Sukhoi T-50
Dave Majumdar, National Interest: Russia's Next Fighter Might Have a New Way to Shoot Down F-22s and F-35s
Russia’s future sixth-generation fighter as well as its next generation unmanned aircraft could be equipped with what is described as a “radio-photonic radar.”
“Its performance exceeds state-of-the-art electronics at carrier frequencies above two gigahertz, and the detection of non-cooperating aeroplanes confirms the effectiveness and expected precision of the system.”
Other researchers—including one from China—have followed up on the PHODIR team’s work to address some of the limitations of current photonic radar technology.
“The signal processing in the sampling receiver is still a main limitation of the operation frequency and bandwidth,” reads a paper by Chinese scientists Fangzheng Zhang, Qingshui Guo and Shilong Pan in Nature .
Read more ....
WNU Editor: Is it me .... but this narrative that the fighters Russia hasn’t built yet are always superior to the ones the U.S. has is getting kind of lame?
ReplyDeleteAgreed. This situation you mention has been going on for some time. Didn't it begin with the Akula class of submarines? I kinda get the impression there is a posturing here that springs from a feeling of inferiority[?] or some other psychological quirk in the Russian psyche. Like a cat that fluffs itself up to discourage an attack by a bunch of dogs.
The only way to "know" is via an actual attack where there is actual shooting. The Russians did report doing well against American planes in Syria suggesting that had these been actual combat situations we would have suffered significant losses. It is certainly possible that this is Russian misinformation.
ReplyDeleteUS personnel tend to overestimate our own abilities while underestimating those of adversaries and potential adversaries. This is a very dangerous situation.
Whoop de doo. I give Russia a bigger chance of failing than this plane getting off the ground OR the U.S. Space Force's first fighter.
ReplyDelete"U.S. Space Force's first fighter..." Russia and China have been thinking about space based weapons and developing them for some time now. The US is behind. If we are going to compete with them, we are going to need to think along these lines. By the priorities set forth in the budget it seems to me that the US plans on trying to compete with them.
ReplyDeleteIs this wise? Is it wise to make provocative moves towards the world's major powers? Perhaps we have no choice. If we are going to do so, we are going to have a space force of some type and, as we are behind them in development, we need to catch up very fast.
Part of the problem with the amount of money spent seems to be that some think that by spending 700+ billion dollars on the military this is a magic wand of sorts that is magically going to undo the past bad decisions which also involved spending large amounts of money and all of this is going to magically transform the United States into a major military power.
ah Poster...of course defend mother Russia. that is, after all, what you get paid to do and the extra vodka as a reward for lots of pro Russian BS
ReplyDeleteAnonymous,
ReplyDeleteHow exactly am I defending Russia?? In my first post, I point out that the Russians reported faring well against our pilots in Syria. I also pointed out that this could be misinformation. As I have pointed out elsewhere, we cannot "know" for certain without having access to inside information and in real time. Nothing in the first post can be construed as pro-Russian.
Let's look at the second one. The Russians and Chinese have been thinking along the lines of space based weapons for awhile now. Russia has even had an entire part of their military devoted to this for sometime now. This is all verifiable. If the US is going to be come competitive or remain competitive, we are going to have to start thinking along those lines. Pointing this out can hardly be construed as being pro-Russian.
Furthermore I point out the tendency of US policy makers to both overestimate our capabilities while underestimating those of adversaries and potential adversaries. This is well known and stretches back quite awhile, think Afghanistan, Iraq, and the 911 attacks. Failing to properly understand an adversary is never good. Sun Tzu had much to say about this. Pointing out obvious facts cannot be construed as a pro-Russian position. Think of them more as a constructive critique.
I point out that spending 700+ billion on the military is not a magic wand that is magically going to have our military ready to meet the coming threats to national security. If simply the amount of money spent was all it took, the US would have the best healthcare and education in the world. As it is, we do not. I've actually delved into this elsewhere on this site. Pointing these things out hardly can be construed as pro-Russian. Think of it as constructive critique for our side in how we might do better. Also, look at how Russian military operations have performed strategically over the past 17 years and compare to ours. There is much that can be learned.
If we need a conflict, then by all means prepare for it to ensure we win or at least to give us the best chance of doing so. If we don't need the conflict, by all means we still need to be prepared militarily but don't take steps that go out of one's way to provoke it. As an American, to me American lives and property are simply to valuable to do stupid.
If you have something to contribute here, please do so. Otherwise don't waste my time.
Get your own blog already.. Writing a comment as a whole wall of text just hurts eyes, and makes baby jesus cry..
DeletePoster
ReplyDeleteYour time is not wasted. You are on the clock, doing your job for Mother Moscow
That's father/mother Russia, you sexist pig. This is a gender inclusive blog!! *inserts SJW outrage scream*
DeleteAnon,
ReplyDeletePlease explain how anything I posted could possibly be construed as pro-Russian. I simply state obvious facts combined with my what are in my assessment obvious flaws with US foreign policy.
I would assert that it is you who is representing a foreign power as you seem to have such a flippant disregard for American lives. before our government commits us to conflict with major world powers I think it prudent that we debate this and they explain their positions to us.
Such things are not pro-Russian. Either you did not read my posts are you are a complete idiot. For now I am assuming you did not bother to read. As stated before, either contribute something productive or stop wasting my time. You could start by explaining which position taken above is pro-Russian or could even be construed that way.
Anon,
ReplyDeleteNice snark. This is all you have, snark. The reason we write a comment as a "whole wall of text" is because we have a great deal to say and complicated points are not easily expressed in one or two sentences.
I do try and break it into paragraphs. Hopefully this helps you to understand better. As I have explained, my eyesight is poor, I am multitasking, and I do not utilize a proof reader for this. Therefore my grammar and sentence structure will sometimes be off. If something needs clarifying I am more than happy to do so.:-)
The reason we post here is for frank and serious dialogue about serious issues. If you are unable to do this, I would suggest that you go elsewhere. You have accused me of being pro-Russian. In other words, you have accused me of being untruthful. You have not nor can you provide any evidence to support such a claim.
The snark about baby Jesus clearly seems an intent to insult Christians. Generally babies do not read. Now I am going to try again, if you have something constructive to add, please do so. Otherwise go away and don't waste time.
My dad can beat up your dad. Easy to say when you know and hope they will never fight.
ReplyDeleteFusion,
ReplyDeleteThe correct analysis of US power would be overrated at least if soneone insists on referring to it as a superpower or a hyper power and if someone actually conducted foreign policy based upon such an assumption this would be even worse. Remember it is Americans who will bear the brunt of any such bone headed policies not those from other countries. As such, many of us are highly motivated to ensure our government gets this right and to ensure others are properly informed.
We do have significant weaknesses. To think 700+ billion dollars is going to fix this like a magic wand, is at best naive and at worst insane.
Anon,
ReplyDeleteSecond to last, with anonymous posters it is hard to tell which one. This is a pretty childish response. I asked you to contribute something constructive or at least establish how my comnents can in any wsy be construed as pro-Russian. You can't do this.
You did, however, finally come up with something constructive and insightful. "Easy to say when you know and hope they will never fight." If you don't need a fight, don't readily have the resources to engage in the fight, even if you "win" you acquire nothing of real value, there's no guarantee of victory, and there's huge downside risks associated with the fight combined with enormous downside risks, it's going to obviously be best not to have that fight. Now, if it is needed, this is going to be a different story.
Anon (last post),
The same generally applies to you. Contribute something productive or don't waste my times.