Putin checks out Sukhoi's new T-50

[Quantum]

Out of respect for Sukhoi Fan, I did not title it "Raptorskii" (as some have done). ;)


Link to Article (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/7836912/Vladimir-Putin-boasts-Russian-fighter-jet-would-trump-US-rival.html)


Vladimir Putin boasts Russian fighter jet would trump US rival

Published: 7:00AM BST 18 Jun 2010

Mr Putin watched a test flight of a “fifth-generation” stealth fighter, dubbed the T-50 and billed as Russia’s first all-new warplane since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991.

“This machine will be superior to our main competitor, the F-22, in terms of manoeuvrability, weaponry and range,” Mr Putin told the pilot after the flight, according to an account on the government website.

Mr Putin said the plane would cost up to three times less than similar aircraft in the West and could remain in service for 30 to 35 years with upgrades, according to the report.

Successful development of the fighter, built by Sukhoi, is crucial to showing Russia can challenge US technology and modernise its military after a period of post-Soviet decay.

Russia also plans to manufacture T-50s jointly with India.

The F-22 raptor stealth fighter first flew in 1997 and is the only fifth-generation fighter in service. Fifth-generation aircraft have advanced flight and weapons control systems and can cruise at supersonic speeds.

According to the government website, the test pilot told Mr Putin the controls of the T-50 allowed the pilot to operate most of the plane’s systems without taking his hands off the joystick, which he said would be very useful under high forces of gravity.

“I know, I’ve flown,” Mr Putin replied. Sukhoi has said the plane should be ready for use in 2015.


EDIT: Changed long link to named link to prevent horizontal scrolling. -Gaillo

[big country]

Is there really any doubt why it will cost 3x less?


the plane should be ready for use in 2015

The F-22 entered SERVICE in 2005. So 20 years later with the technology. No doubt it will be 3x cheaper. The first to adopt a new tech or upgrade ALWAYS gets stuck with the higher price...

I'd say 3x the cost is a good price to pay for a 20 YEAR headstart...

[Quantum]

Is there really any doubt why it will cost 3x less?


the plane should be ready for use in 2015

The F-22 entered SERVICE in 2005. So 20 years later with the technology. No doubt it will be 3x cheaper. The first to adopt a new tech or upgrade ALWAYS gets stuck with the higher price...

I'd say 3x the cost is a good price to pay for a 20 YEAR headstart...


I wonder if the T-50 will crash as much as the Craptor?

It will be 3x cheaper because Lockheed takes $50 million for the plane, $50 million for its black ops products, and $50 million profit.

[big country]

Is there really any doubt why it will cost 3x less?


the plane should be ready for use in 2015

The F-22 entered SERVICE in 2005. So 20 years later with the technology. No doubt it will be 3x cheaper. The first to adopt a new tech or upgrade ALWAYS gets stuck with the higher price...

I'd say 3x the cost is a good price to pay for a 20 YEAR headstart...


I wonder if the T-50 will crash as much as the Craptor?

It will be 3x cheaper because Lockheed takes $50 million for the plane, $50 million for its black ops products, and $50 million profit.


I bet they'll have those crashing issues worked out in 20 years...

My point is, it isn't fair to compare price if you don't also compare the timeline

[Quantum]

My point is, it isn't fair to compare price if you don't also compare the timeline


American cost v. Russian cost for war materiel has always been asymmetric. The AK series came first, is more reliable, and quite arguably more effective than the AR series; the latter which costs two to three times as much.

The difference in price is not a matter of quality nor costs involved in design, but graft. You got/get shot in Russia for what is SOP in America.

[I am me, I am free]

Is there really any doubt why it will cost 3x less?


the plane should be ready for use in 2015

The F-22 entered SERVICE in 2005. So 20 years later with the technology. No doubt it will be 3x cheaper. The first to adopt a new tech or upgrade ALWAYS gets stuck with the higher price...

I'd say 3x the cost is a good price to pay for a 20 YEAR headstart...


You are extremely uninformed/misinformed and IMO your post is nothing more than puffed up pride based on arrogance and ignorance.

The F-22 cRaptor is based on 25+ y.o. technology (little changed from the original plans in 1984). The cRaptor only has 2D thrust vector control which will ONLY operate in tandem, not differentially. The cRaptor was not operational until December 2006. In 1996 Sukhoi fielded the Su-37 (later the Su-35) with 2D differentially operating TVC - a full 10 years before the cRaptor was operational. Hell, in 2004 the Russians had a 3D differentially operating TVC MiG-29 which they built simply by adding the 3D engines to an already in service MiG-29. And now the latest version of the 3D differentially operating TVC engines are being retro-fitted to in service Su-34 aircraft. From what I gather, these new engines also have supercruise capability in the Su-27 family of aircraft.

BTW, the Su-27 STILL holds all the time to altitude records up to 15,000 meters, and has since 1987, so your faith in the MIC is misplaced.

[I am me, I am free]

FWIW, in Russia the 'T-50' is actually referred to as the PAK FA (pronounced just the way it's spelled).

