@Lysander: hell yes, these are just about the most capable platforms in the sky. Even the Russian 4++ generatiom (MiG-35, SU-37, SU-35BM, etc. are amongst the most capable aircraft on the planet, bar none). Heck – even the orignial MiG-29s and SU-27s were better warfighting aircraft (as opposed to technology demonstrators) than anything the USAF/USN had with the exception of the F-22. As for the old MiG-31 it is still in many ways without equivalent. No, Russian aircraft are really very, very good. Don’t trust the US propaganda on this topic as it always compares the latest of US made aircraft operated by a superpower to the stripped down older Soviet machines operated by 3rd world countries. That is how you get those steller kill ratios for, say, the F-16. I am not dissing US aircraft which are good, I am just saying that they are not the always best. Cheers!
Lysander, that Russia is now developing a 5th generation fighter (that is, of the newest kind, similar to the US F-22 and F-35, the last one still being developed) means that the US will not have absolute technological predominance in the air. And, considering that the US never gets involved in conflicts when they fear they won’t be able to reach air superiority, the strategical and geopolitical significance of this new Russian fighter is immense. A few years ago, the US was confident that they (and their allies, through the F-35 program) would be the only country in the world to have 5th generation fighters. Now their dream is gone. Despite previous delays, since 2007 the PAK FA program is running on schedule, funding is coming and India is also participating, which will make it easiear to get funds for mass-production. There was an increasing gap between the US and the rest of the world in airpower when the first 5th generation fighter, the F-22 Raptor, entered service with the USAF. Now this gap is beginning to close.
Another consequence of the PAK FA program is that the generals in the USAF and executives in the defense industry will begin whinning because of Obama’s decision to stop building the F-22, the most expensive fighter ever. Their argument will be that now the Russians have a 5th generation fighter and soon will begin selling to India, China, Iran, Venezuela, Syria, North Korea, etc (so far, only India signed contracts to get this aircraft, but this won’t stop them to say this), so the US NEEDS to have more F-22, and NEEDS to improve it. So the defense budget will be increased in a few dozen billions more for this.
As for the F-22 it is obscenely expensive, not to say overpriced.
I therefore would say that the PAK-FA is really not ‘similar’ or ‘equivalent’ to either of these two aircraft.
The funny thing is that cost overruns are so endemic at all phases of the US weapons procurement cycle that we might see the ironic situation of a totally mythical Russian “threat” justifying more US “defense” spending thereby ruining the Empire even faster. Pretty much what happened to the Soviet Union actually. I find that rather ironic.
@Carlo: I don’t think that the PAK-FA will go to many countries besides India which already has a top level air force which has the ressources and sophistication to incorporate a 5th generation aircraft. But countries like Venezuela or, even more so, North Korea simply don’t have what it take to do much more than maybe overflights and static displays. It’s like Libya or Algeria with their MiGs. The thing to watch for is China here. China is slowly “getting there” and, at some time in the future, might become a PAK-FA client and that would have the Empire having a total fit :-)
That said, do you think Russia would sell this to Iran sometime down the line…or credibly threaten the US to do so, so as to extract some concession not to?
Do you think in a future arms race, Russia could reverse the process of the 1980’s and force the US into financial hardship? Reason being that these systems would actually be profitable if Russia is willing to sell them to actual paying customers, whereas the US basically either gives its weapons away (Israel, Egypt) or finances them through low interest loans that might not get repaid (Poland, new NATO, etc.) I think only the gulf states are dumb enough to actually pay full price.
In a hypothetical situation where Russia was prepared to sell to Iran whatever it wanted to buy, could it change the conventional balance of forces in the region?
Saker: I fully agree with your remarks on the F-35 (junk), and F-22 (capable, but absurdly expensive). About Russia selling this new fighter to other countries, like I said, so far only India has a deal to get it. China is very unlikely to receive the PAK FA, as the Russians now are very cautious when transfering high technology to China. They were forced to do this in the 90’s, when their defense industries needed to export to survive, but times have changed. China is developing their own 5th generation fighter (the J-XX), but no one knows when it will fly. China has a lot of difficulties in developing new avionics and engines (they buy Russian engines for their own indigenous fighter, the J-10), so perhaps it will be a long time til they are able to come with a similar aircraft. Lysander, your idea is interesting. But let’s see how willing is Russia to export this aircraft. India is a special case for Russia: they have a decades-long partnership, and India has been always a very trustful partner. And, like Saker noted, we have to see how many countries will be able to afford it: though not as expensive as the F-22, it won’t be a cheap aircraft.
