J-20 goes operational again

Military aircraft - Post cold war aircraft, including for example B-2, Gripen, F-18E/F Super Hornet, Rafale, and Typhoon.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

inst

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 148
  • Joined: 04 Jul 2015, 01:58

Unread post16 Sep 2019, 13:18

madrat wrote:Capability is a function of exposure. The U.S. is much more widely dispersed, therefore needs much more overall force quantity. The U.S. has to contend with China being able to concentrate more power in any one places while within its own sphere of influence, which explains the discrepancy between inventories.


Yes, but the PPP GDP doesn't mean the Chinese have the same military budget to play with. Equipment is expensive, the J-20 at 700 RMB is about 90 million USD right now, but it's likely 210 million when you consider PPP.

You have to think about China in terms of full-spectrum or rather hybrid warfare. Their goal is to set up a regional sphere of influence; i.e, Japan flips and PLA bases in Japan now provide protection for the vulnerable Chinese coastline instead of the PLAN and PLAAF.

To achieve that end, they're better off working on IRBM / MRBMs that have the ability to penetrate Japanese and American BMD with HGVs; the US can counter by increasing basing, but the prospect of getting caught in the crossfire will eventually pressure Japanese elites to switch sides or Finlandize.

For all the talk about traditional Sino-Japanese enmity, you have to remember that Mao actually thanked the Japanese invaders for "teaching" the Chinese how to be nationalist and how to be militant. The Chicoms are incredibly flexible ideologically, Communism, after all, is the model for 1984, and "we were always at war with Oceania / East Asia / Eurasia" isn't beyond their purview. The Chinese problem with Japan isn't fundamentally ideological, but rather strategic, in that Japan is like an unsinkable aircraft carrier pointed at the Chinese heartlands. This is not wholly incompatible with Japanese nationalism, remember that the Chinese never nuked Hiroshima or Nagasaki, and that the Chinese didn't firebomb Tokyo.

If we're talking, say, Taiwan, I'm more expecting the Chinese to blink and go "well, okay, see you in 10 years". The Chinese are obligated to invade Taiwan if it declares independence, but they never said when. Building capability over time and getting through the tech gap is more important for them than the Russian tendency to snap brutally at any encroachments on their sphere of influence, notice that the PAP has not openly intervened in Hong Kong yet.
Offline

inst

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 148
  • Joined: 04 Jul 2015, 01:58

Unread post16 Sep 2019, 13:21

sferrin wrote:
inst wrote:One thing I do want to point out is that it's possible that the J-31s will end up getting replaced by the Su-57s instead. Trick is, the Su-57s are now incredibly cheap; the Russians claim to have gotten the cost down to 35 million,


:lmao:


Are you laughing at the Su-57, its cost being so low, or are you laughing at the idea that the pride of the Russian Federation is reduced to an F-16/F-35 analogue? The ruble dropped 50% since the Ukraine crisis, and the Russians are more autarkic than the Chinese so they rely less on imports for equipment.

The Su-57 isn't necessarily a good stealth fighter, but at half the price of a F-35, it's cheap. I.e, you can think of it as a 4++ gen fighter that's not overwhelmingly crushed by 5th gens.
Offline

milosh

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1282
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 23:40
  • Location: Serbia, Belgrade

Unread post16 Sep 2019, 14:25

Su57 doesn't cost same as Su35 it cost 50% more by russian media and that price doesn't include r&d cost. Export price would have r&d in price.
Offline

inst

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 148
  • Joined: 04 Jul 2015, 01:58

Unread post16 Sep 2019, 15:32

Su-57 is reported to cost 35 million flyaway on the Russian government contract. Even if Su-57s cost 50 million for export, they're still cost competitive with the F-35; get an LO heavyweight fighter that's ultra-maneuverable for half the cost of an F-35. It's a great deal and the Chinese should get in on it.

