Russia to test fifth-generation fighter in 2009

[SUBMAN1]

LANGKAWI: Flight tests of a fifth-generation Russian-Indian fighter will begin as early as 2009 and mass production of the aircraft may start by 2015, the Sukhoi aircraft maker said Wednesday.


A Russian-Indian advanced multirole fighter is being developed from a Russian prototype by Sukhoi, which is part of Russia's United Aircraft Corporation (UAC), and India's Hindustan Aeronautics Limited, under an intergovernmental agreement signed in October.


"At present we are building prototypes of the fifth-generation fighter and will soon start preparation for flight-testing, which is planned for 2009," Sukhoi CEO Mikhail Pogosyan announced at the Langkawi International Maritime and Aerospace (LIMA) 2007 exhibition in Malaysia.


Pogosyan said mass production of the future fighter could begin by 2015.


The new fighter aircraft, which will feature high maneuverability and stealth to ensure air superiority and precision in destroying ground and sea targets, will be built at the Komsomolsk-on-Amur aircraft-manufacturing plant in Russia's Far East.


Discussing the future implementation of the Russian-Indian project, Pogosyan said joint efforts should be focused on three areas: coordination of technical specifications, application of advanced technologies, and preparation of a legal framework for future cooperation.


"We have conducted preliminary discussions on these issues and now we have to work out a detailed program for the implementation of the [fifth-generation fighter] project," the official said.


India and Russia have a long history of military cooperation, going back almost half a century. The existing Russian-Indian military-technical cooperation program, which lasts until 2010, lists up to 200 projects worth about $18 billion in all, according to Russia's defense ministry.

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

Wishes them luck. America needs a competitor.

Frankly, sometimes I wonder whether Europe's best chance for actually having European equipment is to work with Russia. That way, they'd at least have one partner with the will to actually make an effort... and Russia gets access to more modern electronics - benefits for all.

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by Kazuaki Shimazaki II

Wishes them luck. America needs a competitor.

Frankly, sometimes I wonder whether Europe's best chance for actually having European equipment is to work with Russia. That way, they'd at least have one partner with the will to actually make an effort... and Russia gets access to more modern electronics - benefits for all.

Russia's got access to modern electronics. They have MiG and SU upgrade programs all the time, giving them glass cockpits.

Besides, Europe has Eurofighter. This is an excellent aircraft. Probably the second best aircraft flying at this time, outside of F-22 only. Better than anything Russia is fielding right now, and better than anything India is fielding as well. This new Russian fighter is just a catch up program.

-S

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

Russia's got access to modern electronics. They have MiG and SU upgrade programs all the time, giving them glass cockpits.

That's why I said MORE.

As for the superiority of the Typhoon, well debates over aircraft can last for near eternity, but here's an alternate view of the matter: http://www.ausairpower.net/typhoon.html

[XabbaRus]

Carlo Kopp, that name rings a bell. There are a couple of aussies over at strategypage who also post at defensetalk.com whose opinion I respect and what they and others have to say about Kopp isn't good. He's a guy with an agenda so I would take that article with a pinch of salt. From what I understand he has pissed off a fair number of Aussie top brass.

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

Originally Posted by XabbaRus

Carlo Kopp, that name rings a bell. There are a couple of aussies over at strategypage who also post at defensetalk.com whose opinion I respect and what they and others have to say about Kopp isn't good. He's a guy with an agenda so I would take that article with a pinch of salt. From what I understand he has pissed off a fair number of Aussie top brass.

Of course he did. He's basically saying the Australian military is making a huge, horrible mistake, and you don't do that without making some enemies, since he's basically calling them idiots.

On the other hand, he is prominent enough to have his opinions directly quoted by the Australian Parliament, so at least he's no Mike Sparks (but then, even Sparks occasionally has a good point). Which must of course, be just infuriating to the Aussie top brass by itself.

As for agenda, he certainly has a position. In a world where people are constantly mumbling about electronics (a group which includes the Australian MoD) as the solution to all problems, he's a kinematics man who believes that though electronics are important, they are also the icing on the airframe and (to a lesser extent, since these can sometimes be changed) engine cake. Since the electronics can be changed, it is important to get the airframe right. It is the fundamental origin of most of his positions regarding everything from the F-22 to the JSF.

But as for agenda in all its more sinister senses, I wonder what they are claiming he is. Lockheed agent? Propagandist from Red China. I'm interested.

The only thing I wonder is what he thinks of oh, Colonel Riccioni, the guy who contributed to the F-16 and the most prominent star against the F-22. The F-22 did well in its last combat exercise IIRC, but then it has always done well in American simulations (which includes American assumptions of how air combat will occur). If I were Riccioni, I would note that in the last round, most of its kills were BVR - only ~3 were WVR, and the F-22s seem rather heavily supported by a tanker in a relatively small playing area.

[geetrue]

Originally Posted by Kazuaki Shimazaki II

Wishes them luck. America needs a competitor.

Frankly, sometimes I wonder whether Europe's best chance for actually having European equipment is to work with Russia. That way, they'd at least have one partner with the will to actually make an effort... and Russia gets access to more modern electronics - benefits for all.

How can you trust someone who has never kept a treaty? They would love to be someone's partner that's for sure. A European co-op jet fighter made in Russia does not interest anyone ... who are they going to fight? Each other?

Paint one red and one blue ... sorry for the irony.

They might even be able to put secret microchips in the airframe to bring it down in a time of war ...

[CCIP]

Originally Posted by geetrue

How can you trust someone who has never kept a treaty?

You mean the Americans?

(bad joke, but I find your statement to be no less provocative and unfair, not to mention unsubstantiated)

[geetrue]

Originally Posted by CCIP

You mean the Americans?

(bad joke, but I find your statement to be no less provocative and unfair, not to mention unsubstantiated)

Only because you are Russian my friend ... when your in a cold war both sides see it different ... wait a minute that goes for a hot war too, uh ...

Merry Christmas