Sukhoi PAK FA

[icecoolben]

Most probably FGFA will be derived from a basic two-seat trainer version of T-50 prototype designed by 40 HAL engineers stationed in Russia in a russian aircraft design institute like TsAGI, while the Russian model will be a single seater perhaps its composite skins, mission computers, navigation aids and several other sub systems could be supplied by the Indian side whose lead contractor is HAL just like the lead contractor of Russian side is Sukoi design bureau.

In developing subsystems, just because a prototype can be built by an experienced developer doesn't mean its going for production the next day, several copies of the same are made and tested for 100s of hours together to test and certify if it performs to the user's specifications on performance parameters, life expectancy etc. All these process involve money money money, for which India is commiting $ 6 billion. Hence the Intellectual property rights will be soley owned by Indian government e.g exclusive two-seat FGFA design, the mission computers, composite skins. Sukoi would licence these components developed by India and manufacture it in a russian factory and pay royalties. The Russian side would be responsibe for overall PAK FA airframe design & development, Engine (D&D) and AESA (D&D), these will take the $ 6 billion from the russian side whose IPR will remain with Russian government and HAL will Licence produce it in India and pay Royalties.
For every Russian built PAK FA single seater 30% of value will be Indian comonents for which sukoi will pay Indian government Royalties, Every FGFA 50% by value would be Russian including AESA radar and Engine, for which HAL will pay royalties. The airframe would be copyright of both countries thats why the skewed workshare on both versions.
Since Russia and India are not contiguous nations like EU so assembly and perhaps overtime production too of all the aircraft components may be done at the respective countries within the ambit of a shared IPR. This might be necessary for Indian needs to avoid dependance on shipments from Russia during wartime. But it kinda leaves the door open for china to replace all Indian designed units with its own J-xx developed subsystems and procure single-seat PAKFA chinese variant. Still we have to just take Russia's word for that.
"exported to third friendly countries".

 

[icecoolben]

COLUMN: An IAF View Of The FGFA Partnership

The following column, exclusive to Livefist, is by a senior IAF officer, who for obvious reasons, cannot be named. I sought his views on the FGFA agreement and have with a measure of effort persuaded him to give Livefist his views on the programme in his own words. The following piece is the result. The views here are his own, and written in his capacity as an officer of the Indian Air Force. As a matter of detail, he has permitted me to mention here that he is a fighter pilot who has been involved in two major Indo-Russian aircraft programmes in the 1990s. He has also permitted me to proofread his piece but only for purposes of clarity and continuity. His piece, in full:

At the outset, it should be clear to all concerned, especially the Indian taxpayer, that this "mother of all aircraft programmes", i.e. the agreement between India and Russia to jointly develop and manufacture an advanced fifth generation fighter aircraft (FGFA) will deliver a formidable combat platform. While all development projects have their attendant hurdles, delays and overruns, we as a nation must be sure that the end result meets all performance parameters. As of now, there is no reason to believe that there will be any undue problems in the programme.

However, it is the idea that the FGFA is a "joint design and development programme" that is troubling to many in the IAF who have dealt with all parties concerned, i.e. Hindustan Aeronautics, Sukhoi Design Bureau (SDB), UAC and ROE. Before proceeding to the ground realities, let us first understand what the FGFA is being projected to offer India over and above the material delivery of a combat platform. It is being projected as a partnership between India and Russia, where both sides will co-design, co-develop, co-engineer and co-manufacture the aircraft. The idea is also that in the course of the programme, HAL's design inputs to the FGFA will spin-off and accrue into an indigenous capability to build next generation combat platforms using strictly in-house resources. There are several other projected benefits of the programme, but these two will suffice for the purpose of this article.

Currently, the SDB has designed three prototypes (1 flying, 2 ground testbed platforms) which are of single cockpit (i.e. T-50) configuration. The idea of the preliminary design contract signed on December 21 is that HAL will be the design partner for the twin-seat variant of the aircraft. Some facts: The fact that the Russians are now testing the single-seat T-50/PAK FA does not mean that they do not have the necessary design data to fabricate a twin-seat/trainer platform. In fact, it is just the opposite. Remember that the PAK FA programme was initiated in the late 1980s, which means the standard approach of the time was to build aircraft along with a mandatory trainer variant for conversion training as well as squadron service, as has been the standard practice with Soviet aircraft engineering. Furthermore, it is a known fact in the IAF that the SDB has, in a layperson's terms, a blueprint to fabricate a twin-seat version of the T-50. If so, then the purported design inputs being offered from India's side are worth pausing to think about. What are these design inputs? Are they really design inputs?

