I don't believe this at all. Maybe in some years China might outproduce the US, but overall the US Aerospace industry is far larger than China's. A point in fact, during 1987 the US produced almost one F-16 a day (360 for the whole year)! You are also currently looking at 130-150 F-35's per year (regardless of International participation, which was the whole point of the F-35 program) along with F-15, F-16 and F-18.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Russian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.
- Thread starter tphuang
- Start date
That's Cold War's numbers, though. Hardly relevant today given how the West pissed away most of their industrial base thanks to Regan, Thatcher and later during the 90's neoliberal craze.A point in fact, during 1987
Cold War capacities are not really useful to extrapolate today's capacities of most countries.
None of them in large enough numbers so far, with some stretching the orders as much as possible to avoid closure of the lines until orders come in.F-15, F-16 and F-18.
One good example of lost industrial capabilities is the F-14. You could not build one today if you wanted to. It used an electron beam welded titanium torsion box and titanium cast parts. When Russia wanted to restart the Tu-160 production, which also uses a titanium torsion box and titanium cast parts because of the variable geometry wings, they had a heck of a time putting the industrial processes for it back into place. It took many, many years to do it. A lot of people in the West even very recently presumed that Russia was bluffing when they said they had built a whole new Tu-160 assuming it was made with stored parts.
I don't believe this at all. Maybe in some years China might outproduce the US, but overall the US Aerospace industry is far larger than China's. A point in fact, during 1987 the US produced almost one F-16 a day (360 for the whole year)! You are also currently looking at 130-150 F-35's per year (regardless of International participation, which was the whole point of the F-35 program) along with F-15, F-16 and F-18.
So basically when the US military budget was at like 8% of GDP it was producing 360 fighter aircraft per year.
Are you sure you want to compare that to what a China at 8% of GDP could do? China is already doing >100 fighter aircraft per year currently, and will probably continue to increase that number. That's at 1.2% to 2.1% of GDP...
I don't need to extrapolate for you to see how ridiculous the comparison will look. And, that is with the F-16 of 1987 being far less capable than the J-20 or even older Chinese planes of today...
That's fair statement, but I don't think the US Aerospace industry has suffered as much in comparison to say shipbuilding since the Cold War. Commercial aerospace, turbofan production, APU manufacturing, etc are all areas in which the US continues to be a major player if not outright dominant.That's Cold War's numbers, though.
I tried to find current US F-16 and F-18 yearly production numbers but couldn't, but know that around 2016-2018 Boeing was producing about 24 F-18 E/Fs per year. I believe current F-15 E/X deliveries are slated to be 24 per year as well. So that is another almost 50 aircraft per year.
My main point is that the idea that US cannot match Chinese fighter production is not true, especially when you factor in the size and scope of the US Aerospace industry. One of these countries has the largest aerospace industry in the world, the other doesn't.
Sorry for derailing the thread though, it was really just that statement I took issue with.
Jeesus christ, i stopped reading at DSI is cheaper and easier to make. And by the way, are you certain that J20 has less control surfaces than Su-57??Those are the Flanker aircraft delivered to the Russian Air Force. Then you have the Su-35s they made for the Egyptian order.
If you want to determine Russia's current industrial output capabilities you should take those into consideration. Even then these numbers are way off from peak production like a decade ago.
I expect the Su-34NVO and Su-30SM2 production to ramp up. Now that these aircraft are available, imports of electronics components used in them were replaced. There are still quite a few Su-24 aircraft to replace. Plus some airframe losses in the Ukraine conflict. The Su-35 does not use any imported components that I know of, but the factory was busy building the Egyptian order, and it is not like Russia is lacking Su-35s. Does it even make sense to buy a lot of these aircraft when the Su-57M is already in testing? The Flanker HUD used to be made in Ukraine, and some Flankers used LCD MFDs imported from France. Both of those components were replaced in the Su-30SM2 and Su-34NVO. The Su-35 already used Russian design LCD MFDs I think and now the others got the same treatment. A modern Russian HUD was also designed, using digital electronics to replace the analog Ukrainian design, and put into serial production.