But analysts have denied the jet is a leap forward. “It’s just a prototype lacking new engines and a new radar,” military analyst Pavel Felgenhauer told the Associated Press news agency. Originally scheduled for 2007, the T-50’s maiden flight was repeatedly postponed because of technical problems. Observers of Russia’s recent military modernisation drive say it has been plagued by delays and quality problems.
First, this is nonsense. The PAK-FA WILL have a new radar and engine (even Wikipedia knows about that) and Felegauer is THE “prostitute” journalist in Moscow who always puts the ‘correct’ spin when needed by Western news sources. As for the delays, that is nonsense too. Sukhoi had a long series of aircraft (SU-35, SU-37, SU-47) which were testbeds for many of the systems which the PAK-FA will have. Ditto for the MiG-35 which is a 4++ generation aircraft. ALL of these aircraft performed to the full satisfaction of the constructors (compare that with the sagas of the B-1 or V-22, LOL!). The Birts are really full of shit.
This reminds me of the following fact: everytime a Tupolev, Illuishin or Antonov crashes the western media always helpfully adds that it is a “Russian built) Tupolev, Illiushin or Antonov. But when a Boeing or Airbus crashes, you NEVER hear about the “US built” Boeing or “EU built” Airbus.
The viceral russophobia of the corporate media is really something to behold…
Delays are not exceptions in the aviation industry nowadays (both civilian and military), they are the rule, in every country. Designing new planes has become so complex and expensive, that you have to expect technical problems that will make costs rise and delays appear. But PAK FA, since 2007, has been running on schedule. That year the construction of the first 3 prototypes began, and since then the Russians were announcing the first flight for late 2009 or early 2010. And it happened exactly as planned.
can you recommend a good source or book or website where one can learn about the different military capabilities and technologies of Russia vs. the US?
i don’t know this information, and need a good source for catching up.
btw, what kind of fighter jet fleet does iran have?
Anonymous, now I don’t remember any specific website or book comparing the air capabilities of Russia and the US. I know lots of websites, with many information, and if you can read Russian it will help a lot. About the Iranian air force, it consists mostly of US aircraft from the 70’s, bought before the 1979 Revolution. Also, they got some Russian planes from Iraq (Saddam Hussein sent some of his planes to Iran to avoid destruction in the First Gulf War, and Iran never returned these), and also bought a few planes from Russia. As the US planes are very old, many of them are not combat-ready, though Iran made a huge progress in manufacturing spare parts and even electronic components for these planes. Their most capable fighters are the F-14 Tomcat and the MiG-29. Then they have some Su-24M attack planes, and Su-25 for close air support. Other combat planes include F-4 Phantom II and F-5E Tiger. Iran also produces some indigenous aircraft, like the Saeqeh (in fact, an updated F-5E) and the Shafaq, a trainer/light attack probably developed with Russian help.
@anonymous: it is really hard to find good sources comparing Russian and US systems. This is due to a number of issues: 1) there is BIG money involved. 2) there is lots of stupid flag waving on both sides 3) weapons are only as good as the soldiers using them 4) there is no such thing as an inherently good weapon. it all depends on the engagement doctrine (David vs Goliath) 5) the design philosophies are dramatically different
Let me explain this last one.
Here is how Americans work: the take all the bleeding edge technologies, they integrate them into a system, and then make maximum use of then by designing a mission which puts them to the ‘best’ use.
Russians do it all the other way around: they define a mission, and then the make use of the most reliable technology to execute that mission. So sometimes they go VERY low tech (MiG-29) and sometimes they go for the high tech solution (phased array radar, HMS, IRST, etc.).
You could also put it this way:
American weapon systems relect the mindset of American engineers. Russian weapon systems reflect the mindset of Russian soldiers.
All that is hard to compare, is it not?
Even the old M-16 vs AK-74 thing reflects that. The M-16 is a superior single shot rifle, the AK-74 is a superior machine gun.
So, on a shooting range I rather have a M-16. In a conflict I much rather have a AK-74 (or even the older AK-47). But that is me.
Anyway – all this is to say that comparing capabilities is hard. and that is also true for air capabilities. What is more important – being able to engage 6 targets while tracking another 12, or being able to land on a dirt road or on snow? What is more important – thrust to weight ratios or engine life?
