Sukhoi PAK FA

[bhramos]

 

[p2prada]

Well I wont put my money for the side parts as weapon bay unless the panel blows away before firing the weapon.

Those are confirmed to be weapons bays.

We are yet to see the inside of the bays.

EDIT: Missile load is said to be 16. That's 8 in the main weapons bay, 2 in the side bays and 6 on external stations. No idea if they are developing pods capable of holding more than 2 missiles on each hardpoint. That would increase numbers by at least 2 more if not 4 more.

 

[Payeng]

well I cant figure out how a weapon would be fired by those side pods..........

Though the last image show some lines (not those red markings) indicating that it could be a missile firing concealed bay.
but relating the same with the Prototype 1 pictures it is hard to justify that it is a weapon bay
The size of the pod would be able to hold a AAM but the mechanism about how it will open up remains a mystery.
Another fact that supports the it can be a weapon bay is, due to the positioning of the landing gear door bay it was necessary to relocate the position.

p2prada If their is any company/govt. report that declare the side pods as weapon bay please let me know.

Regarding external weapons load if it is 6, you can count it as 2 each under the wings and 1 each under the engine air duct, thats makes a count of 6 without the use of dual missile capable hardpoints.

 

[p2prada]

well I cant figure out how a weapon would be fired by those side pods..........

They can be mockups for aerodynamics rather than the real thing. Even I did not believe they could be pods until analysts pointed it out as pods. Maybe they do open and we don't know how. They are big enough to hold atleast one.

p2prada If their is any company/govt. report that declare the side pods as weapon bay please let me know.

Nothing official has been released for PAKFA. It may not even be a side bay. We may have to wait for the fourth prototype or the ones that come later for confirmation.

Some bloggers don't point it out as weapons bays. I think I saw a Pravda drawing with only the main internal bay carrying weapons.

Regarding external weapons load if it is 6, you can count it as 2 each under the wings and 1 each under the engine air duct, thats makes a count of 6 without the use of dual missile capable hardpoints.

Seems like it; 4 on wings and 2 on nacelles.

Multiple ejector racks can increase the number even further. Stealth optimized, aerodynamic weapons pods with dual ejector racks can be used on the wing hardpoints to double the number without major drag penalties. So, we can give a fanboy estimate of 10 internal and 10 external = 20 AA-12s and look all doe eyed until reality brings us back with just 8 internal and 4 external missiles, with the 8 being combinations of WVR and BVR.

At least we know J-20 has side bays(6+2).

One second thoughts,

I think I see something here, in the red circle I marked at the right side.

A crevice.

Seems like dreams can be true afterall.

 

[Twinblade]

The new engine's nozzles will most probably be round. Flat nozzles like F-22 has nothing to do with stealth, but supercruise.

Even round nozzles can have saw tooth arrangement and provide lower RCS returns.

This is a stealth optimized nozzle of the F-35.

Supercruising is all a game of thrust and drag and the loss of thrust in 'flattening' the nozzles can in no way compensate for the reduction in drag due to flattening (if any). The purpose of flat nozzles is to reduce the IR signature of the exhaust plume by spreading it into a sheet instead of a cone, thereby increasing the surface area and dissipation of heat. The serrations on the nozzle take care of EM reflections.

Those are confirmed to be weapons bays.

We are yet to see the inside of the bays.

EDIT: Missile load is said to be 16. That's 8 in the main weapons bay, 2 in the side bays and 6 on external stations. No idea if they are developing pods capable of holding more than 2 missiles on each hardpoint. That would increase numbers by at least 2 more if not 4 more.

8 missiles in the weapons bay ? not before folding fin versions of R-77 are developed

 

[p2prada]

Supercruising is all a game of thrust and drag and the loss of thrust in 'flattening' the nozzles can in no way compensate for the reduction in drag due to flattening (if any). The purpose of flat nozzles is to reduce the IR signature of the exhaust plume by spreading it into a sheet instead of a cone, thereby increasing the surface area and dissipation of heat. The serrations on the nozzle take care of EM reflections.

There is RAM coating on the inside along with a radar blocker in the F-22's engine. Something that has not been placed inside the F-35.

With high thrust and drag you don't achieve the same levels of supercruise as the F-22/PAKFA or SR-71. Supercruise needs to be designed right from the outset. Rafale and EF's capability to supercruise wasn't a design parameter even if the speeds are above Mach 1.

Flat nozzles on F-22 are meant for supercruise is Gambit's opinion.

IR cooling is not the objective of flat nozzles, IR cooling is more complex on the F-22 and the F-35. It is achieved by mixing cool air with the hot gases at the exhaust. There are ducts which allows the inlet air to exit the aircraft without having to enter the hot parts.

8 missiles in the weapons bay ? not before folding fin versions of R-77 are developed

Already developed. Actually both Russian and western analysts have pointed out that even the first R-77 model was customized for an internal bay. Su-47 has had internal bays since years now along with the Mig 1.44.

