Jump to content

All Things Stealth


Mr King

Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Replies 2.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Two F-35As deployed at Misawa Air Base made an emergency landing at Aomori Airport. No reports of injuries. One domestic flight was delayed by 12 minutes as a result. Investigation into details underway.

 

Quote

24日午後2時20分ごろ、青森県の航空自衛隊三沢基地に所属するF35ステルス戦闘機2機が、青森空港(青森市)に緊急着陸した。青森県によると、けが人の情報は入っていない。新千歳空港に向かう民間航空機1便の出発が12分遅れた。三沢基地は「詳しい状況を調べている」としている。

https://this.kiji.is/747354634404249600?c=39546741839462401

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Firefox didnt have any trouble with Canards.  :D

But...it was piloted by Clint!

He'd have prevailed in Sopwith Camel! (Though I think US pilots in WW I flew Spads...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There were two US fighter squadrons that flew Camels.  "The Camel Drivers:  The 17th Aero Squadron in World War I" is, I thought, a good read.  They were transitioning to SPADs when the war ended.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/24/2021 at 4:56 PM, JasonJ said:

Two F-35As deployed at Misawa Air Base made an emergency landing at Aomori Airport. No reports of injuries. One domestic flight was delayed by 12 minutes as a result. Investigation into details underway.

 

https://this.kiji.is/747354634404249600?c=39546741839462401

It turned out to be a quick fix. The two F-35As were training over the Sea of Japan when the light that indicated a defect for the engine system on one of them went on so it and its partner F-35A made an emergency landing at Aomori Airport. 10 JASDF maintenance personel were dispatched to the airport, looked into the troubled F-35A, swapt out defect part that's for engine control with a new part, and the F-35A took off on its own from the airport and returned to Misawa Air Base. According to Misawa Base, it was the first time for an F-35A to make an emergency landing due to engine related defect. The other 19 F-35As deployed at Misawa were grounded for inspection, equiping, and pilot safety. Training for all of them resumed in the 25th.

Quote

24日、青森空港に緊急着陸した航空自衛隊三沢基地のF35戦闘機について、自衛隊が原因を調べたところ、エンジンを制御する部品に不具合があったことがわかりました。
機体は、部品を交換したあと、青森空港を離陸し、25日午後5時に三沢基地に戻りました。

24日午後、航空自衛隊三沢基地のF35戦闘機2機が、日本海の上空で訓練を行っていたところ、このうち1機にエンジン系統の不具合を知らせる警報灯が点滅したため、青森空港に緊急着陸しました。
航空自衛隊は、青森空港に隊員およそ10人を派遣し、警報灯が点滅したF35の機体を調べたところ、エンジンを制御する部品に不具合があったことがわかったということです。
機体は部品を交換したあと、25日夕方、青森空港を離陸し、午後5時に2機とも三沢基地に到着しました。
三沢基地によりますと、航空自衛隊のF35がエンジンの部品の不具合で緊急着陸するのは初めてで、基地に配備されているほかの19機の点検や整備を行うとともに、パイロットへの安全教育を行ったとして、中断していたF35の訓練を25日午後、再開したということです。

https://www3.nhk.or.jp/lnews/aomori/20210325/6080011919.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

With Russia building the heavy Su57, I always thought the Russians had shot themselves in the foot. The Su57 was simply too expensive for the export market, whilst at the same time Russia needed a heavy stealth aircraft to try to gain parity with the American F22. 

Now we have the answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well... the problem seems to be that Russia prefers to buy long range fighters, because then they dont have to buy lots of tankers. So you have a distinct preference of the SU27 to the Mig29, to the point where Mig pretty much was ending up irrelevant. Nobody was buying Mig35.

So you now have the problem, they have the Su57 and seemingly a cheaper, lighter substitute. So they will logically buy lots of small aircraft because of cost, and very few Su57's, right? Well thats the way we would do it, Im not sure their thinking extends to quite the same way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Possibly it is based on yet another attempt to get some export sales, into the same market that Mig 29 did decades ago.

This is the big problem for Russia - in order to get a decent return on near cutting edge projects it needs to increase volume, but there is not enough funds to support a large domestic buy.

The only workable solution to me seems to be some sort of cooperation with China, but the record there is not so good. Actually China has been a little bit too hard for it's own good - it would be better off long term if it can help the Russian arms industry improve it's applied technological level, and even better if it can help sustain rapid economic growth, as their whole Eurasian strategy is dependent on a rather strong Russia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would guess the Chinese have got zero interest in improving the Russian military industrial capability. Partly because they are still a potential peer opponent, but also because they have had a history of arming India, also another peer opponent. Shortsighted I agree, but then Xi seems to be in an awful hurry doesnt he?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are not a peer opponent, but rather a potential ally that is left at arms length because of a desire to avoid some replay of the Cold War. And until recently, financial largess as part of grand geostrategic objectives was seen as far too ambitious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, KV7 said:

Possibly it is based on yet another attempt to get some export sales, into the same market that Mig 29 did decades ago.

This is the big problem for Russia - in order to get a decent return on near cutting edge projects it needs to increase volume, but there is not enough funds to support a large domestic buy.

The only workable solution to me seems to be some sort of cooperation with China, but the record there is not so good. Actually China has been a little bit too hard for it's own good - it would be better off long term if it can help the Russian arms industry improve it's applied technological level, and even better if it can help sustain rapid economic growth, as their whole Eurasian strategy is dependent on a rather strong Russia.

