PAK FA preliminary Stealth Assesment - Ausairpower

[average american]

Let me repeat, military technology isn't part of the study. Only civilian tech is part of the study. Which part don't you get?

Should I tell you the difference between military and civilian?

Also it doesn't matter, these studies.

Send a man to space and then we will talk. That's 2020. So, hush until then.

It is impossible for a country to have an advance technological military and backward civilian technology. Same for productivity and quality control.

 

[halloweene]

Believe me AA, with all its technology, F22 can sometimes be spanked in BFM. I just cant disclose clues.

 

[average american]

Believe me when I tell you that you are buying planes from Russia that are 20 years behind European technology and will turn out to be a disaster.

 

[halloweene]

Hmm i'm not buying anything, i'm frnch mate!

 

[average american]

Every one even India knows that Russian weapons are less reliable and effective than their Western counterparts. It is understood that this is a tradeoff for cheaper prices and more bribes for the purchasing officials. Whenever these weapons are used on a large scale in a war, many of them do work, although not as well as Western versions and whoever is using Russian weapons usually losses.

 

[p2prada]

They are both state owned entities... it does work that way in the world of central planning.

That's not how it works in India, maybe in France, but not here. HAL is a major competitor and in fact don't even want private companies challenging its dominant position. Secrecy is maintained as diligently as between Intel and AMD or Boeing and LM.

Then what would be the point of ToT if you can't use it? It doesn't work that way.

I had already explained it. ToT is meant to build, maintain and upgrade the product, nothing more.

HAL is a state owned company... whatever tech they absorbed belongs to GoI... that includes GTRE.

Complete and utter nonsense. Shows your lack of knowledge even in how companies run businesses.

Even different state owned oil companies compete in India.

If the production method is inferior, the product will be inferior... a la China.

Utter nonsense... True Spirit didn't post anything about Indian scientists headed to NIIP. India's workshare doesn't include radar. That is why it is a prerequisite in MMRCA.

Wait for info from the horses's mouth if you will.

The requirement was repeated, then dropped. It is now 144 single seat PMF. The exact model Russia is developing for itself.

Aho! The news is from April 2013. The two seater cancellation news is much older than that. Also, the guy saying it was Pogoysan. It could very well have been from Putin himself. Google Pogosyan's name.

Just like you have exported Brahmos?

How about waiting for real news. Brahmos export clearance was given only last year. How long did you have to wait to get a Rafale customer?

Not the HPT-32...

I mentioned it. It is a trainer. The T in HPT stands for trainer.

$10 billion is the cost of the entire programme. It is more like $1.7 billion...

Yes, quite close. There will be no 360 degree radar.

Observe carefully, you will see a radiation symbol on PAKFA's tail. That's where the tail radar is.

Those supposed L bands displayed at MAKS had nothing to do with it.

Of course. All of PAKFA's primary radars are X band radars. Total of 4 radar for a 360 degree capability. One in the nose, one in the tail and two on the sides. The L band arrays are for a different purpose which is yet unknown.

Nope...

Yes...

Au contraire, Sukhoi is indeed making another standard that will be heavily upgraded, including engines, before the first model is even operational. Every fighter undergoes these upgrades.

Most probably a PAKFA Mk2. But PAKFA Mk1 will be at Rafale F3 level. PAKFA's first missiles were all air to surface missiles. A total of 14 weapons are being developed for PAKFA alone. This is outside whatever IAF has planned for FGFA.

You mean like this?

That's not a loop. But nice try.

Funny that FGFA now looks like PMF.

FGFA and PMF are the same. PAKFA is the Russian project name. PMF is the project name for FGFA in Russia. Also, yes, it is confirmed that the airframe and engine will be the same for FGFA. FGFA radar will be derived from PAKFA's radar. Most of the avionics and systems will be different though. You aren't keeping up with real news.

ELTA isn't handing over an AESA either.

Depends. But we will see to what extent they will transfer tech. They are providing the T/R modules, just like the Americans provided their modules to Thales. Israel has already supplied a 2052 radar to India. The point is we just need a radar for LCA. As for T/R modules we have programs dealing with it on our own. We don't need external help.

