China Flanker Thread II

[MiG-29]

Lockheed or Sukhoi's opinion on TVC does not matter at all. What matters is whether the air forces around the world think TVC is worthwhile. Take the US for example, F-22 is the only aircraft that is fitted with TVC but it is not outside of US capabilities to design TVC to retrofit older fighters. However, US clearly chosen not to do so because such action is not worthwhile. European countries equip with Eurofighters can op for TVC as well, but none of them have done so. In fact, Eurojet needed one plane for flight test and their wish was not granted. As far as China's air force is concerned, their lack of interest in Su-35 reflects their lack of interests in subsystems of the plane, including TVC. Whether you think TVC have advantages at all is irrelevant, as China is not interested in Su-35 no matter how you or anyone try to spin it. That's the core of the issue.

I do not think you are reading what i said, but i will tell you why you say what you say.


Su-35 supercruises, what about J-10 or J-11? do they supercruise?

117 is the less powerful of the 3 russian engines, T-30 is a 17 tonnes engines but this engine is still in development, it is reported it has been tested

117S flies on the PAKFA prototypes.

Now you can not even grasp why Sukhoi and Lokheed use TVC nozsles
It is not just agility as you suppose.


J-11 and J-10 for example need their airfoils to deflect, canards and tailplanes, this means higher drag and higher RCS.

Su-35 uses less its tailplane so it reduces further is RCS and drag.

Now thrust is increased in some types of TVC nozzles such as Eurofighters, but not in F-22.

By reducing drag it increases range.

Su-35 has magnificent range.

It increases STOL a very importat factor for fighter.

So what ever you say is a bunch of excuses to defend the lack of TVC nozzles in J-10 and J-11.

In Europe, due to economic crises, they are not implementing any upgrade on Rafale and Eurofighter.

The US chose for F-22, F-22 is a blackhole budget eating project, so upgrading F-15s or F-16 was deemed innecesary because an F-22 can down 30 F-15s before a single F-22 will be down.


F-35 contrary to your excuses uses TVC nozzles, for V/STOL.


So actually, the US fifth generation fighters both use TVC nozzles.

Now the only way China won`t buy Su-35 is if it has already an engine like 117 ready or near operational capability, why simple 117 is already in series production, the rest i leave it to your imagination

 

[MiG-29]

F16 Fighting Falcon is primary a fighter aircraft, F16 can pull 9g and it isn't that hard to get it to pull that kind of tight turn since it is such a well balanced aircraft, the amazing thing is the aircraft does what the pilot wants it to do, when it wants to do it

F15 is a air superiority aircraft, no doubt it can dogfight but not in the same way as F16, the super hornet is designed for low altitude fast turns where the air is thick take it up to 30,000-40,000 feet 450 knots and it won't out turn a F16

Flanker is a multi role aircraft designed for air-land, air to ship and air to air also as a bomber, it's not designed to engage in a tight turning fight although it's been given all the tools to do so, But at the end of the day no matter if you give it thrust vectoring or super cruise the airframe does not give it the agility to engage close qaurters nor does it have the advantage

J10 is in the same category as F16, so it is no surprise it can out do Flanker in WVR

What you are saying actually is not true.

Su-27 has different variants, each one with different performances and flight envelopes.

Su-30 is more a bomber than a fighter, but the original single seat Su-27 will out flight a F-15; Su-30MKI, has TVC nozzles and canards due to weight increases, same is Su-34.

the J-10 is more or less a Gripen type of aircraft, it flew 20 years after Su-27.

Now Su-35 and Su-37 had increased agility, basicly they match Eurofighter`s agility, in fact Su-30MKI did hold its own against Eurofighter and they have be flown against each other in exercises in Europe.