Hi anonymous. To answer your question in a factual and honest way. No there is nowhere you will find any good information on Russian v U.S. kit. For very obvious reasons, countries do not post classified info on their products! Also, treat anyone who refers you to wikipedia as an idiot, as anyone with REAL knowledge can see that most of their entries come from fantasy land! I am used to dealing with RAF facts and figures, plus some USAF ones, and can tell you almost everything you will read in forums is innacurate or very out of date. In a similar way, ALL of the exact figures in wikipedia will not be accurate. There are folks in this forum saying how good the PAK 50 is, even though it has only just flown, has not proved its systems, and does not have a modern rader yet, or even its final engines!
@anonymous: There are folks in this forum saying how good the PAK 50 is, even though it has only just flown, has not proved its systems, and does not have a modern rader yet, or even its final engines!
Yes and no. The model shown on hte video did, indeed, lack these elements as what was being tested was the airframe only. However, most of the systems of the PAKFA have already been developed, and quite a few have already been tested on the SU-35/37/47 series. So while I agree with you that final judgement on the PAKFA cannot passed right now or, in fact, anytime sooon, I also disagree with the idea that we cannot make some rather educated guesses about it. For example, the analysis of Dr. Kopp and Peter Goon
is one such attempt and while some of their claims, in particular about the JSF, are controversial, I have yet to see somebody being able to challenge their findings or methodology on the PAKFA.
Check out their assessment of the F-22 and JSF vs the PAKFA here:
It’s been a long long time since I have special access to classified data, but I vividly remember how often the folks in the “threat assessment” department used open sourced studies for they analysis even though they had access to the classified info for their own side.
Yes, classified facts and figures can be different from the ones presented in open sources, but by how much and does that matter? Yes, I would not trust Wikipedia on these figures, but Kopp and Goon are, I submit, in a wholly different category.
Wow! Is it any good?
@Lysander: hell yes, these are just about the most capable platforms in the sky. Even the Russian 4++ generatiom (MiG-35, SU-37, SU-35BM, etc. are amongst the most capable aircraft on the planet, bar none). Heck – even the orignial MiG-29s and SU-27s were better warfighting aircraft (as opposed to technology demonstrators) than anything the USAF/USN had with the exception of the F-22. As for the old MiG-31 it is still in many ways without equivalent. No, Russian aircraft are really very, very good.
Don’t trust the US propaganda on this topic as it always compares the latest of US made aircraft operated by a superpower to the stripped down older Soviet machines operated by 3rd world countries. That is how you get those steller kill ratios for, say, the F-16.
I am not dissing US aircraft which are good, I am just saying that they are not the always best.
Cheers!
Lysander, that Russia is now developing a 5th generation fighter (that is, of the newest kind, similar to the US F-22 and F-35, the last one still being developed) means that the US will not have absolute technological predominance in the air. And, considering that the US never gets involved in conflicts when they fear they won’t be able to reach air superiority, the strategical and geopolitical significance of this new Russian fighter is immense. A few years ago, the US was confident that they (and their allies, through the F-35 program) would be the only country in the world to have 5th generation fighters. Now their dream is gone. Despite previous delays, since 2007 the PAK FA program is running on schedule, funding is coming and India is also participating, which will make it easiear to get funds for mass-production. There was an increasing gap between the US and the rest of the world in airpower when the first 5th generation fighter, the F-22 Raptor, entered service with the USAF. Now this gap is beginning to close.
Another consequence of the PAK FA program is that the generals in the USAF and executives in the defense industry will begin whinning because of Obama’s decision to stop building the F-22, the most expensive fighter ever. Their argument will be that now the Russians have a 5th generation fighter and soon will begin selling to India, China, Iran, Venezuela, Syria, North Korea, etc (so far, only India signed contracts to get this aircraft, but this won’t stop them to say this), so the US NEEDS to have more F-22, and NEEDS to improve it. So the defense budget will be increased in a few dozen billions more for this.
@everybody: I would like to add one thing: the F-35 is a piece of garbadge:
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-JSF-Analysis.html
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-2008-03.html
As for the F-22 it is obscenely expensive, not to say overpriced.
I therefore would say that the PAK-FA is really not ‘similar’ or ‘equivalent’ to either of these two aircraft.
The funny thing is that cost overruns are so endemic at all phases of the US weapons procurement cycle that we might see the ironic situation of a totally mythical Russian “threat” justifying more US “defense” spending thereby ruining the Empire even faster. Pretty much what happened to the Soviet Union actually. I find that rather ironic.
@Carlo: I don’t think that the PAK-FA will go to many countries besides India which already has a top level air force which has the ressources and sophistication to incorporate a 5th generation aircraft. But countries like Venezuela or, even more so, North Korea simply don’t have what it take to do much more than maybe overflights and static displays. It’s like Libya or Algeria with their MiGs.
