It was reported that some of the controversy stemmed from the fact that the static display aircraft was a mockup and not a flying aircraft and in places had been damaged and the repairs were not really befitting of a flying example which it isn't.
Based on this mockup the experts criticised the aircraft that was flying and those in service in the Russian AF.
Amusing that in my honest opinion the prettiest looking F-35 is the Chinese version... the twin engine design looks sleeker and of a much better aerodynamic shape for flying at any speed.
I rather suspect they also took the time and spent the money on fixing the problems and making it work which Boeing seems rather uninterested in doing for the F-35.
In Europe they want to have over 600 F-35s and there are about 600 EFs.
The F-35 is an economic scam created by the US to siphon money from gullible allies... I say buy 2,000 of the damn things.
Was I Norway that was having problems keeping pilots current on their F-35s because it is so damn expensive to fly them they don't fly them often enough to keep their pilots and ground crew properly trained with enough operational hours per year to keep them on active duty.
The British were saying it cost something like 80K pounds per flight hour to fly their F-35s... that is disgusting corruption.
Russia maintains a purely defensive doctrine whilst the ever expanding NATzo is clearly set on the aggressor path. It is perfectly clear that NATzo will suffer unacceptably high losses during the opening hours of any conventional conflict. Those aircraft that will survive will have no place to go. NATzo have absolutely nothing that can effectively defend against drones and missiles raining down on them.
To their credit they have also taken note of experience in Ukraine and realised lighter numbers aircraft would be a valuable addition to their fleet so they are clearly funding a light 5th gen fighter... whether they would consider producing MiG-35s as well is up for question, but the idea of a cheaper numbers aircraft but with modern AESA radar and modern weapons is appealing to them... and of course would be made more effective cooperating with a solid IADS that is already in operation.
They have very low rate production capacity for the MiG and in a couple of years they will likely have at the very least two and possibly three light single engined 5th gen fighters to test and evaluate.
They might decide that a 4th gen aircraft is good enough and is cheaper to operate and perhaps only produce a few light 5th gen fighters for specific roles where stealth would be important but an Su-57 would not be warranted.
Or the stealth features might be decisive and the costs not enough to effect the result so a light fifth gen fighter might be put into mass serial production as soon as possible to add numbers to the fleet.
Any network relies on nodes and of course when the node on a network is a fighter aircraft with an AESA radar and IRST/EO system and also carries weapons for use against a variety of threats then adding such nodes increases data collection capacity and the capacity to deal with large numbers of enemy at one time.
Each fighter might be able to track 30 targets and launch weapons at 6 or 8 at one time meaning four Su-35s could track 120 targets and engage 24 to 36 targets at once... and would have the onboard capacity to attack up to two waves of targets (12 weapons launched), but 8 light fighters could also track 30 targets each and launch multiple weapons, but the target tracking capacity could also be used by other platforms like surface based SAM systems to launch their weapons at targets too... but the real point is that the four Su-35s are not going to replace those light fighters, they are going to all work together with the heavier aircraft with the longer ranged sensors can protect the lighter aircraft which can engage in dogfights while the heavier fighters engage targets from greater distances.
Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
Mir
