Should China get su-35bm

Chairman Hu

Banned Idiot
i said 12 for technical studying and license for 200 as the J-11A (Yea now the A version will be 27s and 35s) so this way, China will have everything balanced out and counter to India's friggin MKI

Itz not that scary, 2-D TVC isnt that great...

damn flaps
 

tphuang

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
stats on su-27m(su-35)
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!



su2740.jpg (25754 bytes)TITLE:

SUKHOI Su-35 (Su-27M)

TYPE

Single-seat all-weather counter-air fighter and ground attack aircraft.

PROGRAMME:

Experimental version of Su-27 with foreplanes (T-10-24) flew May 1985; first of six prototypes (successively T-10S-70, Su-27M, Su-35) flew 28 June 1988; another was exhibited at 1992 Farnborough Air Show; in final stages of flight testing early 1993; 11 prototype and preseries aircraft ('701' to '711') built by September 1994, of which '711' modified for thrust-vectoring experiments; first flight at Zhukovsky (with nozzles fixed) 2 April 1996; two more aircraft ordered in late 1995 may indicate start of production of service development batch by KNAAPO at Komsomolsk-on-Amur.

DESIGN FEATURES:

Advanced development of Su-27; airframe, power plant, avionics and armament all upgraded; quadruplex digital fly-by-wire controls under development by Avionika; longitudinal static instability; tandem 'triplane' layout, with foreplanes; double-slotted flaperons; taller, square-tip twin tailfins with integral fuel tanks; reprofiled front fuselage for larger-diameter radar antenna; enlarged tailcone for rearward-facing radar; twin-wheel nose landing gear; axisymmetric thrust vectoring nozzles under development for use on production aircraft (see Su-37 in Addenda). Tests with side-stick controller on starboard side of cockpit of Su-27 testbed LMK-2405 are unlikely to lead to change from conventional centre stick.

POWER PLANT:

Two Saturn/Lyulka AL-35F (AL-31FM) turbofans; each 137.3 kN (30,865 lb st) with afterburning. Retractable flight refuelling probe on port side of nose.

ACCOMMODATION:

Pilot only, on Zvezda K-36MD zero/zero ejection seat.

AVIONICS:

Radar: Phazotron N011 Zhuk 27 multimode low-altitude terrain-following/avoidance radar, search range 54 n miles (100 km; 62 miles) in forward sector, 30 n miles (55 km; 34 miles) rearward, able to track 10 targets and engage four simultaneously. Phazotron Zhuk-PH phased-array radar under development for later use, search range 89 to 132 n miles (165 to 245 km; 102 to 152 miles) in forward sector, 32 n miles (60 km; 37 miles) rearward, with simultaneous tracking of 24 air targets and ripple-fire engagement of six; N014 rearward-facing radar, range approximately 2 n miles (4 km; 2.5 miles), may enable firing of rearward-facing IR homing air-to-air missiles.

Flight: Fully automatic flight modes and armament control against ground, maritime and air targets, including automatic low-altitude flight and automatic target designation. RPKB nav system includes laser-gyro INS and Glonass GPS.

Instrumentation: EFIS, with three colour CRTs; HUD.

Mission: New-type IRST moved to starboard; small external TV pod; all combat flight phases computerised. Shown at Farnborough with GEC Ferranti TIALD (thermal imaging airborne laser designator) night/adverse visibility pod fitted for possible future use.

Self-defence: Enhanced ECM, including wingtip jammer pods; RWR.

ARMAMENT:

One 30 mm GSh-30 gun in starboard wingr00t extension, with 150 rounds. Mountings for up to 14 stores, including R-27 (AA-10 'Alamo-A/B/C/D'), R-40 (AA-6 'Acrid'), R-60 (AA-8 'Aphid'), R-73E (AA-11 'Archer') and RVV-AE (R-77; AA-12 'Adder') air-to-air missiles, Kh-25ML (AS-10 'Karen'), Kh-25MP (AS-12 'Kegler'), Kh-29T (AS-14 'Kedge'), Kh-31P (AS-17 'Krypton') and Kh-59 (AS-18 'Kaz00') air-to-surface missiles, S-25LD laser-guided rockets, S-25IRS IR-guided rockets, GBU-500L and GBU-1500L laser-guided bombs, GBU-500T and GBU-1500T TV-guided bombs, KMGU cluster weapons, KAB-500 bombs and rocket packs. Maximum weapon load 8,000 kg (17,635 lb).