India’s Ministry of Defense, had this to say about the initial RAF-IAF clashes, and adds some words of wisdom:

“The operational part of the ‘Exercise Indradhanush-2007’ began with a series of 1 vs 1 air combat sorties… The RAF pilots were candid in their admission of the Su-30 MKI’s observed superior maneuvering in the air, just as they had studied, prepared and anticipated. [emphasis DID’s] The IAF pilots on their part were also visibly impressed by the Typhoon’s agility in the air



This creates more forgiving parameters for a kill than the front gun range requirements; the SU-30MKI’s superior maneuverability would have to contend with UK Typhoon flight profiles enabled by ASRAAM’s longer range and lock-on after launch capability.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Su-35 is even better than Su-30MKI, so your stick measure J-11 is not match for a real Su-30MKI or Su-35

 

[Air Force Brat]

Lockheed or Sukhoi's opinion on TVC does not matter at all. What matters is whether the air forces around the world think TVC is worthwhile. Take the US for example, F-22 is the only aircraft that is fitted with TVC but it is not outside of US capabilities to design TVC to retrofit older fighters.

Well old man, the USAF did choose to put TVC on their air superiority fighter, they choose not to put TVC on the JSF, because its the Joint Strike Fighter. The F-22 is currently the only true fifth generation fighter in the world and will likely remain so, because it is "expensive". If we are both truthfull, the US has dumbed down the F-35 because they think it will be good enough for government work. At present there are two J-20s that we know of and 3-4 T-50s, why?, because they are "expensive", and maintaining the F-22 is a real pain, so Chengdu has left off the TVC, and chosen to pursue as much agility and supercruise as they can get, while getting a reasonably stealthy airplane, Sukhoi has left off the stealth and choosen to get as much agility and supercruise as they can get using a fairly powerfull 3d TVC powerplant, because in their estimation that will be a sufficient foil to the F-35. SSSoooo, Chengdu, Sukhoi and Lockheeds opinion does matter, they are putting as much capability and technology out there as they can out there in order to ensure that their aircraft are competitive with the "bad guys". If you ask me, there will never be more than 185 J-20s or T-50s IMHO, because now that the Raptor is fineto, it is awfully hard to justify the expense to the folks who pay the bills.

Thats why the J-10, J-11, and J-15 are being produced, thats why the Su-35 is being produced, so yes I do think The PLAAF and PLAN would like to equip the J-11 and J-15 with TVC, because Russia is equipping the Su-35 with TVC, and the name of the game has been to at least match the "bad guys". We can argue this till Kingdom come, but in the end it is a horse race, and its always possible that anyone can win on a given day, given the vagaries of equipment in combat. Cheers Brat

 

[Engineer]

I do not think you are reading what i said, but i will tell you why you say what you say.


Su-35 supercruises, what about J-10 or J-11? do they supercruise?

117 is the less powerful of the 3 russian engines, T-30 is a 17 tonnes engines but this engine is still in development, it is reported it has been tested

117S flies on the PAKFA prototypes.

Now you can not even grasp why Sukhoi and Lokheed use TVC nozsles
It is not just agility as you suppose.


J-11 and J-10 for example need their airfoils to deflect, canards and tailplanes, this means higher drag and higher RCS.

Su-35 uses less its tailplane so it reduces further is RCS and drag.

Now thrust is increased in some types of TVC nozzles such as Eurofighters, but not in F-22.

By reducing drag it increases range.

Su-35 has magnificent range.

It increases STOL a very importat factor for fighter.

So what ever you say is a bunch of excuses to defend the lack of TVC nozzles in J-10 and J-11.

In Europe, due to economic crises, they are not implementing any upgrade on Rafale and Eurofighter.

The US chose for F-22, F-22 is a blackhole budget eating project, so upgrading F-15s or F-16 was deemed innecesary because an F-22 can down 30 F-15s before a single F-22 will be down.


F-35 contrary to your excuses uses TVC nozzles, for V/STOL.


So actually, the US fifth generation fighters both use TVC nozzles.

Now the only way China won`t buy Su-35 is if it has already an engine like 117 ready or near operational capability, why simple 117 is already in series production, the rest i leave it to your imagination

I don't think you have read what I have said, so I will repeat it. China has already explicit stated that rumors regarding Su-35 deal are false. It is an established fact that China is not going to acquire any Su-35. The reason is simple just like what you have said -- China won't buy the Su-35 because domestic product is better, and there is no reason why China should spend money on an inferior product. Su-35 offers nothing new for China. Furthermore, the Su-35 is inferior to F-22 which China considers as the primary threat, and the Su-35 doesn't fit into existing logistical structure within PLAAF. There are multiple good reasons that perfectly explain why China doesn't want the Su-35, while you have not offered a single sound reason why the opposite should be the case.

