A cheap fighter is perfectly fine for friendly territory.
>>28295815
It would be better than the shit they pulled for the JSF bid.
>>28295839
>A cheap fighter is perfectly fine for friendly territory.
Might as well just use older airframes as air policing and interceptors, you save a lot more money that way. That's the future of the F-16s anyways.
>>28295822
That's the future for our F-16/F-18 fleets.
The F-22/F-15 replacement is up next. If Boeing can buy Sukhoi, and use american engines/avionics and Boeing's experience with composite materials. Lockheed might actually lose a bid for the new fighter.
>>28295878
I don't get why we use 5th generation craft for routine patrolling to begin with. Considering flying cost, it's a waste of money.
Also, the Russians have continue to upgrade the Flanker (considering they don't even have a 5th gen craft out). I don't know if this is true of our older air frames to the same extent, as we've made much more progress with our 5th gen fighter.
>>28295909
I think it is Boeing's turn for a new fighter anyway.
>The F-22/F-15 replacement is up next.
Not true, next up is the naval fighter to replace the F-18 Super Hornets.
Grunman just got the next Fighter-Bomber, Boeing gets the new Naval Fighers, and Lockheed the F-22 replacement for Air Force.
Sounds about right, all three MIC machines are kept fed.
>>28295929
Mostly convenience. Pilot training and aircraft on hand has a lot to do with it. Not to mention it is a good way for pilots to get experience with new platforms.
Most of the additional costs for a 5th gen fighter are in replacing the RAM coating that slowly wears off after every fight.
>>28295942
Very good chance the superhornet replacement will also be the same for the F-22/F-15.
It isn't a matter if they are up for it or not. If Boeing submits a piece of shit like the X-32, they won't win.
>>28295909
Also, there is one more reason I want America to have Russian planes.
If, God forbid, we ever lose our stealth advantage (due to the inevitable march of technology) we'll still have an aircraft designed for super-maneuverability. I'm not comfortable with not having a backup contingency.
I don't believe in putting "all one's eggs in one basket".
>>28295967
Um, super-maneuverability means even less today than it did 10 years ago. And in another 10 years it might be literally pointless.
>>28295982
Say we lose our stealth advantage.
How good is the F-35 without it?
>>28295688
>Russians surrendered all the fucking time to European powers
There is no need to be this upset, gayropeen.
>>28296013
Better than anything except maybe the F-22.
With modern missiles, even WVR missiles, maneuverability isn't really the problem. It's about getting a lock on before the other guy, and the avionics on the F-35 is better than anyone.
>>28295967
Super-maneuverability doesn't matter anymore.
Modern A2A missiles are more maneuverable and faster than jet fighter will ever be.
>>28296034
Wait 10-20 years when jets have point defense lasers, maneuverability will be literally meaningless.
>>28296013
Still has the best weapons, radars, and avionics of any fighter in the world.
>>28293696
>they can't afford to keep dragging prototype numbers into triple digits like LockMart for example
Is this what russian actually habeebs?
>>28294427
The irony in your statement is delicious.
>>28296034
But there's still electronic warfare. You can disrupt a missile's ability to hit its target.
>>28295942
>LRSB
>Fighter bomber
Kek
The fact you think that the big 3 are not fed off of the f-35 speaks volumes.
>>28296085
>You can disrupt a missile's ability to hit its target.
Worked well for the Su 24.
>>28296085
Sure, but maneuverability still won't matter. If planes are withing gun range, I would still rather fire off an AIM-9X as I can get a lock without having my nose pointing at the other jet. At that range, no manner of jamming is going to make that missile miss.
>>28296136
>jamming
>heater
pick one and only one you double nigger
>>28296085
Anything the Russians can do militarily the US can do better. It's a simple matter of money, the US just has way more cash to fling around.
The only thing left for Russia is its nukes, and those won't last forever either. It's only a matter of time before DARPA pulls some ABM superweapon out of its ass that can nullify Russia's nuclear threat.
