hmm, that's really surprising. I thought China would not be offered that line of the product due to the Indian factor and such.
China Flanker thread
- Thread starter renmin
- Start date
- Status
hmm, that's really surprising. I thought China would not be offered that line of the product due to the Indian factor and such.
Nope... the PLAAF J-11's are Su-27SK's without inflight refueling probe. Here's some descriptions:
And info on proposed upgrade packages, which would install the inflight refueling probe:
The Russian AF has an estimated 350-400 Flankers in its active inventory, though I have no idea how many are actually in flying condition. During Soviet times the Russians produced about 600 Su-27's and 140 Su-27UB's, some could be sitting in storage. The Russians traded 32 "surplus" Su-27's with Kazakhistan for Tu-95's in late 1990's.
===========================
Some time ago there was a rumored "Su-37KK" proposed export version to China. It's bascially a modified Su-35 with new avionics suite, computer, display, digital SMS, GPS, and UOMZ IRST. Does anyone know if this is the Su-35 that the Russians are trying to sell?
Last edited:
That would only be for BARS. No one ever said that IRBIS won't be marketed for the Chinese, and in fact I think that was one of the reasons for making this so you can circumvent any Russo-Indian agreement on exclusivity.
A lot of this "proposals" are coming out because they may all be hinges and weight to add as much ammo to getting Putin to agree on the RD-93 sale.
Personally I think China may be paying too much just to get the RD-93 for Pakistan and a political victory over the Indians. The pyrrhic price will be paid for Russian benefit (and not at all for the local Chinese military industrial complex) in terms of a new era of Russian arms acquisition that includes Su-33s and Su-35s.
Su-33s and Su-35s are cool stuff, no doubt about that. But the alternative price would be denting the introduction of J-11Bs into the PLAAF.
By the way, if any Su-35 will be acquired, it will be the Su-35BN. I believe that's a two seater, and it's really just an MKK upgraded with canards (or did they get rid of that too) new radar and engines.
I totally agree. The su-33 things go a while back. But if they are also purchasing su-35, I think that's totally unnecessary. But I mean if it's a simple matter of upgrading su-30, I'm okay with it. Actually to think about it, if they are upgrading the radar and the engine (with say AL-31FM1), that's quite a huge upgrade. Considering that mkk's airframe was pretty good to begin with (apparently has 85% commonality with su-35ub), I don't really see the need to buy su-35 if they upgrade the radar and engine.
If you think about it, the butt end of every MKK is actually from the Su-35. We're talking of the tail structure, the elevator, the boom, right from back second half of the aircraft.
Sukhoi uses names like Su-30 and Su-35 like marketing gimmicks. For all you know, anything can be called Su-35BM or Su-30MK4. But it does sound a lot cooler with a higher number. The RuAF alone resisted all numbering above Su-27 until recently. All Su-30, 32, 33, 34, and 35 are officially given -27 plus a letter digit.
I still smile at Sukhoi's marketing gimmicks. You get a software upgrade on the Su-30MKK and it deserves a "2" digit? When the F-16Cs get their software upgrades, they're not called F-16C1, C2, C3 or so forth. I'm pretty sure Su-30MK2 sounds nice on the printed contract as an excuse to add some surcharge on it.
I always have this belief that "Su-30" came out out because the name "Su-27" sounds below "MiG-29". But 30 is above 29. The first Su-30s by the way, are nothing more than Su-27UBs with a retractable IFR probe and a new peer to peer datalink system that extends data interaction from 4 planes to 16. The Su-27SKM and the Su-27SMK before it, are far more functional multirole planes the equivalent of an Su-30MKK in single seater but again the RuAF which were eyeing the planes, won't accept the post Su-27 jargon.
Can't have the "31" number because MiG got it. Because MiG failed to reserve the 33 number, Sukhoi quickly grabbed 32, 33, 34, 35 and 37. MiG can always upgrade their 29, with SMT, M, M2, etc,. but it will always be a "29". Sukhoi has won for now, the mind game in number positioning. Simonov may have grown up in a communist country, but he sure learned Western style marketing gimmicks quickly.
