Yak-141 VS. F-35 JSF

[Defcon 6]

Yak-141 Freestyle SpecificationsPrimary Function:Carrier Based InterceptorContractor:YakovlevCrew:OneUnit Cost:N/APowerplant One Kobchenko/Soyuz R-79-300 turbofan engine rated at 34,170lb for takeoff, two Rybinsk RD- 41 turbofan engines rated at 9,039lb for liftDimensionsLength:60 ft 2 inWingspan:33 ft 1.5 in (spread)
19 ft 4 in (folded)Height:16 ft 4 inWeightsEmpty:25,684 lbMaximum Takeoff:34,833 lb vertical, 42,990 lb shortPerformanceSpeed:1148.4 mph (Mach 1.8)Ceiling:49,000 ftRange:1306.8 miArmament One 30mm cannon, Alamo and Archer AAMs, bombs, and rockets

The YAK-141 is a STOVL.



F-35 Joint Strike Fighter SpecificationsPrimary Function:Strike fighter [Conventional Takeoff and Landing]Contractor:Lockheed-MartinCrew:OneUnit Cost (FY94$)$28MPowerplant One Pratt & Whitney F119-PW-100 derivative from F-22 RaptorDimensionsLength:45 feetWingspan:36 feetHeight:N/AWeightsEmpty:22,500 lbsMaximum Takeoff:50,000 lbsPerformanceSpeed:1,018 mph 1800 kphCeiling:N/ACombat Radius:over 600 nautical milesArmament N/A


F-35 is a STOVL.



-Yak-141 has a similar radar to the Mig-31, with a similar look down shoot down capability.
-F-35 has the advantage of stealth, but not much overall
-YAK-141 has higher speed advantage
-F-35 is most likely more expensive
- I need people to contribute information on the weapons systems.
-Agility is unknown.

 

[aaaditya]

Yak-141 Freestyle SpecificationsPrimary Function:Carrier Based InterceptorContractor:YakovlevCrew:OneUnit Cost:N/APowerplant One Kobchenko/Soyuz R-79-300 turbofan engine rated at 34,170lb for takeoff, two Rybinsk RD- 41 turbofan engines rated at 9,039lb for liftDimensionsLength:60 ft 2 inWingspan:33 ft 1.5 in (spread)
19 ft 4 in (folded)Height:16 ft 4 inWeightsEmpty:25,684 lbMaximum Takeoff:34,833 lb vertical, 42,990 lb shortPerformanceSpeed:1148.4 mph (Mach 1.Ceiling:49,000 ftRange:1306.8 miArmament One 30mm cannon, Alamo and Archer AAMs, bombs, and rockets

The YAK-141 is a STOVL.



F-35 Joint Strike Fighter SpecificationsPrimary Function:Strike fighter [Conventional Takeoff and Landing]Contractor:Lockheed-MartinCrew:OneUnit Cost (FY94$)$28MPowerplant One Pratt & Whitney F119-PW-100 derivative from F-22 RaptorDimensionsLength:45 feetWingspan:36 feetHeight:N/AWeightsEmpty:22,500 lbsMaximum Takeoff:50,000 lbsPerformanceSpeed:1,018 mph 1800 kphCeiling:N/ACombat Radius:over 600 nautical milesArmament N/A


F-35 is a STOVL.



-Yak-141 has a similar radar to the Mig-31, with a similar look down shoot down capability.
-F-35 has the advantage of stealth, but not much overall
-YAK-141 has higher speed advantage
-F-35 is most likely more expensive
- I need people to contribute information on the weapons systems.
-Agility is unknown.

the jsf would be stealthier than the yak141 becuse the americans are way ahead of the russians in stealth technology.
the high speed and agility of the yak141 is neutralised by the superior avionics and aesa radar of the jsf.my vote would go to the jsf.:coffee

 

[pingpong]

Here is a link where you can find Yak-141 pictures

http://www.studenten.net/customasp/axl/plane.asp?cat_id=6&ple_id=67&page=0

Yak-141 Freestyle

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/yak-141.htm


The Yak-141 (formerly Yak-41) was intended originally to replace Yak-38 for air defence of Kiev class carriers/cruisers, with secondary attack capabilities. Designed for carrier-borne operations as an air interceptor, close air combat, maritime and ground attack aircraft, the Yak-141 has the same multi-mode radar as the MiG-29, although with a slightly smaller antenna housed in the nose radome. It features a triplex full authority digital fly-by-wire system.