[gunDriller]

i worked on the CNI radios for the F22 and the JSF. CNI = communications navigation Identification friend or foe. as a design engineer for about 7 years.

it's the central radio/ computer electronics unit on the plane.

i'm not at liberty to comment too much but, what i can say - watching the management at Northrop Grumman, the developer of the CNI subsystem, has helped me understand the BP Oil Disaster better.

[I am me, I am free]

i worked on the CNI radios for the F22 and the JSF. CNI = communications navigation Identification friend or foe. as a design engineer for about 7 years.

it's the central radio/ computer electronics unit on the plane.

i'm not at liberty to comment too much but, what i can say - watching the management at Northrop Grumman, the developer of the CNI subsystem, has helped me understand the BP Oil Disaster better.


Are you suggesting that the cRaptor and it's lame single engine cousin the JSF are two more examples of the MIC clusterfuck?

One theme comes to mind when one considers it took 22 years to 'develop' a plane - maximize profit$.

[big country]

Is there really any doubt why it will cost 3x less?


the plane should be ready for use in 2015

The F-22 entered SERVICE in 2005. So 20 years later with the technology. No doubt it will be 3x cheaper. The first to adopt a new tech or upgrade ALWAYS gets stuck with the higher price...

I'd say 3x the cost is a good price to pay for a 20 YEAR headstart...


You are extremely uninformed/misinformed and IMO your post is nothing more than puffed up pride based on arrogance and ignorance.

The F-22 cRaptor is based on 25+ y.o. technology (little changed from the original plans in 1984). The cRaptor only has 2D thrust vector control which will ONLY operate in tandem, not differentially. The cRaptor was not operational until December 2006. In 1996 Sukhoi fielded the Su-37 (later the Su-35) with 2D differentially operating TVC - a full 10 years before the cRaptor was operational. Hell, in 2004 the Russians had a 3D differentially operating TVC MiG-29 which they built simply by adding the 3D engines to an already in service MiG-29. And now the latest version of the 3D differentially operating TVC engines are being retro-fitted to in service Su-34 aircraft. From what I gather, these new engines also have supercruise capability in the Su-27 family of aircraft.

BTW, the Su-27 STILL holds all the time to altitude records up to 15,000 meters, and has since 1987, so your faith in the MIC is misplaced.


Well the first F-22 flew in 1997 so I wouldn't say 10 years. I used the OFFICIALLY ENTERED MILITARY SERVICE date as the "starting" date for my statement, which is what the 2015 date for the T-50 sounded like.

Also, if you say it entered in Dec. 2006 you might want to update the wikipedia page, that is where I got the Dec. 2005 number from. I honestly don't know, I just looked it up real quick.

I'm not saying the F-22 is the best thing out there, I was just pointing out it isn't a fair comparison based soley on cost, which is what Putin did.

I don't have misplaced faith in our MIC, I'm was just pointing out that the article was COMPARING THE T-50 to the F-22, and claimed the F-22 was the main competitor!! and made the claims of "look we can do the same thing cheaper, 3x cheaper!" but failed to compare the timelines of the airplanes as a factor in the cost savings. Thats like saying to INTEL "I can't believe you are charging $1000 for that microprocessor. We're going to release our own that will be faster for only $300. Just give us 20 years...you'll see!"

[kregener]

I see a pic of Putin looking at a....canopy.

War is a racket.

[Heavyweight]

Is there really any doubt why it will cost 3x less?


the plane should be ready for use in 2015

The F-22 entered SERVICE in 2005. So 20 years later with the technology. No doubt it will be 3x cheaper. The first to adopt a new tech or upgrade ALWAYS gets stuck with the higher price...

I'd say 3x the cost is a good price to pay for a 20 YEAR headstart...


You are extremely uninformed/misinformed and IMO your post is nothing more than puffed up pride based on arrogance and ignorance.

The F-22 cRaptor is based on 25+ y.o. technology (little changed from the original plans in 1984). The cRaptor only has 2D thrust vector control which will ONLY operate in tandem, not differentially. The cRaptor was not operational until December 2006. In 1996 Sukhoi fielded the Su-37 (later the Su-35) with 2D differentially operating TVC - a full 10 years before the cRaptor was operational. Hell, in 2004 the Russians had a 3D differentially operating TVC MiG-29 which they built simply by adding the 3D engines to an already in service MiG-29. And now the latest version of the 3D differentially operating TVC engines are being retro-fitted to in service Su-34 aircraft. From what I gather, these new engines also have supercruise capability in the Su-27 family of aircraft.

BTW, the Su-27 STILL holds all the time to altitude records up to 15,000 meters, and has since 1987, so your faith in the MIC is misplaced.
A 3d thrust vectoring aircraft is not necessarily more maneuverable than a 2d tvc aircraft. The F-22 was built with 2d tvc because it didn't need 3d. The US has plenty of experience with 3d tvc airplanes (the X-31 and the F-16).

Also, the F-22 has superior materials, specifically composites. The Russians have not demonstrated that they have equal materials. Thus, it is a near certainty that the PAK FA will be less stealthy and more vulnerable than the Raptor.

Russian tech is not close to catching up. The Russian government doesn't even have enough confidence in Russian industry to build their own helicopter carriers, hence the Russians are trying to buy carriers from the French (possibly with some assembly in Russia).

[Quantum]

Russian tech is not close to catching up.


LOL

Idjits said the same thing just before Sputnik started beeping.




