User Panel
Posted: 8/21/2009 5:15:10 AM EDT
August 21, 2009: The Russian Air Force has ordered another 64 jet fighters from Sukhoi, for $2.5 billion. Most (48) of these will be the Su-35, and all will be delivered within six years. The other aircraft are twelve Su-27SMs and four Su-30M2 fighter bombers. These sixteen aircraft will be delivered within two years. All of these aircraft are variations on the Cold War era Su-27, which was built to deal with the U.S. F-15.
The Su-35 is the most advanced of these Su-27 designs, sometimes referred as the F-22ski. Four months ago, one of the two prototypes of the Su-35s crashed on takeoff. The cause was a problem with one of the two engines. A third prototype is under construction. Russia had hoped to have the destroyed prototype fly over the May Day parade in Moscow on May 1st. The crash was really bad PR, since one of the consistent shortcomings of Russian warplanes has been the unreliable engines. But the project is moving forward, and Russia expects to export over 160 Su-35s in the next five years, and eventually have more Su-35s in service than the U.S. has F-22s. It was a year ago that the Su-35 had its first flight. In late 2007, the Russian Air Force showed off the first of two flyable prototypes. It was just three years ago, that Russia announced its long promised Su-35 fighter, was back in development again, after having been stalled for over six years because of cash shortages. The Su-35 is an enhanced Su-30 (itself a development of the Cold War era Su-27), and has been in development since the 1990s. At one point, it was called the Su-37, but the name was changed back to Su-35. Since the 1990s, time, many Su-35 prototypes were built, and apparently no two were identical. There were many disagreements over what direction the development should take, and by the late 1990s, the project was basically suspended for lack of funding. The Russians want to sell Su-35s to China, India and other foreign customers, and this opportunity turned the cash flow back on. Apparently Russia now has the billions of dollars it will take to carry out the Su-35 development program. India has become a partner, contributing cash, technology and manufacturing capability. The Su-35 is a 34 ton fighter that is more maneuverable than the original, 33 ton, Su-27, and has much better electronics. It can cruise at above the speed of sound. It also costs at least fifty percent more than the Su-27. That would be some $60 million (for a barebones model), about what a top-of-the-line F-16 costs. The Su-27 was originally developed to match the F-15, which is larger than the single engine F-16. The larger size of the Su-27/35, allows designers to do a lot more with it in terms of modifications and enhancements. The Su-35 is to have some stealth capabilities (or at least be less detectable to most fighter aircraft radars). Russia is promising a fighter with a life of 6,000 flight hours, and engines good for 4,000 hours. Russia promises world-class avionics, plus a very pilot-friendly cockpit. The use of many thrusters and fly-by-wire will produce an aircraft even more maneuverable than earlier Su-30s (which have been extremely agile). The Su-35 is not meant to be a direct rival for the F-22, because the Russian aircraft is not nearly as stealthy. The Su-35 will carry a 30mm autocannon (with 150 rounds) and up to eight tons of munitions, hanging from 12 hard points. This reduces stealthiness, which the F-22 and F-35 get around by using an internal bay for bombs and missiles. But if the maneuverability and advanced electronics of the proposed Su-35 live up to the promises, the aircraft would be more than a match for every fighter out there except the F-22. If such an Su-35 was sold for well under $100 million each, there would be a lot of buyers. ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. Ok now read the last sentence again.... are you with me, it says except the F-22 ... which is why we need more, and that they are proposing that these can and will nock down F-35's. Even though they have no possibility of stealth with under wing hardpoint attachments. |
|
tl;dr just send a SEAL team to blow em up and make it look like an accident.
|
|
The Sukhoi PAK-FA is the "Russian F-22", not a warmed over, warmed over, SU-27. The SU-35 would last about as long as it took the AIM-120D to fly to it against an F-22.