Btw, it is a huge lead when the first production model was validated over two years ago while Russia's prototype just got off the bench.

No. Russian prototypes have been flying since 2005. Phazatron since 2005 and NIIP since 2008. That's the reason both are competing for IAF's MKI upgrade program with AESAs.

 

[p2prada]

It is impossible for a country to have an advance technological military and backward civilian technology. Same for productivity and quality control.

Utter nonsense. There are plenty of countries without either. Russia is among the top in military tech while Japan has a non-existent military industry. But the civilian technology situation is the exact opposite, hence why Japan is in the 5th place while Russia is in the 66th. How many nuclear subs has Japan built?

Look up your tech index you posted. France is at a similar rank as Chile when it is France which has advanced space, military and nuclear programs which easily rivals the US tech. But why linked with Chile and below tiny countries like Denmark and Iceland? Heck even Estonia is ahead. Look up Estonia on a map and you will get the point. See when the country became independent. Common sense will teach you the rest.

Taiwan is second on the list, right behind the US. Doesn't get any funnier than that. How many satellites did Taiwan send to the moon? Only five countries have any capability in sending a rocket to the moon, that's US, Russia, China, India and France. The rest are just countries with advanced car, healthcare and computer industries.

When it comes to military technology, this is how it goes,
US
France
UK
Russia
Some countries of Europe in particular fields (Sweden, Germany, Italy and Spain)
China
India

Nobody else.

China and India are in the list because of the scale and size of current projects. Meaning other countries don't have equivalent projects running. For eg: We have projects for 5th gen fighters, nuclear subs, destroyers, frigates, tanks and the entire work. Even projects for modernization of the infantry.

The only reason why I put France and UK ahead of Russia is because of the massive delay between the breakup of the Union and the start of new projects while France and UK did not suffer as drastically from the breakup.

However both China and India are making rapid strides and may eventually match the US in a decade or two. So when you are inducting latest 6th gen programs, there is a chance either India or China or both may come up with a 6th gen design before the US can.

PS: Russia has already built the F-22 of the ballistic missiles (google Bulava) and are currently running the only next gen battle tank program in the world.

Sure countries have quality issues, but this isn't related to the reasons you mentioned.

 

[average american]

Russian military power is about 20 percent that of the USA and about 20 years behind the USA in technology......So is China.

 

[average american]

Boeing to Open Pilot Training School at Skolkovo

04 June 2013
The Moscow Times


Boeing will start training pilots in a multimillion flight school at the Skolkovo technological hub, a Transport Ministry official told Vedomosti Tuesday.

A deal is set to be signed at the end of June that will see the American aircraft manufacturer deliver specialized equipment worth millions of dollars, a representative of Skolkovo foundation said.

The school will join the cosmic cluster in Skolkovo's technopark, where pilots will be given a chance to enhance their qualifications. Their skills will be tested using flight simulators and they will have to provide biomedical information and undergo endurance tests.

Transport Minister Maxim Skolkov said that there is currently a deficit of pilots in Russian airlines. He estimated that another 1,200 are needed to compensate for the shortfall, but the current law bars carriers from hiring foreigners. However, an amendment to the Air Code would allow Russia to attract 200 foreign pilots each year over a five year period, the report said.

Pay at Russia's major fliers, where captains earn on average $14,000 a month, is currently higher than with European competitors, the report said.

Aeroflot said that the proposition is "dubious," because major Russian carriers all have their own requirements for training pilots, and airlines are concerned that they will have to complete the training of any graduates from the new school.
Boeing to Open Pilot Training School at Skolkovo | Business | The Moscow Times

 

[lookieloo]

What's unequal about being equal partners. The point is IPR will be shared 50-50. That makes it equal. Workshare in R&D is 25% for HAL.



Everybody else has heard about it though.

India to get first FGFA prototype 'in 2014'

The Russians are in the process of making multiple prototypes for Sukhoi and VVS for delivery between this year and the next.



The article is quoted from our Air Chief. That should be enough proof.

