*all images are speculative and not based on any evidence or proof of aircraft. I.E nothing substantial

coincidentally

our AF chief honcho says we are going to make a decision on the F35 only next year.

if we were willing to consider SU-35s in our NGF tender. any chance for the PAK-FA ? it seems the better all round contender. Stealth but the capabilities of an F-22 (at least on paper). and at a price we are willing to pay (using the estimated US$80 million we paid for our F15SGs)

i m looking at it as the SU-30 MKI ++ , pretty certain this wont be sold to China.

what are the possible implications and developments ?

1) Raptor released for sale ?
2) f35 is not really meant to function in a air supremacy role as the recent hoo-haa about the RAND reports have generated. F35 seems better suited in other capacities. instead of a pure f35 force ? a mix ? looking at our Airforce and the current threat profile we are possibly facing, we might move for a dedicated air superiority fighter.
3) earlier delivery (possible) for the PAK-FA before the F35 lightning II
4) F35 further cost and programme ovveruns ? cutback /cancellation in orders by development partners (norway, britain and australia might be in doubt) => increased unit price ?
5) the two seats model might be appropriate for us. a usual version with "zhnged" avionics ?

things against this
1) reliability (atypical russian engines but who knows ?)
2) SYSTEMS not platforms (or is it the other way round ?)
3) Russia indiscriminate sell to anyone policy.

what do you guys think ?

i m thinking, slim chance. not by a long shot but this should be on RSAF's cards. an interesting possibility to look at anyway.

this is the biggest Tan Ku Ku fighter i have ever seen. it has been "first flight next year" for quite some years already. expecting to wait some more!

Designs of this aircraft which surfaced on the net are mainly stealth and very similar to that of the existing F-22 or YF-23.

No concrete and reliable info from companies with artists' impression pics, thus can conclude that this aircraft programme's existence is mainly rumoured.

LoL, Su-37 havent even enter active service... and now they talk about this.

i dont know.

ive been following this aircraft and its reports.

apparently it kena shelved for the mig 1.44 for russia's next gen aircraft. India decided to pump funding into it and its become a viable "export product".

if this comes out, all the countries who bought su-30/27s would be so jacked by the sukhoi.

but oh well :) at least its a viable alternative to JSF.

plus, it'd be nice to have something to give us a one up against the su-30 MKMs and the Su-27s that the indons are getting ?

are the indons getting 2 su 27s and 3 su-30s ? or is it the other way round ?

eh ?

why do you say that ? the article quoted HAL and United aircraft Corporation directors making statements about how the russian and indian version are going to be very different. even down to specific differences.

the pictures are put for show. but the content and developments here seem pretty concrete ?

from the ARES blog
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defen...9c-73cf77832373

The fact that India is supposedly pumping money into it does nothing to boost my confidence in the programme-- just look at their own botched MBT development. The Russians would need at least 5-10 years before the prototype even flies-- assuming they start work now. Further, you can count on the PRC to run interference with this programme through their still substantial influence with the Russians.

I don't think the PAK-FA will be a viable contender in our NGF fighter selection. Just look at the problems that the Typhoon had-- undetermined delivery schedule, unconfirmed Tranche 2/3 capabilities that ultimately lead to its elimination. The PAK-FA will have more than its share of such problems, as compared to the F-35.

but according to the article the design work was already done. its like the BrahMos. the BrahMos aint new. its based on a cold war design.

design and development wise appears sound and fine, its just that they lack the funds and the will to develop it. and India appears to be willing to pump in both.

PRC wise its interesting. i thought they were focused on the J-10 production and the development of their own J-XX ? their 5th gen fighter thing ? i think the chinese will sit this one out, buy a few models from russia and reverse engineer the technology out. if Russia's keen to let them have it.

like the vice air marshall kak mentioned at the bottom. there's a transfer of technology too. it could go a long way in helping HAL's future aircraft production plans. plasma stealth and supercruise. benefits them more than interfering with production. HAL is involved too. any official interference would be problematic for the diplomatic reprecussions ? 3 way disaster.

those were the official reasons given for the typhoon's loss but was there the rumour/allusion that the typhoon had clinched it save for the eurocopter corruption scandal ? the contract for our navy frigates chopper ?

and on what basis you feel the PAK-FA will have more problems than the F35 ? not quite getting the picture. i think OTOH, the F35 will have a prolonged and more troubled birth. looking at the procurement numbers issue and the delayed development for the B model and its lift fans. its going to be one helluva a long and bumpy road. the fact that you have 3 different models of the same aircraft, US refusing to share source /development code and far more doubts about its capabilities.

the F35 will be overpriced for its capabilities if its going to fall short of its production target. i m worried the same thing is going to happen like with the F22. from a 1000 plane order cut to 800 and drastically cut to 322. order fall, price skyrocket. Its a shame really. the raptor is a really nice aircraft.