|
|
Quoted:
The Su-35 is not meant to be a direct rival for the F-22, because the Russian aircraft is not nearly as stealthy. The Su-35 will carry a 30mm autocannon (with 150 rounds) and up to eight tons of munitions, hanging from 12 hard points. This reduces stealthiness, which the F-22 and F-35 get around by using an internal bay for bombs and missiles. But if the maneuverability and advanced electronics of the proposed Su-35 live up to the promises, the aircraft would be more than a match for every fighter out there except the F-22. If such an Su-35 was sold for well under $100 million each, there would be a lot of buyers. ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. Ok now read the last sentence again.... are you with me, it says except the F-22 ... which is why we need more, and that they are proposing that these can and will nock down F-35's. Even though they have no possibility of stealth with under wing hardpoint attachments. Stealthy is not the same as 'stealth'. The 'Stealth Fighter' was a trick plane, with one purpose: sneak through anti-air screening to drop bombs on Soviets. More modern jets use elements of stealth tech to get some of the benefits of smaller radar signatures, but will never be 'Stealth'. |
|
Su-27 was a stolen copy of the F-15 so the Su-35 is an upgraded f-15c
Big deal Israel dropped Su-27s with F-4s not really worried about it That being said Countries are now catching up to our aircraft capabilities and us not focussing on the next generation of airwarfare will end up putting us behind for the first time since 1944. |
|
Quoted:
Su-27 was a stolen copy of the F-15 so the Su-35 is an upgraded f-15c Big deal Israel dropped Su-27s with F-4s not really worried about it That being said Countries are now catching up to our aircraft capabilities and us not focussing on the next generation of airwarfare will end up putting us behind for the first time since 1944. you sure about this? |
|
As long as our pilots keep getting the training they get, I'm not worried.
Its the pilot not the plane. |
|
Quoted: Su-27 was a stolen copy of the F-15 so the Su-35 is an upgraded f-15c Big deal Israel dropped Su-27s with F-4s not really worried about it That being said Countries are now catching up to our aircraft capabilities and us not focussing on the next generation of airwarfare will end up putting us behind for the first time since 1944. Um,... no. |
|
Quoted:
Su-27 was a stolen copy of the F-15 so the Su-35 is an upgraded f-15c Big deal Israel dropped Su-27s with F-4s not really worried about it That being said Countries are now catching up to our aircraft capabilities and us not focussing on the next generation of airwarfare will end up putting us behind for the first time since 1944. What we do Know is it is a Copy of the F-15, It is a High Performance Aircraft, not stealth... But building these and selling them gives the company capital to re-invest in the PAK-FA which is going to be the true F-22ski. Our problem with this is that, Russia selling these to countries around the globe will force us to spread our Raptors thin to counter them. The f-35 is still stealthy yet cannot reach the speeds or maneuverability of these aircraft from what we know. Can frontal stealth of the F-35 and its superior digital cockpit counter this SU-35 , yes probably... but we dont know how far those will be cut down to under the current administration. The other problem is when the F-35 will truly be fielded in numbers available to counter the mass production of these SU -35s, which will end up in every corner of the globe if Russia is willing to put a cheap sticker price on them. Hell even Hugo Chavez will probably end up with some. |
|
|
Quoted:
As long as our pilots keep getting the training they get, I'm not worried. Its the pilot not the plane. For gun kills yes. But not when the other guy can see you and already has weapons lock on you and your radar isn't picking up anything. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
As long as our pilots keep getting the training they get, I'm not worried. Its the pilot not the plane. For gun kills yes. But not when the other guy can see you and already has weapons lock on you and your radar isn't picking up anything. When was the last Air to Air US Gunkill? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