The thing to watch for is China here. China is slowly “getting there” and, at some time in the future, might become a PAK-FA client and that would have the Empire having a total fit :-)
That said, do you think Russia would sell this to Iran sometime down the line…or credibly threaten the US to do so, so as to extract some concession not to?
Do you think in a future arms race, Russia could reverse the process of the 1980’s and force the US into financial hardship? Reason being that these systems would actually be profitable if Russia is willing to sell them to actual paying customers, whereas the US basically either gives its weapons away (Israel, Egypt) or finances them through low interest loans that might not get repaid (Poland, new NATO, etc.) I think only the gulf states are dumb enough to actually pay full price.
In a hypothetical situation where Russia was prepared to sell to Iran whatever it wanted to buy, could it change the conventional balance of forces in the region?
I think you answered my question just as I was typing it.
Saker: I fully agree with your remarks on the F-35 (junk), and F-22 (capable, but absurdly expensive).
About Russia selling this new fighter to other countries, like I said, so far only India has a deal to get it. China is very unlikely to receive the PAK FA, as the Russians now are very cautious when transfering high technology to China. They were forced to do this in the 90’s, when their defense industries needed to export to survive, but times have changed. China is developing their own 5th generation fighter (the J-XX), but no one knows when it will fly. China has a lot of difficulties in developing new avionics and engines (they buy Russian engines for their own indigenous fighter, the J-10), so perhaps it will be a long time til they are able to come with a similar aircraft.
Lysander, your idea is interesting. But let’s see how willing is Russia to export this aircraft. India is a special case for Russia: they have a decades-long partnership, and India has been always a very trustful partner. And, like Saker noted, we have to see how many countries will be able to afford it: though not as expensive as the F-22, it won’t be a cheap aircraft.
@everybody:
Check out the BBC’s sour grapes comments:
But analysts have denied the jet is a leap forward. “It’s just a prototype lacking new engines and a new radar,” military analyst Pavel Felgenhauer told the Associated Press news agency. Originally scheduled for 2007, the T-50’s maiden flight was repeatedly postponed because of technical problems. Observers of Russia’s recent military modernisation drive say it has been plagued by delays and quality problems.
First, this is nonsense. The PAK-FA WILL have a new radar and engine (even Wikipedia knows about that) and Felegauer is THE “prostitute” journalist in Moscow who always puts the ‘correct’ spin when needed by Western news sources. As for the delays, that is nonsense too. Sukhoi had a long series of aircraft (SU-35, SU-37, SU-47) which were testbeds for many of the systems which the PAK-FA will have. Ditto for the MiG-35 which is a 4++ generation aircraft. ALL of these aircraft performed to the full satisfaction of the constructors (compare that with the sagas of the B-1 or V-22, LOL!). The Birts are really full of shit.
This reminds me of the following fact: everytime a Tupolev, Illuishin or Antonov crashes the western media always helpfully adds that it is a “Russian built) Tupolev, Illiushin or Antonov. But when a Boeing or Airbus crashes, you NEVER hear about the “US built” Boeing or “EU built” Airbus.
The viceral russophobia of the corporate media is really something to behold…
Delays are not exceptions in the aviation industry nowadays (both civilian and military), they are the rule, in every country. Designing new planes has become so complex and expensive, that you have to expect technical problems that will make costs rise and delays appear.
But PAK FA, since 2007, has been running on schedule. That year the construction of the first 3 prototypes began, and since then the Russians were announcing the first flight for late 2009 or early 2010. And it happened exactly as planned.
can you recommend a good source or book or website where one can learn about the different military capabilities and technologies of Russia vs. the US?
i don’t know this information, and need a good source for catching up.
btw, what kind of fighter jet fleet does iran have?
Anonymous, now I don’t remember any specific website or book comparing the air capabilities of Russia and the US. I know lots of websites, with many information, and if you can read Russian it will help a lot.
About the Iranian air force, it consists mostly of US aircraft from the 70’s, bought before the 1979 Revolution. Also, they got some Russian planes from Iraq (Saddam Hussein sent some of his planes to Iran to avoid destruction in the First Gulf War, and Iran never returned these), and also bought a few planes from Russia. As the US planes are very old, many of them are not combat-ready, though Iran made a huge progress in manufacturing spare parts and even electronic components for these planes. Their most capable fighters are the F-14 Tomcat and the MiG-29. Then they have some Su-24M attack planes, and Su-25 for close air support. Other combat planes include F-4 Phantom II and F-5E Tiger. Iran also produces some indigenous aircraft, like the Saeqeh (in fact, an updated F-5E) and the Shafaq, a trainer/light attack probably developed with Russian help.