The keyword being 'appears' -- I don't think you can draw conclusions from the Brahmos, reason being that India has had some expertise in building missiles before the Brahmos, while it has virtually no expertise with aircraft. At the same time, the Russians haven't really moved beyond evolutionary improvements with the MiG-29/SU-27 family of fighters. The continued delay of the first flight, from 2007 to 2009 now, gives some hints of the problems that they face.

Also, it is their stated design goal to develop a long range and a short range version of the PAK-FA-- which could result in additional complications.

China could run interference for the very reason you stated-- its own J-XX fighter. Failure of the PAK-FA would help China establish itself to take over the customer base that has traditionally bought Russian aircraft. Besides, having a nominal air superiority over the two major powers on her borders would go far to assuage the security concerns of the Chinese.

The F-35 is further along the developmental route-- more of the problems have been solved. This can be seen with Israel placing an order for 25 F-35As-- which is the model we will most likely order as well. The problems with the F-35B and the yet to be tested F-35C don't really concern us, IMO. While we may have some interest in the F-35B, it is a want, not a need, to have STOVL capabilities.

Based on what information has been released about this fighter, it is still very early in its development. Only design work and initial prototypes so far, with the final design not yet decided upon. It has only taken the first tiny baby steps from the cradle. Even with the most optimistic development schedule with everything going perfectly, it will take 5 years to complete and test the design, debug final production software, integrate and certify avionics and weapons, perform flight certification, work out production problems and roll the first article off the line. More realistically, it should take 5-15 years to first production article. After that, even more time will be needed to operationalize it, where even more kinks will need to be straightened out.

For a local example, the first prototype of the Bionix drove around in 1989, but it took until 1997 for the BX to be fielded and 1999 to be operationally ready. And that is just an IFV, not an aircraft. It was not even a particularly difficult program, unlike for example the Pegasus which ran into all kinds of problems and was nearly killed more than once. First prototype is still very early.

The JSF passed this stage of development in the 1990s and still is not ready even with enormous funding and world-class engineers working on it, and it is in some ways a less complex bird than this. I don't hold out high hopes that this aircraft will be ready any time soon. Fighter development in the US has been difficult, but development outside the US has been even worse. Maybe it can compete in the next fighter competition after JSF.

somewhat inaccurate. India's HAL is currently building their LCA (light combat aircraft) with the intention of perhaps supplementing mig 29ks on the indian navy's future indigenous developed carriers. the LCA is intended to replace their british made jaguars for ground attack and mid class support aircraft. HAL is also a developing a light - medium size support helicopter for the indian army.

the way i m looking at it. getting involved in the PAK-FA provides them a quantum leap by providing them access to 4th gen aircraft design techniques and possibly, manufacturing know how and capability in the form of offsets. 5th gen technology will likely be shared with HAL as well, plasma stealth and supercruise.

Success for the PAK-FA would be far more beneficial for the russians ? they get a secure order and participant from india, ensuring that there is a min quantity of orders. At the same time, they do get a 5th gen stealth fighter that can ensure that it is able to protect russian interests in europe and oil and gas assets in siberia and maintain a qualitative edge over qualitative edge over china with whom it shares a border ? with HAL technology sharing, its less likely to be leaked out and end up as a competitor with russian firms. there's also a larger potential market out there with brazil, venuezela as possible buyers for the PAK-FA than simply china.imho, the PAK-FA offers a opportunity for the russians to break the chinese stranglehold of "cheap copies" and offer quality and cheaper aircraft in comparison to the western ones like F35 and F22 and eurofighter (pretty much the traditional markets) and tap into possible new ones (like how malaysia bought mig 29s and now Su-30s and even we considered the su-35)