Is it? The more control surfaces you have the harder it is to model the airframe. The harder it is to write the fly by wire software. And the harder it is to make the hydraulics for it. The J-20's main airframe difficulties are the canard design. But China already had made the J-10. So they had experience modeling canards and writing the fly by wire software for them. The Su-57's LEVCONs are unique and no other aircraft uses them. It is also the first aircraft to be designed to take TVC into consideration to reduce the area of the vertical control surfaces. The J-20 does not even have TVC. The Su-57 is a second generation TVC airframe. The J-20 uses DSI inlets which are way cheaper to design and manufacture at the expense of kinematic performance loss. There is a reason why the supposed to be cheap F-35 uses them and the F-22 does not.
Of course Russia has less budget and industrial capacity than China. Even the US cannot match China in fighter aircraft production when you consider it with all its satrapies put together. When people say "the US produced these F-35 or those F-35 this year". A lot of those F-35 parts are made in partner countries and/or bought with those countries money. And we are comparing a single engine aircraft with the mostly two engines that China is producing. There is a huge, huge, gap in production between the US and China and it is definitively in China's favor. China makes way more engines and the airframes are way more complex.
As for Russia, they have more fighter aircraft in service than the UK and France put together. More than Japan. So I do not know what is your problem really. Should they just produce aircraft for the heck of it? Most of their in service airframes are like a decade old at this point. At least the Su-30/34/35. If Russia really needed airframes for whatever reason quickly, they have loads of Su-27 airframes in mothballs, hundreds, which can be upgraded to Su-27SM3 status. While the Soviets had way more airframes, those were short ranged single role aircraft for the most part. China has not been replacing its J-7s 1:1 either.
IIRC Russia has mothballed all its MiG-29s. Even the remaining MiG-29SMTs have been put into pasture. All the stock Su-27 airframes were also retired and you only have SM or better models in service. The MiG-31 has mostly been upgraded to the BM variant. The major weaknesses from my point of view are the remaining Su-24 models, lack of replacement for the Su-25, and the fact that the early Su-30 aircraft have really weak avionics by modern standards. The first and last problem are taken care of by the Su-34M and Su-30SM2 designs. And the Su-25 might be replaced with drones and attack helicopters. After that you will have the MiG-31 replacement but I doubt it will happen before 2030.
If Russia did not have money they would not fund upgrades for all three of their bomber aircraft models at the same time they develop a new model. You continue making this argument to death. But it does not make it any more true. For whatever reason you seem to think all problems can be solved with money. But technical issues take time to be solved. The Su-57 is not produced in larger numbers because the design is not considered mature enough by the Russian Air Force and there is no pressing requirement for it either. It is as simple as that. Would you prefer Russia do like the US and build like a hundred of these aircraft and then relegate them to be uber expensive trainers?
IIRC, they hardly sorted out their internal weapon bay issue, due to its su-27 esque central-lift air intake design. Su-57 is a faulty product and certainly not a stealth jet. Hence its delay in commission.
Interesting take, end of an era for non-stealth bomber?
That's fair statement, but I don't think the US Aerospace industry has suffered as much in comparison to say shipbuilding since the Cold War. Commercial aerospace, turbofan production, APU manufacturing, etc are all areas in which the US continues to be a major player if not outright dominant.
The comercial capacities are not that relevant for military production outside of skilled manpower and certain materials, I would think. Is not like you can reutilize the 747's tooling and jigs to build F-15's.
Then there was the whole consolidation process of the 90's and early 2000's where a few manufacturers were either exited the market completely or were bought and its operation drastically cut down.
My main point is that the idea that US cannot match Chinese fighter production is not true, especially when you factor in the size and scope of the US Aerospace industry. One of these countries has the largest aerospace industry in the world, the other doesn't.
One is heavily reliant on foreign suppliers from basic materials to finished components that can be easily disrupted should trade routes be affected or countries switch sides, though.
Case in point the moratorium on sanctions for Russian aeronautic titanium supply. Sure the US can assemble a lot of them, doesn't mean they also build all of it.
IIRC, they hardly sorted out their internal weapon bay issue
What is the internal weapon bay issue i wonder ? As the thing do work as intended. Have you seen the weapon release vid back in Syrian War.
Interesting take, end of an era for non-stealth bomber?
Yeah and i wonder why those out there like Israelis and South Korea has not yet dumped their F-15's. Are you really take Rybar as representative of Russian doctrine and aviation school of thoughts ?