>>28296136
>>28296151
We're getting to the point where EW is more than signal jaming and disruption. Think of the theorized F-35 malicious code injection or even the directed energy potential of next gen systems. Not to say it will be easy or exists now but electronics and EW are advancing waaaay faster than other airframe technologies.
>>28296191
And direct energy weaponry will nullify all of it. What's going to matter is battlefield awareness.
>>28296191
Speaking as an American, that's exactly where our enemies would hit us. Our fighter craft are only as good as their electronics and targeting systems.
If anything, we've increased our reliance on technology.
>>28296157
It's not going to be ABM.
The problems with BM right now is terminal phase. Everything else is covered.
There is a race right now to get lasers to the 1MW scale, which is at the point where you can start to engage BM in terminal, but it won't end with 1MW. The Zumwalt can output 58MW for running other things besides the engine.
>>28296210
The stealthiest craft in the universe doesn't mean a thing if your missiles are rendered useless.
>>28296125
>Su-24
>Electronic warfare
Try again.
>>28296250
The Su-35E vs F-15C Eagle is a much better matchup on that.
>>28296250
>>28296237
Sorry bud, Russia is the one investing heavily on Radars, not the US. They are the ones who realize their aircraft are not going to stop F35/22, and are trying to close the gap with SAMs and weather radar fighter.
Aircraft are not going to render missiles useless, certainly not Russian fighters.
>>28296283
Meh. They should be investing in BVR Radar and Electronic warfare. That way they can detect missiles sooner, and jam them more efficiently.
>>28296298
>That way they can detect missiles sooner,
Good luck.
Protip: There is a difference between searching radar and tracking radar. You aren't going to stop a missile from being jammed into your anus by becoming a big fucking light bulb, unless you are going to melt it in the air.
>>28293566
>If you put things on it that are categorically true
- rivets are irrelevant if they're smaller than a wavelength
- s-duct is not the only way how to make inlets stealthy. see also: radar blockers, RAM
- segmented canopy does not necessarily compromise stealth. see also: YF-23
- no one knows how stealthy it is unless we get a reading from an anechoic chamber. specs from any source are not to be trusted, for obvious reasons.
>>28296283
Sorry burger, still irrelevant to Su-24.
>>28291546
So what does Russia do now for 5th generation fighters?
>>28296283
>Russia is the one investing heavily on Radars, not the US.
Not one AESA fighter in front-line service
Not one ship in service with AEGIS equivalent system.
How's that heavy radar investment working out?
>>28296400
Why does Russia need 5th gen fighters?
>>28296404
Even China beat it to AESA, installing them on the J-11Ds.
>>28296408
Why wouldn't they?
>>28296408
If it wants to even pretend to be a threat to the US, it needs them. Otherwise its responses to any potential conflict with NATO fall to NUKE EVERYONE (the consequences of which would be unthinkable) or to roll over and give up.
>>28293831
They're breaking the number one rule on building a fighter. You are supposed to build the airframe around the engine, not the engine for the airframe (which is what they're doing.)
>>28293831
>They pay money to get workshares, tech transfers and a production line out of this.
They are not paying at all. So the workshares, tech transfers, and production lines of the PAK FA must be pretty shit to not even warrant a measly $6 billion for a so-called '5th generation fighter'.
>>28297073
They build Su-27 around an interim engine as well with the first planes flying with those and look at how much of a turd that plane turned out to be.
>>28296429
China is a joke, they're using repainted Israeli AESA radar and claiming it's Chinese.
>>28296371
I am not an EM physics master but I don't believe the comment about rivets is correct. If so, how does OTH UHF radar work when the wavelength ranges from 1-30 meters?
>>28297897
More than what Russia is doing
>>28297897
Still shows China can make AESA radars and put them on things.
Something Russia still can not do.