looking at the J-10 and chinese made Su-27s, export dosent seem to be the primary objective. creating and maintaining a core manufacturing competency is. and in that aspect, China will probably suffer and fail in its J-XX project. i got this gut feel eventually the PAK-FA or a variant of it will end up in the PLAF. This core competency has the means of manufacturing, but lacks in decades in design and engineering proficiency. like you assumed india has no aircraft manufacturing experience, the same thing applies here. getting an aircraft like the PAK-FA and f22, f35 dosent happen overnight. it builds upon decades of experience and knowledge. the best way if you cant get this experience, would to buy it (tech transfer). this is one thing i feel the Chinese sorely lack, hence my gut feel that the J-XX will fail. look at the chinese Su-27 and their engine development problems and you'd understand the point im getting at. even the J-10 uses a russian engine for "reliability purposes" and a indigeneously developed (ws-10a) engine has not been fitted to all J-10s.

the F35 is flying. i agree with you on that aspect is far ahead on the development path. i cited the B model because the problem with the F35 (again imho) is that its very ambitious. by trying for an aircraft to fulfill the role of several legacy platforms, you end up with a product whose sales and developed and intricately linked between the different models.

screwing up the B model might screw up the A and C model in terms of overall development costs. and that screws up the final flyaway cost. like the recent israel purchase of the F35s. the numbers hide a very frightening scenario. the true cost of the F35 might be substantially higher. and what is the projected lifetime operating cost ? More problems might emerge with LRIP and the aircraft's true performance in relation to the possible threats. The f35 is much more developed concept at this point, but its premature to say that its problem free. more likely than not, i think the problems are just emerging.

I wonder how much of inputs/transfers this PAk-FA has from MIG's old project 1.44/1.42 sealth planes, but guess it also needs input from Sukoi SU-37's trust vectoring jet engine technologies to stand out as a true 5th generation fighter which can be closer to the standard of F-22A.

Not at all-- the LCA is another aircraft 'in the making' and it took about 20 years from conception to pre-IOC-- if it gets passed at all. It looks like it might die a premature death like their Arjun MBT. So far, the Indian track record for big ticket defence items is pretty dismal, not counting the complexities involved in a 5th Gen VLO aircraft.

Looking at it another way, the US took many steps and aircraft before the F-22 finally became operational. Now, you are expecting the Russians and the Indians, which have no expertise in production of 5th Gen fighters whatsoever, to make a giant leap forward? Besides, I'm not too sure about the quantum leap forward-- the Russians themselves have no expertise so its really more a case of the blind leading the blind.

I'm not saying that the production of the PAK-FA is impossible, I'm just saying that within the timeframe of our NGF, it won't be ready.

Any problems with the F-35B will not affect the F-35A-- how else can the Israelis fix a price for their 25 F-35A? The cost per airframe definitely cannot be determined from the price of their contract-- with no information about the details of the contract any speculation is pointless. The Israeli's early purchase will benefit us as well, given the depth of our relationship.

no issues and no hard feelings here edwin. btw what you mean by pre-IOC ?

http://www.ada.gov.in/index.html

but the LCA tejas appears to be doing pretty well. albiet not ready for full scale adoption and induction into the IAF but, pretty decent. but relative to comparable developments like the J-10. its lagging behind. its not an idea but its been flying for quite a while now.

there's been systems intergration and nearly reaching 1000 test flights. they've even intergated a litening pod with it. its not the paragon of aircraft development but it isnt fair to call it a total flop and failure altogether. For industry where even kit assembly of aircraft wasnt done, i think the indians have done pretty good. they are having engine problems (pretty similar to chinese J-10) and sourced a GE engine for the first examples while their indigeneous engine is under development.

just a small observation, the LCA appears to have a euro-canard design. big delta wing. somewhat similar to Chinese J-10. same type of design as the Gripen NG and eurofighter. im wondering if this means anything or indicative of any aircraft design trend.

