- Joined
- Jun 17, 2011
- Messages
- 1,273
- Likes
- 1,376
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
2.SERRATIONS ON WEAPONS BAY/LANDING GEAR DOORS:
Serrations, or saw-tooth edges, are needed to hide seams that would otherwise appear on radar.
3.INCREASE IN RAM & PLASMA STEALTH COATING & INCREASE IN COMPOSITES INTAKE :
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:
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
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.
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
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
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
2.SERRATIONS ON WEAPONS BAY/LANDING GEAR DOORS:
Serrations, or saw-tooth edges, are needed to hide seams that would otherwise appear on radar.
3.INCREASE IN RAM & PLASMA STEALTH COATING & INCREASE IN COMPOSITES INTAKE :
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:
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
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.
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
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