As long as our pilots keep getting the training they get, I'm not worried. Its the pilot not the plane. For gun kills yes. But not when the other guy can see you and already has weapons lock on you and your radar isn't picking up anything. When was the last Air to Air US Gunkill? 1991 actuaqlly, a USAF A-10 pilot knocked out an Iraqi helicopter using his 20mm cannon. Pilot could not get a lock on on his A/A missiles, so he switched to guns and vaporized the helicopter, which was an M1-8 Hook transport if my memory serves me right. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
As long as our pilots keep getting the training they get, I'm not worried. Its the pilot not the plane. For gun kills yes. But not when the other guy can see you and already has weapons lock on you and your radar isn't picking up anything. When was the last Air to Air US Gunkill? Desert Storm. ...and the A-10 has a 30mm cannon, NOT a 20mm. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
As long as our pilots keep getting the training they get, I'm not worried. Its the pilot not the plane. For gun kills yes. But not when the other guy can see you and already has weapons lock on you and your radar isn't picking up anything. When was the last Air to Air US Gunkill? Desert Storm. ...and the A-10 has a 30mm cannon, NOT a 20mm. True a GAU-8A Avenger 30mm cannon; a slight typo. |
|
Quoted:
Su-27 was a stolen copy of the F-15 so the Su-35 is an upgraded f-15c Big deal Israel dropped Su-27s with F-4s not really worried about it That being said Countries are now catching up to our aircraft capabilities and us not focussing on the next generation of airwarfare will end up putting us behind for the first time since 1944. Um basically wrong on all counts... |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
The Sukhoi PAK-FA is the "Russian F-22", not a warmed over, warmed over, SU-27. The SU-35 would last about as long as it took the AIM-120D to fly to it against an F-22. Yep, but the PAK-FA is a Paper tiger, it doesn't exist and in current economy it won't exist. this is the PAK-FA at this point; http://howtomakepaperairplane.com/images/How_to_make_paper_airplanes_img_15.jpg It's on schedule to make it's maiden flight by years end. We shall see. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
As long as our pilots keep getting the training they get, I'm not worried. Its the pilot not the plane. For gun kills yes. But not when the other guy can see you and already has weapons lock on you and your radar isn't picking up anything. When was the last Air to Air US Gunkill? Desert Storm. ...and the A-10 has a 30mm cannon, NOT a 20mm. True a GAU-8A Avenger 30mm cannon; a slight typo. So while still an A/A gunkill, not exactly a dog fight... and before that...? BTW the F-35 will have a mini avenger as its primary gun in the CTOL models. 25mm 4 barrell version... |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The Sukhoi PAK-FA is the "Russian F-22", not a warmed over, warmed over, SU-27. The SU-35 would last about as long as it took the AIM-120D to fly to it against an F-22. Yep, but the PAK-FA is a Paper tiger, it doesn't exist and in current economy it won't exist. this is the PAK-FA at this point; http://howtomakepaperairplane.com/images/How_to_make_paper_airplanes_img_15.jpg It's on schedule to make it's maiden flight crash into a school yard by years end. We shall see. fixed it... |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
As long as our pilots keep getting the training they get, I'm not worried. Its the pilot not the plane. For gun kills yes. But not when the other guy can see you and already has weapons lock on you and your radar isn't picking up anything. When was the last Air to Air US Gunkill? 1991 actuaqlly, a USAF A-10 pilot knocked out an Iraqi helicopter using his 20mm cannon30mm. Pilot could not get a lock on on his A/A missiles, so he switched to guns and vaporized the helicopter, which was an M1-8 Hook transport if my memory serves me right. |
|
Everyone talks about us needing a billion F-22s; Just who exactly can develop and afford to field a comparable airfcraft and train (this is the critical part) their pilots on the same level as the United States? The prospect of anyone ever getting air superiority over the US in the next 50 years is laughable.
