Sukhoi PAK FA

[p2prada]

PAKFA radar's detection range is 250 miles whereas F22 is at 185 miles ...

We don't really know this. All we have are rumors or estimations.

We have only seen unofficial data for APG-77 while nothing has been released for N036.

Only some Irbis-E releases are confirmed, but that's an entirely different technology base and can't be used for comparison. That's because the AESA models will use much lesser energy to do the same amount of work.

I guess you're wrong about PAKFA having more or less the same RCS than F-22 and superior RCS to F-35.

Not really. This was just "my" estimate. The F-22's so called metal marble figure is too vague. A metal marble can be half the size of a golf ball, sometimes even 1/3rd. I assumed it is 4x times smaller.

Also these look like average RCS figures rather than frontal RCS figures. Frontal figures will be much lower for all three jets. If the F-22 has a smaller average figure than PAKFA, then that is consistent with whatever Sukhoi has released and is official 0.3m2 vs 0.5m2.

The thing is the person on the video has given a decent comparison matrix with his analogy of a football (4.5th gen) vs a tennis ball (5th gen). So we know that when a Rafale looks like a football on the radar, PAKFA will look like a tennis ball. The Americans when they provided their data of golf ball and metal ball did not give anything else for us to compare with. So, when Rafale looks like a football on radar, F-22 does not have to be a marble at the time, it could be bigger. Could probably mean both countries take different ranges for measurement as a standard which is an established norm with radar too.

Come on, the Russians have given a basic figure of 0.06m2 for EF/Rafale, football size. Anybody knows that's too less according to western standards, which means the range is much lesser than a typical American RCS figure. Western standards place Rafale/EF at 0.1m2 and above and not below that threshold of 0.1m2 (-10dBsm).

Also, be serious people, do you think a tennis ball will be tracked easily? That's the size of a bird and is well within the threshold of many modern radars. My figures don't really give the F-22 much of an advantage since both aircraft will be picked up with IRST first at the range they operate in. The F-22 is expected to pick up a 0.01 m2 object from less than 100Km. That's less than the threshold for PAKFA which means both aircraft will pick each other up at very similar times in a head-on intercept. That would mean all other aircraft below the F-22 in capability will be picked up much earlier, probably up to 200-300 Km for Rafale/EF and 500 Km for Mig-21/Mig-29 type aircraft.

Just look at the X band figures of various birds and imagine where PAKFA would be. Gambit pointed out that the F-22's RCS is between that of a warbler and a sparrow, which is twice or thrice what I gave for F-22 in "my" estimate.

Anyway, don't read too much into it. The actual RCS figures will be suppressed from us for all three jets for obvious reasons. We will only get such estimates. At least we know that the PAKFA is a stealthy bird and not some half-assed attempt at stealth as being claimed by many people. The FGFA may improve on it too especially with the 6 year advantage in development cycle versus the first PAKFA.

 

[gadeshi]

@ersakthivel:
Yeah, the great aviation guru, tell us the truth about G5 requirements, we are begging you!

1 - VLO is only one of the list, and as for now is not the most important one. Logics is simple: F-22 has been created as FDOW agressor, meaning a knife which has to cut a breach in the Soviet AD armed with Su-27 and MiG-31. So, the only chance to do this was VLO (at least this was believed in the 80-es).
Americans have sacrificed all the capabilities to VLO - inoptimal single-mode non-controlled air intakes with awfull losses on the other modes, small MWBs, "not a pound to earth" (non-multifunctional), rediculously small combat radius with a supercruise leap - 100NM only and many-many others.
2 - As we all have knew after 90-s, when the Soviet secrecy fell down, Soviet radars have used LPI modes since MiG-31 Zaslon, so Russians can detect F-22 using passive surviallance from 150km, as LPI is not something new for them.
3 - There are no toe-to-toe duels between fighters - there are battle systems who does the war actions. Stealth works only against the more weak enemy, having rare modern weapons and detection capabilities. The enemy who has no passive surviallance networks compatible to Russian one, and of course who lack modern network-centric battlespace.

So, now G5 requirements are:
1 - Supercruise (tactical agility)
2 - VLO (possibility to infiltrate to enemy space through little gaps between enemy radar fields, not work with comparable foes)
3 - Multifunctionality
4 - Integrated network-centric avoinics complexes, capable of being information unit in the common battlespace (which increases situation awareness a times)
5 - Reduced TCO (less maintenance, self-test and self-control, modular construction)
6 - Supermaneurability

So, is PAK FA a true G5 fighter or not?

RCS of 0.2-0.3 m2 is estimated for prototyles or Phase 1 aircrafts. What will be in Phase 2 and FGFA - we don't know. Regarding the info about the major external differences on the LRIP-1 jets, I would prefer to shut up and wait.

As for Chinese with their J-20... Are you serious?

 

[gadeshi]

01-5 maiden flight official photos from Igor Korotchenko (Russian heavy industry vice-premier) personal blog:

 

[p2prada]

2 - As we all have knew after 90-s, when the Soviet secrecy fell down, Soviet radars have used LPI modes since MiG-31 Zaslon, so Russians can detect F-22 using passive surviallance from 150km, as LPI is not something new for them.

