Interesting post. I would say however that the lesson of the Ukraine war, in this regard, is that fighter jets are just very constrained nowadays by SAMs. We see even Kiev's old S-300s are still super dangerous, wouldn't they still be super dangerous to the most advanced fighters? If the USA were fighting a country with ample S-300s, would they dare deploy the F-22 or F-35? Obviously we now see that Russia badly under-invested in the military, but wasn't it better to prioritize S-400 and S-500? and the new generation of missiles (Kinzhal, Zirkon &c.)?
“The first country to have started a 5th generation program were the United States…”
Had the above been written prior to 1865, it would have been grammatically correct. Post American Civil War, we refer to the United States in the singular in English.
It went from a loose band of states to a banded state. You can see the persistence of the traditional plural treatment of "the United States" in the 13th Amendment, ratified at war's end in 1865:
“Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.”
1. The Eurofighter Typhoon's shape has some resemblance to the 1.42/1.44 prototype?
2. Credit where credit is due. In the current conflict, the RUAF did its part together with SAM's, to remove the majority of UA air force from the board. What remains with partial replenishment by NATO, is confined to area-denial work in the rear and low altitude harrassment at the front.
3. The other Mig, #31, was quite successful with the absurd range enhancement its missiles receive from the speed and altitude. But it hasn't faced the full threat it may do someday.
4. Pretty much every complex weapon designed for a 40 year service life in worldwide use conditions, is going to be the wrong fit in a big war. Big wars need stuff that is potent and quick to build at the same time. US burned through 1000 aircraft a year in Vietnam (without running out). UA supposedly at a rate of 300+ per year, but it could not go full effort for a full year due to lack of planes. Those 1000 F-35's may well be gone in under two years of high intensity combat against a capable opponent.
5. So this returns to the Mig-29 or its modernized derivative, Mig-35. Cheap and high performance.
Is the impact of Khrushchev’s neglect of combat aircraft development in favor of allocating more resources to developing missiles still noticeable in the Russian military industrial complex today? Or were those issues largely resolved during Brezhnev’s era (with the introduction of the MiG-29 & Su-27)? I read a little about it when reading Boris Chertoks, Sergei Korolevs (and later Mishins) deputy at OKB-1, memoirs “Rockets and People” (can’t remember if volume 2 or 3) but he mainly talked about it from the perspective of how it impacted the development of rockets and missiles so I don’t know how big of an impact it really had on the trajectory of Soviet Aviation R&D
I don't say anything about Russian aircraft, except to say that if the Flanker platform still bears fruit today, something must have been done very well! The US only recently became aware of the fraud of its "stealths" - but I'm go already there - and when they thought of modernizing some F-15s that they needed very urgently given the delay of new fighterjets in the last decades to renew the old fleet that on average already required 10 to 50 hours of maintenance for each hour of flight, realizing that structurally no F-15 had the capacity for any modernization. It was then that they ordered a few dozen F-15s from a Boieng production line somewhere in the Middle East. The oldest fighter still in production anywhere in the world today. Such is the evolution of fightersjets in the US!
About the F-22, I'm just to say that no product of any value left the production line so quickly. It didn't even heat up. Another thing are the fantasies that are created! In Hollywood it has always been good for the aura to die young! And the same with the F-35, which also began to suffer cuts in orders early! I'd say it's already lucky when it can get up. Despite the fact that the US reports every day that there is nothing like it in the skies. Not even at the bottom of the China Sea! It seems that even the software is stealthy. In short, yet another US MIC scandal to be foisted abroad overpriced because the oligarchs have to keep making a lot of money. In Australia the order was placed without studying any competitor. They still relegated the F-35 to an uncomfortable place. Which in turn is producing another scandal. After all, Australia is not the USA's shithole in Atlantic. Just for submarines. Will see!
F-22 RAPTOR, the last expensive wunderwaffe strictly for hunting weather balloons:
It is an interesting question, and a great article. MiG is apparently going to release an interceptor to replace the MiG-31 at some point, but that's probably going to be revealed in the latter part of the decade at best. It does seem that the administrative woes are the worst part of the RuAF though, as opposed to aircraft quality. We read of the R-37 and R-77 missiles terrorizing Ukrainian craft from ranges outside of their own, yet most Russian aircraft losses seem to be strike aircraft (Su-24/25/34) or due to friendly fire.
Interesting post. I would say however that the lesson of the Ukraine war, in this regard, is that fighter jets are just very constrained nowadays by SAMs. We see even Kiev's old S-300s are still super dangerous, wouldn't they still be super dangerous to the most advanced fighters? If the USA were fighting a country with ample S-300s, would they dare deploy the F-22 or F-35? Obviously we now see that Russia badly under-invested in the military, but wasn't it better to prioritize S-400 and S-500? and the new generation of missiles (Kinzhal, Zirkon &c.)?