The big problem with Chinese subsystems development is that their engines are garbage, and they're only slowly catching up, with recent exploration of Rhenium manufacturing technology. If the PL-15 scares people, the Chinese had PL-21 and ramjetted missiles in development since 2008 or so. If you compare them to the US's next-gen missile development path, Chinese missiles are slow to develop.

Russian missiles, on the other hand, don't have that problem. Kinzhal is arguably superior to potential DF-21 air-launched variants, and the Russian equivalent to the PL-21 or other long-range interceptor missiles has a smaller form factor. The Russian missile ecosystem plugs a Chinese gap while they work on getting the subsystems and R&D systems up to speed. Getting in on Russian systems is good in other ways for the PLAAF; it means that in the event that the Chinese and Russians do joint operations, the PLAAF will already be familiar with the RuAF's air superiority craft; they already know the Su-30s and Su-35s inside and out, why not the Su-57 as well?

Likewise, the Su-57 and J-20 complement each other quite well. The J-20 is essentially a sixth generation version of the MiG-31, if the MiG-31 is seen as 4th generation and the MiG-25 is seen as 3rd generation with improvements in sustained turn rate (MiG-31 can do 15-18 degrees STR at low altitudes). The J-20 is more optimized for performance at high speed (the long-coupled canards, when coupled with TVC, will probably give it the best supersonic turning performance of any 5th gen). The Su-57, on the other hand, has even less stealth than the J-20, but is probably the most maneuverable 5th gen aircraft.

The combo would have the J-20 using its EODAS and better stealth to screen off Su-57 from BVR threats, and the Su-57 close in for the kill while the J-20s scoot home to rearm or launch potshots from behind a Su-57 screen.

The Su-57 also looks better suited for strike missions than the J-20, since the Su-57 has a long weapons bay that can better fit longer strike missiles. The J-20's weapons bay is too short to hold a Kh-31 or YJ-12.
Offline
User avatar

botsing

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 892
  • Joined: 05 Dec 2015, 18:09
  • Location: The Netherlands

Unread post16 Sep 2019, 16:49

inst wrote:Su-57 is reported to cost 35 million flyaway on the Russian government contract.

So we finally have an official price for the Su-57? Please show us this contract so we can verify!

On the other hand, you are probably just rehashing the same wrong method where they took the words from Putin and simply divided the given budget by the amount of planes (2630 / 76 = ~35).

Since this was of course a rather nonsensical method to calculate the unit price for the Su-57 (Dmitry) Peskov stressed that "here we are not talking about a simple mathematical formula, we are talking about the fact that in general the budget of the ministry [of defense], the budget of procurement will not increase, but some internal redistribution, of course, is possible and acceptable."

So in essence: there is a set budget that will not be increased and they will have to see how far they will get with that, when more money is needed they will do a "redistribution" of funds from other projects. Ergo: there is no set price of $35 million per Su-57.
"Those who know don’t talk. Those who talk don’t know"
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3726
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post16 Sep 2019, 20:19

inst wrote:
sferrin wrote:
inst wrote:One thing I do want to point out is that it's possible that the J-31s will end up getting replaced by the Su-57s instead. Trick is, the Su-57s are now incredibly cheap; the Russians claim to have gotten the cost down to 35 million,


:lmao:


Are you laughing at the Su-57, its cost being so low, or are you laughing at the idea that the pride of the Russian Federation is reduced to an F-16/F-35 analogue? The ruble dropped 50% since the Ukraine crisis, and the Russians are more autarkic than the Chinese so they rely less on imports for equipment.

The Su-57 isn't necessarily a good stealth fighter, but at half the price of a F-35, it's cheap. I.e, you can think of it as a 4++ gen fighter that's not overwhelmingly crushed by 5th gens.

He's laughing at the claim of a unit cost of $35 million, which is nonsensical.
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3726
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post16 Sep 2019, 20:27

Su-35s have been going for ~$80 million, so the Su-57 is likely to be closer to $100 million. Currently, the J-20 hasn't demonstrated superior agility to the F-35, much less the F-22. The Su-57 hasn't demonstrated superior agility to the F-22, either. Remember, agility isn't what a jet can do at 80 to 150kts, at airshow weights.
Offline

charlielima223

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1294
  • Joined: 12 Jan 2014, 19:26

Unread post16 Sep 2019, 22:01

wrightwing wrote: The Su-57 hasn't demonstrated superior agility to the F-22, either. Remember, agility isn't what a jet can do at 80 to 150kts, at airshow weights.