People still think Bars is incapable of operating in LPI modes.

RCS of 0.2-0.3 m2 is estimated for prototyles or Phase 1 aircrafts. What will be in Phase 2 and FGFA - we don't know. Regarding the info about the major external differences on the LRIP-1 jets, I would prefer to shut up and wait.

What do you think about post #3016?

Also can you confirm from Russian sources if what Makarov said is correct, that PAKFA will cost only $1500 per flight hour compared to Su-30's $10000 per flight hour. Of course, I think this is without fuel.

 

[gadeshi]

And more:

 

[Defcon 1]

Will this protuding IRST be taken inside in the production version or will it remain out? The current configuration should be resulting in increased RCS correct?

 

[gadeshi]

And more:

 

[p2prada]

Will this protuding IRST be taken inside in the production version or will it remain out? The current configuration should be resulting in increased RCS correct?

Not necessary. Nobody can eyeball RCS measures.

Anyway, that's rumored to be DIRCM. Meant to spoof incoming IR missiles with laser.

 

[Drsomnath999]

The Stealth value of a stealth plane is highly classified thing no body knows / it is a highly classified data .

but the western standard of RCS value is considerably lesser than russian value of RCS value .

simple examples i can give

1)Vladimir Zagorodnii, chief designer of "Vladimir Tikhomirov NIIP" said

It is interesting to compare the "dueling" possibilities of aviation systems 27SM2-Su (Su-35) and the F-22A «Dry" equipped with "Irbis", can detect a target with RCS of 0.1-0.5 m2 (approximately in this range is the value of the effective radar scattering surface unobtrusive Aircraft Lockheed Martin F/A-22A) at a distance of 165-240 km. At the same time, the American fighter "sees" his opponent with RCS of 1 m2 at a distance of only 200 km (Jane's All the World's Aircraft 2005-2006). Thus, the low-profile "Raptor" with its AESA radar on board of the complex does not have any real advantages over the modernized "dry" in a dogfight missile for "vnevizualnoy" range. "Vladimir Zagorodnii, chief designer of "Vladimir Tikhomirov NIIP" The minimum effective area of "‹"‹the cross section (RCS) are targeted through "Irbis" targets is 0.01 m2 (parameter corresponding to the EPR sverhmalozametnogo
aircraft type American strategic cruise missiles ACM AGM-129).
"http://translate.google.co.in/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http://forum.ykt.ru/viewforum.jsp%3Fpage%3D4%26id%3D57%26xid%3D879291&act=url

2)Alexander Davydenko, chief designer of OKB
The chief designer Alexander Davydenko aircraft indirectly hinted at the size of the effective area of "‹"‹the cross section (RCS) of the future fighter. According to him, the old generation EPR aircraft (such as the Su-27) is about 12 m ², whereas the F-22A Raptor, it is in the range of 0.3-0.4 m ². EPR PAK FA "will not exceed the parameters F-22A, it will be very close to them."
Google Translate

3)AN Lagarkov. Director of the Institute of Theoretical and Applied Electrodynamics.
All of the above technological development is carried out in our country and in leading foreign countries. We demonstrate the global trend of the radar signature of supersonic maneuverable aircraft (Fig. 6). If in the 1980s, aircraft such as the F-15 had an ESR of more than 10 m2 then modernized aviation complex EPR is 1-1.5 m2, while promising fifth-generation aircraft systems such as the F-22, JSF, - 0.3 m2. An even smaller value of the EPR in the modernized Russian MiG-21.

Google Translate

meanwhile if u read the western sources article they have relatively very lesser value of RCS of F22 & 4.5th gen plane standards take for example KAAPO from air power australia articles


SO NOW EVERYONE CAN APPRECIATE THAT RUSSIAN CLAIM OF 0.5 M2 RCS IS NOT SO BAD AFTER ALL FOR STEALTH PLANES


CHEERS

 

[gadeshi]

Will this protuding IRST be taken inside in the production version or will it remain out? The current configuration should be resulting in increased RCS correct?

No.
1 - According to manufacturers data on OLS-50, its fairing is made of special sapphire glass, covered with multilayered nano-film covers, which decreases RCS comparable to OLS-27 or KOLS-29.
2 - According to insiders info, there will be no changes to IRST fairing on prototypes (coz they are excessive on this stagee). All the additional RCS reducing measures are promised from LRIP-0 ("O" cypher on KD - Manufacturers documentation for LRIP-0 as said in SRPP - Laws and orders to put anything into production). There are rumors about RAM-made cover on IRST behind the transparent fairing.
3 - According to insiders (no proofs yet), Phase 2 (T-50M and FGFA) aircrafts will have faceted IRST.