The Russian technology works. they had the su-37 technology demonstrator to show their trust vectoring. bits and pieces of these have streamed down to current 4.5g models like the nice su-30 mkms up north. Im not suggesting that the technology is proven or fully developed. i m saying that the technology is there. this cuts short the process of R&D and jumps straight to the point of adaptation and designing a aircraft that utilizes these technologies.

quantum leap in two sense of the word.

its getting access to these technologies which would take years of development. supercruise would suggest access to engine constructions and designs which are remarkably efficient. far more so than current engine design on the LCA tejas, which is proving problematic. the same problem the chinese are having with their ws-10a. its gaining access to information and knowledge that, in their own time and development schedule, would probably take a decade or a half to acquire.

leap in the sense that they are currently producing early 4th gen aircraft now like the LCA(if there's such a word). by jumping or leaping into a joint production effort with russia in a 4 ++ or 5th gen fighter, they learn so much more. they get access to production techniques, technology or design breakthroughs that they havent made.

correct me if i m wrong but i think you are having the idea that building a 5th gen aircraft requires starting from scratch. its somewhat true in the sense, you have a different set of performance and mission roles for a 5th gen fighter, but much of that technological aspect in development is borrowed from generations of hard work on 4th gen and 4.5 gen fighters. Russia has this in abundance with successful models such as the Mig 29, Su-27 and its derivatives, Su-30mk? and Su-35. projects such as the Mig 1.44 dont magically appear overnight as well. its quite unfair to say that the russians have no expertise. they simply havent produced a 5th gen fighter to challenge the west yet. a lack of examples dosent not equate to a lack of capability. and if really nitpicking, the F-22 ,has its roots in the cold war. its a 4th gen fighter (aerial supremacy, dogfighting) that has 5th gen technology(BVR , stealth first strike) due to its prolonged development. the F35 appears to be the only aircraft thats designed in the 5th gen role (limited A2A capacity due to BVR doctrine, stealth). i might be wrong in these examples (i have a knack for bad examples) but my underlying point that simply the lack of a russian 5th gen aircraft, dosent mean they dont know how to produce them. perhaps the 90s will be viewed as a "lost decade" for the Red army someday by historians ?


imho, the indians are doing the smartest thing (aside from plonking money into the F35 which may be too expensive and they would probably get little or no industrial trade off knowledge) apart from indigeneous development of aircraft. its smarter to latch on to russian development, sponge off them and obtain technology, vs the chinese trying to reinvent the wheel, come up with RAM or plasma stealth for their 5th gen fighter will be a long and painful developmental process for them.

no contest. i m sure the israeli work with the F35a will benefit us. the thing is, the 15.2 billion figure is if all options are exercised. dosent anything about specific prices or changes. totally agree with you that too little information to come to any conclusion about this. but think about the big picture. even if its a fixed price per aircraft (which we cant be certain of). the current wavering about the numbers and procurement commitment might sink or kill the JSF. its really a crunch time for the JSF. its never going to live up to its "cheap" tag if it dosent hit the production target figure of 2300 aircraft.

simple economics. the fixed investment cost is going to be spread out over a smaller number of aircraft, raising the per unit cost. unless the US is willing to absorb and write off any ovveruns in the development cost. any problems with the F35B will and most definitely affect the ENTIRE JSF program. as it is, the USAF is going through a crisis finding funding for enough LRIP in 2009 and 2010 for the JSF. simply isnt enough funding for the numbers it plans to acquire.

even if the f35a is in a "locked" cost sale to israel, smaller production runs of f35s will eventually push up the parts and other secondary component cost. the F35 might become another rafael ? your cost is somewhat reasonable but maintainance is expensive and prohibitive. cost ineffective ?

the whole F35 program hinges on this mass production. the moment the numbers are cut for the F35 program, you'd see the whole program facing the same problem the f22. escalating cost and numbers cutback. a vicious cycle.

thats why i see norway,denmark and britain's continued participation and commitment as essential. why do you think boeing keeps aggressively marketing the f18 to these nations. they know if even they cant produce a 5th gen fighter on their own(boeing), they can effectively hurt LM by making their product priced out of the market. allowing boeing to muscle in with its far more cheaper aircraft like the F18.

No offense, stars, but you don't seem very familiar with military procurement. All the things you bring up describe a project at a very early stage. With only 1000s of test flights and integration of just a few systems, the LCA is still some years from service. You don't seem to have any concept of the scale of works needed to bring an new aircraft into use.

The easy part is R&D and design. The hard part is requirement gathering, testing, integration, certification, supply chain management, training, operational evaluation, production quality control, maintenance and all the other unsexy stuff.

its a two way thing isnt it knowledge? :D i know i dont know much but im learning as i go along. i think the fundamental problem is im looking at it in terms of potential. maybe thats clouding my thinking.

i was thinking R&D and design is the hard part and the others would come along and fall into place as they are engineering feedback loops. its all part of a system. hmm, never considered it from this way. but now that you put it that way...

hmm, need some time to absorb it. cant think at 2.30 in the morning

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htairfo/a...s/20081002.aspx

exactly my point. T-50/pak-fa is a very interesting proposition(s). I m not going out to oppose edwin point for point. im just thinking in terms of its potential. versus things like you know, it will never happen, its doomed to disaster. maybe its how im looking at it is a more positive sense rather than looking at its realistic possibility.

but i have issues with the SU-35 and the Pak-fa/T-50 being the same aircraft.

are they. really ? hmm not too sure.