Now, I shall tell you why you said the things you have said. Fighter aircraft from Russia have already lost relevance in today's market, which is especially so in China. It's just that some people like yourself are unable to accept reality, and has to cling to the fantasy that China is still somehow dependent on Russia. To sustain that fantasy, you need an excuse, preferably something new that Russia has done which China hasn't done. This is why you keep bringing up TVC. However, TVC is all you can talk about because there is nothing more you could talk about. This in turn reflects the current state of Russia's aviation industry, which is an industry that is stuck in concepts created before the Soviet collapsed and made little technological progress for over twenty years.

Finally, let me explain to you why the advantages of TVC listed in your previous post aren't actual advantages. First, you claimed that deflection of control surfaces results in higher RCS. However, nozzles in TVC also deflect and would contribute to increase RCS according to your argument. Secondly, you claimed control surface deflections result in higher drag. However, TVC operates by deflecting the nozzle to produce off-axis thrust, and deflection generates drag according to your argument. The drag translates to reduced range. Thus, even when we ignore factual basis of your claims, TVC offers no advantages in reducing RCS or enhancing range according to your own argument.

The fact is, the so call advantages that you are repeating are nothing more than marketing gimmicks and have little factual basis. At cruise phase where RCS is important, deflection in control surfaces is so minute that it is not going to drastically increase the RCS. Also, turning the aircraft requires energy transfer no matter what method you use. Turning with control surfaces increases drag, while turning with TVC reduces forward thrust. You cannot escape the Laws of Physics. Air force around the world see through these marketing gimmicks, and this is the reason why US doesn't retrofit older aircraft with TVC, why European countries don't opt to have TVC on the Eurofighters, and why China doesn't buy TVC engines from Russia.

 

[Engineer]

Well old man, the USAF did choose to put TVC on their air superiority fighter, they choose not to put TVC on the JSF, because its the Joint Strike Fighter. The F-22 is currently the only true fifth generation fighter in the world and will likely remain so, because it is "expensive". If we are both truthfull, the US has dumbed down the F-35 because they think it will be good enough for government work. At present there are two J-20s that we know of and 3-4 T-50s, why?, because they are "expensive", and maintaining the F-22 is a real pain, so Chengdu has left off the TVC, and chosen to pursue as much agility and supercruise as they can get, while getting a reasonably stealthy airplane, Sukhoi has left off the stealth and choosen to get as much agility and supercruise as they can get using a fairly powerfull 3d TVC powerplant, because in their estimation that will be a sufficient foil to the F-35. SSSoooo, Chengdu, Sukhoi and Lockheeds opinion does matter, they are putting as much capability and technology out there as they can out there in order to ensure that their aircraft are competitive with the "bad guys". If you ask me, there will never be more than 185 J-20s or T-50s IMHO, because now that the Raptor is fineto, it is awfully hard to justify the expense to the folks who pay the bills.

Thats why the J-10, J-11, and J-15 are being produced, thats why the Su-35 is being produced, so yes I do think The PLAAF and PLAN would like to equip the J-11 and J-15 with TVC, because Russia is equipping the Su-35 with TVC, and the name of the game has been to at least match the "bad guys". We can argue this till Kingdom come, but in the end it is a horse race, and its always possible that anyone can win on a given day, given the vagaries of equipment in combat. Cheers Brat

You missed the point entirely. If TVC is so good, then all countries would want it to be installed on their fighter now. US being the most capable could design TVC that can be retrofitted onto older fighter aircraft. Even if cost prevents every single aircraft to receive this upgrade, at least aircraft in forward deployment would see TVC installed. However, we see US making no such action, and from this one can infer that USAF does not see the action as worthwhile.

Lockheed and Sukhoi do manufacture and sales, and a salesman's objective is to get as much money as possible. Thus, the words of a salesman cannot be trusted due to the existence of conflict of interests. An air force is the user of the aircraft, and the opinions and actions of an user are what really matter.