>>28291546
>t. anonymous government official
>>28296013
As much as people say "muh stealth", the F-35 still has the best avionics package in the world, bar none. And America has ALWAYS excelled at building superior avionics and probably more or less always will. So even without stealth the F35 would be a very capable plane.
>>28295414
Well stop looking like an easy target then
>>28298689
let me know when those avionics start working
>>28298725
Now? Try using your brain next time when you get the urge to post.
![mental-retardation-250x250[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/2Wu4dPD.jpg "mental-retardation-250x250[1].jpg")
>>28298822
>The Pentagon discovered deficiencies in the plane's Block 2B software system. Block 2B oversees the plane's initial warfare capabilities, like its various data links and live-weapon firing system. The worst deficiencies were found in the Block 2B's navigation and accuracy software aspects. These software problems slowed weapons integration and flight-testing, and with it the entire aircraft's development.
Block 2B also encountered issues with weapon delivery accuracy. The software still had trouble in the use of radar, passive sensors, friend-or-foe identification, and electro-optical targeting.
The 2BS5 software package, which deals with sensors, also continues to run into difficulties. According to the report, "fusion of information from own-ship sensors, as well as fusion of information from off-board sensors is still deficient. The Distributed Aperture System continues to exhibit high false-alarm rates and false target tracks, and poor stability performance, even in later versions of software."
literally first link in google that doesn't even describe a fraction of its issues.
>>28299120
literary first link in google is shitty uk article that badly describes this
http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/FY2014/pdf/dod/2014f35jsf.pdf
a almost 2 years old gov report
>>28296371
RAM can't be used in the turbine, the only materials you can make the blades out of are highly radar reflective. You have to break line of sight between the turbine and radar.
>>28295359
>>28295451
The light single engine 4th gen market is pretty much crammed full. The fucking goddamn Viper remains the king of the hill there, and that really just tells you everything you need to know about that market.
>>28295692
>Chinese at least know how to make fighters with S-shape inlets.
I'm pretty sure Sukhoi knows how to make S-ducts.
>>28295650
>Shit, Russia can't even build more than a handful of jets a year as it is.
Still better than 0. It's a miracle Russia survived the 90s.
>>28293545
>at most as stealthy as a Super Hornet
Not saying you're wrong or anything, but you got a source there cowboy?
>>28298484
>More than what Russia is doing
>>28298581
>Something Russia still can not do.
Jesus Christ quick wiki:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byelka_(radar)
important to note that its wholly domestic. T/R modules are GaN based and power output is bretty nice.
>>28295650
>Shit, Russia can't even build more than a handful of jets a year as it is.
The RuAF has received 82 new jets this year.
18 MiG-29K/SMT
32 Su-30SM/M2
18 Su-34
14 Su-35S
>>28292678
Always thought people saying that the PAK was a SU derivative was a big meme, god damn you know the struggle is real over there now.
>R-russia
>>28303581
pak-fa has no common parts with su-27.
it has a similar aerodynamic layout, but that's understandable - why fuck with perfection?
yes, straight intakes are less stealthy, but this disadvantage is outweighed by increased aerodynamic efficiency, engine performance and internal fuel capacity.
>>28304026
>be PAK FA
>2018
>chillin over capitalist airspace, be surprised at low response time
>get my face fucked by a ramjet METEOR fired by an F-35 which I couldn't detect because stealth was an oversold meme
>well atleast I had more fuel , better aerodynamics and engine performance
>>28292930
>copy
>F-35
Maybe you should look up on the Yak-141...
>>28304128
>Be F-35
>2018
>The whole fleet of 10 was yet again grounded for a year because of software problems
>>28304200
>fleet of 10
there are more than 100 already you silly shit, lel
>>28296151
It's possible to jam IR missiles. I know the Su-25T has a rearward facing IR jammer. Don't know how great it is, but it is a valid concept. If you are using a band of the electromagnetic spectrum to track something, you can also jam that band with noise. This applies to everything from radio waves to UV, to visible, to gamma.
>>28304200
won't there be like 300 f-35's made by 2018?
