IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v87y2014icp125-134.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring technological trends: A comparison between U.S. and U.S.S.R./Russian jet fighter aircraft

Author

Listed:
  • Bongers, Anelí
  • Torres, José L.

Abstract

Measuring and forecasting technological change is a crucial issue from various points of view. This is particularly important in the case of weapon systems as this would enable technological performance and operational capabilities to be assessed in relation to potential threats. This paper measures and compares technological trends in U.S. and Soviet Union/Russian jet fighter aircraft by estimating the relationship between the first flight date and a set of performance and technical characteristics of these aircraft. From the point of view of technological advantage, we find that U.S. jet fighters were, on average, approximately 2years ahead of the former Soviet Union/Russian jet fighters during the entire jet fighter era. Nevertheless, the technological advantage has swung from one side to the other during specific periods as particular models have been introduced. Finally, the development of 5th-generation jet fighters, in particular the development of the F-22 Raptor, has placed American technology about 20years ahead of Russian technology, a difference that has never occurred before. This finding casts doubt on the ability of Russia, as the inheritor of the former Soviet Union aircraft industry, to match American technological progress in jet fighter aircraft.

Suggested Citation

  • Bongers, Anelí & Torres, José L., 2014. "Measuring technological trends: A comparison between U.S. and U.S.S.R./Russian jet fighter aircraft," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 125-134.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:87:y:2014:i:c:p:125-134
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2013.12.007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162513003144
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2013.12.007?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Kirkpatrick, 2004. "Trends in the costs of weapon systems and the consequences," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(3), pages 259-273.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jung, Sukhwan & Yoon, Wan Chul, 2020. "An alternative topic model based on Common Interest Authors for topic evolution analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(3).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Christine Duke & Cameron McKean, 2008. "Alternative methodologies for projecting defence spending," Economic Roundup, The Treasury, Australian Government, issue 2, pages 1-11, July.
    2. S Y Sohn & Y Kim & B T Kim, 2009. "Cost of ownership model for spare engines purchase for the Korean navy acquisition program," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(12), pages 1674-1682, December.
    3. Adel Ben Youssef & Gueorgui Ianakiev, 2009. "Intégration du marché européen de la Défense et politiques d’offsets : une analyse en termes de coûts de changement et d’externalités technologiques," Post-Print hal-01082243, HAL.
    4. Bongers, Anelí & Torres, José L., 2014. "Technological change in U.S. jet fighter aircraft," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(9), pages 1570-1581.
    5. Renaud Bellais, 2013. "Technology and the defense industry: real threats, bad habits, or new (market) opportunities?," Post-Print hal-00947395, HAL.
    6. Saar Golde & Asher Tishler, 2004. "Security Needs, Arms Exports, and the Structure of the Defense Industry," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 48(5), pages 672-698, October.
    7. Jean Belin & Marianne Guille, 2008. "R&D et innovation en France : quel financement pour les entreprises de la Défense ?," Innovations, De Boeck Université, vol. 0(2), pages 33-59.
    8. Renaud Bellais & Daniel Fiott, 2017. "The European defense market: Disruptive innovation and market destabilization," Economics of Peace and Security Journal, EPS Publishing, vol. 12(1), pages 38-45, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:87:y:2014:i:c:p:125-134. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00401625 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.