I'm not saying that the PAK-FA is not a viable aircraft-- I'm just answering your original question about whether the PAK-FA can be considered for NGF, and the answer, clearly, is no, for the various reasons I have already laid out.

On to the LCA, just because I'm having lots of fun discussing this issue :D , IOC stands for Initial Operating Capability i.e. actually fielding the aircraft out. As of now the LCA is still in the prototype phase, and I drew from the Indian experience with the Arjun MBT for big ticket items and projected that the chances of it actually entering service is about 50-50, given the bad reports about it-- not just an unreliable engine but failing to meet the requirements for the design in many ways.

This is not to say that the Indians haven't learnt from the LCA development. However, like the Russians, the Indians have not had ANY experience at all in developing and/or fielding a 5th Gen aircraft. Now, thrust vectoring may be the most visible and impressive of capabilities, but don't get taken in by it! A 5th Gen aircraft is so much more than meets the eye! Besides, I'm not sure I'd classify TVC as a 4.5 Gen technology-- the Americans and Russians have been playing with it since the 1980s.

As to the quantum leap, a rough genealogy of the F-22/F-35 would include the F-14/15/16/18 as to the 'white' side of the house, but let's not forget the 'black' side-- the SR-71, U-2, F-117, B-2 etc. The Russians do well in the visible 'white' side-- their MiG-29 and SU-27 and derivative airframes clearly outperform the 'teen generation aircraft in terms of maneuverability, and even in some electronics (IRST). But don't forget that they have virtually no experience in the 'black' side-- this is what I mean by the quantum leap.

I think you misunderstand the 4G/5G divide, and the expected roles of the F-22/F-35. But that is not really pertinent to this discussion.

I disagree about the 'little or no industrial trade of knowledge' -- the F-35 source codes will be in the hands of all participating nations eventually, by hook or by crook. As of now, there are two major channels to gain the source code 1) Buy from BAE 2) Buy from the Israelis. Neither entity has shown much qualm when it comes to keeping US military secrets when it doesn't serve their national or company interest. Besides, reverse engineering can do wonders-- just look at the Chinese aircraft industry :D

One reason I suspect the Israeli F-35 buy was so high is because it included a lifetime maintenance contract-- that seems to be the trend in purchasing airframes nowadays-- rendering your point about maintenance moot. As it is, I suspect most of the noises about dropping the F-35 are either 1) To pressure the US to sell the F-22 or 2) To pressure the US to release the source codes.

Looking at your latest article, the PAK-FA seems to be another 4.5G SU-27 derivative that is aimed at the Eurofighter Typhoon rather than the F-22/F-35. They share similar characteristics-- LO, Maneuverability, Air sup. The article also clearly rules out the PAK-FA as a NGF contender. Remember the purpose of the NGF is to replace the F-16s! The 34 ton PAK-FA is more a possible replacement for the F-15 instead-- but of course we aren't looking to replace them!

No problem with looking at possibilities-- I have found this discussion to be fairly interesting! But you have to look at the reality of things-- We are now moving to the standard western airforce hi-lo mix of aircraft. We have just bought the F-15s for the 'hi' part of the mix. We are looking to replace the 'lo' part of the mix. The PAK-FA, as it stands now, seems to be a 'hi' aircraft, which disqualifies it. It is also at least 15-20 years away from fielding-- and we need our NGF before that. It does not seem to incorporate the required 'black' qualities in terms of stealth and electronic network/ EW capability that the F-35 possesses. Frankly the JAS-39 Gripen would be a better contender for the NGF!