 

[gadeshi]

The Stealth value of a stealth plane is highly classified thing no body knows / it is a highly classified data .

but the western standard of RCS value is considerably lesser than russian value of RCS value .

simple examples i can give

meanwhile if u read the western sources article they have relatively very lesser value of RCS of F22 & 4.5th gen plane standards take for example KAAPO from air power australia articles


SO NOW EVERYONE CAN APPRECIATE THAT RUSSIAN CLAIM OF 0.5 M2 RCS IS NOT SO BAD AFTER ALL FOR STEALTH PLANES


CHEERS

Yeah, man!!!
Exactly, how can F-22, which is 5-6 times bigger than AGM-129 and has rather less stealth-optimized shape to be less visible with wtf who claimed 0.000015 m2 RCS, while AGM-129 has 0.01 m2???

 

[gadeshi]

People still think Bars is incapable of operating in LPI modes.



What do you think about post #3016?

Also can you confirm from Russian sources if what Makarov said is correct, that PAKFA will cost only $1500 per flight hour compared to Su-30's $10000 per flight hour. Of course, I think this is without fuel.

1 - I've not said nothing about Zaslon or Bars LPI capability. I've talked about PNS (Pseudo-Noise Signals) sequences, which are a part of it. And Soviets had mastered that radiation mode (instead of open ray) since the first PESA (Zaslon) had been created. So, they simply knew what to listen to to detect Raptors

2 - Who am I against Makarov? He is an official source. However, we all remember Pogosyan interviews, where he stated that 0.3 m2 is actual for Phase 1 aircraft (already achieved), and this figure is widely recitated as the whole PAK FA family (there are rumors about the wide family, including tactical bomber, but no proofs until 2015-2017) value. We don't know, whar RCS will Phase 2 or FGFA have.
About the flight hour costs - they are brave, but quite real according to new materials, lifetime-optimized force structure, self-diagnostics and quality control (smart skin with condition probes embedded within), modular construction with simple parts exchange procedures... Nothing impossible.

 

[p2prada]

Yeah, man!!!
Exactly, how can F-22, which is 5-6 times bigger than AGM-129 and has rather less stealth-optimized shape to be less visible with wtf who claimed 0.000015 m2 RCS, while AGM-129 has 0.01 m2???

Theoretically, it is possible and practically established.

F-22, F-117, B-2 etc have RCS values significantly lesser in comparison to any missile in the world today, even -129.

The larger the airframe the easier it is to incorporate RCS reduction measures.

The object now is to go down even further, into the realm of insects.

 

[p2prada]

1 - I've not said nothing about Zaslon or Bars LPI capability. I've talked about PNS (Pseudo-Noise Signals) sequences, which are a part of it.

PNS is just software codes.

2 - Who am I against Makarov? He is an official source. However, we all remember Pogosyan interviews, where he stated that 0.3 m2 is actual for Phase 1 aircraft (already achieved), and this figure is widely recitated as the whole PAK FA family (there are rumors about the wide family, including tactical bomber, but no proofs until 2015-2017) value. We don't know, whar RCS will Phase 2 or FGFA have.
About the flight hour costs - they are brave, but quite real according to new materials, lifetime-optimized force structure, self-diagnostics and quality control (smart skin with condition probes embedded within), modular construction with simple parts exchange procedures... Nothing impossible.

So, you don't think $1500 is questionable?

 

[gadeshi]

1 - Not exactly. PNS have qite a special RF picture. I'm not a EW surveyer, they knew more about it. However, Kolchuga, for instance, can detect LPI-modded radars from 110-150 km depending on external conditions and jamming density.

2 - If Makarov have said that, then those numbers are viable at least. Of course we can say that an exact cost will fluctuate, but it can fluctuate to 5% around $1500 per hour.

 

[gadeshi]

An official hi res 01-5 photos from KNAAZ press service:

 

[gadeshi]

And more:

 

[p2prada]

2 - If Makarov have said that, then those numbers are viable at least. Of course we can say that an exact cost will fluctuate, but it can fluctuate to 5% around $1500 per hour.

I found this old report.

Russia's T-50 Shows New Face and Human Intelligence - English pravda.ru

The exploitation of the new plane will be cheaper in comparison with its predecessors. For example, the cost of one hour of exploitation of Su-27 (4th generation) makes up $10,000. The price for the same time of exploitation of T-50 is expected to be reduced to $1,500.

Anyway, this doesn't quote Makarov, so I will hold on to it until there's something official.

 

[drkrn]

Yeah, man!!!
Exactly, how can F-22, which is 5-6 times bigger than AGM-129 and has rather less stealth-optimized shape to be less visible with wtf who claimed 0.000015 m2 RCS, while AGM-129 has 0.01 m2???

extensive use of composites,less use of metals,radar absorbing materials,design shape which reflects most of radar waves...

agm-129 is one time use missile.f-22 is not such.so not much of these were used for agm-129

i am not sure of rcs values

 

[drkrn]

1 - Not exactly. PNS have qite a special RF picture. I'm not a EW surveyer, they knew more about it. However, Kolchuga, for instance, can detect LPI-modded radars from 110-150 km depending on external conditions and jamming density.

2 - If Makarov have said that, then those numbers are viable at least. Of course we can say that an exact cost will fluctuate, but it can fluctuate to 5% around $1500 per hour.

so its cheaper to run.what about the maintainance.