|
Post by steve201 (deceased) on Jan 30, 2010 3:52:12 GMT 9
|
|
|
Post by dude on Jan 30, 2010 9:50:23 GMT 9
Impossible. The SecDef said it would take 12-15 years before anyone would catch up to the Raptor. He needs to Google Wiki for his status briefings. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_PAK_FA
|
|
Jim Scanlon (deceased)
Senior Staff
FORUM CHAPLAIN
Commander South Texas outpost of the County Sligo Squadron
Currently: Offline
Posts: 5,075
Location:
Joined: July 2007
Retired: USAF NBA: Spurs NFL: Niners MLB: Giants NHL: Penguins
|
Post by Jim Scanlon (deceased) on Jan 30, 2010 10:34:53 GMT 9
:scratch_head However, on aircraft issues they seem to be very accurate.
There are two things of note in the Wikipedia article on the Sukhoi T-50.
One. The maiden flight was on 29 January 2010. That's to-day. Even in Russia.
So how does that fit in with Secretary Gates' prediction on the development of the T-50?
Two. The manufacture of the Sukhoi T-50 is a joint venture with India.
What does that say about the Indian Air Force?
Seems to me, from all I read, that India has one of the most modern air forces and is primarily equipped with Russian airplanes. They are also modernizing their naval inventory with new submarines and surface ships.
What does that tell us about India?
They currently have the second largest military in Asia, after China.
Maybe we should be paying more attention to India than we have been.
Jim Too
:god_bless_usa
|
|
Bullhunter
Global Moderator
318th FIS Jet Shop 1975-78
Currently: Offline
Posts: 7,451
Location:
Joined: May 2005
|
Post by Bullhunter on Jan 30, 2010 20:21:20 GMT 9
I recall all the excitment about that Soviet Mig years ago until that Soviet LT. flew it to Japan. I read the book, "Mig Pilot". The Soviets really over rated it. I don't think we will have much to worry about.
|
|
|
Post by jimpadgett on Jan 30, 2010 21:18:55 GMT 9
The Russians invented everything first, except the lie detector. India plans a manned space mission in the near future. The mig was categorized as a lead sled with no look-down capability.
|
|
|
Post by steve201 (deceased) on Jan 31, 2010 0:29:12 GMT 9
I recall all the excitment about that Soviet Mig years ago until that Soviet LT. flew it to Japan. I read the book, "Mig Pilot". The Soviets really over rated it. I don't think we will have much to worry about. I read that book too....that is one of the greatest books I've ever read.....I particularly liked the part when Victor Bilenko was being driven to the debrief house in Va. and he required them to stop at every grocery store on the way...he couldn't believe that there was that much food available to everyone....and his one comment that stuck in my mind was "America has reached true socialism....anyone can have anything they want....all they have to do is work for it"....that was one of the greatest comments I've ever read........Everyone in America should read that book to understand the soviet mind.... Steve
|
|
Jim Scanlon (deceased)
Senior Staff
FORUM CHAPLAIN
Commander South Texas outpost of the County Sligo Squadron
Currently: Offline
Posts: 5,075
Location:
Joined: July 2007
Retired: USAF NBA: Spurs NFL: Niners MLB: Giants NHL: Penguins
|
Post by Jim Scanlon (deceased) on Jan 31, 2010 1:38:15 GMT 9
The Soviet Union was always good at imitation.
During World War Two they took apart a Lend Lease C-47 and built a factory to build their version. Even made a DC-3 version.
They took a B-29 that landed in their territory and did the same thing.
For years the USSR had imitation C-47s and B-29s flying for their military.
They looked the same, and apparently flew the same. However, they didn't have the reliability of the American built planes.
Some of their WW2 planes were top drawer, like the Yak-3 and Yak-9.
The 3 was a very small plane that, according to some, would hold its own against the Mustang. I don't know, as it never happened.
The T-50 is clearly a knock-off of th F-22, with some Russian design elements. If it is like most Russian/USSR planes, it will be lacking in protection for the pilot and the electronics will not be as advanced.