@anonymous: it is really hard to find good sources comparing Russian and US systems. This is due to a number of issues:
1) there is BIG money involved.
2) there is lots of stupid flag waving on both sides
3) weapons are only as good as the soldiers using them
4) there is no such thing as an inherently good weapon. it all depends on the engagement doctrine (David vs Goliath)
5) the design philosophies are dramatically different
Let me explain this last one.
Here is how Americans work: the take all the bleeding edge technologies, they integrate them into a system, and then make maximum use of then by designing a mission which puts them to the ‘best’ use.
Russians do it all the other way around: they define a mission, and then the make use of the most reliable technology to execute that mission. So sometimes they go VERY low tech (MiG-29) and sometimes they go for the high tech solution (phased array radar, HMS, IRST, etc.).
You could also put it this way:
American weapon systems relect the mindset of American engineers. Russian weapon systems reflect the mindset of Russian soldiers.
All that is hard to compare, is it not?
Even the old M-16 vs AK-74 thing reflects that. The M-16 is a superior single shot rifle, the AK-74 is a superior machine gun.
So, on a shooting range I rather have a M-16. In a conflict I much rather have a AK-74 (or even the older AK-47). But that is me.
Anyway – all this is to say that comparing capabilities is hard. and that is also true for air capabilities. What is more important – being able to engage 6 targets while tracking another 12, or being able to land on a dirt road or on snow? What is more important – thrust to weight ratios or engine life?
You see what I mean?
Sorry for the non-replying reply.
Cheers!
The Saker
Saker,
I know I’ve asked this before, but how hard is it to produce some runway denial weapons?
In a short range conflict (Israel/Lebanon, for example) it doesn’t seem to be too difficult at least not to a military simplton such as myself.
You would need
1) Missiles that are reasonably accurate, but hardly pinpoint. Within a hundred or two hundred meters would do nicely, if you can fit=re in salvos.
2) Wide dispersion of unexploded ordinance.
I know the enemy could clear and fix the runways, but if the missiles are not that expensive, you can keep firing them.
Its not like you have to stop every plane from taking off. If you just make air warfare much more labor intensive, you’ve accomplished something.
Anyway, Its Friday. I’m going to do something with life.
Till next time.
but but but….the f-22 is the best…not to be beat…nooooooooooooooooooo we have failed!
Hi anonymous.
To answer your question in a factual and honest way. No there is nowhere you will find any good information on Russian v U.S. kit.
For very obvious reasons, countries do not post classified info on their products!
Also, treat anyone who refers you to wikipedia as an idiot, as anyone with REAL knowledge can see that most of their entries come from fantasy land!
I am used to dealing with RAF facts and figures, plus some USAF ones, and can tell you almost everything you will read in forums is innacurate or very out of date. In a similar way, ALL of the exact figures in wikipedia will not be accurate.
There are folks in this forum saying how good the PAK 50 is, even though it has only just flown, has not proved its systems, and does not have a modern rader yet, or even its final engines!
@anonymous: There are folks in this forum saying how good the PAK 50 is, even though it has only just flown, has not proved its systems, and does not have a modern rader yet, or even its final engines!
Yes and no. The model shown on hte video did, indeed, lack these elements as what was being tested was the airframe only. However, most of the systems of the PAKFA have already been developed, and quite a few have already been tested on the SU-35/37/47 series. So while I agree with you that final judgement on the PAKFA cannot passed right now or, in fact, anytime sooon, I also disagree with the idea that we cannot make some rather educated guesses about it. For example, the analysis of Dr. Kopp and Peter Goon
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-2010-01.html
is one such attempt and while some of their claims, in particular about the JSF, are controversial, I have yet to see somebody being able to challenge their findings or methodology on the PAKFA.
Check out their assessment of the F-22 and JSF vs the PAKFA here:
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-NOTAM-300309-1.html
I say that this is pretty darn good, no?
It’s been a long long time since I have special access to classified data, but I vividly remember how often the folks in the “threat assessment” department used open sourced studies for they analysis even though they had access to the classified info for their own side.
Yes, classified facts and figures can be different from the ones presented in open sources, but by how much and does that matter? Yes, I would not trust Wikipedia on these figures, but Kopp and Goon are, I submit, in a wholly different category.
Cheers,
The Saker
Has anyone purchased Roger Waters Tickets from the website http://roger-waters-tickets.doitbigtickets.com/
Canada should buy the T-50 to replace its F-18 fleet. The JSF sucks.