|
|
Quoted:
Everyone talks about us needing a billion F-22s; Just who exactly can develop and afford to field a comparable airfcraft and train (this is the critical part) their pilots on the same level as the United States? The prospect of anyone ever getting air superiority over the US in the next 50 years is laughable. You are delusional if you think that we can maintain uncontested air superiority over the next half century if we continue our current course. We have bought 178 F-22s, not even enough for one squadron per AEF. We are retiring F-16s and the F-15s aren't that much newer. If history teaches us anything it is that the F-35 purchase will be slashed to less than half of the initial purchase plan. |
|
Quoted: Everyone talks about us needing a billion F-22s; Just who exactly can develop and afford to field a comparable airfcraft and train (this is the critical part) their pilots on the same level as the United States? The prospect of anyone ever getting air superiority over the US in the next 50 years is laughable. Really? 50 years ago we were flying the F4 Phantom, the 50 years before that we were still flying airplanes with bicycles tires. Who knows what the next 50 years might bring? If we stop working as hard to remain on top, others will take our place. Think China. |
|
The US has not lost an ACM engagement in almost 40 years. An astonishing record. Right now we are fielding the most advanced planes ever....Our stuff is going to be the best for decades to come.
|
|
The future of air warfare is unmanned vehicles . The F-22 is probably the last manned air superiorty fighter we will ever field. We're a good twenty years away from it, but its coming. No question about it.
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
As long as our pilots keep getting the training they get, I'm not worried. Its the pilot not the plane. For gun kills yes. But not when the other guy can see you and already has weapons lock on you and your radar isn't picking up anything. When was the last Air to Air US Gunkill? You know, the first versions of the F-4 used in Vietnam didn't have a gun because they were convinced it was unnecessary. That lesson cost the lives of several pilots and I don't recommend we re-learn it the hard way. In a low intensity war where air opposition is essentially non-existent, it may not matter. In a full scale head to head war, pilots are going to be glad they've got a fallback. |
|
Quoted:
Everyone talks about us needing a billion F-22s; Just who exactly can develop and afford to field a comparable airfcraft and train (this is the critical part) their pilots on the same level as the United States? The prospect of anyone ever getting air superiority over the US in the next 50 years is laughable. Ahh well, we have air superiority now so I we just won't need every field any new fighters |
|
Quoted:
tl;dr just send a SEAL team to blow em up and make it look like an accident. Meh, all they need is a couple of Russian airshows to destroy them all. |
|
Quoted:
The future of air warfare is unmanned vehicles . The F-22 is probably the last manned air superiorty fighter we will ever field. We're a good twenty years away from it, but its coming. No question about it. The UAV shit for air to air will last until someone realizes that heavy radio jamming will disable your entire air force. Not to mention that in an actual dogfight, waiting 500 milliseconds for your commands to reach the UAV is unacceptably slow. I can see UAV's replacing manned air to ground aircraft, since they won't be used anyway until control of the air is established. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
The future of air warfare is unmanned vehicles . The F-22 is probably the last manned air superiorty fighter we will ever field. We're a good twenty years away from it, but its coming. No question about it. The UAV shit for air to air will last until someone realizes that heavy radio jamming will disable your entire air force. Not to mention that in an actual dogfight, waiting 500 milliseconds for your commands to reach the UAV is unacceptably slow. I can see UAV's replacing manned air to ground aircraft, since they won't be used anyway until control of the air is established. I think we are well aware that our satellites will be attacked on many levels in future wars as will our command and control data centers as witnessed by recent DDOS attacks. It is plausible that they could direct control to people in theatre, via the Aegis Combat system, JSTAR etc... Dont think our UAV guys will continue to sit unscathed in a sunny US locale and run the UAV show. No they will have to be in on a short and direct link to enter aerial combat. And our sensor networks are going to have to reach out farther and touch someone with out them knowing it. That is all part of developing for the future and not stopping at the current level of aircraft. And definately no cutting short our current objectives. Then you have SKYNET, and the autonomus thinking aircraft. So long as they are sent out in a READ ONLY configuration, they should be able to enter combat, identify targets, engage, and return without a control data link, but rather a link to show the results of their actions. The last thing we want is one that is READ WRITE that is hacked and disabled or turned on our own people, assets, and materials. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