Understandably, once the number goes up, you are going to expect them to "charge' for it too. Su-35 won't be cheap but then again, when China started negotiating for the Su-30MKK, it had less than a hundred billion in foreign reserves. Now it has well over 10X as much.
Sukhoi uses names like Su-30 and Su-35 like marketing gimmicks. For all you know, anything can be called Su-35BM or Su-30MK4. But it does sound a lot cooler with a higher number. The RuAF alone resisted all numbering above Su-27 until recently. All Su-30, 32, 33, 34, and 35 are officially given -27 plus a letter digit.
I still smile at Sukhoi's marketing gimmicks. You get a software upgrade on the Su-30MKK and it deserves a "2" digit? When the F-16Cs get their software upgrades, they're not called F-16C1, C2, C3 or so forth. I'm pretty sure Su-30MK2 sounds nice on the printed contract as an excuse to add some surcharge on it.
I always have this belief that "Su-30" came out out because the name "Su-27" sounds below "MiG-29". But 30 is above 29. The first Su-30s by the way, are nothing more than Su-27UBs with a retractable IFR probe and a new peer to peer datalink system that extends data interaction from 4 planes to 16. The Su-27SKM and the Su-27SMK before it, are far more functional multirole planes the equivalent of an Su-30MKK in single seater but again the RuAF which were eyeing the planes, won't accept the post Su-27 jargon.
Can't have the "31" number because MiG got it. Because MiG failed to reserve the 33 number, Sukhoi quickly grabbed 32, 33, 34, 35 and 37. MiG can always upgrade their 29, with SMT, M, M2, etc,. but it will always be a "29". Sukhoi has won for now, the mind game in number positioning. Simonov may have grown up in a communist country, but he sure learned Western style marketing gimmicks quickly.
Understandably, once the number goes up, you are going to expect them to "charge' for it too. Su-35 won't be cheap but then again, when China started negotiating for the Su-30MKK, it had less than a hundred billion in foreign reserves. Now it has well over 10X as much.
RedMercury
Junior Member
Hehe, "The more money you have, the more money you can and thus should pay!!"
But back to a point made earlier. How does importing more SU-3* have a negative impact on the domestic J-11 program? Would it not allow more technologies and ideas to be added to the domestic J-11?
But back to a point made earlier. How does importing more SU-3* have a negative impact on the domestic J-11 program? Would it not allow more technologies and ideas to be added to the domestic J-11?
more money spent on imported flankers means less money on domestic flankers. And no, I doubt anything from su-30 purchase would help J-11B. China is pretty much set on using its own radar, missiles and engines on J-11B. And no, I don't believe the Russians are ahead of China in radar ro avionics. And they are not that far ahead in AAMs and engines. If anything, getting some su-34 technology could help the J-11 bomber program that SAC has going. if they do buy su-35, it would just tell me that J-11B program is taking too long and SAC needs to fire half of its engineers.
Basically your pool of units that you can upgrade is limited. A unit upgraded with Su-30/35 is one less for the J-11B. Consider the J-10, JH-7A, modernized J-8IIs and even potentially the FC-1 all trying to seize part of the pie, you get smaller potential market and production volume.
The less aircraft you make, the higher the cost.
For example, substituting units that would have otherwise upgraded to J-10 into FC-1, would ultimately raise J-10 unit costs to rise. If you have less types, and built as many of the few types you got, the price becomes lower.
The price on the J-11B would balloon if say, I spent all that development money and decided to just make 100 of them? At a certain point, if your quantities are too small, its not cost effiecient to insist everything have to be Hecho en Chino. You should just buy off the shelf.
I do think that in a way, this is not all of SAC's fault. Flanker purchases are also some kind of political tool the PRC uses to gain some hedge over the Russians and SAC's product line is caught between that.
- Status