PAK-FA / T-50: Russian 5th Generation Fighter

[Haavarla]

You beat me to it.

It looks like you're right AD. This does make me wonder about payload and range though.

I think you folk are mistaken on the size matter here..

Granted its not the same overall size of the Flanker here, but it is quite large.
Look behind the cockpit area, and also keep in mind this baby has a very wide fuselage

No this baby will have a very good Fuel range, perhaps not 11.500kg fuel like the Su-35S but close enough.
And also remember, it will have considerble less drag ratio VS the Su-35S.
Take a look at this Link, i cant get the pics up here..

Key Publishing Ltd Aviation Forums - View Single Post - PAK-FA Saga Episode 13

I rest my case


Thanks

 

[Haavarla]

From Paralay's forum

 

[Aussie Digger]

I've seen that one before on rian.ru

Had forgotten all about it.

When I see things like "10x weapons pods in internal bomb bays" I start to wonder about the accuracy of the information being presented...

Unless these "pods" are for a single SDB sized bomb, or smaller, then they seem a little far fetched to me...

It is very interesting that the numerous "flaws" in the F-35 for instance are picked apart ravenously, but whatever claim happens to be made by Russians is accepted largely on face value...

 

[meat_helmet]

When I see things like "10x weapons pods in internal bomb bays" I start to wonder about the accuracy of the information being presented...

Unless these "pods" are for a single SDB sized bomb, or smaller, then they seem a little far fetched to me...

It is very interesting that the numerous "flaws" in the F-35 for instance are picked apart ravenously, but whatever claim happens to be made by Russians is accepted largely on face value...

Thats exactly what I thought when I saw that image.

The line "The T-50 will cost less than $100 million which is 2.5 times less than the Lockheed Martin/Boeing F-22" I also found slightly amusing as there is absolutely no export potential for the F-22. So as this line can not be for any marketing purposes for foreign export against the F-22, it comes down to pure propaganda and starts to call into question the rest of the data on the image.

I wonder if labour is 2.5 cheaper in Russia than the USA...

 

[Feanor]

It is very interesting that the numerous "flaws" in the F-35 for instance are picked apart ravenously, but whatever claim happens to be made by Russians is accepted largely on face value...

It's typical self-centeredness in my opinion. Russian discussion will often go along the same lines, where the Russian weapon systems, and procurement programs, are picked apart and scrutinized, while American ones are sort of a standard which is accepted unquestioningly.

Meat_helemet I suspect that the main difference in price comes from 1)energy subsidies (in Russia internal energy prices are heavily subsidized) and 2) the procurement process itself.

 

[johngage]

Anyone else notice that in this photo the engine face is clearly visible??? i.e. No S shaped intakes. I wonder what that does for frontal RCS?

I noticed that too. Its bizarre to me because if you look at the Yak-130, you can see that they went to the trouble of blocking the intakes.

http://pilot.strizhi.info/photos/d/27891-1/IMG_0218_lp.jpg

 

[Feanor]

It might be something to be added later. Or there might be something at play here that we don't know about. I'd say wait and see.

 

[exec]

Anyone else notice that in this photo the engine face is clearly visible??? i.e. No S shaped intakes. I wonder what that does for frontal RCS?

Well, actually there is a large group of people that still believes that the intakes are S-shaped...

P.S. Hello everybody, I forgot that this is my first post here.

 

[Marc 1]

It might be something to be added later. Or there might be something at play here that we don't know about. I'd say wait and see.

I saw a report that there will be a radar blocking device installed in front of each engine. Basically a ring near the intake, another near the face of the engine. These two rings are connected by flat boards that radiate out fron the centre of each circle. thus there is a straight path for the air to each engine. Also, not particularly stealthy. BUT the pilot can go to 'stealth mode' where the ring at the face of the engine rotates, the ring at the intake stays static, and the vanes get twisted blocking the direct line of sight and radar to the engine faces. Probably also slightly impedes the flow of air to the engines, which is the reason for the complexity of the moving vanes.