Spicy sauce lookie. :cool2:

Well, it looks like "everybody else" has explained the "equal partnership" in more detail than I could, even less-equal than I thought. Also... Jane's? Aren't those the people who published speculation about a Chinese STOVL fighter after someone sent them a picture of a Japanese RC toy? Yeah, I'm gonna stick by what I said for now. If India was getting an FGFA prototype by 2014, the money should have changed hands years ago to start the long-lead-item process; and again, a 2014 prototype would mean it's already on the assembly floor by now (no pictures ). I did notice that there's a rather wide gap in the plan between the first and second copies (#2 doesn't arrive until 2017). Perhaps the Russians hope to keep up appearances by giving you one of their's to play with for awhile.

[edit]Oh, never mind. I see someone has brought out their American sock-puppet to drown the thread in nationalist bombast instead of discussing troublesome details.

 

[p2prada]

Well, it looks like "everybody else" has explained the "equal partnership" in more detail than I could, even less-equal than I thought.

How is a 50-50 partnership unequal? Explain.

Also... Jane's? Aren't those the people who published speculation about a Chinese STOVL fighter after someone sent them a picture of a Japanese RC toy? Yeah, I'm gonna stick by what I said for now.

I don't think you get the point. The article contains a quote from no other than the Air Chief Marshal of our air force saying that the FGFA will come to India in 2014.

Anyway,
India's FGFA stealth fighter set for 2014 roll-out

India's fifth-generation fighter aircraft (FGFA), which the country is co-developing with Russia, is set to be rolled-out in 2014, the Indian air force's (IAF) top uniformed officer says.

"The first prototype of the FGFA is scheduled to arrive in India by 2014 after which it will undergo extensive trials at the Ojhar air base," Air Chief Marshal NAK Browne says. "We are hopeful that the aircraft would be ready for induction by 2022."

Other news reports claiming the same.
CNN's India network India to unveil fifth generation fighter jet by 2014

Reputed Indian sources
Fifth gen fighter aircraft to be unveiled in India by 2014 - Economic Times
Fifth gen fighter aircraft to be unveiled in India by 2014 : North, News - India Today

If India was getting an FGFA prototype by 2014, the money should have changed hands years ago to start the long-lead-item process; and again,

It already has. The only known transfer was a $295 Million transfer early on and anything beyond that is currently unknown.
Fifth generation fighter crosses milestone | The Hindu

Read the entire article.

a 2014 prototype would mean it's already on the assembly floor by now (no pictures ).

Yes, it should be on the production line, not the assembly line yet. There should be time for assembly. Also, why pictures? Who is going to provide the pics? Nobody. We will get our first pictures when the aircraft will fly in 2014, not earlier. It was the same with PAKFA's first flight. No pictures until then.

I did notice that there's a rather wide gap in the plan between the first and second copies (#2 doesn't arrive until 2017). Perhaps the Russians hope to keep up appearances by giving you one of their's to play with for awhile.

Hasn't this been repeated time and time and time and time and time again? FGFA and PAKFA will be very similar in the way it looks. The inside will be different. One of the articles above already clears this.

A lot of the flight testing will involve a bit of re-inventing the wheel and will see benefits that trickle down from the PAKFA program.

 

[average american]

It's no secret how America's stealth warplanes primarily evade enemy radars. Their airframes are specifically sculpted to scatter radar waves rather than bouncing them back to the enemy. Somewhat less important is the application, to select areas, of Radar Absorbing Material (RAM) meant to trap sensor energy not scattered by the plane's special shape.

In short, the four most important aspects of stealth are "shape, shape, shape and materials," to quote Lockheed Martin analyst Denys Overholser, whose pioneering work resulted in the F-117 Nighthawk, the world's first operational stealth warplane.

But in addition to shaping and RAM, the Pentagon's current stealth planes -- the B-2 Spirit bomber, the F-22 Raptor fighter, the RQ-170 Sentinel drone and the in-development F-35 Joint Strike Fighter -- boast other, lesser-known qualities that help them avoid detection. (We left the Army's stealth helicopter out of the discussion owing to a lack of information.)

These other stealth enhancements include: chemicals to eliminate telltale contrails; sophisticated, untraceable sensors and radios; specially designed, hard-to-detect engine inlets; radar-canceling paint; and cooling systems for reducing a plane's heat signature. All of these evasion methods have been disclosed by the Air Force, although sometimes in scant detail.

