Sukhoi PAK FA
- Thread starter Anshu Attri
- Start date
marcos98
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2009
- Messages
- 65
- Likes
- 4
- Joined
- May 20, 2009
- Messages
- 5,133
- Likes
- 746
F22sky finally flys up now and Russian's check is not returned again.....
so congratulations.
so congratulations.
StealthSniper
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2009
- Messages
- 1,111
- Likes
- 61
I can see the internal weapons bay is in the middle of the aircraft. I think that the bay in the middle opens and missiles on a rotating cylinder will pop out. I wonder how many missiles the PAKFA will carry. Also you can see alot of similar things to a SU-XX series aircraft. Not really a bad thing but again it's only a prototype afterall. Overall I can see the potential for a stealth airframe, I wonder how they are going to deal with exhaust gases and reducing heat signatures. The new engine will reveal alot more, I can't wait.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2009
- Messages
- 577
- Likes
- 11
Many Congratulations to Russians for pulling out yet another milestone which will once again going to shape the future of Aircraft design and development. We really need to compliment Russians for making this wonder and becoming second country in the world for making fifth generation stealth fighter jet PAK-FA. Now US airforce has every reason to justify the purchase of more F-22 Raptors. Hopefully, I am highly awating similar test flight of our own MCA. India should support this program with both hands and look to invest as much as it can to really address supremacy of chinese airforce.
But Hats off to Russians, they have really demonstrated they are still unmatched and made known themselves real innovator of Aircraft design
But Hats off to Russians, they have really demonstrated they are still unmatched and made known themselves real innovator of Aircraft design
plugwater
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2009
- Messages
- 4,154
- Likes
- 1,082
i was about to ask the same thing mate
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2009
- Messages
- 880
- Likes
- 60
^^
That's the Infrared Search & Track (IRST) pod
That's the Infrared Search & Track (IRST) pod
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2009
- Messages
- 880
- Likes
- 60
It seems like the stealth design part of this plane is not as aggressive as the Raptor.
I doubt the RCS of this plane is lower than the Raptor or JSF.
Anyway, its still a nice effort.
Given that none of India's enemies are going to get the Raptor, I think this should be enough for India.
I doubt the RCS of this plane is lower than the Raptor or JSF.
Anyway, its still a nice effort.
Given that none of India's enemies are going to get the Raptor, I think this should be enough for India.
black eagle
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2009
- Messages
- 1,237
- Likes
- 134
i also have the same felling. would love to see more stealth features on the aircraft. i think the design will go through some changes in future.
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2009
- Messages
- 880
- Likes
- 60
black eagle
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2009
- Messages
- 1,237
- Likes
- 134
What about reduction in IR signature? how do they plan to achieve that?
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2009
- Messages
- 880
- Likes
- 60
^^
new engines
new engines
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2009
- Messages
- 11,615
- Likes
- 5,775
By ubiquitous08 from secretproject
First impressions....A Ray tracing approach to stealth not having a supercomputer and RCS prediction programmes at hand...
Clearly a VLO design. Shaping appears robust in X band, L band and probably S band in front and side quaters. Facets are large in the order of over 1 meter which satisfy these frequencies.
In the VHF band side on its flat profile should give it very good RCS versus F 22 / F 35 dominated by large if canted tails. Rear quadrant RCs appears disappointing with a clear emphasis on maneouvrability over YF 23 style aft sector facets to which the design clearly has been influenced. Cockpit canopy bow a disappointment but canted. Planform has more lobes than classic 4 lobe YF 23 layout but Lerxes will generate greater maneouvrability at high AOA and ability to dynamically control direction of lerx airflow clearly an innovation intended to work with 3d nozzles and total vehicle management / control surface scheduling system (a technology pioneered in the preceding rival MFI project).
Platform:
Clearly a hybrid between the Yf 22 and the Yf 23 this design appears to combine the best features of both, much as the Su 27 Flanker incorporated the best lessons of the teen generation that preceded it. Wing planform appears F 22 optimised for supercruise but with all moving butterfly tails an attempt to wring out maximum control authority from tails deliberately sized to reduce supercruise drag and side RCS spikes much as the Northrop Grumman McDonnell Douglas JSF contender utilised butterfly tails to reduce weight and reduce tail size increasing range. Overall crossection appears to be YF 23 influenced to presumably take a advantage of volume and RCS advantages inherent to a flatted diamond (in crossection) design. Forward fuselage appears to blend F35 cockpit canopy integration with the Yf 23 moldline presumably to maximise visibility from the upper half of the diamond crossection unlike the F 22 and Yf 23 that seated canopy moldlines far further up.
