Rogerer That. you r right there!
Chinese purchase of Su-35
- Thread starter flyzies
- Start date
kwaigonegin
Colonel
It's not about that. It's about who is hiding under the donkey cart. A million dollar bomb is nothing if it retires a HVT.
Brumby
Major
A deal comes together after protracted negotiations when both parties are able to conclude on a set of terms that are acceptable. Your assertion is that a reduction in quantity buy to 24 units from the original target of 48 would suggest a lower profitability outcome for Russia. That is a possibility but in any commercial transaction, you sell to the level of willing purchase. Additionally, unless you are privy to the terms you are not in a position to make a determination of lesser profitability in the absence of facts.
I think the bigger issue is IP rights which is hard to assess the risk to Russia. Maybe, the view is that China will get there eventually regardless and so you just milk what you can when you still can.
neither side was in a hurry to sign the deal so why not just call it a win-win instead of keeping debating who needs who.
80 million dollar for an aircraft like su-35 is quite expensive if you ask me, regardless whose avionics will be used. But who knows what else is in the package.
With a small batch like this, I doubt there are ToT involved, or any future purchase.
Geopolitically I think Russia is under heavier pressure than China does. The east china sea situation has levelled off with no sign of further escalation. the south china sea is like playing Taichi or Go. While on the Russia side it's really like playing chess and they are hacking each other's pawns now. But again this is not about who needs who more, both sides have the geopolitical desire to support each other.
To me, geopolitical influence is the biggest gain to both sides. Russia gets the prestige for its arms, which may well invites more sales. On the China side, this deal sends a strong signal to its rivals. The real capability is not nearlly as important.
Same goes with S-400 deals.
Technologically, Russia is also strong on nuclear powered ships. If Russia is willing to share some military nuclear reactor technology, I bet China would be interested. It already happened with civilians ones anyway.
80 million dollar for an aircraft like su-35 is quite expensive if you ask me, regardless whose avionics will be used. But who knows what else is in the package.
With a small batch like this, I doubt there are ToT involved, or any future purchase.
Geopolitically I think Russia is under heavier pressure than China does. The east china sea situation has levelled off with no sign of further escalation. the south china sea is like playing Taichi or Go. While on the Russia side it's really like playing chess and they are hacking each other's pawns now. But again this is not about who needs who more, both sides have the geopolitical desire to support each other.
To me, geopolitical influence is the biggest gain to both sides. Russia gets the prestige for its arms, which may well invites more sales. On the China side, this deal sends a strong signal to its rivals. The real capability is not nearlly as important.
Same goes with S-400 deals.
Technologically, Russia is also strong on nuclear powered ships. If Russia is willing to share some military nuclear reactor technology, I bet China would be interested. It already happened with civilians ones anyway.
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
I never suggested that lower numbers comes at the cost of profitability. Those were the people scrambling to look for an excuse why the deal they said many times was confirmed failed to happen. Back then the excuse was China wanted to order less than 48 but Russia didn't see a profit from such a low number. Did I say I was privy? Again I'm using all the excuses those that said the deal was done multiple times used after time showed it didn't happen. The fact is there was never a done deal after all the claims that it was for sure by the fact that the order of 48 is now only 24. We don't even know that was the original number but that's the number given by those that said the deal was done and wrong all those times before. They shot themselves in the foot looking for anything to save themselves from being wrong.
Yes you can charge all the points in my arguments are wrong but they're not my points. It's the points used in arguments of those that said the deal was done and had to find excuses to cover why the deal didn't happen after all those times.
Last edited:
Plus you gave me my Chuckle of the Day! Boy Wonder, you give me hope for the future Bud, hope you have lots of pretty babies surrounding you some day.
One more thing, the SU-35 is a Flanker, and as such it has already earned its stripes, this will just be the Maxi Flanker! and so life changes, I was a vociferous proponent 2 or 3 years ago of the Chinese purchase of SU-35, but like Jeff Head I am now a skeptic, to be totally honest, some of my many arguments with the Eng for same, providing the opportunity for me to re-evaluate my earlier PRO Buy position, I don't think China needs the Su-35, nearly as bad as the Russians need to sell the Chinese this bird?
and I seriously question that a deal has been inked? When I see Su-35s in Chinese colors, and money changing hands?? then and only then will I believe what has been said of late, for me this remains a very "smokey, back room" kind of chatter???