The Russian government doesn't even have enough confidence in Russian industry to build their own helicopter carriers, hence the Russians are trying to buy carriers from the French (possibly with some assembly in Russia).


The Russians are trying to buy French equipment because it's a good design...why duplicate hardware development when it was already done right?

The best in the world:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT-2UTTH_Topol_M

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-400

[7th trump]

What does all this mean?
Simply nothing but chest beating!
Any and all aircraft regardless of what it can do or cannot do can be taken out of the sky simply by means of a pull on a little metal device called a trigger.
Operated from the shoulder of any trained GI and disposed of as simple as pulling the trigger.
Fly's faster than mach three in a few seconds and can manuever better than any manned aircraft with deadly precision.
Let the Russians develope the most sophisticated toto wearing ballerina pilot and aircraft it so desires.
A high school drop out GI will simply point, wait for lock on, and fire and down the toto wearing soviet pilot with barley breaking a sweat.
Keep it simple stupid!

[Dave Thomas]

Where is Russia with their drone technology?

It's not who builds the best planes anymore, that's dinosaur stuff.

Who's got the drone that can drop the exploding cocktail olive in the antagonist's drink is what I wanna know.

Everyone here thinking there is going to be some pitched Battle over Britian scenario between BVR fighters in this day and age. Please.

If your thinking dogfight, you've missed the boat.

[Skirnir]

It is not so much the weapon, but how it is used. That said, one must know both the enemy and one's self (Sun Wu) so such due diligence is wise. I would like to see where both sides stand in terms of asymmetric warfare as well.

[Dave Thomas]

Right and you have to admit that the fighter in this day and age will be used for mop up. Not head to head strategical engagements like we've seen in places like the battle of Midway.

We're all clutching to technology that's almost 100 years old now. Why risk millions of dollars per plane, and millions of dollars in training to blow up some guy with a grudge against any one superpower. This is all nationalistic prick waving.

Give Sun Wu a drone, a hellfire, and a joystick, and I betcha he'll be curling his toes.

[Skirnir]

He would likely apply the weaponry in a way that even I, having studied the 36 Ji, could not conceive...

[Heavyweight]

Where is Russia with their drone technology?

It's not who builds the best planes anymore, that's dinosaur stuff.

Who's got the drone that can drop the exploding cocktail olive in the antagonist's drink is what I wanna know.

Everyone here thinking there is going to be some pitched Battle over Britian scenario between BVR fighters in this day and age. Please.

If your thinking dogfight, you've missed the boat.




I wouldn't go that far.

Drones have been very useful against our opponents in Afghanistan and Pakistan. But in a major war against a nation with large conventional forces, there is, as yet, no substitute for manned aircraft. Only manned aircraft have any real air-to-air capability, and maintaining air superiority is critical. We can use drones against the Taliban because they don't have an air force. If we sent drones against anyone with 1 operational squadron of combat aircraft our drones would be shredded almost instantly. Hence, we still need air superiority aircraft like the F-22.

[BrewTech]

Where is Russia with their drone technology?

It's not who builds the best planes anymore, that's dinosaur stuff.

Who's got the drone that can drop the exploding cocktail olive in the antagonist's drink is what I wanna know.

Everyone here thinking there is going to be some pitched Battle over Britian scenario between BVR fighters in this day and age. Please.

If your thinking dogfight, you've missed the boat.




I wouldn't go that far.

Drones have been very useful against our opponents in Afghanistan and Pakistan. But in a major war against a nation with large conventional forces, there is, as yet, no substitute for manned aircraft. Only manned aircraft have any real air-to-air capability, and maintaining air superiority is critical. We can use drones against the Taliban because they don't have an air force. If we sent drones against anyone with 1 operational squadron of combat aircraft our drones would be shredded almost instantly. Hence, we still need air superiority aircraft like the F-22.


::)

[Olmstein]

War is a racket.


And both of these planes are obsolete out of the box. With the advances in drone technology, piloted fighter aircraft are an expensive toy.

[Mouse]

FWIW, in Russia the 'T-50' is actually referred to as the PAK FA (pronounced just the way it's spelled).


You seem to be quite the fanboy of the Sukhoi?

[7th trump]

Where is Russia with their drone technology?

It's not who builds the best planes anymore, that's dinosaur stuff.

Who's got the drone that can drop the exploding cocktail olive in the antagonist's drink is what I wanna know.

Everyone here thinking there is going to be some pitched Battle over Britian scenario between BVR fighters in this day and age. Please.

If your thinking dogfight, you've missed the boat.




I wouldn't go that far.

Drones have been very useful against our opponents in Afghanistan and Pakistan. But in a major war against a nation with large conventional forces, there is, as yet, no substitute for manned aircraft. Only manned aircraft have any real air-to-air capability, and maintaining air superiority is critical. We can use drones against the Taliban because they don't have an air force. If we sent drones against anyone with 1 operational squadron of combat aircraft our drones would be shredded almost instantly. Hence, we still need air superiority aircraft like the F-22.

The F22, the Sukhoi can both be downed by a high school drop out trained with delivering over the shoulder guided bottle rockets.
They can also just fall out of the sky with the same technology that the police use to shut off an engine of speeding car.

