What modification should be done to 3rd prototype of pak- fa ?

Discussion in 'Indian Air Force' started by Drsomnath999, Oct 7, 2011.

?

WHAT MODIFICATION SHOULD BE DONE TO 3RD PROTOTYPE OF PAK- FA ?

  1. 1.structural modification

    62.5%
  2. 2.engine air inlet modification

    75.0%
  3. 3. piss off no modification is required

    12.5%
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. Drsomnath999

    Drsomnath999 lord of 32 teeth Elite Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2011
    Messages:
    1,223
    Likes Received:
    1,220
    Location:
    BHUBANESHWAR
    Once PAK-FA becomes operational, this plane is expected to get the designation SU-50. At the moment, 2 prototypes are flying. The 3rd prototype, expected to fly by the end of 2011, will be the first to have the full avionics and radar suite, including the AESA radar. That would allow initial firing tests for weapons to begin in 2012.

    On the other hand, former HAL chairman Ashok Baweja has stated that that the current PAK-FA prototype and tests are only “proof of concept” level work, adding his belief that materials and some design aspects will change, so “the FGFA will keep evolving for a fairly long time.”

    While the Russians may have a different point of view, Baweja could point to the F-22A program as support for his thesis. It made quite a few modifications from the original YF-22 prototype, and those changes took place over a period of years.


    . While Russia is currently planning on 2015 as the date for operational trials, Indian officials have pushed a timeline that’s 4-5 years longer, in order to develop many of the FGFA’s systems. They also want at least 2,000 hours of certification flying, and possible configuration changes in light of tests. They expect their fighters to prepare for service no earlier than 2017, with the IAF’s 2-seat version taking until 2019-2020 at least.
    PAK-FA: India, Russia Cooperating re: “Fifth-Generation Fighter”



    SO WHAT STRUCTURAL MODIFICATION SHOULD BE DONE TO 3RD PROTOTYPE ?
    1.FRAMELESS COCKPIT CANOPY:
    Traditional cockpits have metal supports that could be a strong reflector of radar energy. Frameless canopies are very difficult to make as they involve advanced materials science. The Russian T-50 lacks this feature. RUSSIA should built
    frameless canopy
    [​IMG]
    2.SERRATIONS ON WEAPONS BAY/LANDING GEAR DOORS:
    Serrations, or saw-tooth edges, are needed to hide seams that would otherwise appear on radar. [​IMG]
    3.INCREASE IN RAM & PLASMA STEALTH COATING & INCREASE IN COMPOSITES INTAKE :
    [​IMG]
    Can not see any evidence of coating material or ink to absorb radar waves, RAM and RAP, respectively, which must be present in the operating aircraft. It will be used in places where the techniques that can not be used or are ineffective
    From the front you can see that a large investment in the control of RCS. From the side you can see how serious shortcomings in the side of the engines. Seen behind the setup is fairly conventional. Well Russia needs to increase it’s RAM & composites concentration to reduce
    RCS of plane atleast in rear & middle fuselarge

    4.ENGINE INLET MODIFICATION:
    [​IMG]
    The pak fa engine air intake and pod does not seem to form an "S" is recommended for stealth aircraft. The front of the engine is one of the main reflectors in the front and the Russians should use other means to block air intakes.
    They should use radar blockers or modify the engine inlet by adding a coat in the inlet duct with radar absorbent material, because a lot of radar energy bounces off the duct wall several times on the way in and out again. High-level stealth, though, means physically blocking the line of sight with a "serpentine" duct (which is done on the F-22, JSF and Typhoon). But that can take up a lot of space, particularly with big engines, and isn't practical for a stealth retrofit or on some new designs.

    The Super Hornet, for example, has short inlet ducts so line-of-sight blockage by curvature isn't practical. The solution was to install a blocker in the inlet duct - looking down the duct, you see what looks like a compressor face, but isn't. It's a fixed composite structure, RAM-coated.

    ANOTHER INTERESTING CONCEPT OF ENGINE INLET MODIFICATION
    [​IMG]
    It uses flexible vanes with a rotating ring at the rear end: in the "stealth regime" it provides extensive blockage, but it clears the airflow when it doesn't matter or you need full speed or power. One challenge would be the structural design, because the last thing you want is a piece of RAM flaking off the moving surface and FODing out your motor.

    5.ENGINE NOZZLE MODIFICATION:

    The engine used in the prototype is not definitive and may be one reason for the lack of attention in this area. In any case, the aircraft may be inclined to hide these areas with the wings of a known radar. The back is clearly due mainly to the conventional engine cover. Again, it is necessary to wait for the final configuration of the final aircraft engines. Technology "plasma shield" may be an option to reduce the RCS of the back section.

    The engine exhaust seems not to have treatment to reduce the thermal signature. The minimum would be about a block structure of the hot parts and reduce the thermal signature of the main heat source of the aircraft. A rectangular exhaust would be ideal to facilitate mixing of heat from the turbine with the air around. You should keep an escape from conventional to use vectors of orientation in three dimensions.
    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
    but the problem Russian pak fa wont comprise manuverabilty to stealth so if we have rectangular nozzles then it would have 2 axis movement but russia would probably stick to 3 axis nozzles .Instead they may concentrate on supercruise engine rather than nozzle modifiction
    instead Sawtooth edges on the engine nozzle should be done to scatter radar waves from behind like F35

    [​IMG]
    6.SMOOTH SKIN LACKING SIGNIFICANT PROTRUSIONS-
    PAK FA aircraft have many vents, exposed rivets, and antennas. Stealth aircraft must have smooth and flush surfaces. So Russia should take notice of this thing & should do something
    about it.