>>28292930
>They haven't even been able to properly copy the F-35
why would you want to copy a defective design?
>>28304239
DIRCM haven't been effective for a very, very long time.
>>28304128
>get my face fucked by a ramjet METEOR fired by an F-35 which I couldn't detect because stealth was an oversold meme
are you really this delusional?
>>28304277
ya what a retard, believing that the PAK FA will ever make it to production
>>28304286
Top bantz
>>28304223
100 prototypes that have nothing to do with the operational combat ready fleet.
>>28304247
Why? They planned hundreds of F-22 and ended up with less than 200 and a closed program.
>>28304338
>Have units that are past IOC
>p-prototypes
>>28304128
nice greentext, but pak-fa was never intended to operate alone deep in enemy airspace without any support.
do you think russians are stupid and they won't design it's doctrine around defeating well-known threats like stealth aircraft?
>>28304338
because they're pure interceptors and no one has an air force that warrants more
>100 built
>prototype
learn what the term means
And why? Because the US has 40 year old planes it needs to replace before their wings start falling off. It's either replace them with a new and better plane, or spend trillions keeping the old planes air worthy. The US is going to build over 2,000 of the things, deal with it.
>>28301422
Show one image of it having a full s-duct.
>>28304366
the point is, sukhoi knows how to design an s-duct, but chose not to use it on pak-fa
>>28295359
Sukhoi did to Mikoyan the same thing as Uralwagonzawod to Malyshev.
Sukhoi used politics to drain people, knowledge and orders from Mikoyan.
MiG is now on life support and Russians won't pull the plug out to avoid embarrassment.
>>28304381
>the point is, sukhoi knows how to design a good aircraft, but chose not to with the pak-fa
This is basically what you're saying.
>muh radar blockers
>muh RAM
>>28304381
I've never seen the Su-47s supposed full s-duct. I want to see it.
>>28304388
To make matters worse, now MiG is trying to make an updated version of the MiG-31 which was made obsolete long ago along with the entire notion of heavy ground based interceptors.
>>28304026
>yes, straight intakes are less stealthy, but this disadvantage is outweighed by increased aerodynamic efficiency, engine performance and internal fuel capacity.
Aerodynamic efficiency is a matter of airframe design, and internal fuel capacity is the same but I will grant the SU-27 design is pretty good for both.
Engine performance, however, is kinda odd considering an S duct allows the air to be slowed some, as well as allowing a bypass to be built into the intake without compromising stealth. That tends to increase performance in an engine, especially one designed for super cruise where peak efficiency is desired at high air speeds.
>>28304363
>they're pure interceptors
Not really, the F22 was designed as a pure air superiority frame, interception is just a role that it can perform.
why don't they just sell the F-35 to russia?
>>28304451
mixed up the term, my bad
Pls give india F-35s america
We dont want those russian PAK FAs anymore
>>28304475
Fuck off shit skin
>>28304427
I want too see it too lol
>>28304427
Sukhoi Su-7 had an s-duct in 1955
>>28304438
>MiG is trying to make an updated version of the MiG-31
The updated version of MiG-31 is called MiG-31BM and they are not trying to make it, they are producing it for quite a while. But they are indeed on state provided life support, since MiG-29K production and old MiG-29 modernisations aren't nearly enough to supply them with orders and the new interceptor project development is basically the only thing they have to offer.
>which was made obsolete long ago
>along with the entire notion of heavy ground based interceptors
The most glacial tale, boyar.
>>28304453
Why would Russia want this piece of shit? They have made it very clear that they do not want single engine bullshit by getting rid of all Su-17M4 and MiG-27s.
>>28304510
How does that mean the Su-47 has one?
>>28304481
>slav level discussions
I swear dealing with Israel is much better..atleast they deliver what they promise.
>>28304513
Name one thing a heavy interceptor can do that an air superiority fighter can't do better.
Mount a powerful radar?
Nope
Go fast?