[keehah]

Something was missing for a Sukhoi Fan thread. Pictures!

http://www.ausairpower.net/Sukhoi-T-50-PAK-FA-KnAAPO-2S.jpg

http://lh6.ggpht.com/_S1Gu2hX9S6c/So-ES1lvRHI/AAAAAAAAMq4/tJoY7ymzEbY/s800/pak_fa_2_144.jpg
http://www.hitechweb.genezis.eu/fightersSF04.files/sukhoi_pak_fa_T-50-1_7.jpg

_____________
militaryaerospace.com (http://www.militaryaerospace.com/index/blogs/john-kellers-blog/blogs/military-aerospace/john-keller-blog/post987_2031859261323782586.html)

The Global War on Terror has been long, nasty, and exhausting. Far worse, there's no arms race. The terrorists don't parade their guns, tanks, and missiles through Red Square. We have to content ourselves with rapid advances in IED detection technology, and that's just not the same as seeing a shiny new Russian guided missile cruiser every couple of years.

But now things seem to be turning around. I'm reading lately about the new Russian Sukhoi T-50 jet fighter, and things are starting to feel comfortable again. The T-50 fighter, which should be deployed in 2015, is Russia's answer to the U.S. F-22 Raptor advanced tactical fighter. Both planes are useless as paperweights in the War on Terror, but man, do they look slick!

Now for the best part: we finally have two teams on the field again. There's trash-talk, and everything! Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin stood beside a T-50 fighter yesterday and said this: "This machine will be superior to our main competitor, the F-22, in terms of maneuverability, weaponry, and range," Music to my ears.

Sounds like we're all back in the saddle again ... right where we belong.

[Quantum]

And both of these planes are obsolete out of the box. With the advances in drone technology, piloted fighter aircraft are an expensive toy.


I'm sure Russia already has the (secret) technology to either block or disable permanently the radiofrequency systems that control the drones.

Depending solely upon drones is like depending solely upon the WOPR.

[Quantum]

The F22, the Sukhoi can both be downed by a high school drop out trained with delivering over the shoulder guided bottle rockets.


Save for the fact that this aircraft can outrun and outmaneuver MANPAD missiles.




They can also just fall out of the sky with the same technology that the police use to shut off an engine of speeding car.


Unless the avionics are hardened against EMP.

[TomD]

Sukhoi Fan, in the only competition that counts, any time in the past 40 years that Soviet and US equipment came head to head, the Soviet stuff came in a very distant second and usually failed to score at all.

Beautiful aircraft though, T-50, it looks like a ringer for the plane that the F22 beat out in the competition years ago. They need to re-designate it, sounds too much like a Soviet era tank. I note one area that Putin doesn't say that the T-50 will outclass the 22 and that would be radar visibility.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4020/4654121544_007b4357df_b.jpg

[I am me, I am free]

Sukhoi Fan, in the only competition that counts, any time in the past 40 years that Soviet and US equipment came head to head, the Soviet stuff came in a very distant second and usually failed to score at all.

Beautiful aircraft though, T-50, it looks like a ringer for the plane that the F22 beat out in the competition years ago. They need to re-designate it, sounds too much like a Soviet era tank. I note one area that Putin doesn't say that the T-50 will outclass the 22 and that would be radar visibility.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4020/4654121544_007b4357df_b.jpg


Hi TomD, glad you could drop in.

Frankly, while it appears YOU are hung up on the "our team can beat your team" bullsh*t, all I'm really concerned about is sheer hardcore performance, not just agility or speed, but bank for the buck (cost of operation upkeep/maintenance included) and robustness. I'm not that a big fan of the PAK FA, I'm a much bigger fan of the Su-25, Su-26, Su-27, Su-28, Su-29, Su-30, Su-31, Su-33UB, Su-34, Su-35, Su-80, the SSJ-100, and simply Sukhoi in general since the west has absolutely nothing that can go toe to toe directly up against any of the models I've listed - NOTHING! The A-10 can't hold a candle to the Su-25 (which can fly supersonic on dry power unloaded/clean whereas the A-10 'hits the wall' at only 400 knots), the German made Extra 300 is a distant second to any of the Sukhoi sport planes (more like the Sukhoi sport planes are in a class with the Pilatus turbo-prop trainers, Su-29s are what the Argentine AF train in), there is NOTHING to compare the record-holding Su-34 to (the F-111 notwithstanding), the Su-27 series STILL holds all the time to altitude records for air-breathing powered airframes 23 years later, the high performance, extremely versatile and robust Su-80 is simply without peer anywhere (name any 'civilian' aircraft which can provide 800+ KW electric ground power with one engine), and comparing any other regional jet with the SSJ-100 would be a cruel joke on the competition. I seriously doubt the Russians would adopt a POS which requires 30 hours of maintenance for every flight hour, which is what the cRaptor requires - a true moneymaker for the MIC, which was originally intended, i.e. a HUGE payday for the MIC while utilizing 20+ y.o. technology. $362 million a copy for the cRaptor?? Give me a break.

