Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Wolfala on July 31, 2007, 12:15:30 PM
-
Hey Eagl,
At anypoint after the Cold War did SU-27s ever do a visit to the US, like in a pilot exchange type of arrangement?
Wolf
-
I'm sure if they did, it's not going to be a "talked" about thing.
-
Originally posted by crockett
I'm sure if they did, it's not going to be a "talked" about thing.
Why is that?
-
Well, seeing as there are Mig-29s in private collections over here - doesn't seem like it would be that difficult.
-
Originally posted by Wolfala
Well, seeing as there are Mig-29s in private collections over here - doesn't seem like it would be that difficult.
US have officially (well, in fact - not quite ;) ) bought 30 MiG-29s from Moldavia. Also they got one or two from former GDR air force. I don't know about if they got any Su-27s yet.
BTW there were rumors that Su-27 saw combat in Ethiopia-Eritrea conflict back in early-90s.
-
No Su-27's in Red Flag?
Edit: I guess not, just checked. Wikipedia has a claim that there are three in the US:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-27
There's no citation, so take it with a grain of salt.
-
US have officially (well, in fact - not quite ) bought 30 MiG-29s from Moldavia
If I were a betting man, I'd bet the farm those MiG-29's aren't the only MiG's the US has purchased. ;)
-
I remember one or two friendship flights involving F-15s visiting Russia and Russian fighters visiting either the US or Nato countries, but I really don't have any details or even the exact locations. I remember seeing a really nifty picture of either a Mig-29 or SU-27 painted up in airshow colors flying formation with some US fighters, and I vaguely recall the Russian fighter was over US territory.
But I don't have any details and it was a few years ago so I might be mis-remembering.
-
Two Su-27's visited Alaska during the '90s. They were accompanied by the An-225.
-
Originally posted by Viking
Two Su-27's visited Alaska during the '90s. They were accompanied by the An-225.
Yes. Correct. And one time at 2000-2001. As I remember, that time was a problem, when Su-27 engines shutted down on flight level because of jet fuel difference.
-
I thought soviet engines could practically run on seawater :huh
Maybe the JP(#) was too refined for them and must be properly mixed with raw crude oil to bring it to the proper state for burning in russian engines. Kinda like a two cycle ;)
-
prior to the fielding of the F-22 and I have wondered why the US simply didn't purchase the rights to build the SU-27 under license here and equip them with our electronics and powerplants. it will probably be a viable and competetive airframe for another twenty years.
-
You're kidding, right?
-
no not at all. it's a great design.
-
Originally posted by storch
no not at all. it's a great design.
Yes it is, but it's a complete different generation of warbird than the F-22.
-
clearly and with the F22 in production it would be pointless but prior to the arrival of the F22 it would have been an inexpensive alternative as an interim fighter. I believe the US gov't owns one currently.
-
The SU-37 is a great design, my disbelief was not at that, but that you could suggest with a straight face that the US government would purchase a foreign design when it could build a native one at 10x the price.
The cold war isn't over, not by long. It's just switched frequencies, but national pride and technological prestige are still very active currencies that can be spent politically.
Our battling space programs were only half "We've got big missiles" posturing, they were also advertisements for a way of life. "Our rockets are big, proof that communism is The Answer." "Our men have landed on the moon, proof that US capitalism is The Answer."
It was the most expensive marketing campaign undertaken, and in the end, we seem to have come out on top.
But it's not over yet.
We're not going to buy a russian fighter (even if it's great) if Russia can turn say "Our version of capitalism is great. Look, even the US military uses it!"
This, plus the fact that very few of the russian aerospace companies operate in US congressional districts, and an arrangement like this, even licensed, just won't "fly".
-
Originally posted by Golfer
I thought soviet engines could practically run on seawater :huh
Maybe the JP(#) was too refined for them and must be properly mixed with raw crude oil to bring it to the proper state for burning in russian engines. Kinda like a two cycle ;)
The problem was that in Arctic conditions US fuel became too dense, we have several different fuel types from "summer" to "winter".
AL-31 family are one of the most advanced turbojet engines ever made. Mono-crystal turbine blades - I don't know if any other company makes anything like that, but feel free to inform me ;) It took us over 30 years to catch up with the West...
-
the martin B-57 was a license built english electric canbarra. The Av8 harrier is also an english design built under license. there is precedent but I guess you are correct in your assessment, what was I thinking!!!
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
We're not going to buy a russian fighter (even if it's great) if Russia can turn say "Our version of capitalism is great. Look, even the US military uses it!"
No sane government will ever buy anything like a combat system from it's potential enemy. Remember French SAMs in Iraq in Gulf War? They were remotely disabled. Back in the 70s and 80s "civilian" research institutes bought state-of-the-art computers from the West (we had 3 Convex supercomputers here in ChemPhysics institute), while military were restricted to use home-made iron.
Also keep in mind that export versions of Russian planes have "downgraded" avionics and fire-control systems.
-
To be fair, Boroda, he was suggesting licensing the airframe design, not buying them as 'Ready To Fly'. Built in the US with US avionics installed, Russia remotely disabling them isn't really a terribly likely threat.
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
To be fair, Boroda, he was suggesting licensing the airframe design, not buying them as 'Ready To Fly'. Built in the US with US avionics installed, Russia remotely disabling them isn't really a terribly likely threat.
I think that with our local version of ZOG (LOL :D) it's quite possible. They have sold license to China, so - expect to see fake Chinese Su-27s in the market :D
-
The chinese version of the Soyuz has pretty fancy modern avionics, with LCD panels, powerful computers, and enhancements to the flight module.
Maybe their 'cheap copy' of the SU-27 will have unexpected enhancements.
:D
-
Originally posted by crockett
I'm sure if they did, it's not going to be a "talked" about thing.
I was assuming you meant the Russians testing our defenses. IE flying close to our air space to see how long it takes us to react and so on.
-
Originally posted by crockett
I was assuming you meant the Russians testing our defenses. IE flying close to our air space to see how long it takes us to react and so on.
As far as I know, in regards to US airspace that was done with bombers only.