I have to wonder where they got all the information.
You don't suppose that there were spies involved, do you ?
Nah!
Spying, espionage, and all that went out when the USSR collapsed.
It did, didn't it?
With India involved in the building of the T-50, that could all be changed, and the bird may have the latest of electronics, weapons and other things to make it equal to the Raptor.
Time will tell.
Now that it has had it's maiden flight, I don't think Russia or India will fool around for years of testing for noise and other environmental issues before they get to the field.
Maybe, just maybe, like in 1940, we got caught napping.
Jim Too
:god_bless_usa
|
|
|
Post by dude on Jan 31, 2010 3:58:44 GMT 9
Perhaps to all of this on the technology, but I still don't like the lead heads running the show using our "technology edge" as a reason for cutting programs like the F-22. Less than 6 mos after saying he was going to accelerate the F-35 Gates came out and said they are more likely going to slow down and stretch out the production. So now their talking about a fighter gap and Navy's getting money to by additional F/A-18 Super Hornets while the Air Force presses on with its planned F-15/F-16 drawdown. BTW. One thing not mentioned yet about the T-50. With India's involvement, they no doubt will have a 24/7 In-Flight Help Desk and maybe even prioritized baggage claim
|
|
Bullhunter
Global Moderator
318th FIS Jet Shop 1975-78
Currently: Offline
Posts: 7,451
Location:
Joined: May 2005
|
Post by Bullhunter on Jan 31, 2010 4:35:04 GMT 9
Steve201 said:
That was a very interesting book. That section on all the store stops caught my eye also. The first section of the book was pretty good also where he talked about life of a your pilot and how the Soviet military "Air Force" operated. Not only did we get much information about that mig but vast information on how they operated.
Posted by Jim:
Agree, Russia has always been interested in numbers and not quality.
|
|
Jim Scanlon (deceased)
Senior Staff
FORUM CHAPLAIN
Commander South Texas outpost of the County Sligo Squadron
Currently: Offline
Posts: 5,075
Location:
Joined: July 2007
Retired: USAF NBA: Spurs NFL: Niners MLB: Giants NHL: Penguins
|
Post by Jim Scanlon (deceased) on Jan 31, 2010 6:05:48 GMT 9
Books translated to English from Russian can be daunting.
However there are some that are well worth the read, if you want to see how the Soviet Union treated their military and their workers.
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, who lived in America for many years wrote three books that some of you may want to read.
One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich (1962; novella)
Cancer Ward (1968; novel)
The Gulag Archipelago (three volumes) (1973–1978), not a memoir, but a history of the entire process of developing and administering a police state in the Soviet Union.
His books are based on his own experiences in World War Two as a major and then a prisoner.
Pretty telling stories.
Not easy reads, but worthwhile.
You might also want to look at:
And Quiet Flows the Don,
The Don Flows Home,
by Mikhail Aleksandrovich Sholokhov
These stories take place around the time of the Russian Revolution.
Both are quite long.
Jim Too
:god_bless_usa
|
|
|
Post by dude on Mar 6, 2010 9:49:26 GMT 9
|
|
Bullhunter
Global Moderator
318th FIS Jet Shop 1975-78
Currently: Offline
Posts: 7,451
Location:
Joined: May 2005
|
Post by Bullhunter on Mar 6, 2010 15:00:38 GMT 9
This sentance in the article caught my eye.
“It’s going to be no worse than an F-22,” said Anatoly Kornukov, the former commander of Russian air forces. “I’ve been in an F-22, and I know.”
When are we going to get back to developing secret war planes like the SR-71 & F-117 without showcasing everything.
