Sukhoi PAK FA

[Anshu Attri]

cross posting......

PAK FA t-50.........

 

[Anshu Attri]

clear veiw of inlet.....

 

[Anshu Attri]

inlet closer veiw.........

 

[A.V.]

very old video documentary on the development of the PAKFA not much is the same as of now but still an excellent watch

P.N.- full video is in russian so mut know russian to understand no subtitles too

[video]http://www.megavideo.com/?v=2F6A8GVD[/video]

 

[AJSINGH]

i wonder why IAF is asking for twin seater PAK FA

 

[Armand2REP]

i wonder why IAF is asking for twin seater PAK FA

Already discussed a couple times on here, check back in the thread over our discussion for IAFs need for penetration strike.

 

[death.by.chocolate]

the aircraft has been designed with a clear understanding of the effects of 'stealth' on air combat when both sides present with low-observable aircraft. Obviously, the combatants will be closer when their radar sensors detect the other side, so close in fact that the Infra-Red Scan and Track (IRST) might be the first sensor to detect the presence of an enemy aircraft. The problem is this: the PAK-FA has IRST capability and the F-22A does not. Worse, the extreme agility of the PAK-FA will allow it to dodge the F-22A's AIM-120 missile shots, while the Raptor will likely not be able to out-turn the more advanced Russian (and Chinese) missiles. Surviving F-22As would then be committed to what fighter pilots call a 'knife fight' – close-in dogfights where superior agility wins – and the PAK-FA will out-manoeuvre the F-22A.

Yes the F-22 is vulnerable in WVR - name one fighter that is invulnerable in a 'knife fight'? An F-22 pilot will have to be monumentally stupid to abandon a considerable LO advantage and engage in a dog fight.

IR sensors provide good angular resolution but not range. Radar and lasers offer good range resolution but poor angular resolution. A combination of sensors is always employed in an engagement.
In other words the PAK-FA cannot rely solely on its IRST sensors to track and target an F-22. In addition, the IR signature of a penetrating F-22 is dominated by aerodynamic heating of the skin and not the exhaust; a key design consideration for the F-22 is to limit IR detection to 10 km at a penetration speed of mach 1 from a lower threat surveillance altitude (adversary is at a lower altitude). The altitude and MACH speed is of crucial importance because the F-22 is designed to blend into the sky when seen by IRST sensor from a lower altitude at MACH 1 or lower speeds. This is rumored to have been achieved by using fuel to cool leading edges and lower wing surface, this explains why the Raptor is easily visible to space based IR sensors but less visible to ground based or lower altitude IR sensors. F-22 is a networked fighter; it will likely acquire target data (including IR) in real time from AWACS and satellites and so IRST sensors are considered unnecessary for current block Raptors.

The Raptor can be beaten by forcing it to compete outside its operational envelope; a 1-v-1 dog fight is an example of the opponent forcing the F-22 to fight by its rules, even in a 1-v-1 dog fight I believe the Raptor will prevail against most adversaries may be 50-50 against the PAK-FA but is the risk of losing an expensive fighter worth the reward of neutralizing just one enemy combatant? A rhetorical question the answer should be obvious to most, in the real world, air combat is not about proving which plane or pilot is better it is about accomplishing a mission efficiently.

 

[AJSINGH]

Yes the F-22 is vulnerable in WVR - name one fighter that is invulnerable in a 'knife fight'? An F-22 pilot will have to be monumentally stupid to abandon a considerable LO advantage and engage in a dog fight.

IR sensors provide good angular resolution but not range. Radar and lasers offer good range resolution but poor angular resolution. A combination of sensors is always employed in an engagement.
In other words the PAK-FA cannot rely solely on its IRST sensors to track and target an F-22. In addition, the IR signature of a penetrating F-22 is dominated by aerodynamic heating of the skin and not the exhaust; a key design consideration for the F-22 is to limit IR detection to 10 km at a penetration speed of mach 1 from a lower threat surveillance altitude (adversary is at a lower altitude). The altitude and MACH speed is of crucial importance because the F-22 is designed to blend into the sky when seen by IRST sensor from a lower altitude at MACH 1 or lower speeds. This is rumored to have been achieved by using fuel to cool leading edges and lower wing surface, this explains why the Raptor is easily visible to space based IR sensors but less visible to ground based or lower altitude IR sensors. F-22 is a networked fighter; it will likely acquire target data (including IR) in real time from AWACS and satellites and so IRST sensors are considered unnecessary for current block Raptors.

The Raptor can be beaten by forcing it to compete outside its operational envelope; a 1-v-1 dog fight is an example of the opponent forcing the F-22 to fight by its rules, even in a 1-v-1 dog fight I believe the Raptor will prevail against most adversaries may be 50-50 against the PAK-FA but is the risk of losing an expensive fighter worth the reward of neutralizing just one enemy combatant? A rhetorical question the answer should be obvious to most, in the real world, air combat is not about proving which plane or pilot is better it is about accomplishing a mission efficiently.

i buy your argumnet but you mentioned here that Raptor will work here with the AWACS,well yes isnt that true for PAK FA,wont it work with AWACS ,so let us assume that both the aircraft are in close range ,with IRST working for PAK FA ,it then can very well switch on its radar and engage the aircraft
PAK FA will defenitely have an edge over F-22 because it having 3-D TVC
and plus IRST is suppose to pick up the aircraft and it is not enough to lock on to the enemy .

 

[Quickgun Murugan]

Don't know if posted before.

Compendium of all pak fa images in link below

http://www.paralay.com/su50/

 

[plugwater]

...................................................

 

[plugwater]

..........................................

 

[plugwater]

.................................................

 

[plugwater]

.......................................

 

[plugwater]

.........................................

 

[AJSINGH]

sleek beauty and larger internal payload ....its NATO name should be "Invincible " or "Raptoriski" ( meaning Raptor killer)

 

[ahmedsid]

sleek beauty and larger internal payload ....its NATO name should be "Invincible " or "Raptoriski" ( meaning Raptor killer)

Raptorski means raptor killer? so Amraamski means AMRAAM killer? Ski means killer in Russian? Could you please clarify, my Russians bad. I always thought they add Ski at the end to Russianise the word and it didnt have a meaning like killer. Do Correct me.

 

[nrj]

sleek beauty and larger internal payload ....its NATO name should be "Invincible " or "Raptoriski" ( meaning Raptor killer)

NATO reporting name for PAK FA (T-50) is Firefox.

 

[plugwater]

sleek beauty and larger internal payload ....its NATO name should be "Invincible " or "Raptoriski" ( meaning Raptor killer)

Firefox is its NATO reporting name. Under the NATO reporting system all Russian and Chinese fighter names starts with letter F. Raptorski is just a nickname.

 

[flash]

sleek beauty and larger internal payload ....its NATO name should be "Invincible " or "Raptoriski" ( meaning Raptor killer)

Curb your enthusiasm mate, all we know for certain at the moment is that it can fly.

 

[plugwater]

Raptorski means raptor killer? so Amraamski means AMRAAM killer? Ski means killer in Russian? Could you please clarify, my Russians bad. I always thought they add Ski at the end to Russianise the word and it didnt have a meaning like killer. Do Correct me.

"ski" is kind of like "son of" or "closely associated with". but i am not so sure though.