J10B-J-20, and Su-27 - Su-35. That is far more logical than moving from Su-35 to J-20
Shouldn't the J-20 and J-11 fill the same role as a high end air superiority aircraft.
Or is the J-20 a much smaller aircraft, maybe in the F-15C weight class with around 5 or 6 tonnes of fuel, and a 12-13 tonnes empty weight? Something like the EF-2000, with 5th gen capabilities, then that makes sense. That would solve a lot of other doubts too.
Not sure of your "certain parameters". That is no small feat to develope all those aircrafts at once. I dont think China is as familiar with the flankers as the russians, yet.
I guess so, especially when it comes to developing a 9:1 T/W engine.
Nop, the competition of JXX is yet to start. The rumour is JXX is bigger than J-31
That would be interesting.
I think there is a bottleneck in design and production. Or you got any evidence that there is no production bottleneck? Dude, CAC and SAC produce around 50 jets a year.
On the contrary, if you had production bottlenecks you would expand. We are doing it, it would be much more easier for you.
How is 24 Su-35s gonna provide the increased capability? The future war is about battlespace management. A single jet is not gonna change the balance.
Agreed. But these could very well be initial orders. While you can't fight a war with 24 jets, you can't clear production bottlenecks with 24 jets either.
There are and will always be two options. Either SAC plans to reverse engineer certain technologies for future applications or PLAAF is planning on ordering much more than 24 jets as a 4.5 th gen requirement after evaluating it or both are possible.
There is a chance that if the J-20 is much lighter than a Su-35, then the 117S will give it a major thrust upgrade.
SU-35 can not be linked to existing chinese networks.
Why, that's not true. You just need to fix your own datalinks to it, along with your own cockpit design which I am sure the Russians will be happy to install for you.
We plan on doing that fleet wide with Indian (LCA/UAV/EW/AWACS), French (Rafale), American (transports), Israeli (UAV/AWACS/AEW/EW) and Russian (everything else) aircraft, you guys have it easy in comparison.
Any idea the number of 3-gen jets in PLAAF and PLAN? Take a guess.
I should say less that 1000 left if you are referring to our 3rd gen definition, else much more than that when it comes to our 4th gen definition. I am assuming you are referring to our 3rd gen.
No , it is not. I already told you the engines were offered to the chinese. They do not need to buy the jets to get access to the engines.
It only makes the case for PLAAF requirements stronger.
You forgot that the soviet/russia made the flankers to begin with. That they can do it, dosnt means China can do it. China has come far in the last decade. But they are not yet on par with Russian when it comes to flankers.
Still 24 is too less a number to clear any kind of a production bottleneck.
The question is what does JV entitles. My guess is they will deliver less than what India desired.
Have you seen the Israelis deliver any lesser when it came to giving up their Greenpine radar? Heck, they couldn't deliver the Greenpine, so they came to India and helped DRDO develop an even better radar. The same with the delivery of French FCR for our BMD.
According to the DRDO chief we have achieved complete self reliance in the BMD program.
I can't comment on the Phalcon program because we don't know anything about it yet. We did not even know the proper radar designation until recently.
Export, yes, not ToT. I never question their desire to sell engines to India. Only their willingness to provide ToT.
The AL-31FP was their best engine when they signed agreements for ToT. The development of the 117S happened much, much later when the Su-35BM program started again.
If they could sign "Deep ToT" agreements for their best engine then, why would they not sign a new agreement today?
This contract was signed in 2000.
HAL inks $300 million Sukhoi deal - Times Of India
Dated: PTI Jun 6, 2003, 06.03am IST
Under the $3.5 billion Sukhoi license deal inked in December 2000, Moscow-based aero-engine design bureau 'Lyulka-Saturn' and Bashkiria-based Ufa engine plant (UMPO) will transfer full technical documentation and technology to HAL for the production of unique 'AL-31FP' thrust-vectoring engines for the Su-30MKI.
The work for the transfer of technology and production of "AL-31FP" engines in India at Koraput is already underway, General Director of JSC "NPO Saturn" Yuri Lastochkin here said.
One, they are very, very confident of our ability to adhere to IPR and contract obligations.
Two, we are in effect strategic partners.
Three, they know that we don't need their engines for other purposes except for modernizing and using on the FGFA alone. That is to their benefit.
Now that we have Russia out of the way, let's get to France and Britain. They have the engine technology we seek and both IAF and GTRE would prefer that we go through the Europeans in order to get the best stuff followed by the Russians and with the Americans falling last in line. This is in order to have a more diverse base. Also GTRE has mainly worked on British engines in the past.
So, why would Britain and France want to give away their engine technologies to India. It is very, very simple, really. We have money. We have money and they don't. It is the same thing why Israel was so heavily dependent on a Phalcon contract from India or China in the past. They wanted money. Why money, you ask? The answer is simple. They don't have the money.
Now, reading the above statements you will think I am some sort of an idiot. Okay, let me explain in another way. There are two reasons why we have the money and they don't have the money. One, they don't have a military, or have a sizable military. Two, they don't have the money to propel their own domestic programs forward. So, these countries neither have the money to push their research forward or the market to purchase it once the technology is developed, but they have the technology to do it. India has both money and a large market, but no technology.
If Britain and France want to continue to be military exporters in the future, they need a market to sell to. But in order to do that they need development money that can make these things, for which India can pay. Today, neither Britain nor France can afford a new aircraft development project and hence an engine making capability is the biggest hurdle to maintain until a new project can be started after 2040 (that's their plan). That's too long a dormant period for anybody. There is no guarantee they can sustain it while competing with Russia, US and maybe even China.
Hence their salvation can lie in a future engine project with India or another country like Turkey, Japan, Sweden etc. Whatever engine tech they have planned, they can sell to us with guaranteed profits because they know we have a market that can absorb anything that they can make. A JV with India would mean they don't have to take risks by not finding any export customers, like how the Russians poo-phooed the loss of a deal worth $7.3 Billion in Korea after withdrawing PAKFA from the tender, saying they have a much bigger deal with India (over $30 Billion).
Your JF-17 marketing technique was the exact same as well. A guaranteed export customer who can absorb all the costs with a long production run.
India knows and understands this fact very well. So it is really a buyers market here since even the Americans and Russians would not want to lose out on a contract worth Billions that will be almost guaranteed with the production of a minimum of 250 AMCAs (minimum 1000 engines) and hundreds of different UCAVs that we may plan for after AURA.
Now you know why Britain and France would wanna line up for an engine JV with India. They will practically be begging to hand over their technology and we will get to choose.
Dosnt change the fact it is still under developement. There is no production engines for any of your projects.
Agreed. We are behind. But terming the K-9 itself as a failure is wrong. It is the LCA Mk1 which failed with just one crucial failure of K-9 in 2004, not the entire K-9 program since it continued after that.
I think if there is a backup plan, then PLAAF is going for proven engines, not the new russian ones.
PLAAF won't have a better option than the 117S. It still belongs to a family of proven engines.
Nobody else will give it.
If the deal is signed this year. You can expect delivery around 2014. That is only 3-4 years before the supposed delivery of J-20.
I would say 2015-16, since PLAAF will ask for modifications, especially in the cockpit. And the Russians may take at least another year before they increase the capacity of their own production line to 24-30 aircraft a year up from whatever number is being delivered to VVS today.