It's should be noted that the USAF pilots weren't able to duplicate the agility of the Su-27 aircraft with the cRaptor until ~2008 (when first seen performed at airshows) which the Russians had been doing with the Su-27 for over 20 years. lol

http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/middle/2/4/5/0697542.jpg

http://www.knaapo.ru/media/rus/gallery/aircrafts/civil/su-80gp/su-80gp_07_big.jpg

http://www.knaapo.ru/media/rus/gallery/aircrafts/civil/su-80gp/su-80gp_05_big.jpg

[I am me, I am free]

FWIW, in Russia the 'T-50' is actually referred to as the PAK FA (pronounced just the way it's spelled).


You seem to be quite the fanboy of the Sukhoi?


Why not? Sukhoi is the world's premier aircraft company. The facts speak for themselves. See previous post.

BTW, check out the world's fastest fire/rescue vehicle, still another Russian plane without peer (not a Sukhoi, it's the Beriev Be-200) -

http://nimg.sulekha.com/others/original700/vladimir-putin-silvio-berlusconi-2009-10-23-13-10-17.jpg

[Quantum]

Sukhoi Fan, in the only competition that counts, any time in the past 40 years that Soviet and US equipment came head to head, the Soviet stuff came in a very distant second and usually failed to score at all.


If the US' opponents flew exactly the same aircraft as US pilots, say, F-16s to F-16s, they'd still lose. Training and experience is the difference.

The US has not had to face Russian or Chinese pilots...yet.

[I am me, I am free]

Oh, and FWIW, dunno about the PAK FA, but the Su-27 aircraft will literally fly itself out of a flat spin (the pilot only need take his feet off the rudder pedals and his hand off the stick) given sufficient altitude - the wing/fuselage/LERX configuration is that perfected. Name a MIC aircraft that can do that. The MIC has never designed anything as aerodynamically clean as the Su-27 (which is why the Su-27 still holds the all the time to altitude records to 15,000 meters). Why do you think that recent MIC aircraft don't have air brakes (the F-86 is the only one I know of with an air brake)? Because they fly like bricks. lol

http://www.ausairpower.net/000-Su-27SK-MER-S.jpg

Note that Sukhoi pioneered the elevated position of the guy in back -

http://sukhoi.org/img/gallery/wallpaper/1.jpg

Best jet fighter airframe ever engineered, imo -

http://sukhoi.org/img/gallery/wallpaper/27-02-08_11.jpg

[big country]

If you're going to keep quoting that "all time altitude record" with at 15,000m at least back it up with a disclaimer like "all time altitude records IN ITS CLASS" or something like that.

Because if you don't I'm going to call BS. The U-2 Spy plane flys at 21,000m (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U2_spy_plane) its in the second sentence.
Also the SR-71 Blackbird flies at 24,000m (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sr-71) in the "Life Support" section.

[Quantum]

Lockheed Quality:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2A7_-8OwXTk

[Quantum]

If you're going to keep quoting that "all time altitude record" with at 15,000m at least back it up with a disclaimer like "all time altitude records IN ITS CLASS" or something like that.

Because if you don't I'm going to call BS. The U-2 Spy plane flys at 21,000m (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U2_spy_plane) its in the second sentence.
Also the SR-71 Blackbird flies at 24,000m (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sr-71) in the "Life Support" section.




BFD...combat aircraft v. recon aircraft.

The MiG-25 and MiG-31 are both combat aircraft and operational up to 20+K meters (some say up to 22.5K meters).

The fascination with the inferior products of the US MIC is a tradition of arrogance extending back to before Pearl Harbor.

[7th trump]

Doesnt matter.
Shoulder held stealth rockets from a high school drop out will take down any aircraft ever made.
Technology is too far advanced and going nano which means even faster more manueverable rocketry the aircraft will be up against.
They can be taken down by these mach 3 rockets for a fraction of the price.
This day and age you dont want to play like a ballerina.
And no, the aircraft cannot out perform rockets that turn on a dime at mach 3.
You are just plain stupid to think the SU can out maneuver any rocket..................just plain stupid or real arrogant or both.

[I am me, I am free]

If you're going to keep quoting that "all time altitude record" with at 15,000m at least back it up with a disclaimer like "all time altitude records IN ITS CLASS" or something like that.

Because if you don't I'm going to call BS. The U-2 Spy plane flys at 21,000m (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U2_spy_plane) its in the second sentence.
Also the SR-71 Blackbird flies at 24,000m (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sr-71) in the "Life Support" section.




You don't get it.

The Su-27 (bort P-42) climbed to 15,000 meters in 70 seconds, a record which it currently holds (since 1987) - that makes it the *quickest* (NOT fastest - duh) aircraft with air breathing engines. The previous recordholder was the 'Streak Eagle' (purpose built one off F-15 like P-42 was a purpose built one off Su-27).