The Yak-141 continues previous Soviet V/STOL principles, combining a lift and propulsion jet with two fuselage mounted lift jets in tandem behind the cockpit, with cruise power provided by a single Tumansky R-79 jet engine. The R-79 has a rear lift/cruise nozzle which deflect down for take-off while the two lift engines have corresponding rearward vector to ensure stability. The airframe makes extensive use of composites materials, with some 28 percent by weight constructed of carbon-fibre, primarily in the tail assembly, while the remainder of the structure is mainly aluminum lithium alloys.

The project began in 1975, but was delayed by financial constraints as well as the protracted development of the engine, which meant the prototype did not fly until March 1989. This development program was cancelled due to termination of Defence Ministry funding. Yakolev OKB continued development in refined land-based and naval combat aircraft forms. Four prototypes were built, two continuing in flight testing until 1995, with the other two used for engine and structural testing. To facilitate sales of the Yak-141, Yeltsin has issued decrees allowing tri- or quadripartite agreements with a number of interested organizations in Latin America and Asia.

AC's Specifications
​

Country of Origin Russia
Builder Yakovlev
Role: air defence
Span 33ft 1 1/2in (10.105m); folded, 19ft 4 1/4in(5.9m)
wing area 341.56ft(2) (31.7m(2))
length overall 60ft 2 3/4in (18.36m)
height 16ft 4 1/4in (5m)
wheel track 9ft lOin (3m)
wheel base 22ft 9 1/4in (6.945m)
tailplane span 19ft 4 1/4in (5.9m)
Weights 25,684lb (11,650kg) Empty, equipped 34,833lb (15,800kg) VTO max take-off weight 42,990lb (19,500kg) STO max take-off weight

Loads 2,204lb (1,OOOkg) VTO max external load 5,732lb (2,600kg) STO max external load 3,858lb (1,750kg) max external fuel
Armament

• 30 mm cannon
• AA-10 Alamo radar-guided medium-range AAM
• AA-11 Archer shortrange IR-guided missile
• bombs
• unguided rockets

limiting load factor 50% fuel, 7g.
Accommodation Single pilot in a Zvezda K36V rocket-boosted zero-zero ejection-seat.

Power Plant

• One Kobchenko/Soyuz R-79-300 vectored-thrust lift/cruise turbofan developing 34,170lb (15,500kg) with afterburning for conventional take-off, or 23,148.5lb (10,500kg) dry, plus
• two Rybinsk RD- 41 turbofan lift engines each rated at a maximum 9,039lb (4,100kg)

Max internal fuel capacity 9,700lb (4,400kg)

Maximum Speed 675 kts (1,250km/hr) Max level speed, sea level
971 kts (1,800km/hr) at 36,089ft (11,OOOm) M=1.8 max achievable Mach numbe

vertical climb rate 49,213ft/min (250m/sec)
service ceilingover 49,000ft (15,000m+)

combat radius

• 351nm (650km) VTO range at sea level, no external weapons
• 372nm (690km) with 4,409lb (2,000kg) weapon load and take-off run of 394ft (120m)
• 755nm (1,400km) at 32,808-39,370ft (10-12,000m)
• 1,133nm (2,100km) max range, with external fuel and short take-off
• 755nm (1,400km) with vertical takeoff and internal fuel

JSF

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/jsf-specs.htm

Function strike fighter
Contractor Lockheed-Martin (Boeing lost the contract)
Service U.S. Air Force U.S. Marine Corps U.K. Royal Navy U.S. Navy

Variants
Conventional Takeoff and Landing (CTOL) Unit Cost $28M
Short Takeoff and Vertical Landing (STOVL) Unit Cost $35M
Carrier-based (CV) Unit Cost $38M

Inventory Objectives U.S. Air Force 2,036 aircraft U.S. Marine Corps 642 aircraft U.K. Royal Navy 60 aircraft U.S. Navy 300 aircraft
Inventory Objectives 1,763 aircraft 609 aircraft 480 aircraft
Propulsion Baseline: P&W F119-PW-100 derivative from F-22r
Alternate Engine: General Electric F120 core Thrust


Empty Weight ~22,500 lbs(USAF) ~24,000 lbs U.S. Navy
Internal Fuel 15,000 lbs(USAF) 16,000 lbs U.S. Navy
Payload 13,000 lbs(USAF) 17,000 lbs ( U.S. Navy)
Maximum Takeoff Weight ~50,000 lbs
Length 45 feet
Wingspan 36 feet(USAF) 30 feet Height( U.S. Navy)
Ceiling ?
Speed supersonic USAF
Combat Radius over 600 nautical miles (USAF)
Crew oneUSAF
Armament ?
First flight 1999 USAF
Date Deployed 2008 USAF

Varients of JSF-35.jpg

This piece of information is quite old and was modified a bit.
​

 

[Brit]

A stealthier varient of the Yak 141 has been proposed.