 

[Sridhar]

Monday, June 25, 2012
DRDO's Strike Scenario For 3 Indian Fighter Efforts
Livefist: DRDO's Strike Scenario For 3 Indian Fighter Efforts

 

[Payeng]

look at the picture of FGFA DRDO needs to brush up power point skills.

 

[p2prada]

What bull crap analysis. PAKFA can be used in all three scenarios. AMCA can be used in the first two as well.

DRDO is only trying to sell LCAs here.

Anyway this scenario is useful only against China.

 

[Apollyon]

Those are confirmed to be weapons bays.

We are yet to see the inside of the bays.

EDIT: Missile load is said to be 16. That's 8 in the main weapons bay, 2 in the side bays and 6 on external stations. No idea if they are developing pods capable of holding more than 2 missiles on each hardpoint. That would increase numbers by at least 2 more if not 4 more.

Air-to-Air missiles being developed for PAK-FA :

1. Long Range : RVV-BD

- RVV-BD long-range guided missile is presented at MAKS-2011 for the first time. In comparison with its predecessor R-33E long-range guided missile the new one has improved technical performance. High aerodynamic quality of RVV-BD missile and use of dual-mode solid – fuelled motor taking into consideration its all-up weight up to 510 caliber, permit launch – range up to 200 km (R – 33E has launch range only 120 km) and ability to destroy targets with overload up to 8 g (R – 33E able to destroy only with 4 g overload) at the altitude from 15 m to 25 km.

2. Medium Range : RVV-SD (Range : 110km max, Weight : 190kg)

Missile dimensions, m
- length – 3.71
- diameter – 0.2
- wing span – 0.42
- fin span – 0.68

3.Small Range : RVV-MD (Range : 40km max, Weight : 106kg)


Missile dimensions, m
- length – 2. 92
- diameter – 0.17
- wing span – 0.51
- fin span – 0.385

 

[p2prada]

The dimensions for RVV-MD indicate there can be two missiles per side bay on the PAKFA. The side bays seem to be at least 5m in length.

Anyway there is a high chance these are not meant for PAKFA, but for Su-35 and other Flankers and Migs. These missiles have been available since 2009 while PAKFA is a 2015 development.

The Navy came under attack by CAG for not having bought weapons in the 2004 Mig-29K contract. Perhaps the IN was waiting for the Russians to operationalize these three missiles before placing orders.

 

[Payeng]

what happened to the K-100 AWAC killer

 

[p2prada]

That's for MKI. We are getting it.

It is 6m without boosters, so I don't think PAKFA will carry it. The R-37 is more compact at 4m without boosters.

Maybe the Russians will combine the 2 weapons bays to act as a single bay. That way we have place to carry one Brahmos discreetly. Or it could be possible on FGFA instead while we use R-37 and R-37M variants on PAKFA.

Well whatever the case, K-100 will be used on MKI.

 

[A chauhan]

nozzle concept for PAK FA....... © saintkatanalegacy

I have seen this technique somewhere in TV don't know what they call it, but this technique is used to pump air into Airbus 380A's emergency exit bags with the help of rockets, which dramatically increases the thrust sucking the air from open sides due to vacuum created by engine exhaust.
These pics appear to be of 2D TVC concept. Are they really going to use this concept with PAKFA 3D TVC ?

 

[Drsomnath999]

8 missiles in the weapons bay ? not before folding fin versions of R-77 are developed

i think 6 would be the appropiate answer in the internal weapon bay in fuselarge i think
1+1 on side weapon bay for short range missiles

 

[p2prada]

8 missiles in the weapons bay ? not before folding fin versions of R-77 are developed

I forgot to add one more important point. The wing span is very small on the R-77.

The grid fins are what pose problems and they can fold. I think they could always fold since the day it was inducted.

Like I said, the R-77 was built from scratch for the internal bay.

 

[Payeng]

Next generation fighter jet should have next generation missiles.

 

[p2prada]

Not necessary that they should change the R-77 airframe. It is simply very good. What matters is the seeker and guidance should be next generation.

There is a chance we will see a R-77 with Ramjet for the PAKFA. IMHO SD, BD and MD versions are meant for 4th gen aircraft rather than PAKFA.

Eventually we will see a much more advanced version before induction in 2015.

 

[Payeng]

By folding the wings they can sort out better use of limited space, consider the concealed weapon bay as a canister like that in Anti Tank missile like Nag or that of Brahmos cruise missile.

previous versions of AAM did not demand a folded wings while the compactness of size by folding the wings it might make space for one extra missile.

 

[Twinblade]

I forgot to add one more important point. The wing span is very small on the R-77.

The grid fins are what pose problems and they can fold. I think they could always fold since the day it was inducted.

Like I said, the R-77 was built from scratch for the internal bay.

The minimum wingspan on r-77 is 350mm (when wings are aligned diagonally) and the bay width is 1.4-1.5 m. The only way the current gen of r-77 is going to get crammed in those bays is with negligible clearance between the walls and the missiles