More analysis of su-35 from its inception to the current su-35bm mode:

  众所周知,SU-35最初叫SU-27M(实际上前几架也是在SU-27的机体上改装的)其来源于80年代苏霍伊对SU-27的改进,其目标是在90年代为前苏联空军提供一种可以与西方三代后期改型和三代半战机相对抗的武器装备。主要改进是提高机动性能,采用了三翼面设计,采用性能更好的航电及座舱系统。包括采用NO11及NO14后视雷达的RLSU-27火控雷达系统。前苏联在改进SU-27放弃原来的“单纯的空优战机‘概念而力图将其改进多用途战机,所在在其翼根增加了各增加一个可以负荷2000公斤的挂架,苏联解体后缺乏银子的俄罗斯将SU-27M也外销,为了增加看点将其编号改变为SU-35,后来在711号装备AL-37FU推力矢量发动机,现将其编号增加为SU-37,也被称为SU-37MR(MR为多用途之意),不过后来由于喷口的到达使用期限后又将其编号改回。实际上后来的情况来看前苏联在改进SU-27计划中有过其其他武器装备同样的”贪大求全“的老毛病,航电系统比其先进的多的西方国家在经过海湾战争后也认为单座战机无法在”严重威胁环境执行多种作战任务“。俄罗斯人自己也承认SU-35的多用途改进不成功。尽管SU-35/37系列对外被说的天花乱坠,但在90年代苏霍伊的工作重点却是第五代战机和SU-27IB远程攻击机的研制,这从侧面说明许多问题。

  从相关的介绍来这个新的SU-35没有SU-35的鸭翼,甚至招牌式的平顶垂尾也“改回“了尖削,其改进具体包括:“取消”了鸭翼、缩小了腹鳍和尾锥、采用类似SU-33的全翼展后缘襟翼、发动机采用推力为140千牛级的AL-41F发动机、航电采用包括玻璃化座舱在内的综合航电系统、雷达更新为NO35并在尾锥采用后视雷达等等。从介绍上看这个东东相比较于SU-27的改进和俺国J8B到J8C的改进似乎有异曲同工之处,当年顾诵芬总师接受采访就曾指出歼八B的改进方向就是:采用自适应变弯度机翼,据说此举可以提高战机在“高亚音速的机动性能30-40%”,另外就是采用“体积、重量尽量不变,推力有较大提高的发动机”,还有就是采用包括计算机外挂管理在内的综合航电系统。由于歼8C是在国产新机装备部队前为部队提供一种可以与周边三代机对抗的手段,那么似乎可以这么说这个“新‘SU-35也是在俄罗斯第五代战机服役前为部队提供一种快速、廉价的机型,以平衡欧洲国家装备三代半的威胁。