Why are we now showing off our secrets and advanced systems?
|
|
cc790
F-106 Skilled
F-106 '80-'84 F-15 '84-'01
Currently: Offline
Posts: 106
Location:
Joined: February 2010
|
Post by cc790 on Mar 6, 2010 20:17:04 GMT 9
[quote author=bullhunter board=otheraircraftinfo thread=1632 Why are we now showing off our secrets and advanced systems?[/quote]
Money.
|
|
|
Post by dude on Mar 7, 2010 5:32:26 GMT 9
Well if money's the answer, lets get the Arabs lined up for rides too. Don't know Bullhunter. In the back of my mind I keep wondering if there isn't some really good reason why they pulled the plug early on the 22. Almost like, "OK lets use it as a gap filler until..." I can think of a couple Tom Clancy-like scenarios. 1) Somewhere along the line the most sensitive technology got compromised; or 2) There's something better in the pipeline a.k.a. area 51 stuff that will make the 22 look like a Spad. Sure hope it's #2.
|
|
cc790
F-106 Skilled
F-106 '80-'84 F-15 '84-'01
Currently: Offline
Posts: 106
Location:
Joined: February 2010
|
Post by cc790 on Mar 7, 2010 20:14:58 GMT 9
I agree that the F-22 may be just a filler...
But, the Arabs will be the first in line to buy any export. What you are forgettiing is we export the basic airframe, not the avinoics packages. The F-15 is an example. I've worked the F-15I and J models. They are much different than our C and E models.
We definately benefit financialy from these foriegn countries exports. We gained 12 new F-15E's in 2000 because the Israelis paid to reopen the production line.
But keep writing, these conspiracy theories keep me amuzed.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Mar 7, 2010 23:09:38 GMT 9
|
|
cc790
F-106 Skilled
F-106 '80-'84 F-15 '84-'01
Currently: Offline
Posts: 106
Location:
Joined: February 2010
|
Post by cc790 on Mar 7, 2010 23:33:17 GMT 9
It's just business. You seem to forget the cold war is over. The manufacturers and the US government need the export contracts to offest the costs. You could buy a squadron of deuces for the cost of one F-22.
So they sell the airframes. So what? The man in the seat makes all the difference. Our pilots are the best trained in the world.
Our men and woman in uniform deserve the absolute best, but our government can't afford to pay for it. so export substandard machines...
|
|
cc790
F-106 Skilled
F-106 '80-'84 F-15 '84-'01
Currently: Offline
Posts: 106
Location:
Joined: February 2010
|
Post by cc790 on Mar 8, 2010 1:16:28 GMT 9
The way this conversation is going, it needs to be PCS's to Purgatory, Political Manure. Than continue...
|
|
|
Post by dude on Mar 8, 2010 2:37:01 GMT 9
It's just business. You seem to forget the cold war is over. The manufacturers and the US government need the export contracts to offest the costs. You could buy a squadron of deuces for the cost of one F-22. So they sell the airframes. So what? The man in the seat makes all the difference. Our pilots are the best trained in the world. Our men and woman in uniform deserve the absolute best, but our government can't afford to pay for it. so export substandard machines... I wonder how many sins of history have been explained away by the phrase, "It's just business." So they sell the airframes? Oh you mean the ones with the skins containing the high tech stealth composites? Or perhaps the thrust vectoring technology that the Raptorski has apparently not yet cracked? Hmmm... I agree with you that there are some platforms designated for export, but that's done on the front end; a.k.a. F-35. Offset what costs? We've already paid through the nose for development. And now when they're in position to reap the reward of that investment, they cut the numbers which drives up the unit price. Want to reduce the flyaway cost of a 22? Don't defer it to foreign sales. BUY MORE OF THEM FOR OUR AIR FORCE. No in my book there has to be at least one technically advanced platform that we keep only for ourselves. :patriotic-flagwaver
|
|
cc790
F-106 Skilled
F-106 '80-'84 F-15 '84-'01
Currently: Offline
Posts: 106
Location:
Joined: February 2010
|
Post by cc790 on Mar 8, 2010 3:17:17 GMT 9
I saw a Su come through Lakenheath late 98 that had thrust vectoring. May have been a prototype, I don't know. My point is, they have the technology also.
Now, just so I understand, ALL american fighters prior to the F-22 were developed, upfront, for export? The SR-71, U-2, and F-117 excluded. If I'm wrong let me know. I'd like to know of an airframe we didn't export.
|
|