FWIW, the absolute recordholder for altitude of an air-breathing powered airframe is currently held by the clumsy MiG-25, which also is the unofficial recordholder of 'world's fastest' air-breathing powered aircraft (because it was dash speed, non sustained flight, as clocked on Israeli radar) at 3.2 Mach. The best I can find on the SR-71 (including what's on the Lockheed website) is "Mach 3+" - of course this is sustained flight which earns its place in the record book, but the MiG-25 can outdash the SR-71 (at the expense of the MiG-25's engines).

http://records.fai.org/general_aviation/absolute.asp

P-42 *still* the recorderholder of all time to altitude records up to 15,000 meters for 23 years -

http://records.fai.org/general_aviation/current.asp?id1=129&id2=4

[I am me, I am free]

Doesnt matter.
Shoulder held stealth rockets from a high school drop out will take down any aircraft ever made.
Technology is too far advanced and going nano which means even faster more manueverable rocketry the aircraft will be up against.
They can be taken down by these mach 3 rockets for a fraction of the price.
This day and age you dont want to play like a ballerina.
And no, the aircraft cannot out perform rockets that turn on a dime at mach 3.
You are just plain stupid to think the SU can out maneuver any rocket..................just plain stupid or real arrogant or both.


It's a combination of countermeasures, avionics, superagility, and pilot skill which gives the aircraft the 'potential' to outfly a missile.

Missiles don't always shoot down Sukhois. lol (do you think an A-10 could return to base after taking a SAM up the tailpipe?)

http://img214.imageshack.us/img214/6246/su25stinger9qi3nx.jpg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_SV2T3EOrO8w/SNi45GFkLyI/AAAAAAAAARk/vXLS_GHmloo/s400/su-25.jpg

http://fotoplenka.ru/photo/sergxon/422476/8725688.jpg

[keehah]

I am me I am free you seem to be he!

Hello though there was no goodbye. :)
___________

As for all the planes discussed.... they are just imitations of the original!
I can prove it with this old faded photo. ;D

http://www.avroaircraft.com/images/AvroArrow.jpg
____________

India-Russia fail to sign additional protocol on 5th-gen stealth fighter news (http://www.domain-b.com/aero/mil_avi/mil_aircraft/20100619_india_russia.html)

19 June 2010

Russia's Sukhoi design bureau director general, Mikhail Pogosyan, has confirmed that India and Russia have decided not to sign additional agreements to create a joint venture for the production of a fifth-generation fighter. Sukhoi has combined with India's Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) to jointly develop the fifth-generation stealth fighter jet designed by Sukhoi.

HAL is working on a two-seater derivative of the aircraft.

Earlier, it had been made clear that an additional agreement would be signed specifying the work load of each side in the project, but on Friday Pogosyan said the Russian company now hoped work would begin soon without any such deal.

"We don't plan to sign a joint venture. We have agreed on joint work with our Indian colleagues," Pogosyan said. He said the joint work could be carried out under the current agreement.

[I am me, I am free]

I am me I am free you seem to be he!

Hello though there was no goodbye. :)
___________

As for all the planes discussed.... they are just imitations of the original!
I can prove it with this old faded photo. ;D

http://www.avroaircraft.com/images/AvroArrow.jpg



Yes, the cutting edge Avro Arrow and the story of its demise are both very fascinating. Another example of the MIC's duplicity??

[Quantum]

I am me I am free you seem to be he!

Hello though there was no goodbye. :)
___________

As for all the planes discussed.... they are just imitations of the original!
I can prove it with this old faded photo. ;D

http://www.avroaircraft.com/images/AvroArrow.jpg


More Avro Quality: ;D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PIu3rGAA3k

[keehah]

More Avro hyjack; first flight of the modern era style interceptors.

Piloted by Janusz Zurakowski.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8lTGTPQlDE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22fN4fVoFdY

[big country]

I was just saying that your "claim" isn't accurate. You should be claiming it is the FASTEST TO CLIMB TO 15000m not that is has an "all time altitude record of 15000m". Those two aren't the same thing. Sorry I "didn't get it" but you mis-represented the record. Intentional or not.

[I am me, I am free]

I was just saying that your "claim" isn't accurate. You should be claiming it is the FASTEST TO CLIMB TO 15000m not that is has an "all time altitude record of 15000m". Those two aren't the same thing. Sorry I "didn't get it" but you mis-represented the record. Intentional or not.


I'm thinking you may need to go in for an eye exam and possibly corrective lenses. What I posted TWICE was "all the time to altitude records up to 15,000 meters (for an aircraft with air-breathing engines)" - I didn't misrepresent a thing, you apparently cannot comprehend plain English.

[7th trump]

I was just saying that your "claim" isn't accurate. You should be claiming it is the FASTEST TO CLIMB TO 15000m not that is has an "all time altitude record of 15000m". Those two aren't the same thing. Sorry I "didn't get it" but you mis-represented the record. Intentional or not.


I'm thinking you may need to go in for an eye exam and possibly corrective lenses. What I posted TWICE was "all the time to altitude records up to 15,000 meters (for an aircraft with air-breathing engines)" - I didn't misrepresent a thing, you apparently cannot comprehend plain English.