    PLEASE NOTE
    This is my personal assumption of what modification should be done in 3rd prototype of PAK-FA,i have tried my level best to give as much accurate list i could.If i by chance had missed out any important modification or u want to change the list then plz comment
    I hope u would appreciate my hard work.THANK YOU
     
    Neil, dealwithit, pmaitra and 7 others like this.
  2.  
  3. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,542
    Likes Received:
    6,539
    I am not going to go into any specifics for modification but I will stress 2 things that PAKFA must have:

    1) Novator long range AWAC killer missile. There has never been confirmation that the 200km Novator
    AWAC killer was developed for the MKI. But rumor has it that Novator is working on an even longer range
    AWAC killer for PAKFA. This would offer a great advantage in denying airspace penetration to the enemy.

    2) Secondly and this is even more important then my first point. PAKFA should have a powerful AESA radar
    which if needed can even function in a AWAC role. The AESA radar is my biggest concern with PAKFA I hope
    Russians have advanced after falling behind to Americans and Europeans in this area.
     
  4. Kunal Biswas

    Kunal Biswas Member of the Year 2011 Moderator

    Joined:
    May 26, 2010
    Messages:
    27,584
    Likes Received:
    28,383
    Location:
    BHARAT, INDIA, HINDUSTHAN
    The Inlet have already radar blocker..

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
    F-18 radar blocker, Those are not blades, Blades are behind the radar absorbing blockers, deign to absorb and reflect wave..



    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    This PAK-FA radar blocker same concept..



    Their will be many 1000 improvements, we can hardly guess..
    Their will be structural improvement also avionics....
     
    Last edited: Oct 7, 2011
    drkrn, SpArK, A.V. and 1 other person like this.
  5. SPIEZ

    SPIEZ Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2011
    Messages:
    3,507
    Likes Received:
    1,009
    Guys will you please STOP this. First of all we don't even know how many technologies goes in the development of the NOZZLE or even a simple flight control system. I bet ppl don't even know how RADAR's even work.
    Let's concentrate on BASICS and leave the technical stuff to the technicians.

    No offense to anyone here. Its because technology of an aircraft is really complicated. When it comes to things like vehicles and small arms, almost anyone can do it. most people do vehicle's as projects in their final years nowadays
     
    Last edited: Oct 7, 2011
    Anshu Attri likes this.
  6. Drsomnath999

    Drsomnath999 lord of 32 teeth Elite Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2011
    Messages:
    1,223
    Likes Received:
    1,220
    Location:
    BHUBANESHWAR
    IRST probe is to be recessed
    [​IMG]

    TAIL BOOM OF PAK FA

    DEMERITS
    [​IMG]
    creates additional radar-reflective surfaces.

    MERITS
    [​IMG]
    but on another ground it has some use.The F-22's stealth is mainly optimised for X-band radars, the type commonly used in other fighters. To try and counter this, the PAK FA uses IRST and L-band radars in the wings. It also has an X-band radar in the tail boom in addition to the one in the nose to give it true 360 degree coverage.
     
  7. Kunal Biswas

    Kunal Biswas Member of the Year 2011 Moderator

    Joined:
    May 26, 2010
    Messages:
    27,584
    Likes Received:
    28,383
    Location:
    BHARAT, INDIA, HINDUSTHAN
    Pak fa is using more than just radars at back but three IR sensors all over the aircraft to detect stealth aircraft heat signature..
    The IR sensors are controlled by computer..
     
  8. Kunal Biswas

    Kunal Biswas Member of the Year 2011 Moderator

    Joined:
    May 26, 2010
    Messages:
    27,584
    Likes Received:
    28,383
    Location:
    BHARAT, INDIA, HINDUSTHAN
    The eighth part pf the report from MAKS-2011.

    Irbis-E radar
    [​IMG]





    L-band AESA
    [​IMG]





    Optic-electronic station 101KS-U with sensors from 101KS system for T-50
    [​IMG]





    Optic-location station 101KS-O from 101KS system for T-50
    [​IMG]





    Optic-location station 101KS-V from 101KS system for T-50
    [​IMG]





    Observation sighting-searching system pod 101KS-N from 101KS system for T-50
    [​IMG]





    Escort jamming station SAP 14
    [​IMG]





    Active towed ECM decoy from ECM system President-S
    [​IMG]





    Laser DIRCM system from ECM system President-S
    [​IMG]
    .
     
  9. SATISH

    SATISH DFI Technocrat Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    2,006
    Likes Received:
    228
    Darn....many of the experts believve that the Russians have made a headway in the T 50.

    1. All movable vertical stabilizers reduce the total RCS of the aircraft as the largest spike in radar reflection is the tail fins.

    2. If an F 22 and Pak-FA go on head to headd by the time the F 22 detects the PAK-FA it has lost it's major BVR advantage.

    3. Due to presence of many passive sensors the F-22 is at risk and is forced to enter into a merge and to dogfight.

    4. During this Dogfight the PAK-FA must have advantage in maneuverability , agility and a High AoA

    5. It must have loner range than F-22 to protect the vast skies of the Russian airspace

    6. It must be capable of carrying weapons load internally and externally.

    7. The engine performance must be the same in all flight profiles.

    8. The presence of two weapon bays is to increase the reliability so that if one dosent open the other one does for sure.
     
  10. Drsomnath999

    Drsomnath999 lord of 32 teeth Elite Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2011
    Messages:
    1,223
    Likes Received:
    1,220
    Location:
    BHUBANESHWAR
    Sadly no such modification would be done in reality??

    only

    1) few composite & RAM enhancements

    2) engine would change got to wait whether they would go for 3 axis or 2 axis TVC

    3) structural modifaction would depend upon 2 seater variant but dont expect much

    4)Tail part may have some modifaction


    CHEERS
     

Share This Page