 

[aaaditya]

A stealthier varient of the Yak 141 has been proposed.
http://prototypes.free.fr/yak36/images/yak43_01.jpg

a proposal is no good,by the time the stealthy yak141 proposal materialises ,who knows we may have a ucav based on the jsf.
the fact is that as of now usa is way ahead of russia in a whole range of fields
1)aircraft design.(they having working examples of low rcs aircrafts)
2)powerplant
3)avionics
4)aesa radar

and by the time the stealth yak141 arrives ,usa would have gone to the next level.

 

[Defcon 6]

The U.S is already there. We are already working on our 3rd generation stealth technology. The F-22 and JSF.

The Russians can't even get their Mig Mapo 1.42 off the ground. It has a radar cross section the size of cleaveland.

 

[JSF]

correct me if im wrong here but i believe part of the JSF project was sub contracted to Yakolev

 

[Brit]

The U.S is already there. We are already working on our 3rd generation stealth technology. The F-22 and JSF.

The Russians can't even get their Mig Mapo 1.42 off the ground. It has a radar cross section the size of cleaveland.

The Mig 1.42 has flown, fact. As to its RCS merits, that's open to debate -but certainly your comments aren't factual.

Whilst I agree with the general sentiment that the JSF is a better aircraft/system, there is a big issue surrounding radar stealthiness - to what extent will future detection technology negate it? If history is to repeat itself, in the near future someone will work out a way of detecting stealth aircraft and then, slowly (as the detection system is developed and deployed), stealthiness will become an expensive tangent in the tale of air combat. And at any rate, once the stealth aircraft emits any form of radiation (it already emits heat energy (/IR light)), such as a burst of radar, or IFF, it becomes a beacon. There are so many chinks in the armour, possible routes for development of anti-stealth technologies -they may prove cheaper than the actual stealth technology.

 

[Brit]

correct me if im wrong here but i believe part of the JSF project was sub contracted to Yakolev

I've read that too. The JSF layout does reflect the older Yak Freestyle design.

 

[turin]

correct me if im wrong here but i believe part of the JSF project was sub contracted to Yakolev

You might want to read this:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/x-35-tech.htm

The exhaust from the engine flows through the 3 Bearing Swivel Nozzle (3BSN). The 3BSN nozzle, developed by Rolls-Royce, was patterned along the lines of the exhaust system on the Yakovlev Yak-141 STOVL prototype that flew at the 1992 Farnborough air show. A US Navy program also developed swivel nozzles in the late 1960's and was proposed for a supersonic STOVL design by Convair (one of the Lockheed Martin heritage companies) in the early 1970's.

It was no real sub-contracting, more something along the lines of acknowledgment of the research and work by Yakovlev.

The Yak-43 was a proposal, however they ran into some difficulties with weight issues IIRC and finally there was no real requirement for the AC anymore.

 

[Defcon 6]

The Mig 1.42 has flown, fact. As to its RCS merits, that's open to debate -but certainly your comments aren't factual.

Whilst I agree with the general sentiment that the JSF is a better aircraft/system, there is a big issue surrounding radar stealthiness - to what extent will future detection technology negate it? If history is to repeat itself, in the near future someone will work out a way of detecting stealth aircraft and then, slowly (as the detection system is developed and deployed), stealthiness will become an expensive tangent in the tale of air combat. And at any rate, once the stealth aircraft emits any form of radiation (it already emits heat energy (/IR light)), such as a burst of radar, or IFF, it becomes a beacon. There are so many chinks in the armour, possible routes for development of anti-stealth technologies -they may prove cheaper than the actual stealth technology.

Actually I do know what I'm talking about. As for my refference "get off the ground" I meant the project. As I said, it isn't stealthy. It ran out of funding for the most part.

At any rate your incorrect about the stealth thing. It is not total stealth. The B-2 can be detected, usually only at close range. The B-2 DOES have a radar cross section, it's just say...perhaps about the size of a bird as far as the radar is concerned. And thus it won't show up on a radar screen, because Radar's are programmed to filter all of that out, or else they would have tens of thousands of little blips representing birds flying a couple hundred feet up. Stealth is only a term that means difficult to detect even with modern radar and impossible to detect with more primative systems.