Its without a doubt you are Sukhiofan from gim1.
All the sukhio, as in all the modern day technology that the USSR has, comes directly from the USA from I beleive a Social Security treaty agreement we have with them that allows the USSR to view our most secretive pattens.
Like I said before there is no aircraft that cannot be taken down by a high school drop out with a shoulder fired rocket.
BTW, sukhiofan you cannot expect me to let you use old pictures from whenever to support your theory do you. This new Su can only fly by means of a computer and anything that disrupts the CPU causes the whole damn thing to spiral down into a big huge blume of smoke at the bottom.
Shyt, the B17 has had a Me109 lodge into its tail and it flew home as well with the german pilot.................so my point to you is so freaken what...............!
No aircraft has been developed that its pilots can not passout from the g-forces encountered trying to manuever from a mach 3 missile. Missile technology is far to advanced over aircraft.
The su type aircraft are only impressive at airshows where they can wear a toto and tights and dance around and thats it.
A su pilot that thinks he can toto around in a missile fight is not going to last long.
So the Su can turn on a dime, but in doing so, leaves itself where no pilots wants to be................a slow moving locked on target. I bet the Su has the state of the art ejection system in it also..........hahahahaha!
The Russians know all to well that missile technology puts them in an advantage. Just look at the their sunburn system.
You dont see the USSR's millitary putting any money into R&D do you for this type of aircraft? No you dont and theres a reason why.

[keehah]

Canada to purchase 65 U.S. stealth fighter aircraft (http://www.vancouverobserver.com/blogs/world/2010/06/21/canada-purchase-65-us-stealth-fighter-aircraft)

Jun 21st, 2010

Canada will soon join the ranks of 21st century military aviation. The Federal Government announced that it will purchase 65 new F-35 Lightning II's to replace the aging, multi-role workhorse of the Canadian Forces Air Command, the CF-18/A Hornet. This decision, to an untrained observer, may seem to be just part and parcel with the otherwise dull and innocuous process of military procurement.

In reality, it is perhaps the most expensive military purchase by the Canadian government for a single weapon system in the history of this country. The Department of National Defence (DND) will be outlaying, all told, $16 billion for the aircraft. Consider that Canada's defence budget is something like $21 billion.

[I am me, I am free]

Canada to purchase 65 U.S. stealth fighter aircraft (http://www.vancouverobserver.com/blogs/world/2010/06/21/canada-purchase-65-us-stealth-fighter-aircraft)

Jun 21st, 2010

Canada will soon join the ranks of 21st century military aviation. The Federal Government announced that it will purchase 65 new F-35 Lightning II's to replace the aging, multi-role workhorse of the Canadian Forces Air Command, the CF-18/A Hornet. This decision, to an untrained observer, may seem to be just part and parcel with the otherwise dull and innocuous process of military procurement.

In reality, it is perhaps the most expensive military purchase by the Canadian government for a single weapon system in the history of this country. The Department of National Defence (DND) will be outlaying, all told, $16 billion for the aircraft. Consider that Canada's defence budget is something like $21 billion.


They'd get a lot more for their Canadian buck if they acquired Su-35s and Su-34s with 3D TVC/supercruise capable engines. But of course the only intended effectiveness is the most profit for the MIC, not best value.

[7th trump]

Canada to purchase 65 U.S. stealth fighter aircraft (http://www.vancouverobserver.com/blogs/world/2010/06/21/canada-purchase-65-us-stealth-fighter-aircraft)

Jun 21st, 2010

Canada will soon join the ranks of 21st century military aviation. The Federal Government announced that it will purchase 65 new F-35 Lightning II's to replace the aging, multi-role workhorse of the Canadian Forces Air Command, the CF-18/A Hornet. This decision, to an untrained observer, may seem to be just part and parcel with the otherwise dull and innocuous process of military procurement.

In reality, it is perhaps the most expensive military purchase by the Canadian government for a single weapon system in the history of this country. The Department of National Defence (DND) will be outlaying, all told, $16 billion for the aircraft. Consider that Canada's defence budget is something like $21 billion.


They'd get a lot more for their Canadian buck if they acquired Su-35s and Su-34s with 3D TVC/supercruise capable engines. But of course the only intended effectiveness is the most profit for the MIC, not best value.

I think Canada is smarter than that.
1. They know that dancing around in the sky in a toto aircraft is not that smart economically or stratigically when ground support can take it out with a pull of a trigger.
2. Su's are not that electronically advanced over American made. (which where the rubber meets the road with todays aircraft)
3. That much more to go wrong when you dont need it going wrong in such a cold harsh enviroment. (just more parts to keep in working order at all times)
4. Su is based in an unstable and known untrustworthy country.
5. US is more than willing to keep its neighbors as allies and thus willing to help out. (USSR....? well you get my drift ....no money.)
And the list can go on...........

[I am me, I am free]

Canada to purchase 65 U.S. stealth fighter aircraft (http://www.vancouverobserver.com/blogs/world/2010/06/21/canada-purchase-65-us-stealth-fighter-aircraft)

Jun 21st, 2010

Canada will soon join the ranks of 21st century military aviation. The Federal Government announced that it will purchase 65 new F-35 Lightning II's to replace the aging, multi-role workhorse of the Canadian Forces Air Command, the CF-18/A Hornet. This decision, to an untrained observer, may seem to be just part and parcel with the otherwise dull and innocuous process of military procurement.

In reality, it is perhaps the most expensive military purchase by the Canadian government for a single weapon system in the history of this country. The Department of National Defence (DND) will be outlaying, all told, $16 billion for the aircraft. Consider that Canada's defence budget is something like $21 billion.


They'd get a lot more for their Canadian buck if they acquired Su-35s and Su-34s with 3D TVC/supercruise capable engines. But of course the only intended effectiveness is the most profit for the MIC, not best value.