Nope
Be huge and have range?
Nope.
Carry heavy missile Shield?
Nope.
All these things a proper air superiority fighter can do while also being able to turn, loiter and be used for more than fast runs somewhere and then have to turn back because of inefficient engines.
>>28304552
To cover greater range at greater speed while carrying huge ass missiles. Here's three things an interceptor does better than any of your puny fighters.
>>28304569
>didn't even read the post that directly refutes those cliche points that haven't been true for decades
>BBBBUT MUH MEME PLANE
>>28304552
>Mount a powerful radar?
>Nope
oh yes. zaslon is powerful as fuck, and dual band
>>28304578
>Implying implications
You do realise that just because you post something doesn't mean it automatically becomes true, right? I mean come on. At least put a bit effort in baiting.
>>28304592
>says the vatnik protecting his meme plane
The T-50 alone can do everything that the Foxshit series can do and better.
>>28304680
>Implying implications
You do realise that just because you repeat some bullshit twice it doesn't automatically become true? Try again.
Is it possible the lack of an s-duct on the PAK FA has to do with the fact it is still using a placeholder engine? I don't see why they would do it that way and then have to redesign the airframe to install the new engines. But s-ducts are not an advanced concept or difficult to implement, so Sukhoi must have consciously decided against it. Or maybe they just built the whole damn plane, looked at it afterwards, and said "oh...whoops."
Didnt first get jets have fucking S-Ducts even not if on perpose.
>>28304936
>Is it possible the lack of an s-duct on the PAK FA has to do with the fact it is still using a placeholder engine?
Not really, anon
It doesn't make a whole of sense for them to produce several prototypes then change some major airframe characteristics that would nullify much of that testing
>>28304964
In a manner of speaking some of them did, yes.
>>28304936
different building philosophies, if F22, F35 has S duck doesn't mean it's the only correct way to build intakes.
>>28305053
It is, though.
>>28297897
That's bullshit, anon.
China serial produces AESA equipped aircraft for years, and even install AESA radars into their fucking L-15 trainers.
>>28305121
The L-15 has a PESA.
and for that matter, not every AESA/PESA uses the same hardware or technique. They're not all equal, even of the same size, power, or T/R module number.
>>28303064
and what is Byelka mounted on in service?
Oh wait nothing, because the radar and the plane it's supposed to go on are still in development.
and so far I've been able to find nothing to indicate that Byelka uses GaN TR.
>>28304969
>to produce several prototypes then change some major airframe characteristics
So basically how T-10 turned into T-10S then?
>>2830417
Looked it up. It's a piece of shit with a joke of a lift system. 3 jet engines, lol.
>>28304475
We've already offered it to you
It's upto your government to buy it
Start a petition faggot
>>28305053
Um, either you have sducts and stealth or you don't have stealth. Radar blockers means this guy isn't any stealthier than the superhornet.
>>28304026
>but this disadvantage is outweighed by increased aerodynamic efficiency, engine performance and internal fuel capacity.
All of that could be amended if Russia would develop better engines like America, but they can't.
>>28304844
You do realize that just because you repeat some bullshit twice it doesn't automatically become true? Try again.
>>28305330
objekt 117 has 147kN of thrust that's not bad. new more advanced engine is supposed to be ready in 2020
>>28305871
Gas guzzling and unreliable. That's why they didn't use sducts.
Modi left Russia without a deal for the pak-fa.
>>28304366
here you go champ
>>28305581
But really, PAK-FAs are not as fast as MiG-31BMs, nor is their radar as capable.
>>28305978
Is this true ?
Is PAK FA really a no deal ?
Could India buy F-35 ?
Man I would fucking love to rub that in the Slavaboo face
>>28291546
>Under 800 flight test hours for the whole "fleet"
>No live fire weapons test yet
>Only 12 into 2020
>No engine
>No S-ducts
>No sensor fusion
>Indian co-development and cost sharing shaky
>'''''''5th'''''''' gen
It's a damn low-profile SU-30 bodykit.