“The first country to have started a 5th generation program were the United States…”
Had the above been written prior to 1865, it would have been grammatically correct. Post American Civil War, we refer to the United States in the singular in English.
It went from a loose band of states to a banded state. You can see the persistence of the traditional plural treatment of "the United States" in the 13th Amendment, ratified at war's end in 1865:
“Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.”
Great article by the way.
Good stuff. Some thoughts:
1. The Eurofighter Typhoon's shape has some resemblance to the 1.42/1.44 prototype?
2. Credit where credit is due. In the current conflict, the RUAF did its part together with SAM's, to remove the majority of UA air force from the board. What remains with partial replenishment by NATO, is confined to area-denial work in the rear and low altitude harrassment at the front.
3. The other Mig, #31, was quite successful with the absurd range enhancement its missiles receive from the speed and altitude. But it hasn't faced the full threat it may do someday.
4. Pretty much every complex weapon designed for a 40 year service life in worldwide use conditions, is going to be the wrong fit in a big war. Big wars need stuff that is potent and quick to build at the same time. US burned through 1000 aircraft a year in Vietnam (without running out). UA supposedly at a rate of 300+ per year, but it could not go full effort for a full year due to lack of planes. Those 1000 F-35's may well be gone in under two years of high intensity combat against a capable opponent.
5. So this returns to the Mig-29 or its modernized derivative, Mig-35. Cheap and high performance.
Is the impact of Khrushchev’s neglect of combat aircraft development in favor of allocating more resources to developing missiles still noticeable in the Russian military industrial complex today? Or were those issues largely resolved during Brezhnev’s era (with the introduction of the MiG-29 & Su-27)? I read a little about it when reading Boris Chertoks, Sergei Korolevs (and later Mishins) deputy at OKB-1, memoirs “Rockets and People” (can’t remember if volume 2 or 3) but he mainly talked about it from the perspective of how it impacted the development of rockets and missiles so I don’t know how big of an impact it really had on the trajectory of Soviet Aviation R&D
I'm Russian-American, my grandparents left there in 1905. I podcast & write, here's something I wrote: https://www.buffalorising.com/2021/09/natural-niagara-falls/
My great grandfather was a Russian general with a wooden leg. Please come on my show, thanks. andyz7@verizon.net
I don't say anything about Russian aircraft, except to say that if the Flanker platform still bears fruit today, something must have been done very well! The US only recently became aware of the fraud of its "stealths" - but I'm go already there - and when they thought of modernizing some F-15s that they needed very urgently given the delay of new fighterjets in the last decades to renew the old fleet that on average already required 10 to 50 hours of maintenance for each hour of flight, realizing that structurally no F-15 had the capacity for any modernization. It was then that they ordered a few dozen F-15s from a Boieng production line somewhere in the Middle East. The oldest fighter still in production anywhere in the world today. Such is the evolution of fightersjets in the US!
About the F-22, I'm just to say that no product of any value left the production line so quickly. It didn't even heat up. Another thing are the fantasies that are created! In Hollywood it has always been good for the aura to die young! And the same with the F-35, which also began to suffer cuts in orders early! I'd say it's already lucky when it can get up. Despite the fact that the US reports every day that there is nothing like it in the skies. Not even at the bottom of the China Sea! It seems that even the software is stealthy. In short, yet another US MIC scandal to be foisted abroad overpriced because the oligarchs have to keep making a lot of money. In Australia the order was placed without studying any competitor. They still relegated the F-35 to an uncomfortable place. Which in turn is producing another scandal. After all, Australia is not the USA's shithole in Atlantic. Just for submarines. Will see!
F-22 RAPTOR, the last expensive wunderwaffe strictly for hunting weather balloons:
https://youtu.be/KaoYz90giTk
Excellent post . Thanks for this. May I quote you on my newsletter? Here. https://open.substack.com/pub/julianmacfarlane
Your information should be useful for me in upcoming articles.
It is an interesting question, and a great article. MiG is apparently going to release an interceptor to replace the MiG-31 at some point, but that's probably going to be revealed in the latter part of the decade at best. It does seem that the administrative woes are the worst part of the RuAF though, as opposed to aircraft quality. We read of the R-37 and R-77 missiles terrorizing Ukrainian craft from ranges outside of their own, yet most Russian aircraft losses seem to be strike aircraft (Su-24/25/34) or due to friendly fire.