Isos wrote:I'm still neutral. I never said russia makes shit stuff and west very good one. It's just annoying that some people here can't even accept that US and generaly western stuff is sometime better than russian and they have some advanced in r&d than russia thanks to a better eco situation and far greater investement.
This is a genuinely free place and also critic positions, by part of anyone, is well accepted also when not shared.
What someone here is attempting to suggest is that general situation with influence in the public information media world (above all in "western" based) about military subjects is exact opposite of what you seem to allude
In particular influence of some persistently repeated "half truth" or patentely false notions that with time become accepted as true, bypassing critical thinking, (the basis of modern western PR operation doctrine) have, in the opinion of several contributors here, caused some ,but not obviously all, of your positions to be based on wrong assumptions or "false symmetry" mistakes.Let begin with the real
, or for better say the true historical center, of Federation's military and civilian industrial complex weakness : electronic component basis and particularly microprocessor
.This element ,surely important but
still representing a proportionally minuscle fraction of the scientifical and engineering capital involved in the creation of the most up-to-date military products,
is literally used by western propaganda institutions not only to create the necessary "reality radications" for theirs attacks on the image of competitors ,enormously overbloating their importance among the parameters of new products through the use of continuously repeated "coded words"
, but also to cover the gigantic lags, in an enormous amount of others much more relevant scientifical fields, that they suffer in comparison with theirs most advanced competitors
So when, for example, present a "new" missile
(not rarely nothing more than a modification of products used and created for other tasks) with its relative launcher US firms, among coded words like "dominance" and "superiority", avoid at any cost to notice that
, cause in reality the immense scientifical lags accumulated against its main competitor in aerodynamics modeling, material science, elctgromagnetic interference modeling, mathematical modeling of not satelite-dependant navigation, mechanical solutions for the launchers etc..etc...etc.... theirs products show, in comparison with domestic products embarassing low range of engagement, average speed, time of delivery, EW susceptibility, navigation method fraility, warhead's destructive power, average cost and time to construct, time to lauch and to egress from launch's point and so on and on
while turning the entire presentation around its "joint" , "data sharing", "network-integrated" renovated electronic content.We are very near to a true tectonic change just in this area of historical western lead
- representing also the foundation of theirs civilian high-tech sector- that will force theirs entire industrial complex ,with all the related production lines, to be literally erased and be reconstructed on a new basis
and let me say that at today the US ,putting the thing midly, is not well placed in the scientifical race toward this new era of the sector and anyway the costs of the reconversion will be for them truly incalculable.
All the others area of theirs scientifical lags , that as already said are not only much more basis-science-intensive but also significantly more relevant , in all those years, have not only not shown any sign of reduction with us but rather the opposite tendency, that mostly thanks to the general borious ,self-praising aptitude of US culture.
Neo let return to some of your assertion 1) Western AESA radars are "superior"
....... and russian fanboys criticized stealth and AESA as shit and useless technology but now russia use it everywhere
Someone should begin to ask to itself in what parameters a latest western serially produced АФАР
for fighter aircraft is superior to a latest domestic serially produced ПФАР of the same type
; it would suddenly discover that the former widely suffer against the latter in cost, average radiated power, sidelobe performances, detection field of view, weapon guidance off-vector of motion angle and, above all, detection and lock-on range while surpassing the latter in reliability, beam agility and time of interleaving air and ground attack mode.
The objective observation of the performance data say to us that choices made by part of domestic Institutes to proceed in the capitalization of the possibilities still offered by ПФАР, have produced ,in the same time window taken into consideration, a radar product costing a fraction of the best foreign samples surpassing them in the first series of parameters while conceding in the second.
Now Isos do you believe that capability to detect potential menaces at longer range , cover contemporaneously a significantly bigger air space sector and guide medium range and long range missiles while moving contemporaneously long a tangential evasion vector (so to put enemy missiles out of effective kill range) is surpassed by reliability and beam agility of a much more costly АФАР ?
If the response to this question is not you have realized the rational of develop at maximum the possibilities of ПФАР.
Now the quewstion of АФАР
(or for better say АФАР based on today elementary MMIC component).
Contrarely to the western media induced notion (that Federation attempt today to follow the same road of the US in АФАР) in wide majority of Russian Federation Institutes the road chosen by western radioelectronic specialists with АФАР was considered a big mistake at the time when the technology was immature and incredibly costly and is considered a solution with a short future, under a mere performance point of view, today that MMIC costs has reached a somewhat affordable level. The prevalent research and development orientation in the Federation was toward a radar-"electronic" technology allowing the shaping and merging of the radiating and receiving elements directly in the structure of the vehicle
with an increase of performance at least an order of magnitude greater
in comparison with the most advanced projected foreign samples constructed with today technology.
From that orientation born nore than a decade ago the "РОФАР" program that is today at advanced stage (5 of 7) of development. Also today anyone can notice like for T-50 , that was conceived from the beginning of ПАК ФА program for those new generation arrays fused in the structure, the АФАР of different wavelenght
(as said actual technology do not allow even by far the desired spectrum wideness) are placed in different position of the aircraft to offer some kind of elementary mimic of the capabilities that will be integrated with the projected new radio-optical arrays.
There is nothing more far from western approach than Federation one