Since 2006, ever since HAL had expressed its keenness to co-implement the IAF's custom specifications in the new platform, there has been a debate between the definition of design input and specification/modification input. Let us be clear that the T-50 prototype that is currently flying is the work of years of design engineers from one of the most skilled design bureaus of the former Soviet. This is not suggest that HAL does not have any design strengths, but merely to say that in this particular programme, the space for any inputs simply does not exist. In simple words, even if HAL is partnering in the twin-seat version, their job will involve no/negligible inputs as far as airframe is concerned. A common perception that needs to be corrected is that adding Indian avionics, BEL radar receiver, DRDO weapon systems or composite control surface elements constitutes "design input". It does not. That falls in the realm of custom modification which is basically what IAF/HAL had undertaken with the Su-30 programme in late 1990s. However, in all fairness it must be said that the scope for composites in the airframe holds some innovative possibilities from Indian laboratories. Be that as it may, the design of the platform will not be changed.

When the preliminary design of the T-50 was frozen some years ago, the IAF provided requested inputs on platform preference. Our inputs basically fell in four categories, i.e. two-pilot configuration, custom sensors/avionics, options for turbofan engine and weapon systems. Additionally, the IAF was of the view that it would be desirable to have a lower empty weight, a parameter which would to some degree be met with composites, and for which work has already begun by SDB. While the IAF team tasked with studying the platform/programme proposal was quite satisfied with the basic design, the above four parameters were crucial for our own future operations and perspective planning. The requirements were duly endorsed at all levels and met with the concurrence of HAL engineers. As far as the IAF is concerned, HAL will not be a design partner in the FGFA programme. For IAF purposes in the project, HAL is a integration/workshare partner that will co-inspect the joint modification study and execute in conjunction with SDB/Irkut/ROE. None of these areas justify the prestigious title of "design and development partner".

Finally, the FGFA will be a very competitive platform for IAF, and its first stealth aircraft. And India's involvement even at this late stage in the programme is still desirable to just being a customer like in the case of all other platforms barring Su-30 (though in the last also, contribution has not helped us keep cost down). There should be no doubts about the platform itself.

But to project this as an landmark project that has created history with great dividends for India is too far fetched. HAL is our partner at the best and worst of times. And it is important to remember that the way the FGFA programme is being projected today is as much the play of the Russian side as it is for sections within the Indian defence setup. The Russians have been reliable friends for decades, but it would be imprudent to imagine that there is any element of philanthropy in their dealings with India. If communications between IAF and ROE were ever declassified (like the Wikileaks, maybe some day!), the nation would have quite a different picture of how it is to deal with the Russians. Still, that does not take away from the value of their partnership. Ultimately, the FGFA programme, in my view, is no different from most of the other so-called joint programmes we have with Russia, including the Su-30 MKI.

To conclude, a few questions which are worth considering: As a "joint D&D partner", will HAL be able to devlop and deliver India's next generation fighter aircraft all by itself? Is India's involvement in the FGFA programme simply as a monetary investor?

http://livefist.blogspot.com/2010/12/column-iaf-view-of-fgfa-partnership.html

Here's my assesment of the latest Livefist report on FGFA programme.

The IAF is an organisation that never built within itself an institution with the capability to design airframes or atleast build technology demonstrators of subsystems. It doesn't have the industrial cooperation experience of other airforces like Russain Federation, Europeon forces or USAF to base its stand and distinguish true blue field joint venture like A400, multiple projects built from a common basic layout general Dynamics F-16 variants around the globe like F-2, KF-16, F-16 Bk 60, Lavi, same project amalgamated from different technology demos like Tornado, Eurofighter, customisation to particular user and a user made modification on an ad hoc basis from one another on a qualitative and quantitative basis. the role of the User in the development of a weapons system is the prominent one, which is something this service has never realised.