For how disastrous the PAK-FAs development has been, what does it mean for the supersonic stealth transport plane in the works?
>>28306089
>Could India buy F-35 ?
I actually think that they have already promised to do so, but have not announced it yet for geopolitical and strategic reasons.
The next Indian Carrier will have a General Dynamics EMALS launch system courtesy of US. No way EMALS would have been handed over if India didn't also agree to procure some other equipment. This means E-2D Haweye and probably the F-35C.
>>28306376
Does that mean the F-35C? If so, no reason to even announce they buy for a few years at least.
>>28306133
>what does it mean for the supersonic stealth transport plane in the works?
If you are talking about:
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UAC/HAL_Il-214
Then it is pretty much dead. IAF wants Full Authority Digital Engine Control (FADEC), with the capability to relight the engines mid-flight. Russia says they can't deliver.
India will probably just get some C295 as part of a joint manufacturing venture.
As long as Russian engine design is stuck in the 80s, don't expect any huge aircraft deals anymore with them. They already got booted out of the civilian aviation market for the same reason, and now only Sukhoi can make a small passenger plane now.
>>28306385
EMALS probably means F-35C. The only other option in the world for catapult launched aircraft is the Rafale-M.
Russia insists that they are planning for a naval PAK FA, but nobody believes that they will deliver.
>>28306458
And the SJ-100 is using western designed engines and Boeing helped them with the initial airframe design and how modern supply chains work.
>>28306481
Oh man, I didn't even know that. Really embarrassing for the Russian aviation industry.
And then it crashed on a mountain during the first tour run killing 100 people. What a great way to start off.
>>28306510
*45 people
>>28306481
>>28306510
no it doesn't and no it didn't. shill harder
>>28306133
>astrous the PAK-FAs development has been, what does it mean for the supersonic stealth transport plane in the works?
If you mean the PAK-DA, it was only ever a design concept and nobody seriously believes Russia has the capability of building it.
>>28306458
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UAC/HAL_Il-214
I was talking about the PAK TA which RT and western news was raving about. Didn't even know about that medium transport project, its fate seems to be a recurring theme now.
>>28306524
Are you a moron? This shit is readily available online.
>On 19 December 2002, Sukhoi Civil Aircraft and Boeing Commercial Airplanes signed a medium-term Cooperation Agreement to work together on the design. Boeing consultants had already been advising Sukhoi for a year.[
>The SaM146 design is based on the CFM56
It's engine is built under fucking license.
>>28306557
It's just posturing by Russia. All of the performance and features Russia wants to pack into would make even nations with the money to build it question its practicability.
>>28306510
>>28306517
>>28306524
With no survivors.
>>28306376
Well the Indians are buying Rafale but yeah EMALS is some tech and it had to come with some strings attached.
Might just be the Hawkeyes though.
>>28306510
And Americans stopped sanctions for buying Russian space tech, so they could buy more RD-180s, it's more than 40 old design and Americans still can't make replacements.
>>28306799
>Apples to oranges
You know that's not true.
>>28306570
>Sukhoi wants to make an aircraft that would comply with Western standards
>asks the leading Western aircraft company for directions
>LOL BOEING ACTUALLY DESIGNED THE AIRCRAFT SUKHOI PAID BOEING TO DO EVERYTHING AND PRETEND IT'S RUSSIAN BUT IT'S ALL BY BOEING!
The engine is based on that design to comply with western safety standards and certifications. It's just a commercial passenger jet, not the next Soyuz.
The Russians have been raping the Indians on the submarine maintenance contracts, doing work over and over to keep subs in dock for years at a time.
>>28306799
wut? That isn't true. We can't make them cheaper than Russia because you can pay Russians in rubles. Only ULA and the Jeff Bezo team uses Russian engines.
SpaceX and NASA do not use the R180.
>>28306844
lol, I said Boeing helped them with the design. They did.