Shhh! Dont you know that the PAKFA's adherence to super manueverable capabilities will give it an edge over its more stealthy competitors. Russia is betting on this and so is PAKFA. Why be stealthy as possible as well as operational when you can do aerobatic stunts as MAKS. Dont you know looking cool is 90% of the job?
Offline

southerncross

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 131
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2019, 17:09

Unread post17 Sep 2019, 01:12

IMHO a domestic price of $40-45 million is indeed a possibility, mainly because the ruble lost half of its value vs the dollar in recent years. A normal market price for a plane in this segment would be clearly above $100 million (see latest contracts, i.e. F-35 for Poland), but in a sale to China it would ultimately depend on how far they take their increasing military cooperation and if it reaches the point of a proper military alliance. After the drills came the joint bombers patrols and joint aerospace developments, then rumours are being heard about Russia lending their AD cover and even strategic early warning expertise to China, which is essentially a priceless asset for a superpower. So I don't think it can be dismissed that Russia may sell the Su-57 at very reduced prices, if the conditions are right, even when now I admit it doesn't seem likely.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7280
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post17 Sep 2019, 01:37

southerncross wrote:IMHO a domestic price of $40-45 million is indeed a possibility, mainly because the ruble lost half of its value vs the dollar in recent years. A normal market price for a plane in this segment would be clearly above $100 million (see latest contracts, i.e. F-35 for Poland), but in a sale to China it would ultimately depend on how far they take their increasing military cooperation and if it reaches the point of a proper military alliance. After the drills came the joint bombers patrols and joint aerospace developments, then rumours are being heard about Russia lending their AD cover and even strategic early warning expertise to China, which is essentially a priceless asset for a superpower. So I don't think it can be dismissed that Russia may sell the Su-57 at very reduced prices, if the conditions are right, even when now I admit it doesn't seem likely.



Absurd Russia isn't going build Su-57's for $40-50 Million. When they're building 8 per year....
Offline
User avatar

botsing

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 892
  • Joined: 05 Dec 2015, 18:09
  • Location: The Netherlands

Unread post17 Sep 2019, 13:17

southerncross wrote:IMHO a domestic price of $40-45 million is indeed a possibility, mainly because the ruble lost half of its value vs the dollar in recent years.

You are using flawed logic.

If the ruble lost half it's price compared to the dollar, then the plane will not be half the price in dollars but double the price in rubles.

Just look at (domestic) car prices in Russia. They are not magically half the price in rubles now, instead they pretty much increased to the same price as what the ruble lost in value compared to other major currencies.
"Those who know don’t talk. Those who talk don’t know"
Offline

inst

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 148
  • Joined: 04 Jul 2015, 01:58

Unread post17 Sep 2019, 13:25

botsing wrote:
southerncross wrote:IMHO a domestic price of $40-45 million is indeed a possibility, mainly because the ruble lost half of its value vs the dollar in recent years.

You are using flawed logic.

If the ruble lost half it's price compared to the dollar, then the plane will not be half the price in dollars but double the price in rubles.

Just look at (domestic) car prices in Russia. They are not magically half the price in rubles now, instead they pretty much increased to the same price as what the ruble lost in value compared to other major currencies.


That actually depends on the inputs. If the Su-57 is mostly made using domestic materials, as opposed to imported materials, the cost will remain somewhat stable in terms of rubles, barring inflation, which takes time to move real prices in the currency back to normal.
Offline

southerncross

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 131
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2019, 17:09

Unread post17 Sep 2019, 14:42

Corsair1963 wrote:Absurd Russia isn't going build Su-57's for $40-50 Million. When they're building 8 per year....