With China and Russia both demonstrating a rapidly improving grasp of stealth shaping -- and materials to a lesser extent -- these other, possibly harder-to-master aspects of radar-evasion are arguably becoming more important to maintaining America's aerial advantage.

Smart Sensors

Radar is like long-range eyes in the sky for modern warplanes. Without this sensor, a plane is more or less flying blind. The problem is, radar works by emitting energy -- lots of it. And that can be detected by an enemy's own passive radar receptors in the same way that someone standing in a dark room can track the movements of another person carrying a flashlight.



The F-22, F-35 and B-2 work around this problem by practicing what Aviaton Week stealth guru Bill Sweetman called "emission-control principles." With the Raptor, emissions from the jet's APG-77 radar "are managed in intensity, duration and space to maintain the pilot's situational awareness while minimizing the chance that its signals will be intercepted." In other words, the plane's software is smart enough to use just enough energy to find and track targets -- and no more. The B-2 and F-35 have electronically-scanned radars that are similar to the Raptor's and probably employ the same tactics.

Plus the Raptor and Joint Strike Fighter both have non-emitting backup sensors that can fill in the gaps in the radar coverage. The F-22's ALR-94 radar-warning receptors are among the most sensitive ever designed and can accurately, and "silently," detect most radar-using targets at long range. The F-35 boasts a powerful set of cameras that achieve the same effect.
7 Secret Ways America's Stealth Armada Stays Off the Radar | Danger Room | Wired.com

 

[lookieloo]

How is a 50-50 partnership unequal? Explain.

:accepted:The Russians can produce as many PAK-FAs as they want... and sell them to whoever they want... without asking India's permission or paying India a red-cent. Separate program or not, India will have no such liberties with the FGFA. That is not an equal partnership.

 

[Somreet Bhattacharya]

:accepted:The Russians can produce as many PAK-FAs as they want... and sell them to whoever they want... without asking India's permission or paying India a red-cent. Separate program or not, India will have no such liberties with the FGFA. That is not an equal partnership.

How do you know that??

 

[lookieloo]

How do you know that??

Seriously? Guess what, this is happening.


Had to be done.

 

[p2prada]

:accepted:The Russians can produce as many PAK-FAs as they want... and sell them to whoever they want... without asking India's permission or paying India a red-cent. Separate program or not, India will have no such liberties with the FGFA. That is not an equal partnership.

It depends.

If the Russians have plans of exporting PAKFA, this has not been officially conveyed to date. However FGFA is following the Brahmos model which means we can pick and choose the export customers with Russia.

PAKFA is not an equal partnership, FGFA is. Let me repeat this again. PAKFA is a different program. FGFA is a different program. They are interrelated in the sense that FGFA is an India specific model of the PAKFA.

India signed a deal for partnership in the FGFA program. Why is this so difficult to get?

FGFA is being treated as an entirely new program. In Russia FGFA is called PMF or Perspective Multirole Fighter while in India it is called FGFA.

If the Russians decide to export PAKFA, it is their prerogative since it is an independent program.

Read this,
https://sites.google.com/site/idpse...hters/perspective-multi-role-fighter-pmf-fgfa

 

[lookieloo]

If the Russians have plans of exporting PAKFA, this has not been officially conveyed to date. However FGFA is following the Brahmos model which means we can pick and choose the export customers with Russia.

In other words, they can sell without you... but you can't sell without them.

Indeed, why is this so difficult to get?

 

[p2prada]

In other words, they can sell without you... but you can't sell without them.

Indeed, why is this so difficult to get?

PAKFA they can sell without us. But they said FGFA will be the export model. Meaning, at least officially, PAKFA is not up for export. In case they decide to export PAKFA, we will see then.

Also it is yet unknown what technologies of FGFA will find its place on PAKFA. For eg: Let's say the new Item 30 engine is developed on an equal partnership, then the Russians won't be able to sell PAKFA with the Stage 2 engine. Only stage one engine, that is Item 117. Meaning India will hold 50% IPR for the new engine while Russia will have 100% ownership over the engine's "technology" since they developed it while we funded half of it. Meaning they can decide what levels of ToT they will provide to export customer, but both countries will have to make a decision for selling it.