So, it looks like approaching the battle the aircraft keeps its engines 'cloaked', and the T50 gets its first shots away without being spotted (good RCS management frontally). Then as the battle is joined and the not so flash side and rewar RCS's come in to play the pilot 'decloaks; the engines to allow better airflow and more power, as after firing missiles and manouvreing the 'stealth' is compromised anyway.

 

[Haavarla]

Well, actually there is a large group of people that still believes that the intakes are S-shaped...

P.S. Hello everybody, I forgot that this is my first post here.

Greetings exec. And welcome.
Ready to battle it out on this forum as well i see.

Ok, you started it.

If we remember that the engines are slightly canted outwards from each other.
How would you folks explain this pic then?
Clearly the intakes curve both in vertical and horisontal direction.

Oh, and from the very start the intake curves down a bit, add the MLG that eats a good chunk off its side and it all makes the different here..


Thanks

 

[exec]

Greetings exec. And welcome.
Ready to battle it out on this forum as well i see.

I don't want to fight with anybody Haavarla.

 

[BK101]

Cool looking fighter!! It looks like a cross between a Su-37 and a F-22. I have little time to read all of the posts, but when will this fighter become operational, and how many are to be built?
Sorry if these questions have been already asked!

Cheers!

 

[Aussie Digger]

Cool looking fighter!! It looks like a cross between a Su-37 and a F-22. I have little time to read all of the posts, but when will this fighter become operational, and how many are to be built?
Sorry if these questions have been already asked!

Cheers!

The Russians have stated that they have a requirement for 250x of these fighters and that they will be operational by 2015 (not the entire amount obviously), though the intended engines are expected to take 8 years more work at least, with some lesser interim engine used in the mean time.

They have also stated that India will be investing in a 2 seat version and want 250x as well.

Again, these are the sorts of "face value" claims I was referring to earlier...

 

[BK101]

The Russians have stated that they have a requirement for 250x of these fighters and that they will be operational by 2015 (not the entire amount obviously), though the intended engines are expected to take 8 years more work at least, with some lesser interim engine used in the mean time.

They have also stated that India will be investing in a 2 seat version and want 250x as well.

Again, these are the sorts of "face value" claims I was referring to earlier...

Thanks Aussie Digger!! Why would Russia want to deliver that type of technology to another country when it could be reversed engineered? Like the F-22, the U.S. has no plans on sharing information about its' technology to another country.

Cheers!

 

[kay_man]

Thanks Aussie Digger!! Why would Russia want to deliver that type of technology to another country when it could be reversed engineered? Like the F-22, the U.S. has no plans on sharing information about its' technology to another country.

Cheers!

Simply because.....Russia had a shortage fo funds and India agred to provide funds to complete the program.
There probably wont be a question of reverse engineering beacuse its agreed to share the tech and co-develop the fighter.
Anyway lessions leart with the PAF-FA will surely be implemented on the MCA.

 

[BK101]

Simply because.....Russia had a shortage fo funds and India agred to provide funds to complete the program.
There probably wont be a question of reverse engineering beacuse its agreed to share the tech and co-develop the fighter.
Anyway lessions leart with the PAF-FA will surely be implemented on the MCA.

So I'm guessing that it's not as high tech as the f-22? Air superiority is #1 when it comes to warfare and I wouldn't see why any country would want to jeopardize that.
Sorry if my questions are elementary, I am trying to be logical.

Cheers!

 

[localhost127]

So I'm guessing that it's not as high tech as the f-22? Air superiority is #1 when it comes to warfare and I wouldn't see why any country would want to jeopardize that.
Sorry if my questions are elementary, I am trying to be logical.

Cheers!

i suggest reading this thread from the start - as many of these questions have been addressed and discussed at reasonable length.

 

[BK101]

i suggest reading this thread from the start - as many of these questions have been addressed and discussed at reasonable length.

Like I said from my original post……….”I don’t have time to read all of the posts and I apologize!” I just needed a quick and simple answer. Is that too hard?

 

[brian00]

Like I said from my original post……….”I don’t have time to read all of the posts and I apologize!” I just needed a quick and simple answer. Is that too hard?

Kay man already gave you that

 

[BK101]

Kay man already gave you that

??? Ok, I guess my question can't be answered in a easy manner.

Thanks anyways guys.......

Cheers!!