different strokes for different folks

[sicsok]

The aviation-market (particularly so the military aviation market) is still living in the superpower-era when large number of the same type of aircrafts were sold to every recipient country. But does Chad have the need for the same type as Finnland? Can the same aircraft satisfy Hungary's air-defense as the Far-East's or the infrastructure-heavy USAF?
No. A small country with maintenance and modification-experience better off with modernised versions-instead of reliance or industry-building from the scratch. For buying new aircrafts: does the new type need new hangars, ground-support, accessories, shops etc? Or does it fit with minimum changes into existing infrastructure?
What are the priorities? Top speed, high altitude or quick response, low altitude superiority? What about the human side? Do you need entirely new training (incl.language-skills etc.)?
At this point let me bring up a question: What happened to the Sukhoi 55?
After all-for a small country (i.e.Costa Rica, etc.) even the Rutan Ares would have been superior to the currently used traditionally military aircrafts.

[Pavel]

Shame on me - but I will ask this question - what's happened to the Sukhoi 55 ? It's single-engine two-seater fighter project (and training plane too), as far as I know.

In general - for sure, I agree with your idea, we already discussed it - big open areas requires from Russian fighters big operational range with the same payload, that's why we have such huge monsters, like Su-27. And EU put different tasks in front of Gripen and Eurofighter. Especially, again, it's very represantive in AXALP Swiss Air Forces excercises.

[sicsok]

What I have meant that Russia could have beaten (or at least be included as seller) to modernise the fleets of many air forces besides Gripens, F16-s and such-had they really did a good market-research with the Su-55.
But-I know-there was a lot of "anything but Russian" stupidism a decade ago. I myself can not suffer those blockheads who think that their stupid (and brainwashed) sentiments (which may be proper for a soccer-game only) should EVER form a nation's policy.

[Pavel]

Russia, thanks God, survived after Perestroyka and all this shit. I think it was very bloody and hard time for all the industries, and aviation development and research too, of course.
For all the times industries of the state level has financial support from the goverment. And I think this is very correct way to do it - country defense should belong to the goverment and nobody else.

But after economical reform in Russia in '90th financial support of this area became very weak. And all the leaders of design bureaus were in very tough conditions, they studied the basics of economy on the run.

And I bless God that right now situation in aviation industry is returning to more-less stable level. We not just selling, what was stolen from the army stocks, but creating, developing, upgrading. We learned to understand, what market requires and today we can offer competitve products. It can be viewed easely on every MAKS (http://www.aviapedia.com/category/exhibitions/maks/) show, what another step Russian aviation industry took.

[sicsok]

After any de-stabilisation or shock-be it war, perestrojka, big pothole under the wheel of a car-there is a natural tendency within the following time when we are so much under the influence of what happened (or the causes of it, or:"what could have happened?) that for a while we are unable to relax, look forward, focus our attention on the road ahead of us.
The strength of authotarian systems that we were always driven (even insanely sometimes) to look forward. I do not detail why-but this was abused many times. Yet-exactly this "post traumatic" effect is what paralyses most, not the destabilising shock. So many opportunities lost, but it could have been worse. If you talk with anyone at Sukhoi-tell them to market not only the few already offered products, but-for example: the Su-55 too!

[Pavel]

:D Will do it for sure! Still they didn't reply on my mail about their videos... so I think they are just too busy promoting their products :)

If seriousely, I think they will learn very fast, what to develop and what to promote. They are trying to get positions on international market, without good marketing it's just impossible to do.

Still I think such things should be hardly managed by the government. BTW, Janos, can you tell me, what's situation in US with military aviation? It's been controlled by the state, but government orders are beeing fullfilled by commercial companies? What are the limitations for them in this case?

[sicsok]

It is a chaos in an artificially mongered dog eat dog scenario and it is under the control and supervision of Big Brother. Much like the cockfighting and other circus. Economy is important, but the entertainment here seems to be the "favourite son".

[Pavel]

Janos, thinking of you I've translated Interview with Vladimir Michailov, Commander-in-Chief of Russian Air Forces (http://www.aviapedia.com/news/interview-with-vladimir-michaylov-commander-in-chief-of-russian-air-forces-20060119)

It's back to the question of what Russian Air Forces are planning to do.

[sicsok]

This improvement has to focus on a new control system (man-machine interface) if the advantages of the routine supermaneuvers to be included in a new fighter. The control stick can be six-degree freedom pressure sensing (i.e. not only tip forward-aft, left-right) but being pulled up is aim while climb, pushed down descend while aim, pushed sideways is sideslip, twisting the stick is rudder-input, etc.). But with the available technological gadgets today I would only use pinhead-size sensorgloves on the pilots' hands with chip-transmitters to the main control computer and agility-trims instead of trying to modify existing sticks and rudders etc. This sensor-packed glove can push any surface and voting among sensors activate optimal aircraft-controls. This is much lighter and more elegant way, and can be personalised as key to access.