The FGFA and PAK FA will differ from one another, the way lockheed martin F-16 and mitshibishi F-2 differ from one another. It depends on the individual's association with industry, experience and intellectual capacity to arrive at a logical conclusion before passing judgement on HAL and about Russian-Indian joint venture. I doubt this officer has the above mentioned traits to base his beliefs on.

 

[gogbot]

See we already worked with the Russians on a similar deal the Brhamos.
Which we all are happy with the end result.

why is everyone so afraid the FGFA is will be any different.

 

[ppgj]

a realistic article/observations by the anonymous IAF officer.

"joint development" was a misnomer. india would be at best contributing to the "composies", avionics including possibly EW system etc..

however what India would be aiming/gaining is -

1. by being an "equal partner" will have IP rights over the export. it can block sales by Russia to China or any other potential adversaries of India.

(by doling out expensive mirage upgrade deal to the french, they want to make sure french do not give the pakistanis the avionics upgrade they were close to clinching for the JF 17)

however it needs to be seen if this IPR is limited to FGFA or extends to PAKFA as well. any body??

2. it will give indian designers an opportunity to closely observe and be part the designing of various stages of the "stealth" aircraft - a step, which would give them a leg up when they settle to put them to use in the AMCA.

i guess ADA/HAL designers would be part of the indian design team which would be stationed in Russia for this purpose.

also as part of india's geostrategy -

keeping the russians on their side politically - a step, which will soothe their nerves who are getting alarmed by india getting cosier with the US with many defence deals being struck with them in the recent past.

russians would also be doubly happy as they get the much needed capital infusion in to their MIC which of late has been going thro' tough times both economically and due to lack of innovation.

 

[shuvo@y2k10]

even though i agree with some points in the article posted on livefist but i beleive that this project is very essential for hal because not only will they be able to jointly design the 2-seater version of fgfa but it can also have technology spinoff's which can be used in amca project.also
according to some western analyst the pak-fa airframe is not a true steath airframe like f-22(i don't know how much is truth and how much is western propoganda) so hopefully the 2 seat prototype can be upto the stealtyh standards of f-22 in terms of airframe (if not more) and will also be as per iaf reqirements.the su-30 mki was not just a 2 seater version of su-27 prototype but it had canards, 2-d tvc ,indo-israeli-western avionics and advanced radards(bars -n011m passive),so the fgfa prototype is also highly unlikely to resemly just a 2 seater version of the t-50 protype.

 

[sayareakd]

COLUMN: An IAF View Of The FGFA Partnership

from Live Fist

So we dont get much from FGFA,
IAF dont want any fighter made by DRDO, what to say of AMCA,
So that leave us with USA 5G.

Got it Shiv Aroor..................:emot0: :emot100: :emot112:

 

[Anshu Attri]

Новая версия

 

[icecoolben]

For the F-35 sceptics: Joint Strike Fighter program reaches 2010 goal of 394 test flights

The F-35C prototype (carrier version) shown here being drop tested. Meanwhile, the US Marine Corps is adamant on seeing the F-35B programme through

News about the F-35... from Lockheed Martin

"On Thursday, December 9, the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II program team reached its 2010 goal of 394 test flights jointly established by the Joint Strike Fighter Program Office and Lockheed Martin. Since the first flight of the F-35 on December 15, 2006, the program has logged a total of 531 flights, expanding the performance envelope of the three F-35 variants and testing the mission systems.

"We exceeded our 394-flight goal and expect to meet our overall test-point goal this year by reaching ahead and working 2011 test points," said J.D. McFarlan, Lockheed Martin vice president of F-35 Test and Verification. "While we are still behind on our overall STOVL variant testing, we are working through a plan to get us back on track."

In November, the program completed 60 flights against a plan of 51. Both the F-35B short takeoff/vertical landing (STOVL) and the F-35A conventional takeoff and landing (CTOL) variants exceeded their monthly flight targets. The F-35C carrier variant (CV) jet fell just two flights short of its plan.