Su-35s are even cheaper and they procure like 10 per year, too. Conventional deterrence is nice, but strategic deterrence is what really matters and has budgetary priority.
inst wrote:That actually depends on the inputs. If the Su-57 is mostly made using domestic materials, as opposed to imported materials, the cost will remain somewhat stable in terms of rubles, barring inflation, which takes time to move real prices in the currency back to normal.

Exactly, Russia's main effort has been to completely nationalize their defence industry and currently little remains that needs to be bought abroad, unlike with some civilian products. Modern developments are mandatory to be produced with domestic supplies.
Offline
User avatar

botsing

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 892
  • Joined: 05 Dec 2015, 18:09
  • Location: The Netherlands

Unread post17 Sep 2019, 16:37

inst wrote:That actually depends on the inputs. If the Su-57 is mostly made using domestic materials, as opposed to imported materials, the cost will remain somewhat stable in terms of rubles, barring inflation, which takes time to move real prices in the currency back to normal.

Again flawed logic.

Your reasoning only applies if those domestic resources are never exported (which we all know is not true), once they do those resources will have a global pricing. Using those resources for yourself instead of exporting them for the seemingly higher global price impacts your economy, this is why the final price is based on the global pricing of your resources.

southerncross wrote:Exactly, Russia's main effort has been to completely nationalize their defence industry and currently little remains that needs to be bought abroad, unlike with some civilian products. Modern developments are mandatory to be produced with domestic supplies.

This kind of reasoning will only work if Russia never trades anything with another country. Once they do they however we are back to global pricing.

A piece of metal does not care if it becomes part of a Su-57 or a South-Korean smartphone, in both cases however the economic impact is the same. If you sold it to the global market you made x amount of money, if you did not you lost out on x amount of money, x will be the same in both cases. So using that piece of metal for an Su-57 will have lost you out on the amount of x in your final bookkeeping.
"Those who know don’t talk. Those who talk don’t know"
Offline

inst

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 148
  • Joined: 04 Jul 2015, 01:58

Unread post17 Sep 2019, 18:32

botsing wrote:
inst wrote:That actually depends on the inputs. If the Su-57 is mostly made using domestic materials, as opposed to imported materials, the cost will remain somewhat stable in terms of rubles, barring inflation, which takes time to move real prices in the currency back to normal.

Again flawed logic.

Your reasoning only applies if those domestic resources are never exported (which we all know is not true), once they do those resources will have a global pricing. Using those resources for yourself instead of exporting them for the seemingly higher global price impacts your economy, this is why the final price is based on the global pricing of your resources.

southerncross wrote:Exactly, Russia's main effort has been to completely nationalize their defence industry and currently little remains that needs to be bought abroad, unlike with some civilian products. Modern developments are mandatory to be produced with domestic supplies.

This kind of reasoning will only work if Russia never trades anything with another country. Once they do they however we are back to global pricing.

A piece of metal does not care if it becomes part of a Su-57 or a South-Korean smartphone, in both cases however the economic impact is the same. If you sold it to the global market you made x amount of money, if you did not you lost out on x amount of money, x will be the same in both cases. So using that piece of metal for an Su-57 will have lost you out on the amount of x in your final bookkeeping.


Please don't go with the economics arguments because they're bad. Russia's goods are now cheaper because many of their potential buyers are sanctioning them. I mean, if you were talking about China or Japan, you might have a point given that much of their resources are imported, but Russia is a raw material exporter.

As for whether Russian goods are sold internationally, the question is, at what price would the Su-57 be a competitive product on the global market? It's likely inferior on a 1v1 basis to the F-22 and F-35, and the buyers who are locked out of the F-35 often don't have money.

Put another way, if the Su-57 cost about the same as a J-20 or F-22, it'd see no sales. But if it's extremely cheap, it's competitive through skeet strategy (put a lot of planes in the air, have them have reasonable K/D ratios even if below 1) for deterrence.
PreviousNext

Return to Modern Military Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], talkitron and 6 guests