A french engine company designed the engine and produces the critical parts of the engine. Which is true.
Someone said the above isn't true, when it's common knowledge that it is.
>>28306863
>A french engine company
>National origin: France, Russia
>PowerJet is a 50-50 joint venture held by Snecma (Safran) and NPO Saturn, created in July 2004.
>PowerJet has two operational units dedicated to production: one in Villaroche (France) and the other in Rybinsk (Russia).
>The core was developed by Snecma
>In 2014, the SaM146 is operated by several airlines: Interjet (Mexico), Aeroflot, Moskovia Airlines, Yakutia Airlines, Gazpromavia, Centre-South, UTair Aviation (Russia), Lao Central Airlines (Laos) and Sky Aviation (Indonesia).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PowerJet_SaM146
>>28306856
>On 24 December 2015, United Launch Alliance announced that it placed an order for more RD-180 rockets to be used by the Atlas V launch vehicle, on top of 29 engines that the company has ordered before US sanctions against Russia were introduced over Crimea last year and just days after the US Congress lifted the ban on the use of Russian engines to get American ships into space.[10]
>>28306911
Um, Snecma contracted NPO to assemble the engines. They are using Russians as cheap labor. The actual engine design was done by Snecma. It's under a CFM license.
Do you understand what that means? It's a western engine design, built by cheap Russian labor. Period. Russians did not design it.
>>28306934
That's exactly what I said. Only ULA and that Bezo team uses the RD-180. We can't make them as cheap in the USA, because we can't pay our people in rubles.
NASA and SpaceX do not use them.
>>28306037
Yes, it's radar is more capable.
>>28306557
You mean some college kids final project?
http://www.cardesign.ru/articles/diploma/2014/6/11/6047/
>On June 6 in MGHPA of S.G. Stroganov, better known as "Stroganovka", passed protection of degree projects of Design of Transport vehicles. In total 11 works were presented, about some of them we plan to prepare separate articles for now we bring to your attention the photo report.
>Alexey Komarov. The air vehicle of a special purpose (the military transport plane of a heavy class for the company Volga-Dnieper). The research supervisor - professor Oleg Levin.
>>28307001
>https://www.rt.com/news/242097-pak-ta-russian-army/
>According to a new design specification from the Military-Industrial Commission in Moscow, a transport aircraft, dubbed PAK TA, will fly at supersonic speeds (up to 2,000 km/h) and will boast an impressively high payload of up to 200 tons. It will also have a range of at least 7,000 kilometers.
Guess RT was wrong. Wouldn't be the first time. At the end of the day it's chances are still as good as the PAK-DA.
>>28306936
Not according to NPO Saturn itself.
>The SaM146 is the first Russian-made propulsion system having received an internationally recognized EASA type certificate.
http://www.npo-saturn.ru/?rssid=1404895399&sat=6&slang=1
>NPO "Saturn" is responsible for "cold" part of the engine — the aerator and low pressure turbine, as well as the installation of the engine on the Sukhoi SuperJet-100 airframe and the general assembly.
http://www.aviationunion.org/news_second.php?new=57
> With financial support from SNECMA (France), NPO Saturn has designed the SaM146 for the new generation of jetliners in the 70-120 passenger class.
http://www.bainessimmons.com/npo-saturn-raises-the-bar-by-embracing-eu-safety-regulations/
>SaM146 is a complete integrated propulsion system, developed by Snecma and NPO Saturn through PowerJet, their 50/50 joint company.
http://www.snecma.com/commercial-engines/regional-jets/sam146/sam146
Sorry Frog, but it's Russian. Even Snecma agrees, the red part is 100% made by NPO Saturn. It's pretty much 50-50.
>>28307091
Yeah, literally nowhere does it say they designed it. Russians are used for their cheap labor by the west.
>>28305214
Yes, exactly like the aircraft that kept crashing so badly they were forced to redesign it
>>28307442
Sure thing Mr. white flag. Sukhoi paid a few pennies to some broke French company and it's got it's hands into the CFM56's blueprints. Win-win deal.