This is not even taking into account the maintenance and logistics and systems side of the equation, which was one of the major factors that led us to select the F-15 over more technically capable aircraft and which will lead us to buy American for the foreseeable future.

edit: Point to note-- the article you just posted directly contradicts the pictures you first posted. Now, this is either a brilliant piece of misinformation, or the contradicting reports indicate how messed up the programme is and the lack of a clear finalized product. I suspect the latter.

i dont know :)

i m kinda looking forward to a flying demonstration of the f35 here in asian aerospace 2010 here. plus, with a little luck, maybe a pak-fa demonstrator ?

hmm. isnt 5th gen characteristics like VLO/stealth, internal carriage of weapons, BVR fighting , tend to be AESA radar equipped and usually thrust vectoring equipped ?

ic, so its basically saying the LCA is something thats pretty much still in its testing phase and its not out of the woods yet ? the LCA is apparently using some GE engine. ingenious engine on its way. J-10s facing the same problem.

ah.. i see the difference. you were putting it in the quantum leap/ generation leap from platform to platform ? like the f4/a4 --> teen series --> F18/Interim => f22/f35. i was thinking more like the strategypage article mentioned, how the russians use incremental bit by bit improvments. i thought the indians would benefit by getting jumping ahead of the curve and getting access.

been reading up on pak fa today. appears that the pak fa / t-50 if made, will be produced in russia. indian not really getting much aside from plasma stealth and possible engine technology.

hmm, about the Hi-lo mix. i dont really see how. ok. flashback to when our airforce was using A4SU and F16 A & B and f5s right ? f5s are interceptors. light and fast. manueverable. A4SU serve as bomb trucks and the F16 A & B were deployed as aerial supremacy/ dominance figthers right ?

now the fleet consists with F-16 C and D+ variants with the F15sg arriving next year serving as both interceptor/bomb trucks.F5 gradually being phased out.

and 10 years down the road, assume our first F35 is delivered. we'd be caught in a situation where the F35 might not be as manuverable and function in a interceptor/air superiority force but your best interceptors are a pretty old design and non stealthy design. the F16s are gradually phased out over the subsequent 15 years.

i m thinking of it as problematic in the sense you might have a "hi-lo mix" with a ageing interceptor model versus a highly manuverable enemy (both indon and malaysia have Su-27 and 30 variants) and a possible VLO multi role aircraft thats so-so in A2A (or so the story goes: fundamental assumption F35 inferior in A2A). might be wise to acquire a third platform as a dedicated interceptor, something like PAK-FA and pushing the F15s to bomb truck (like how the A4SU became bomb trucks when the F16s came onboard) , F35 special purpose and first strike and the PAK-FA in a aerial superiority/escort role

add : worry about the F15 SG as its based on the E model, wont it be a little on the heavy side ? manuverability and in the unlikely event of a dogfight/pissing war. how would it handle and fly ? read some comments that the C and E versions fly somewhat differently.

I think the RSAF's procurement model would probably not involve a dedicated air-supremacy aircraft for a while. We will probably stick to purchasing multi-role or swing role aircraft.

I have serious doubts about the Su-27s and 35s. I don't see how they gain so much reputation by hype alone. Yes, they look pretty, but they are just another 3G aircraft.

They are hardly stealth, and have RCS that will light up on an F-16s radar 100 miles away.

They are fast and agile, but so what? My AMRAAMs are fast and agile too. In fact, no Su- is gonna be faster or out-turn my AMRAAM. As long as they aren't stealth, our F-16s won't have a problem taking them out.

ahhh...

but thats really dependent on BVR combat right ?

strategypage posted something up recently about "magic missiles" and their hit probabilities.

BVR depends on 2 things
1) high hit probability
2) your missiles cant be jammed/diverted/decoyed in any effective way.

without that, you either scoot or be engaged in a dogfight.

there's rumours about the su-30 MKX series having a onboard radar that "future" developments will allow it to function like a mini AWACs. they all feature really powerful radars.

any chance that it jams BVR missiles ? allowing the Su-30 to get close and personal where its manuverability does the trick ?

arent malaysia's MKMs at red flag this year ? any chance of seeing the red flag reports and AAR ?

Red Flag AARs.. are not available to us common folk, unfortunately.

even in visual/dogfight combat, modern WVRAAMs will do much to level the playing field between the agile and super-agile. all else being equal - equal radar, IRST, HMS - the larger and hotter Flanker/PAK-FA will probably get seen and locked onto first... and then die first.

