Should western nations work with Russia on PAK-FA?

Some of us still remember the cold war, where Russia was both over-estimated and under-estimated in the same breath, and the Western acquisition of Russia arms was unthinkable. It seems that it's still unthinkable. Yet, the cornerstone of Western power, USA, is refusing to share some of its latest toys even with "Tier 1" allies. I'm thinking of the F-22.

So why, 15 years after the collapse of the USSR, are some nations (and many forumites on many military boards) so anti-Russian?

Would it not make sense for say Australia to become a partner in PAK-FA project? -Why is that so unthinkable?

Originally posted by planeman
Some of us still remember the cold war, where Russia was both over-estimated and under-estimated in the same breath, and the Western acquisition of Russia arms was unthinkable. It seems that it's still unthinkable. Yet, the cornerstone of Western power, USA, is refusing to share some of its latest toys even with "Tier 1" allies. I'm thinking of the F-22.

So why, 15 years after the collapse of the USSR, are some nations (and many forumites on many military boards) so anti-Russian?

Would it not make sense for say Australia to become a partner in PAK-FA project? -Why is that so unthinkable?

Western forces regularly acquired Russian machinery, the issue is that it was all monkey-model. That's the reason the Russian's had the ability to sell everything, they didn't sell their best stuff. They sold you a Tour de France-grade bike, but took out all the carbon fiber and gave you bricks.

Furthermore, Russia is plenty hostile now. Perhaps you should go look at the development of its new tank / cruise-missile / ICBM / Submarine / Aircraft Carrier / 'Ihavethebiggestp-] FOAB, and etc.

The Cold War is still burning, some may argue.

Planeman doesn't seem to be a foolishman but from this thread, I am thinking what constructrue of his brain is.

A valid question planeman; but if the polarities of the cold war are still perceived to exist by certain nations, then they would see it unfit to choose one side over the other.
Australia is one such country. It sees its relationship with the US as a binding engagement that forbids flirting with other power blocs like China or Russia, w/o the explicit authorization by the US.

Other countries, France for example, have followed their own agenda even though they were a part of NATO. Soviet French relations were quite decent during the 1980s with the USSR launching France's first cosmonaut.

India is currently warming up to the US and is facing major temper tantrums from Russia with regards to this.

So its not that simple.

Originally posted by Iblis
Furthermore, Russia is plenty hostile now. Perhaps you should go look at the development of its new tank / cruise-missile / ICBM / Submarine / Aircraft Carrier / 'Ihavethebiggestp-] FOAB, and etc.

Interesting thoughts. Perhaps Russia is not the only one doing so, though? I seem to remember the US recently entering a new, stealthy aircraft into service. I also remember that they're making another new, stealthy aircraft. And maybe some other stuff, too.

DDG-1000
LCS
CG(X)
Gerald R. Ford-class Aircraft Carrier
Virginia-class Submarine
AGM-158 JASSM

The evidence leads me to conclude that Russia is not the only one beefing up their military.

Also, while I consider nations like the United States to be outside the realm of wanting to aid Russian on an arms project, it occurs to me that there are a lot of nations we consider to be "Western" or "Western-like" that aren't nearly so closed off. Japan, for example, is pursuing development of its own 5th-generation aircraft, as is China. Information and technology exchange between the two does not seem too far-fetched for belief. Aside from that I'm not entirely sure what the standpoint of other countries would be. Just west of Russia we have other companies like Saab and Eurofighter that are currently dealing with their own recent 4+/4++ aircraft so I don't expect them to try for a 5th-generation aircraft just yet.

[edit on 3/11/2008 by Darkpr0]

It isn't necessarily a question of being anti-Russian, Planeman. Australia has certainly evaluated systems and platforms from other nations, however when stacked up against the end-user requirements, they have been found to be less compliant than the US systems and platforms. The simple fact of the matter is (and as I said in the thread I suspect prompted this one), it generally comes down to training, ILS, weapon integration, interoperability with major partners, and so on. The only reason that we would consider going Russian is if the actual platform performance was so significantly better than the comparative US option, which has thus far never happened.