  从以上小猪的拙见是这个所谓的SU-35还不如说是SU-27的改进型(其实都差不多,原来的SU-35也是SU-27M,实际上原来的改进还大点),再讲明白点这个东东可能就是以前传闻的所谓SU-27SM的第二阶段改进型,众所周知俄罗斯通过为SU-27装备SU-30MKK的综合航电系统完成SU-27SM第一阶段改进,在提高其空战能力亦添加了空地精确打击能力。但其仍旧采用原来的机翼,即翼下6个挂架,机身4个,由于SU-27外侧机翼负荷能力较强,一般只挂载近距空空导弹,而机身挂架由于布局原因也难以挂载较大的空地武器尤其是截面不规则形状的东东,所以SU-27SM第二阶段采用SU-35的机翼,也就是增加了翼根的可以负荷第四个挂架,以便挂较大的空地武器装备,由此需要对中机身进行加强。俄罗斯人为什么要这样做哩?这应该与俄罗斯空军目前的现状有关,众所周知前前苏联战机分工比较专业,歼击机就是歼击机,轰炸机就是轰炸机,这样东东就可以专注于某些性能而对其他进行取舍,但衍生的问题就是执行任务时就需要较多的战机,维持较大规模的部队。其费用也很高,这个观点甚至影响现在的俄罗斯,如SU-24的后继机SU-27IB战胜SU-30就是例子,但俄罗斯空军规模显然比不上前苏联,随着SU-24和SU-17大量退役,俄罗斯空军对地攻击能力直线下降,车臣之战不得不用SU-27挂载普通炸弹执行轰炸任务,结果被地方击落,在机队规模下降的情况提高现在战机的多用途能力以便用较少的战机执行更多的作战任务就成了关键。这是为什么90年代俄罗斯战机改进计划非常强调多用途能力的原因,甚至MIG-31这样的防空截击机也有MIG-31BM这样的多用途性能的出现并不是偶然的情况。这个东东对俄罗斯苏霍伊来说也有比较现实的意义,众所周知其主要生产基地KNAAPO多年仅靠对外出口战机和帮助俄罗斯空军升级SU-27维持生产线的运转,随着俺国大规模引进俄罗斯战机时代的结束,而俄罗斯第五代战机又刚刚进入工程研制阶段,最快可能也要2015年才能进入量产,所以这个东东可以帮助KNAAPO渡过这之前的过渡时期,保持现有的技术力量。同时为下步的生产打好基础。
 
Last edited:

tphuang

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
I can't think of a reason that they would not be. Especially since this flanker is that much better than the flankers we have. I guess the sticking point could be the pricing, whether or not ToT is part of the agreement and the radar/missiles offered as part of the deal.
 

Chairman Hu

Banned Idiot
uhhh the purchase shall be determined by...

1. What are the complete range of missiles will be offered

2. What kind of engine to be offered and their power and design blueprints

3. Can it be modified to fire Chinese made weapons

Umm... yea a license production should solve #3's problem
 

MIGleader

Banned Idiot
tphuang said:
I can't think of a reason that they would not be. Especially since this flanker is that much better than the flankers we have. I guess the sticking point could be the pricing, whether or not ToT is part of the agreement and the radar/missiles offered as part of the deal.

off course radar is part of the deal. are u saying the russians would not put a radar on the su-35?

missles are definilty part of every aircraft deal. pricing...24 for 1 billion. thats standard

modified to fit chinese missles? lmao
 

tphuang

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
No, I'm saying which specific radar gets offered. Zhuk-mfe is obviously better than N-011M. I'm not sure whether it is better than Irbis or not.

The Russians don't want to let us use SD-10 and China would not want to give the launch code for it.
 

trkl

New Member
tphuang said:
I guess the sticking point could be the pricing, whether or not ToT is part of the agreement and the radar/missiles offered as part of the deal.

I don't think that ToT would actually be all that useful in this case. Partly this is because much of the ToT would be redundant since the technology is pretty similar to what was already aquired through the J-11 deal. In addition, it takes years to sucsessfully absorb and copy a new system. Even in areas where the Russian systems are superior to the Chinese systems, they may no longer be the best by the time China is able to duplicate them.
 

MIGleader

Banned Idiot
trkl said:
I don't think that ToT would actually be all that useful in this case. Partly this is because much of the ToT would be redundant since the technology is pretty similar to what was already aquired through the J-11 deal. In addition, it takes years to sucsessfully absorb and copy a new system. Even in areas where the Russian systems are superior to the Chinese systems, they may no longer be the best by the time China is able to duplicate them.

i hate it when people think all china can do is copy russian gear. china faily experienced in radars and can improve any russian design. lets not forget the chinese also have the israelis, the best at making radars.
 

tphuang

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
MIGleader said:
i hate it when people think all china can do is copy russian gear. china faily experienced in radars and can improve any russian design. lets not forget the chinese also have the israelis, the best at making radars.
Hopefully, we are getting help from the Europeans too. The advantage China has over the Russians is that our electronics technology is much better, so I think we will get AESA radars before the Russians.

Licensed production of su-35 might not be such a bad thing.
 
Top