The F-35 Lightning II is a 5th generation fighter, combining advanced stealth with fighter speed and agility, fully fused sensor information, network-enabled operations and advanced sustainment. Lockheed Martin is developing the F-35 with its principal industrial partners, Northrop Grumman and BAE Systems."

My comment

Benith said...

OK, we agree F-35 program is on track will beat all MMRCA and FGFA. But no matter how much hue and cry paying for one fighter's development and buying 100 of another variety is complete non-sense. But I was surprised u could get the highest decision making apparatus to be so transparent and come out with an explanation.

I've been campaigning for scrapping MMRCA since it would scuttle proper induction of Tejas by depriving it of IAF's attention, u can check it out at

http://www.defenceforum.in/forum/showthread.php?t=16914

I agree by the time FGFA is inducted there will be no strike fighters in IAF armoury to help army in A to G ops. So why don't u write an article "the case for developing Indo-Russian FGFA into a stealthy strike fighter with a secondary air defence role"

Its not something out of the blue. the Russians call Su-34 a bomber inspite of it having only 8 tons of payload. the americans investigated FB-22, unfortunately it never got off the drawing board. Imagine a Su-34 kind of version of PAKFA developed in two-seat configuration(exclusive WSO) for INDIA developed and fielded in 200 nos starting 2020 along with first batch of 50 single seater PAKFA for air-superiority can be maintained till AMCA takes over the load starting 2025. First set of PAKFA may be sold to friendly nations like vietnam to ease logistics, after AMCA is taken in numbers. AMCA with 2 tons of internal load is more than enough for Air to Air, while 6-8 tons of payload on FGFA can give both tactical and deep penetration stealthy strike capability. What do u think?

Ajay replied

Broadsword said...

Ravi's comment: "I would avoid Americans as long as I can."

All the best, Ravi, in your lonely little corner! I don't know if you've noticed it, but the MoD certainly isn't avoiding the Americans.

Benith's question: "AMCA with 2 tons of internal load is more than enough for Air to Air, while 6-8 tons of payload on FGFA can give both tactical and deep penetration stealthy strike capability."

Benith, you're making the same mistake that most people in the F-35 debate have made, which is to imagine that if you have a 6-8 tonne weapons load, you can do the job of a ground strike aircraft. No Sir.

The F-35 is engineered, ground up, with every nut and bolt geared towards ground strike. It is about much, much more than just weapons load.

Anonymous 20:10. Thanks for bringing that error to my notice. I've corrected it.

My reply

The JSF F-35 didn't just fall out of the sky into US lap as the premier post cold war multi-role fighter.
A multi-role plane is so uttered becos, it performs three tasks Air-defence, Strike and Reconnasance. You should acknowlodge the world's first ground up development of a multi-role fighter is the JAS-39 grippen. After 14 years in service, few combat planes have been fielded as multi-role ground up as the JAS-39 bar the Dassalt Rafale with F-35 soon to join the ranks. Others have largely been makeovers of existing platforms compromised to perform multi-roles at a switch turn Hence swing-role aircrafts.
Our arguement involves around the context that F-35 is more survivable as a defence and strike fighter in the Chinese and pakistani theatres of conflict since its armour is compounded by stealth, giving it the element of surprise. I hope u agree.
It seems u are fixated on the sense that PAK FA is an air-superiority fighter with limited strike capability with a 6 ton payload. Lets come to terms with the present with only a Technology demonstrator T-50 is just a hood with nothing in it to perform neither defence, strike nor reconassance. To perform multi-roles a Radar needs to look to air and terrain at the same time, this radar is in the works. To hit a target 400 km away using a cruise missile u need GPS,TERPROM(Terrain profile matching)guidance, Just dropping two LGB won't do. Targetting pods need to be developed with capabilities to distinguish ground targets and engage the most important and evasive ones using armour piercing ammunition. A special EW suite, Senor fusion have only started. In short with $ 12 billion earmarked PAK FA is no short of resources and commitment. with which it can be developed to become as multi-role as the JSF F-35.
Our plane is FGFA which is still very much on paper, it will only mock up when 40 HAL engineers reach Russia and work in TsAGI research institute with Sukoi Engineers. The very need for a special WSO is for strike role like in the F-14 to operate complex avionics. With sensor fusion and a second member FGFA can be developed into a best multi-role fighter if large quantity of orders keep coming. But for that to happen IAF cannot go duplicating inventory by buying F-35.
Technically Su-30 is a better strike fighter to replace Mig-27 and Jaguar with a combat load of 8 tons. It has already replaced all of mig-23. But still to keep up its tradition of evaluating and selecting IAF is hloding a bogus MMRCA in the name of diversifying from the Russians.
If they want to diversify why not into Tejas? it is our own plane, no IPR restriction any type of munition from any source like the Raytheon cluster bombs can be integrated onto it, which may not be possible on Su-30. Of all the Late claims, there is still 15 more years before Mirage 2000, Jaguar and mig-29 start retiring. Can't Tejas replace the 2 ton payload carrying Mig-21 now and Tejas mk-2 replace 4 ton carrying mig-27 and Jaguar till 2025?
The military seems to be on a muddled path where it encourages indigenous and joint developments in talks and forums; in actual practice they never appreciate the work of scientists and engineers in developing weapons and systems platforms for them. This is especially true regarding the Indian context where the attitude is "give us the money and we'll get what we need from any loser out there with a 'open for sale' sign".
It seems for all the enthusiasim u show for Akash and Tejas program, when I see that u seem to be taken by surprise when indigenous programs meet their specifications and impress the forces to get more orders.may be its due to your stint with the army, but no problem we engineers are used to it by now. Just don't take our foreign counter parts for granted too. They may sell off weapons eagerly for money, but they seldom get to enjoy the respect, glamour and admiration military commanders get.