The Chinese have there own Stealth fighter the J20 so I don't think the Su57 would ever be sold to it. They also make copied of the Su27/30, the J10 and the JF17 (for export only). But China has bought 24 Su35's, so that China can take them apart to study and then improve their own J11 series jets.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chengdu_J-20

China has a problem in it's ability to produce jet engine's. There track record is rather poor, for example the new JF17 is powered by the Klimov RD-33 turbofan engine which originally powered the MIG29.

Edited by TrustMe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TrustMe said:

The Chinese have there own Stealth fighter the J20 so I don't think the Su57 would ever be sold to it. They also make copied of the Su27/30, the J10 and the JF17 (for export only). But China has bought 24 Su35's, so that China can take them apart to study and then improve their own J11 series jets.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chengdu_J-20

China has a problem in it's ability to produce jet engine's. There track record is rather poor, for example the new JF17 is powered by the Klimov RD-33 turbofan engine which originally powered the MIG29.

I am well aware, and the engine problem is part of the case for collaboration. China probably should offer to fund substantially some joint engine development program, even if they have to put up a lot of the capital and recurrent funding and the facilities are largely in Russia, such that the whole deal is a sweetheart one for Russia.

In one sense such a deal would not be 'fair' to China but it hardly matters, because they have ample economic resources, Russia has ample expertise, and any 'excess generosity' has useful side effects, and so there is a certain efficiency that overrides any issue of the allocation of benefits.

One potentially problem here is that it may alarm some in the US and possibly provoke some new US expenditures, i.e. it would be (mildly) provoking an arms race.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, KV7 said:

They are not a peer opponent, but rather a potential ally that is left at arms length because of a desire to avoid some replay of the Cold War. And until recently, financial largess as part of grand geostrategic objectives was seen as far too ambitious.

I would respectfully suggest that if China wants to avoid a new cold war, then its go a very funny way about it. :)

I dont think they regard Russia as a potential ally either. I think they view it as something to be exploited, certainly not something they wish to assist. They flirt with the idea, but Russia just does not have a powerful enough Navy to be a threat or useful to China.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe both sides remember the 1960's border clashes between the two sides. But, I think KV7 is right, with Russian know how and Chinese money they can both go far. The Chinese WZ10 attack chopper was designed by Russian design house Kamov using Chinese money. The Chinese space program benefits from Russian know how as well.

Edited by TrustMe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/18/2021 at 11:03 PM, Stuart Galbraith said:

I would respectfully suggest that if China wants to avoid a new cold war, then its go a very funny way about it. :)

I dont think they regard Russia as a potential ally either. I think they view it as something to be exploited, certainly not something they wish to assist. They flirt with the idea, but Russia just does not have a powerful enough Navy to be a threat or useful to China.

Until recently the aphorism was 韬光养晦 which has been taken to mean 'observe calmly, secure our position, cope with affairs calmly, hide our capacities and bide our time, be good at maintaining a low profile, and never claim leadership'.

Given their economic capacity they have been rather restrained, though I fear they are sort of making a mess of it now - there is perhaps too much 'look we are strong' and perhaps also too little substantive push back.

But again this can be explained by their commitment to not being prematurely committed to costly projects, as they think this was partially responsible for the fall of the USSR. It is a good heuristic.

The 'look we are strong' is also explicable by them reasonably thinking that deterrence is necessary, because reliance on US goodwill is too risky.

Edited by KV7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does the economics of light 5th gen fighters work out ? Surely the second engine and larger airframe is a small portion of the cost of a heavy fighter. If you are going to have cutting edge avionics you arguably may as well have it on a platform with long legs and ideally supercruise ability.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

Does the economics of light 5th gen fighters work out ? Surely the second engine and larger airframe is a small portion of the cost of a heavy fighter. If you are going to have cutting edge avionics you arguably may as well have it on a platform with long legs and ideally supercruise ability.


This is a good point. It is likely that this new fighter uses downsized equipment from Su-57, and savings are important over the life of the fighter (40 years nowadays).  Switzerland estimates that annual maintenance cost per F-35 will be 10.46 million $. If you manage to reduce that by ~30% and multiply it by 24 fighters and 40 years the savings are important.

 

Quote

So you have a distinct preference of the SU27 to the Mig29, to the point where Mig pretty much was ending up irrelevant. Nobody was buying Mig35.

Also with foreign customers. Countries like Algeria or Vietnam have acquired plenty of Flanker. In the tables below you can see a pretty up to date summary of Su-27 vs MiG-29  contracts. Rows highlighted in blue are for second hand aircraft. Flanker has done much better, getting sales even in small countries like Armenia or Belarus.

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-as4BSGSB9TA/X4jU40F-CjI/AAAAAAAAlbE/5mh7-BGosTsGF8xZHVuoRVXnFzrStnTDQCLcBGAsYHQ/s811/Tabla%2B10-2020%2BMiG.png

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-dFIoZRMpcz8/X4jU_M_kUHI/AAAAAAAAlbI/8YqhEre5QEkOd3zfsJUaYWvsKa0nI3qxgCLcBGAsYHQ/s1113/Tabla%2B10-2020%2BSu.png

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, alejandro_ said:


This is a good point. It is likely that this new fighter uses downsized equipment from Su-57, and savings are important over the life of the fighter (40 years nowadays).  Switzerland estimates that annual maintenance cost per F-35 will be 10.46 million $. If you manage to reduce that by ~30% and multiply it by 24 fighters and 40 years the savings are important.


Those costs seem very high. Are maintenance costs much reduced by dropping an engine though ? The other issue is that if capability is reduced, you need more fighters for the same efficacy, and then more pilots, hangers etc. too.

I am not against light fighters but I think they make more sense if they can be used for roles that do not demand cutting edge technology, though UAV seem to be able to increasingly fill these roles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...