Operational Factors:
Clearly the Russians sought the range and volumetric advantages inherent of the Northrop design but without the limitations of this design in maneouvrability. Given the size and reputed loadout of 10 missiles, a Yf 23 design would be a logical choice. Likewise in regards to the nose and tail, the T 50 can be seen as an "2010 update" on the YF 23 concept integrating 3D nozzles for maneouvrability at the expense of aft sector RCS, a similar approach to that taken by the F 35 with its circular nozzles (driven by Stovl and weight saving factors). As such like the F 35 a small narrow lobe in the aft RCS sector may exist. Note in the much lauded VHF band this may even be true of the F 22. Other examples of this "update" include some very F 35 reminiscent shaping solutions in the front assembly and a willingness to try the umproven small tail concept proposed by McDonnell Douglas Grumman Northrop in their JSF contender and later X 36 demonstrator. Unwilling to leave the concept of supermaneuvrability we see some curious nods to Russian obsession with post stall combat; namely a moveable lerx lip above the intakes and integration of 3 d nozzles on a 5th generation design, a first.
Conclusion: A very Russian response to the requirements of range, large loadouts and low RCS performance leveraging the many RCS solutions proposed and / or utilised by the U.S.
First impressions....A Ray tracing approach to stealth not having a supercomputer and RCS prediction programmes at hand...
Clearly a VLO design. Shaping appears robust in X band, L band and probably S band in front and side quaters. Facets are large in the order of over 1 meter which satisfy these frequencies.
In the VHF band side on its flat profile should give it very good RCS versus F 22 / F 35 dominated by large if canted tails. Rear quadrant RCs appears disappointing with a clear emphasis on maneouvrability over YF 23 style aft sector facets to which the design clearly has been influenced. Cockpit canopy bow a disappointment but canted. Planform has more lobes than classic 4 lobe YF 23 layout but Lerxes will generate greater maneouvrability at high AOA and ability to dynamically control direction of lerx airflow clearly an innovation intended to work with 3d nozzles and total vehicle management / control surface scheduling system (a technology pioneered in the preceding rival MFI project).
Platform:
Clearly a hybrid between the Yf 22 and the Yf 23 this design appears to combine the best features of both, much as the Su 27 Flanker incorporated the best lessons of the teen generation that preceded it. Wing planform appears F 22 optimised for supercruise but with all moving butterfly tails an attempt to wring out maximum control authority from tails deliberately sized to reduce supercruise drag and side RCS spikes much as the Northrop Grumman McDonnell Douglas JSF contender utilised butterfly tails to reduce weight and reduce tail size increasing range. Overall crossection appears to be YF 23 influenced to presumably take a advantage of volume and RCS advantages inherent to a flatted diamond (in crossection) design. Forward fuselage appears to blend F35 cockpit canopy integration with the Yf 23 moldline presumably to maximise visibility from the upper half of the diamond crossection unlike the F 22 and Yf 23 that seated canopy moldlines far further up.
Operational Factors:
Clearly the Russians sought the range and volumetric advantages inherent of the Northrop design but without the limitations of this design in maneouvrability. Given the size and reputed loadout of 10 missiles, a Yf 23 design would be a logical choice. Likewise in regards to the nose and tail, the T 50 can be seen as an "2010 update" on the YF 23 concept integrating 3D nozzles for maneouvrability at the expense of aft sector RCS, a similar approach to that taken by the F 35 with its circular nozzles (driven by Stovl and weight saving factors). As such like the F 35 a small narrow lobe in the aft RCS sector may exist. Note in the much lauded VHF band this may even be true of the F 22. Other examples of this "update" include some very F 35 reminiscent shaping solutions in the front assembly and a willingness to try the umproven small tail concept proposed by McDonnell Douglas Grumman Northrop in their JSF contender and later X 36 demonstrator. Unwilling to leave the concept of supermaneuvrability we see some curious nods to Russian obsession with post stall combat; namely a moveable lerx lip above the intakes and integration of 3 d nozzles on a 5th generation design, a first.
Conclusion: A very Russian response to the requirements of range, large loadouts and low RCS performance leveraging the many RCS solutions proposed and / or utilised by the U.S.