>>28307057
>>28307001
>rt literally using some kids school project to say that's what they're making
how are slavs this pathetic?
>>28295663
Russo-Japanese war, ww1, crimean war, Afganistan, 1st Chechnyian war, the cold war. These losses are just off the top of my head
You fail at life as well as your ancestors fail at everything vatnik. Russia has and always will be a paper bear.
>>28291546
is it just me or do those engines look rustier than a chernobyl teapot
>>28308871
Russian Material Design is stuck in the 80s, same with their shitty engines.
>>28305265
Wait wasnt that a deal for f-16s with a possibility of f-35s in the future?
>>28306376
India wont buy the f35c.how bad will it look when they just signed defense contracts with russia.
Rafale is a possibility
>>28311613
>How bad will it look when they just signed defense contracts with russia.
What defense contracts? India has been signing a huge ton of backlog deals in the last 18 months recently with the new government.
Russia just lost:
-Heavy Transport: US Chinook
-Heavy Attack Heli: US Apache E
-MANPADs: US Stringer
-ATGMs: Jewsrael Spike
-Towed Artillery: UK M777
-Tracked Artillery: South Korea K9
-SAM: Jewsrael Barak 8
Russia Won:
-Surface Frigates: 4 Talwar Class
-Light Helis: Ka-226T
Nobody cares how bad it is going to look for Russia, and btw this won't be for several years. We are talking early 2020s. That is when they will start construction of their new carrier. Backlogs in F-35 orders means they couldn't get one until then anyways.
>>28311745
At this point they might as well just anounce they're breaking up with russia....put em out of their misery
>>28311745
http://news.usni.org/2015/12/14/u-s-ambassador-to-india-verma-outlines-growing-defense-ties-between-washington-and-new-delhi
http://news.usni.org/2015/12/11/secdef-carter-shows-off-carrier-eisenhower-to-indian-mod-delegation-amidst-increasing-defense-cooperation
>>28312017
Yay give gen 5 please
>>28306848
while that is true, reading that reddit AMA from that Dude who worked on an indian aircraft carrier shows that maybe those subs require massive amounts of maintenance due to indian irresponsibility. Sanitation on those things must be a disaster.
>>28311506
Initially. After the F-16 lost out it was offered standalone according to your Indian sources and DoD has already said they're open to selling the F-35 to India
>>28312017
Look at poo pattel eyeing his future squat location.
>>28312745
the indians wanted tech transfer which the us is refusing, that's why the us contenders never had a serious chance
>>28312794
For 126 fighters and prospect of more down the line ? of course they demanded tech transfer.
And I'm pretty sure we offered them enough.
The reason for the disqualification of the F-16 was because the Pakis also operate them in good numbers and it's not a good idea to operate the same fighter your nemesis knows inside our
The F-18 was the second last fighter to get disqualified after Gripen and MiG-35,meaning it had a chance,but it's likely that Dassault landed a backroom deal with the Indians or the EF and Rafale outperformed it.
It's not hard to imagine that we offer them tech transfer.Heck we're giving them EMALS and are co-operating on producing jet engines with them. that's a lot of sensitive technology we'll be sharing.
>>28312989
not really. tech transfer was the main hurdle of us contenders
also the fact that the rafale is generally better than the f16 and f18, plus dassault was offering full tech transfer. i believe the f16 being offered was the block 60, which is newer than anything pakistan has
>>28313029
The Paki F-16 is a block 52 IIRC It's still the same airframe 90%
>Dassault was offering full tech transfer
>Indians fell for the full ToT meme
How'd that turn out ? Order got downsized to 36.With No ToT to come with and still cost 200+mil. Frogs are the masters of bait and switch when it comes to defense deals.
What makes you say that the U.S wasn't offering ToT , considering the tech we are sharing with India at the moment , doubt tech transfer was an issue.