tl;dr just send a SEAL team to blow em up and make it look like an accident. Meh, all they need is a couple of Russian airshows to destroy them all. Pretty much this. If Russia is still trying to catch up to our last new gen fighter..when are they (or anyone else for that matter) going to actually field anything that holds a candle to the F22? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
tl;dr just send a SEAL team to blow em up and make it look like an accident. Meh, all they need is a couple of Russian airshows to destroy them all. Pretty much this. If Russia is still trying to catch up to our last new gen fighter..when are they (or anyone else for that matter) going to actually field anything that holds a candle to the F22? Well the reality is that "stealth" is no longer as stealthy as it once was and it will be even less so in the future with more and more advanced sensor systems that are capable of detecting and targeting stealth aircraft. And past its stealth features the F-22 isn't that much more advanced than its rivals (it is more advanced right now, but its generally easy to catch up in terms of engines/sensors). |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
The future of air warfare is unmanned vehicles . The F-22 is probably the last manned air superiorty fighter we will ever field. We're a good twenty years away from it, but its coming. No question about it. The UAV shit for air to air will last until someone realizes that heavy radio jamming will disable your entire air force. Not to mention that in an actual dogfight, waiting 500 milliseconds for your commands to reach the UAV is unacceptably slow. I can see UAV's replacing manned air to ground aircraft, since they won't be used anyway until control of the air is established. ECCM. |
|
Please name a decisive battle in which superior Russian training and technology won the day.
Seriously |
|
Quoted:
Please name a decisive battle in which superior Russian training and technology won the day. Seriously Khalkin Gol. |
|
I can see UAV's becoming aerial attack platforms, essentially flying missile carriers. A stealthy spotter aircraft like an F22 or an uber powerful radar like an AWACS paints the targets and the drones launch their missiles. No need for any fancy dogfighting or combat maneuvers; with modern air to air missiles there's almost no way to evade them anyway, so why would there be a need to dogfight?
Why take the risk of getting that close to the enemy when you can pick him off without ever having visual contact? I see aerial maneuvers becoming less and less relevant as missile technology gets more and more advanced, thus UAV's would be a cheap but formidable air superiority component. And as for the jamming arguments, who or what is going to be doing the jamming? An aircraft that can be shot down? A ground installation that can be bombed? Anything doing that jamming is going to be lit up like a christmas tree and blown to hell in short order. |
|
Quoted:
Please name a decisive battle in which superior Russian training and technology won the day. Seriously The battle of Rotyacokof |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
The future of air warfare is unmanned vehicles . The F-22 is probably the last manned air superiorty fighter we will ever field. We're a good twenty years away from it, but its coming. No question about it. The UAV shit for air to air will last until someone realizes that heavy radio jamming will disable your entire air force. Not to mention that in an actual dogfight, waiting 500 milliseconds for your commands to reach the UAV is unacceptably slow. I can see UAV's replacing manned air to ground aircraft, since they won't be used anyway until control of the air is established. No different than that same jamming eliminating AWACS direction, radar, commo, etc for manned aircraft. |
|
Quoted:
Everyone talks about us needing a billion F-22s; Just who exactly can develop and afford to field a comparable airfcraft and train (this is the critical part) their pilots on the same level as the United States? The prospect of anyone ever getting air superiority over the US in the next 50 years is laughable. Why do you even open your cakehole? |
|
Quoted:
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/images/AIR_SU-35_Below_lg.jpg http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/images/AIR_SU-35_Sukhoi_2008_lg.jpg http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/images/AIR_SU-35_Sukhoi_2008_Rear_Runway_lg.jpg Pure sex. Teh russkies make some beautiful aircraft. |
|
Quoted:
Everyone talks about us needing a billion F-22s; Just who exactly can develop and afford to field a comparable airfcraft and train (this is the critical part) their pilots on the same level as the United States? The prospect of anyone ever getting air superiority over the US in the next 50 years is laughable. But that's just the point: we don't want anyone ever reaching that stage, so why blow our crucially-important technological superiority? Moreover, we're going to produce so few F-22s that we'll be forced to rely on larger numbers of fourth-generation fighters, which WILL be matched technologically in the next few years. Even with our pilots' superior training, the new AA and SA battlefield doctrine of the Russians and Chinese is to overwhelm any attacking force with numerical superiority in the aircraft and missile envelope. When your enemy builds an excellent fourth-gen fighter cheaply enough to export thousands of them, as well as build eight hundred or a thousand for themselves, we have a problem, and it will absolutely be in the next decade rather than 50 years. The key is to build more F-22s; building more of them lowers the per-unit cost and keeps our advantage on the modern battlefield. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Everyone talks about us needing a billion F-22s; Just who exactly can develop and afford to field a comparable airfcraft and train (this is the critical part) their pilots on the same level as the United States? The prospect of anyone ever getting air superiority over the US in the next 50 years is laughable. Why do you even open your cakehole? My thoughts exactly. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Everyone talks about us needing a billion F-22s; Just who exactly can develop and afford to field a comparable airfcraft and train (this is the critical part) their pilots on the same level as the United States? The prospect of anyone ever getting air superiority over the US in the next 50 years is laughable. But that's just the point: we don't want anyone ever reaching that stage, so why blow our crucially-important technological superiority? Moreover, we're going to produce so few F-22s that we'll be forced to rely on larger numbers of fourth-generation fighters, which WILL be matched technologically in the next few years. Even with our pilots' superior training, the new AA and SA battlefield doctrine of the Russians and Chinese is to overwhelm any attacking force with numerical superiority in the aircraft and missile envelope. When your enemy builds an excellent fourth-gen fighter cheaply enough to export thousands of them, as well as build eight hundred or a thousand for themselves, we have a problem, and it will absolutely be in the next decade rather than 50 years. The key is to build more F-22s; building more of them lowers the per-unit cost and keeps our advantage on the modern battlefield. This is the absolute truth... cut one unit or one program and the rest all go up in price... Because they have workers that need paid that were put to work at the start of the programs. this a current quote today about Raytheon: "The latest additions include a successful missile intercept test, big cost hikes for the SM-3 Block II due to another program’s cancellation, and Raytheon’s announcement that it will develop a land-based SM-3 variant"
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Everyone talks about us needing a billion F-22s; Just who exactly can develop and afford to field a comparable airfcraft and train (this is the critical part) their pilots on the same level as the United States? The prospect of anyone ever getting air superiority over the US in the next 50 years is laughable. But that's just the point: we don't want anyone ever reaching that stage, so why blow our crucially-important technological superiority? Moreover, we're going to produce so few F-22s that we'll be forced to rely on larger numbers of fourth-generation fighters, which WILL be matched technologically in the next few years. Even with our pilots' superior training, the new AA and SA battlefield doctrine of the Russians and Chinese is to overwhelm any attacking force with numerical superiority in the aircraft and missile envelope. When your enemy builds an excellent fourth-gen fighter cheaply enough to export thousands of them, as well as build eight hundred or a thousand for themselves, we have a problem, and it will absolutely be in the next decade rather than 50 years. The key is to build more F-22s; building more of them lowers the per-unit cost and keeps our advantage on the modern battlefield. This is the absolute truth... cut one unit or one program and the rest all go up in price... Because they have workers that need paid that were put to work at the start of the programs. this a current quote today about Raytheon: "The latest additions include a successful missile intercept test, big cost hikes for the SM-3 Block II due to another program’s cancellation, and Raytheon’s announcement that it will develop a land-based SM-3 variant"
The single largest determining factor in the per-unit labor cost is the fact that all those workers are unionized. When we buy a Raptor, part of its trmendously bloated price tag is due to union wages, union healthcare and investment packages, and union pensions. The reason the Russians and the Chinese are able to do it for so much less is labor costs, all of which are non-union. I wish that America would learn to put national security ahead of union security; we would be a hell of a lot better off. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
tl;dr just send a SEAL team to blow em up and make it look like an accident. Meh, all they need is a couple of Russian airshows to destroy them all. Hahahaha!!! Grreeat!! |
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.