 

[MiG-29]

Finally, let me explain to you why the advantages of TVC listed in your previous post aren't actual advantages. First, you claimed that deflection of control surfaces results in higher RCS. However, nozzles in TVC also deflect and would contribute to increase RCS according to your argument. Secondly, you claimed control surface deflections result in higher drag. However, TVC operates by deflecting the nozzle to produce off-axis thrust, and deflection generates drag according to your argument. The drag translates to reduced range. Thus, even when we ignore factual basis of your claims, TVC offers no advantages in reducing RCS or enhancing range according to your own argument.

look to start all what i said has basis in physics and studies from ITP a real engine maker, your opinions are just from your opinions without actual real proof, just mere opinions of a forum no more you are welcome to say whatever.

In the real world, Sukhoi does not care about your opinion niether Lockheed or ITP

Of course the Chinese want TVC nozzles, and a Supercruise engine, i do not work for Interfax, so If China and Russia are actually in negociations is something i can not prove beyond what interfax says.

The only thing i said is only time will tell, if China has the engine, yes they are not going to buy Su-35s, in fact, Su-35 is basicly a 4 generation Su-27 airframe with a 5th generation core avionics and engine.


China is testing some core avionics of 5th generation aircraft on J-10, the engine i do not know, do they have the supercruising engine? i do not know, is J-20 flying with a supercruising engine now? i do not know i know PAKFA is now on test for supercruising regime

J-11B could be a likely candidate to test such engine.


Russia chose to modify the Al-31 with fifth generation engine technologies, actually 117 has many new technologies, 117S is even more advanced.

Su-35 can fly supercruise in fact it has 3 of the 4S that J-20 needs, it has supercruising capability, supermaneouvrability and STOL it only lacks stealth airframe and an AESA radar.

So for me is a great mystery where is the 5th generation chinese engine i do not know if it is on J-20 or J-10 but it seems still is not there, the rest i leave it to your imagination

 

[Schumacher]

............

Plus Su-35BM can supercruise, it means only Rafale, Eurofighter can do it in 4++ fighter aicraft and F-22 and PAKFA can do it too, J-20 it supposed it will do it, i do not know if now it does it, but PAKFA as we speak is having test of supercruising now.


So Su-35 can supercruise and choose how to fight while J-10 can not supercruise and Su-35 can dogfight with a J-10 easily even with some advantages, add the Russian Machine has more thrust available then you will get a bigger payload carrying capability, it means better BVR capability and longer legs CAP capability and at 400KM detection capability for a 3 square meter target means a J-10 can be detected at 200km since a F-35 can be detected at 90km.

pretty much Su-35 has 5th generation technologies with the exception of full aspect stealth

Time to get back to reality.
Su35 can only super-cruise, effectively detect F35 and has 5th gen tech in the imagination of Sukhoi's sales department.

No one in the real world will pay much real money for Su35's imaginary capabilities as can be seen from its zero export orders.
Even traditional Sukhoi users like Indonesia opted for F16 instead recently, and we're not even talking of the latest F16E/F.
If even F16 beat Su35, it'll have little chance against J10.

 

[AssassinsMace]

Notice this seems always to surface when deals with other countries falls through? India and now Indonesia.

 

[MiG-29]

Time to get back to reality.
Su35 can only super-cruise, effectively detect F35 and has 5th gen tech in the imagination of Sukhoi's sales department.

No one in the real world will pay much real money for Su35's imaginary capabilities as can be seen from its zero export orders.
Even traditional Sukhoi users like Indonesia opted for F16 instead recently, and we're not even talking of the latest F16E/F.
If even F16 beat Su35, it'll have little chance against J10.

President Vladimir Putin said on Monday Russian arms export deliveries for the first six months of 2012 had reached over $6.5bn (£4.1bn), a 14% increase on the same period last year. That figure put Russia on track to beat last year's record-breaking total sales of $13.2bn, analysts said


With a 24% share of the global arms trade, Russia was the world's second largest arms exporter, lagging only behind the United States, with its 30% share, Putin said. Moscow delivered arms to 55 countries in all, he added.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

check the data before you opine, Russia remains selling well

 

[Schumacher]

President Vladimir Putin said on Monday Russian arms export deliveries for the first six months of 2012 had reached over $6.5bn (£4.1bn), a 14% increase on the same period last year. That figure put Russia on track to beat last year's record-breaking total sales of $13.2bn, analysts said

............

Nice try, but we're talking about Su35 here. So keep trying.
Besides, I'm sure AK47 still sells very well.