What can I say to guy who thinks nuts and bolts of a aircraft need to be developed for strike mission? I don't think he knows there are guidance systems on combat aircraft that are used to guide precision giuded weapons be it cruise missiles, smart bombs or armour piercing ammunitions. They are more important the airframe itself in mordern warfare.

 

[p2prada]

Icecoolben:

That guy called Ajay is right. A fighter needs to be jury rigged to be a strike aircraft. Even if the F-18SH carried lesser payload than the F-15E, the SH is still a better strike fighter than the F-15 to the point where the F-15 cannot even match the SH in any parameter. Likewise, the Mig-29k cannot be compared to Mig-27 in strike missions.

The fighters like Su-30 and F-15 or even Mirage-2000 are meant to be air superiority platforms. They cannot fly very well in lower altitudes like the SH or the Mig-27.

Indigenous capability is very important for Global players. But India and China are not Global players in the military domain. Look at China, after an entire decade of experimenting with indigenous capability they have nothing. Their J-10 has a foreign engine just like the LCA. Their J-11 is a rip off that cannot fly properly. Their Type-99 is next to useless. Their Awesome capability in Nuclear submarines have been best used to break the tide in the harbour. Now they are turning to Russia for the defence needs AGAIN. Indigenous capability is for global players with a proven industrial capability. Not for countries which are still learning to walk. So we have to buy from countries that put up a sign saying "Open for sale."

Having Indigenous capability is great. But if the product is not great then you cannot have a great armed forces. You will get stuck with Only mediocre. Look at Iran or China.

DRDO has had its ups and downs. Many projects have been failures like Arjun, Trishul etc. Many projects have been successful like 3D Rajendra, Akash missile, Swordfish, Samyukta EW systems etc. The successful products have been inducted but the failed products have not and that's the only difference.

 

[jstcvw09cd]

Very informative thread.


Any info about the Head dsiplay system for Pak-fa?

 

[RPK]

5G aircraft: MoD yet to give final shape
http://expressbuzz.com/nation/5g-aircraft-mod-yet-to-give-final-shape/235074.html

NEWDELHI: With India and Russia finalising the design contract for joint development of a fifth generation fighter aircraft (FGFA), contours of the mammoth programme that would give the Indian Air Force (IAF) arguably its most potent arsenal for the future are open for analysis.


The Ministry of Defence is yet to spell out partnership arrangement between the Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) and the Russians.

The questions being asked are if this would be an equal partnership or India would essentially contribute with funds and Russians would actually design the aircraft.

Russia's Sukhoi Design Bureau has already been ready with prototypes of its FGFA T-50, which is a single-cockpit aircraft.