I think Canada is smarter than that.
1. They know that dancing around in the sky in a toto aircraft is not that smart economically or stratigically when ground support can take it out with a pull of a trigger.
2. Su's are not that electronically advanced over American made. (which where the rubber meets the road with todays aircraft)
3. That much more to go wrong when you dont need it going wrong in such a cold harsh enviroment. (just more parts to keep in working order at all times)
4. Su is based in an unstable and known untrustworthy country.
5. US is more than willing to keep its neighbors as allies and thus willing to help out. (USSR....? well you get my drift ....no money.)
And the list can go on...........


Again you prove you are best at talking out your butt.

Because of the geographical location of their country, the Russians' aircraft are better adapted to extremes in temperatures than anything the west has. lol I'd like to see MIC aircraft operate reliably in a temperature range from 60 below to 135 degrees F.

As for 'unstable and countries' you haven't seen anything yet. lol

http://www.energybulletin.net/node/23259

'Untrustworthy'?? Do you even read the posts on this forum regarding how the Z tribe pwns the USG/MIC??

The Su-25, the Su-27, and the Su-33 each dramatically outperform whatever the MIC has as a counterpart (the A-10, the F-15, and the F-18 respectively), and the Su-34 is simply without peer - the MIC has nothing that comes close its mission capability.

Maiden flight of one of the two hottest jets in CONUS with a ground temperature at 7 degrees F (they were apparently completely unconcerned about making the maiden flight in extreme cold) -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d4lE6HcBPxw

[keehah]

DND computers used to change Wikipedia site (http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/07/29/wikipedia-dnd.html#ixzz0vD5XMih6)
Last Updated: Thursday, July 29, 2010 | CBC News

A Defence Department spokesperson confirms computers at the department's research agency were used to alter a Wikipedia page entry about the Joint Strike Fighter jet and the Conservative government's decision to spend as much as $18 billion on the aircraft.

Those edits included the removal of information critical of the government's plan to buy the jets and the addition of insulting comments aimed at Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff.

As first reported in a story by Postmedia, Wikipedia traced the edits to computers owned by Defence Research Development Canada's Ottawa offices. Wikipedia locked down the entry, labelled the changes as vandalism and only allowed recognized editors to work on the page.

In one entry, all information outlining the criticism of the jets and the plan to buy them was removed. In another, someone added that Ignatieff thought the deal to buy the planes for Canada was an "awesome, amazing decision to proceed with this contract." In reality, Ignatieff has been critical of the sole-source contract, calling for a reconvening of the defence committee to examine the decision.

Another version of the entry inserted that Ignatieff has six toes on each foot.

Ignatieff said the incidents show the government has "something to hide."

"Instead of making the case for Canadians ... saying, 'this is why we need this plane,' they're playing these games with Wikipedia," Ignatieff said, while in Toronto on his summer bus tour.

"If you can't prove this case straight up and you have to resort to these tricks, then there's something wrong with the very proposition."

NDP Leader Jack Layton was also unimpressed.

"Attempting to expunge the realities of debate. I mean what the heck is going on here?" asked Layton at a news conference Thursday. "We all knew [Prime Minister Stephen] Harper operated a controlling operation, but we didn't think he was willing to go so far as to snatch the words out of people's mouths and pretend they never were spoken. I hope that DND are simply disavowing this practice and will put a stop to it ASAP."

DRDC spokesperson Martin Champoux said the defence department does not condone the behaviour.

He said IT specialists are trying to track down who uses the computers with the Internet Protocol (IP) addresses that were traced to the altered entries. As well, employees will be sent reminders about regulations concerning computer use, he said.

The head of communications at Wikipedia, Jay Walsh, said most people who use the site know that edits are easily traced.

"It's kind of surprising. Usually folks from pretty smart public services around the world seem to be fully aware of how Wikipedia works," Walsh told CBC News in a telephone interview.

"People on those networks usually understand that if they’re going to edit Wikipedia, it’s not really anonymous."

[keehah]

theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/tories-convert-russian-bomber-incident-into-pitch-for-new-jets (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/tories-convert-russian-bomber-incident-into-pitch-for-new-jets/article1658006/)

The Conservative publicity machine scrambled into action as a common confrontation between Canadian and Russian military planes turned into a campaign for $16-billion in new fighter jets.

The story started on Wednesday when NORAD officials spotted two incoming planes, identified as Russian TU-95 long-range bombers, heading toward Labrador.

The aircraft never entered Canadian territory, which starts 200 nautical miles outside of the land border, but they were clearly within the 300-nautical-mile “buffer zone,” according to Canadian defence officials.

Two CF-18s scrambled out of CFB Bagotville, Que., and started shadowing the Russian planes about 50 nautical miles outside the Canadian territory, until they headed northeast and out of the “area of interest.”

While similar incidents occur 12 to 18 times a year, a story on the confrontation appeared on Friday morning in the Sun Media chain. Within a few hours, the Conservative Party issued talking points on the matter designed to boost the Harper government’s plan to buy Joint Strike Fighter F-35 fighter jets to start replacing the CF-18s in 2017.

“This incident demonstrates why it is vitally important for the Canadian Armed Forces to have the best technology and equipment available,” the Conservative Party said.