Some aspects of PAKFA are already developed, for example all of what you see in the PAKFA today belongs to Russia. That includes the new radar, the 117 engine, FBW, software etc. But a lot of other technologies are yet to be developed, which includes the 360 degree radar capability that will most probably be exclusive to FGFA. So if an export customer wants 360 degree capability on their PAKFA, they will need to knock on India's doors too.

FGFA they cannot sell without us. Most of the innards will be Indian, French or Israeli. Apart from that computers will be our own along with software. Meaning a lot of this stuff will be developed in India and hence we will hold exclusive rights to these technologies. The radar is currently said to be a variant of the PAKFA's radar, but even this will be Indianized along with Indian software.

Export customers who pick FGFA will have exclusive access to Russian, Indian and Western weapons while PAKFA users will be restricted to Russian weapons. The same with avionics like HMDs, cockpit, pods etc. Overall, customers will find FGFA a more convenient aircraft. For eg: A customer like Malaysia may like to operate the aircraft with Indian weapons and Indian navigation system like IRNSS instead of GPS or GLONASS. A country like Israel may like to use American and their own weapons instead of Russian while receiving spares support from India. Any European customer may like MBDA weapons on their version of FGFA, like Meteor, IRIS-T and Brimstone instead of Aim-120, Aim-9 and Hellfire. South American customers may want Indian support (since Russians are supposedly bad at it) and western avionics. And so on.

So yeah, the Russians may end up selling PAKFA on their own to some country or the other, like China, Iran, Syria or N.Korea which India and the West may not like, which will be a watered down version anyway. But to most other international customers, the Russians may prefer to enter a tender with the FGFA due to the above advantages.

This should better your understanding of how things stand.

 

[lookieloo]

PAKFA they can sell without us. But they said FGFA will be the export model. Meaning, at least officially, PAKFA is not up for export. In case they decide to export PAKFA, we will see then.

Also it is yet unknown what technologies of FGFA will find its place on PAKFA. For eg: Let's say the new Item 30 engine is developed on an equal partnership, then the Russians won't be able to sell PAKFA with the Stage 2 engine. Only stage one engine, that is Item 117. Meaning India will hold 50% IPR for the new engine while Russia will have 100% ownership over the engine's "technology" since they developed it while we funded half of it. Meaning they can decide what levels of ToT they will provide to export customer, but both countries will have to make a decision for selling it.

Some aspects of PAKFA are already developed, for example all of what you see in the PAKFA today belongs to Russia. That includes the new radar, the 117 engine, FBW, software etc. But a lot of other technologies are yet to be developed, which includes the 360 degree radar capability that will most probably be exclusive to FGFA. So if an export customer wants 360 degree capability on their PAKFA, they will need to knock on India's doors too.

FGFA they cannot sell without us. Most of the innards will be Indian, French or Israeli. Apart from that computers will be our own along with software. Meaning a lot of this stuff will be developed in India and hence we will hold exclusive rights to these technologies. The radar is currently said to be a variant of the PAKFA's radar, but even this will be Indianized along with Indian software.

Export customers who pick FGFA will have exclusive access to Russian, Indian and Western weapons while PAKFA users will be restricted to Russian weapons. The same with avionics like HMDs, cockpit, pods etc. Overall, customers will find FGFA a more convenient aircraft. For eg: A customer like Malaysia may like to operate the aircraft with Indian weapons and Indian navigation system like IRNSS instead of GPS or GLONASS. A country like Israel may like to use American and their own weapons instead of Russian while receiving spares support from India. Any European customer may like MBDA weapons on their version of FGFA, like Meteor, IRIS-T and Brimstone instead of Aim-120, Aim-9 and Hellfire. South American customers may want Indian support (since Russians are supposedly bad at it) and western avionics. And so on.

So yeah, the Russians may end up selling PAKFA on their own to some country or the other, like China, Iran, Syria or N.Korea which India and the West may not like, which will be a watered down version anyway. But to most other international customers, the Russians may prefer to enter a tender with the FGFA due to the above advantages.

This should better your understanding of how things stand.

Semantics.

 

[arnabmit]

Huh? Are you deliberately flame-baiting or do you really lack comprehension skills?

Semantics.