MiG and Sukhoi fans love to gloat about the alien performance capabilities of their favourite jets. But fact is the F-15Es and F-16s come with impressive track records as evidenced in the Gulf Wars, Kosovo and Arab/Israeli air wars. While MiGs and Sukhois look better in airshows and are impressive in training exercises and combat simulations, it is the actual combat arena that matters. Then MiG/Su fans like to point out that if the 15s and 16s face better trained opponents, the MiGs/Su should prevail. Lame, it hasn't happened yet so its just conjecture and hot air.

Its like a soccer match. Team A had 80% possession of the ball and had ten hits against the goal post. Total domination.

Team B had only one shot at goal throughout the match and made that one count by putting the ball into the net.

Team A's result: A loss, and no trophy for second best. They howl loud and long that they're the better team but the result stands.

Team B's result: A win, and they take the silverware.

Serious and discerning customers want Reliable and Battle Proven assets. Not combat simulations, 'expert' opinions and analysis by non- pilots who haven't flown combat missions beyond computer games.

At the end of the day platform vs platform comparisons are meaningless. Weapons are important, training is even more important, Logistics is EVERYTHING. I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that the Israeli Air Force would have won even if they had an inferior platform. For e.g. the Mirage III was not as manuverable as the MiG-21 except in the high altitude envelope. But because they knew this, and the Israelis had better pilots, they developed a doctrine which could overcome this disadvantage. Likewise I think no matter how good the equipment of the Arab airforces, even those equipped with Western aircraft such as the Saudi Airforce, when it comes down to an actual war, they r going to be in trouble because of deficiencies in their training and logistics.

@wd1

centerius paribus assumption ? ok but if we were to apply that in our context. for now. till the F35s (if we do get them) come in. you have a "high-low" mix of F16s and F15s.

ceterius paribus. our best interceptor is not a pure interceptor, being substantially larger and heavier than the C air superiority model. in a pure non-stealthy environment with R-77s and aim120-Cs all loose. will it necessarily be the case ? i hope the rumours about the pythons and derby's are true though. But if they dont exist. will we have the BVR qualitative edge ?

@f14d.

no issues with what you are saying.totally agree with the futility of plane vs. plane scenario. wont be going into this. this is to explore the PAK-FA idea and how it might fit into a RSAF context.

but the fundamental flaw is about numbers. all the A2A victories recorded by the F15 and F16, has been pretty much based on aerial supremacy afforded by numbers of aircraft. There's never ever been a case of where 2 powers (with approximate number of aircraft ) fought a A2A shooting war. in every case of A2A thus far, its always been the F15, F16 being a numerically superior "blue" force vs a "red force" consisting of substantially less Migs and Suks. Its never been a level playing field with equal teams as suggested by your football analogy

that, has also been the key limitation of the "combat proven" assets theory. how combat proven can your platform be when they have never encountered a opposition that they cannot outnumber and possibly outgun ? thats why the recent RAND analysis of a F22 vs Su-27 pissing battle off taiwan is interesting.

not trying to offer a "expert" opinion and analysis here. just exploratory in nature. they way i see it, the PAK-FA presents a possibility to fulfill a niche in our Air Force

i myself wouldn't like to play a 1v1 plane vs plane scenario... but in an F-15SG vs MKM BVR shoot-out, we can be confident of a better AESA radar, equivalent IRST and far superior situational awareness - by virtue of a far superior training/AWACS/airborne jammer setup.

as you mentioned, Eagles and Falcons have yet to be tested in conflicts where they were outnumbered, outgunned and outsupported. but then, given the disposition of our Air Force vs that of potential opponents, chances are that we will outnumber, outgun and outsupport them - even if both should gang up on us. it is of course systems vs systems not just platforms vs platforms, and we have got the stronger package all round.

if PAK-FA really provides all that has been promised, that it might just be worth buying. but IMO, first they've got to make it work with AMRAAM, AIM-9X, JDAM, JSOW, Link 16 et al, and throw in source codes, parts blueprints and pilot training. which would be a tall order.

and the Americans will be desperate for us to take those PAK-FAs to Red Flag!