 

[Brit]

Actually I do know what I'm talking about. As for my refference "get off the ground" I meant the project. As I said, it isn't stealthy. It ran out of funding for the most part.

At any rate your incorrect about the stealth thing. It is not total stealth. The B-2 can be detected, usually only at close range. The B-2 DOES have a radar cross section, it's just say...perhaps about the size of a bird as far as the radar is concerned. And thus it won't show up on a radar screen, because Radar's are programmed to filter all of that out, or else they would have tens of thousands of little blips representing birds flying a couple hundred feet up. Stealth is only a term that means difficult to detect even with modern radar and impossible to detect with more primative systems.

Ok, I thought you meant litterally about the Mig 1.42. I agree re the project and also that it is not stealthy in the context of the JSF. But I would suggest that it's stealthy to a similar extent as the Eurofighter and has an internal weapons bay which counts for a lot. Which brings us back to the JSF.

How meaningful is its internal weapons load? If you wanted to carry storm shadow or some such large weapon, you'd have to hang it on the outside... hardly stealthy.

Re your comments on the meaning of stealth. Yep. Never said, or meant to imply, that stealth is absolute. Merely suggesting that it is one phase in an ever twisting tale of hunter and hunted -the balance will swing -every development is eventually obscelete. Network centric systems are definately the way forward, but how long before the datalinks are subjected to attack (spoofing, disruption etc) and/or real-time decryption. And for the stealthy aircraft to remain 'radiation silent' it needs external radar sources (AWAC etc) -denied this, it has to switch on its radar and becomes a beacon. It's cat and mouse.

 

[Defcon 6]

eh, I'm a bigger fan of the Yak-141. Thats why I made this thread.

Although I'll take the F-22 over the Eurofighter anyday.

On that note, I think a perfect air force would have a combination of F-22's and Su-47's. With a good number of Mig-31's for advanced interception.

 

[Pursuit Curve]

Yak-141 Freestyle SpecificationsPrimary Function:Carrier Based InterceptorContractor:YakovlevCrew:OneUnit Cost:N/APowerplant One Kobchenko/Soyuz R-79-300 turbofan engine rated at 34,170lb for takeoff, two Rybinsk RD- 41 turbofan engines rated at 9,039lb for liftDimensionsLength:60 ft 2 inWingspan:33 ft 1.5 in (spread)
19 ft 4 in (folded)Height:16 ft 4 inWeightsEmpty:25,684 lbMaximum Takeoff:34,833 lb vertical, 42,990 lb shortPerformanceSpeed:1148.4 mph (Mach 1.8)Ceiling:49,000 ftRange:1306.8 miArmament One 30mm cannon, Alamo and Archer AAMs, bombs, and rockets

The YAK-141 is a STOVL.



F-35 Joint Strike Fighter SpecificationsPrimary Function:Strike fighter [Conventional Takeoff and Landing]Contractor:Lockheed-MartinCrew:OneUnit Cost (FY94$)$28MPowerplant One Pratt & Whitney F119-PW-100 derivative from F-22 RaptorDimensionsLength:45 feetWingspan:36 feetHeight:N/AWeightsEmpty:22,500 lbsMaximum Takeoff:50,000 lbsPerformanceSpeed:1,018 mph 1800 kphCeiling:N/ACombat Radius:over 600 nautical milesArmament N/A


F-35 is a STOVL.



-Yak-141 has a similar radar to the Mig-31, with a similar look down shoot down capability.
-F-35 has the advantage of stealth, but not much overall
-YAK-141 has higher speed advantage
-F-35 is most likely more expensive
- I need people to contribute information on the weapons systems.
-Agility is unknown.

Defcon, remember the golden rule of aircraft specs.
If you looked at the raw data for say the F4 Phantom vs the Mig 21
It would appear that the MiG21 has the advantage in terms of thrust to wieght ratio, and depending on the version of Phantom, the MiG21 has an internal gun, the F4A, B, C, D. F4J and F4G Wild Weasel do not.

What makes the difference is Aircrew capability, combat experience and quite honestly the Russians have some amazing aircraft, but with their lack of financial resources and low flight hours for their military would mean that they are at a definite disadvantage in any kind of comparison.

The YAK 141 would not stack up in air combat in a realistic situation. Sure, it has a radar that is on the MiG 31, but that is as much a hazard to itself than to its opponent, namely that it will be seen before it sees!