The 85 million is quite reasonable if you consider that it includes the cost of spares, which for the engines and radar could add up to be a lot. Export deals can't be 1-1-ed to domestic production because domestic production is for the runway price, whereas export deals usually include a support package.
On one of the posts deleted, I think a remark that needs to be kept is that the Su-35 has a longer range and payload than J-11Bs. The J-11B is on the Su-27 baseline, which means it only has about 4000 kg in payload capacity. The Su-30s remedy this, of course, but they trade off about 15% range. The Su-35 uses composites to increase fuel capacity from 9500 to 11500, giving you slightly more range than the Su-27 (less than 2%) while giving you a robust payload level. I think in PLA service, the Su-35s will be used primarily for strike missions, perhaps using Russian armament as well, which is a field where China is slightly behind.
Regarding the avionics, in an ideal case the avionics would be Chinese, but if you had Chinese avionics, you'd need to recertify and rework all the Russian munitions for the Chinese fire control system. It's not undoable, of course, but at least with initial versions you will want Irbis-E for plug-and-play use of Russian AAM and AshM. A J-11D-class AESA is better, of course, but it's only a 25% range trade-off and against ground targets where the Su-35 has the most advantage over existing planes in the PLAAF (J-10B is better WVR, J-11D better BVR) you're more likely going to be limited by missile range instead of radar range.
On one of the posts deleted, I think a remark that needs to be kept is that the Su-35 has a longer range and payload than J-11Bs. The J-11B is on the Su-27 baseline, which means it only has about 4000 kg in payload capacity. The Su-30s remedy this, of course, but they trade off about 15% range. The Su-35 uses composites to increase fuel capacity from 9500 to 11500, giving you slightly more range than the Su-27 (less than 2%) while giving you a robust payload level. I think in PLA service, the Su-35s will be used primarily for strike missions, perhaps using Russian armament as well, which is a field where China is slightly behind.
Regarding the avionics, in an ideal case the avionics would be Chinese, but if you had Chinese avionics, you'd need to recertify and rework all the Russian munitions for the Chinese fire control system. It's not undoable, of course, but at least with initial versions you will want Irbis-E for plug-and-play use of Russian AAM and AshM. A J-11D-class AESA is better, of course, but it's only a 25% range trade-off and against ground targets where the Su-35 has the most advantage over existing planes in the PLAAF (J-10B is better WVR, J-11D better BVR) you're more likely going to be limited by missile range instead of radar range.
Last edited:
Sorry, but what do we actually know of the J-11D's radar ?
I'm very much surprised that You are already comparing both radars - Su-35's vs. J-11D's - in air-to-air, air-to-ground, range and so on ... isn't this a bit farfetched ?
Deino
We know it'll be AESA and we know that a paper shows 420 km range vs 1 m^2. Considering that the US tends to understate their radar range, it seems reasonable for a radar larger than the APG-77 and APG-63.
The main point is that the Su-35's big advantage is being able to carry a larger payload for longer than existing aircraft in the PLAAF inventory. If you consider that the J-20 will IOC in 2017 and the Su-35 deliveries will begin in 2016, as well as the limited quantities of Su-35 that will arrive in the PLAAF inventory, strike seems to be a safe assuption.
The main point is that the Su-35's big advantage is being able to carry a larger payload for longer than existing aircraft in the PLAAF inventory. If you consider that the J-20 will IOC in 2017 and the Su-35 deliveries will begin in 2016, as well as the limited quantities of Su-35 that will arrive in the PLAAF inventory, strike seems to be a safe assuption.
kwaigonegin
Colonel
Can you provide a source? I'm not saying I don't believe but that's pretty dang good especially since companies like to underestimate capabilities and not the other way around when it comes to this type of hardware.
Also max detection could mean different to different people. What are the conditions of search area or dwell time of the radar can increase or decrease the numbers.