Not really :)

a 2 seater version of the PAK-FA with greater range, israeli avionics and ECM and gear and missiles would do pretty fine. India is getting the 2 seater ones. they are currently waiting for their il-76 phalcon awacs from israel. say the PAK-FA matures in about 15 years. we could have pilot training in india.

see the parallels ? with increasing defence ties with india, and a common military supplier in our israeli friends. its a three way triangle.

hmm, i didnt see it in that way. was still thinking how would our platforms fare if its a face off between the su-30s MKM against us. but now that you put it this way. systems and not platforms i guess the whole picture makes sense. but i find the F15 a problematic purchase. its good, its combat proven and it can carry a whole lot of weapons.

but its an ageing design/platform when you have new and escalating threat scenarios around the area. J-10 is an unknown quality. Su-30s in indon, malaysia, vietnam and china. china mass manufacturing SU-27s. underlying question, is in maybe 10-12 years down the road. after the F16 replacement program. will our sg eagles be the weakest link in the system ?

the indian navy getting the refurbished admiral gorshkov and its 2 light indigenous carriers somewhere within that time frame. china's own carrier should be up and running. the 2020s wont be a nice time to live in i feel.

The deciding factor will probably be logistics. The more reliable and maintainable an aircraft is, the more time it spends in the air and the less it spends on the ground. Essentially, superior logistics increase the effective number of aircraft you have. That is one reason why Western designs have tended to outnumber Eastern designs in sustained conflicts so far -- the Migs and Sukhois were in their hangers being cursed at by maintainers while the F-16s and F-15s were ganging up on the rest. The RSAF is particularly strong in combat power generation, and this is one of our main strengths.

Also, one reason why Western pilots tend to be better trained than pilots on Eastern designs is again logistics. Western planes are cheaper to fly per flight hour and safer. This allows pilots to get more flight hours and become better trained.

It is not right to separate the performance of an aircraft from its logistical supportability. Logistics is the heart of combat performance. It is better to have a reliable and maintainable plane that is slightly worse, than a hot rod that is hard to keep in the air and too expensive and dangerous to train with. Western designs so far are definitely better from a logistical standpoint. As far as I am concerned, this is a decisive advantage over the slightly better flight performance of Eastern designs.

one small step for india, one giant leap for PAK-FA ?

this really hints at something. im sure india arent throwing 10 billion dollars at the PAK-FA project for nothing.

if they do go for the mig 35. it would suggest PAK-FA would indeed be a huge leg up from the current Su-30mkX series. hence the funding and their involvement.

very interesting. like edwin suggested. its either a really clever smokescreen for a really good fighter without arousing attention from the west, or its a really messed up procurement effort. i m reserving my opinion on either.


@kaikuan :

PAK-FA is expected to have engine life expectancy of 4,000 hours. i m not too sure but is this comparable with western made engine life ? i read somewhere that the russians , after cold war ended, had access to alot of newer technology, allowing them to improve in their engine designs. dont think the newer sukhois are having this much problem right ?

maybe the older mig29s but the newer models do have such reliability issues as well ? as i understand it, the engine and their "short legs" was their main liability

http://www.hindu.com/2008/10/06/stories/2008100655751300.htm

wow.

PAK-FA being held up.

possible AN-225/ C-5 / C-17 acquisition ?

Negotiations with Russia being held, not being held up.

oops. my bad. hmm

but works both ways right if you think about it. if it isnt an issue, it wont be neogotiated.

plus, its some indication(of sorts) that the PAK-FA isnt vapourware

AN-225/C-5 might be a bit difficult to procure.... probably down to AN-124/C-17

considering they don't build anymore 225's....yea wld be hard

was thinking old stock or existing stock.

wow. india's really spending big on procurement.

SU-30 mki, pak fa choppers.

plus two carriers.

i think the pakistani's must be really really worried.

New PAK-FA video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KW0x2EDghbE

thanks to Alert5

Few points:

1) Extreme nationalism in the video (as expected) The section on the SU-47 fails to mention that the US first tested and discarded the Forward Swept Wing in the X-29, long before the SU-47 was built.

2) Hints that the sigma for the design will be 1m^2, no mention of baffles for the engines, just composite coatings on the turbine blades. This is roughly comparable to the Typhoon and the Rafale, no where near the F-22 or the F-35, even though they make that comparison in the video.

3) Supercruise capable even on the current AL-31F(?) engines. Performance should be better with the S-117s.

4) Has the two 'cheek' AESA arrays that were left off the F-22 due to cost. Also has additional radars on the wing tips.

Conclusion: If all the planned features actually do make it to the production variant, it will probably be a pretty good fighter.

new photos just turn up... now in full camo. B)

http://take-off.ru/index.php/news/93-april...-lii-29-04-2010

i'm no expert but the elevator construction looks a bit filmsy...