The IAF wanted its FGFA to be a twin-seat variant. It needs to be clarified what would be the HAL's contribution, in terms of design of the new version.

The Russians took more than 20 years to finalise design of T-50, but its new variant, being named as perspective multi-role fighter, would come out of the design stage in only 18 months according to the agreement.

The perspective multi-role fighter will have the IAF's basic requirements in place like that of a twin-pilot configuration and provisions for customised sensors and avionics.

It wants flexibility of adding more thrust capacity and lighter weight. The programme is crucial for the IAF as it would be the first stealth fighter in its fleet and with planned induction of 300 of these aircraft, the FGFA would become the mainstay of its combat capacity in the future. The HAL is likely to contribute mostly at the joint production stage as is the case with the Sukhoi-30 fighters which are now being produced at home. In terms of money, India will make huge investments into the programme over the next two decades.

It is estimated that each aircraft would cost somewhere around $100 million. The size of entire deal could be anywhere between $30 and $35 billion, making it the biggest-ever contract.

 

[black eagle]

FGFA: INDIAN IRON

SOURCE : AJAY NAIK Security Editorial Panel For Security Magazine

Russian and India have recently cleared way for the development of India's first Stealth fighter aircraft which will be based on Sukhoi's T-50 (Pak-Fa) 5th Generation aircraft, Russia will field a real Pak-Fa Prototype only in 2013 which will incorporate a better 3D Thrust Vectoring Controls (TVC) nozzles powered by an upgraded AL-41F engine, while it will also get Stealth treatment near its engine section.

After first flight of T-50 many western defense experts claimed that Indian FGFA (Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft) will be only MKIisation of Pak-FA, but recent agreement clears some air in development of FGFA.

HAL will be working FGFA along with Sukhoi which will require intense modification to the airframe, HAL will have a 30 % share in design work of FGFA, and whole Avionics package will designed and integration will be done HAL, cockpit layout of the aircraft will also be done by HAL that will include MFDs, FGFA will be a twin seat 5th gen Fighter aircraft has required by Indian air force which will also require redevelopment of wings and control surfaces.

HAL will also integrate avionics which will also find its way into AMCA which ADA will be developing soon. FGFA which will have Second pilot or a WSO officer meaning additional avionics will have to be developed for the second pilot, HAL will also integrate Avionics of European origins, and HAL will also be developing Indian Mission Control Computer for FGFA.

India would bring into play its expertise in composites, lightweight high-strength materials that significantly bring down the weight of FGFA. While HAL is tight lipped about Weapons package which might go in FGFA since it is too early to talk about it but sources have indicated that FGFA will have Indian Astra -2 and Astra-1 has main BVR Missiles, FGFA will also incorporate European Weapons package.

HAL will also be developing Electronic Warfare package for the aircraft too, now it seems that FGFA will if not Be totally indigenous aircraft but will have a significant Indian input and it will only help India develop AMCA countries Indigenous 5th generation fighter aircraft and first flight of it has been planned by 2018-20 time frame, just after development of FGFA will be over.

http://idrw.org/?p=2062

 

[sathya]

mod :-FAKE PHOTOSHOP IMAGES FROM PAKISTAN - WHO HAD NO ROLE IN J-20 NOT WORTH A SPACE



its time Russia and India speedup, otherwise will lose both power and business to china

 

[icecoolben]

its time Russia and India speedup, otherwise will lose both power and business to china[/QUOTE]

WhatS it supposed to do, flap its wings and fly?

Don't get so worked up about these images, these chistmas fighter images will cease to appear when chinese photo-shop designers leave for their real jobs from 02 jan 2011.

 

[hitenray09]

its time Russia and India speedup, otherwise will lose both power and business to china

crap.......................................

 

[JHA]

Why is so much importance being given to Photoshops..Each day they are appearing in dozens.. Maybe we should make some AMCA and fly next year ..

 

[sandeepdg]

What, you guys are still doubting the Chinese 5G bird ??? Its real, just admit it and get over it !!!

 

[Kunal Biswas]

This thread belongs to PAK-FA :emot159:

 

[Kunal Biswas]

 

[Kunal Biswas]