Sukhoi PAK FA

[p2prada]

Speculation is rife. They have come on record saying they have built the device but engines do not have the kind of power they require to power the generator to its fullest capacity.

Check "Keldysh NIT" and "Anatoliy Koroteyev" at ITAR. He is the director of a research institute. There are only 2 reasons for this. Either they are successful or close to being successful or they are making it all up right from the top ranking scientists just to make themselves look good.

Some analysts suggest the T-50 would have plasma ports at specific parts of the aircraft like in front of the air inlets where a plasma cloud can be used to break BVR tracking signals. The plasma may not stay for long, but if it does it's job it would be a huge deal.

Of course, American analysts say it is all hogwash. But Russians scientists would not be pushing this unnecessarily and try to look like a fool at the same time. That's why let's not discount it until they confirm it either by words or by action.

 

[black eagle]

Its a little old but i came across this piece on the PAK-FA while browsing.. Couldn't help but post it...

 

[chex3009]

 

[Crusader53]

Kopp is quite respected by Analysts.


LOL

 

[p2prada]

Kopp is quite respected by Analysts.

LOL

Yeah. Check again. He is even quoted in the Carniegee think tank report with MMRCA.

Just because you don't like his analysis does not mean other don't too.

 

[black eagle]

another view of the L-Band antennas...

 

[Crusader53]

Yeah. Check again. He is even quoted in the Carniegee think tank report with MMRCA.

Just because you don't like his analysis does not mean other don't too.

Would you care to provide a list of respected "Analysis" that support APA and/or Dr,. Kopp.

 

[black eagle]

Funny PAK-FA pic...

 

[p2prada]

Would you care to provide a list of respected "Analysis" that support APA and/or Dr,. Kopp.

You cannot take Dr. Kopp's work as Gospel truth, but at the same time you cannot dismiss him as ludicrous simply because your "PhD" opinions don't match with his Phd opinions.

There are many analysts who do read Dr. Carlo Kopp's work without dismissing him.

His primary problems against F-35 is it's small payload, less loiter time and less maneuvering capability against aircraft like Su-30MKI and Su-35BM. All of that is true in every sense.

Carnige also says the MKI is closer to the Raptor in performance and EW and aircraft like Super Hornet can only complement bigger beasts like MKI. They also say MRCA jets like SH will still be inferior to the big beast in IAF. Carnige also says the MKI's performance and capabilities equal F-35 is some parameters and exceed in some others. This analysis has a lot in common with Dr. Carlo Kopp and a lot of other analysts with PhDs, including USN.

 

[sandeepdg]

A respectable Aussie aviation site is saying that J20 is more stealthier than PAK FA.

Well, that can also mean that the J-20 is more stealthier than the F-35 and the F-22 ! Poor Americans !

 

[Anshu Attri]

T-50 / PAK-FA: one year anniversary of the first flight and new documentary


http://www.strategypage.com/militaryforums/6-74895.aspx

[video]http://rutube.ru/tracks/4001286.html?v=161f9887a5800237c7f75533d4e7b903&autoStart=true&bmstart=1000[/video]

Some assertions from the documentary:

- Work on "second stage" engine(featured with a increased thrust, stealthy nozzles etc.) for PAK-FA should be started in 2011 with consolidation of whole Russia's engine manufacturing industry

- PAK-FA maneuverability capabilities should be significantly better compared to 4th generation fighter jets

- Self-diagnose systems in most critical parts and components of an aircraft

- A widely usage of advanced composite materials. PAK-FA's airframe has four times less parts compared to Su-27(T-10) series aircraft

- VVS (air force) is planning to finish preliminary fighter jet by 2012 and general trials by 2015

- More than 50 aircraft are planned for the first PAK-FA procurement party

- Russia's Ministry of Defense put higher requirements on PAK-FA program than Americans had put into their 5th-generation fighter jet program (more likely they refered to F-22 program)

- Second flying prototype was built in the end of 2010, then also two prototypes should be build in 2011

- First flying prototype is equipped with a most of 5th generation navigation an indication systems that were developed for PAK-FA program

- Third and fourth aircraft should be equipped with a full electronics package required by Ministry of Defense (it could be interpreted as radars, weapon systems, IRST, ECM...)

- One PAK-FA should be approximately equal in combat to three 4++ generation fighter jets

- Stealth capability was a primary requirement in design and research(airframe, materials etc.). But these 16 test flights(the number of flights up to June 2010) of the T-50-1 were nothing to do with a trials of stealth technology.

- PAK-FA would get new generation of air-air missiles (R-77 and R-73 successors more likely) that also incudes ultra-long range missile (~400 km range, the R-73 successor) in its compartments (internal bays).

 

[chex3009]

- One PAK-FA should be approximately equal in combat to three 4++ generation fighter jets

Thats Amazing. This is what was expected from a 5G bird.

- Stealth capability was a primary requirement in design and research(airframe, materials etc.). But these 16 test flights(the number of flights up to June 2010) of the T-50-1 were nothing to do with a trials of stealth technology.

That would be enough for both our neighbours to keep their mouth shut regarding their expertise on the stealth capabilities.

- PAK-FA would get new generation of air-air missiles (R-77 and R-73 successors more likely) that also incudes ultra-long range missile (~400 km range, the R-73 successor) in its compartments (internal bays).

Which missiles are talked about here? Such a long range....!!!

 

[black eagle]

- PAK-FA would get new generation of air-air missiles (R-77 and R-73 successors more likely) that also incudes ultra-long range missile (~400 km range, the R-73 successor) in its compartments (internal bays).[/B]

I don't think the ULRM would be a R-73 successor.... It would be a new missile altogether...

 

[black eagle]

T-50 / PAK-FA: one year anniversary of the first flight and new documentary


http://www.strategypage.com/militaryforums/6-74895.aspx

[video]http://rutube.ru/tracks/4001286.html?v=161f9887a5800237c7f75533d4e7b903&autoStart=true&bmstart=1000[/video]

Some assertions from the documentary:

- Work on "second stage" engine(featured with a increased thrust, stealthy nozzles etc.) for PAK-FA should be started in 2011 with consolidation of whole Russia's engine manufacturing industry

- PAK-FA maneuverability capabilities should be significantly better compared to 4th generation fighter jets

- Self-diagnose systems in most critical parts and components of an aircraft

- A widely usage of advanced composite materials. PAK-FA's airframe has four times less parts compared to Su-27(T-10) series aircraft

- VVS (air force) is planning to finish preliminary fighter jet by 2012 and general trials by 2015

- More than 50 aircraft are planned for the first PAK-FA procurement party

- Russia's Ministry of Defense put higher requirements on PAK-FA program than Americans had put into their 5th-generation fighter jet program (more likely they refered to F-22 program)

- Second flying prototype was built in the end of 2010, then also two prototypes should be build in 2011

- First flying prototype is equipped with a most of 5th generation navigation an indication systems that were developed for PAK-FA program

- Third and fourth aircraft should be equipped with a full electronics package required by Ministry of Defense (it could be interpreted as radars, weapon systems, IRST, ECM...)

- One PAK-FA should be approximately equal in combat to three 4++ generation fighter jets

- Stealth capability was a primary requirement in design and research(airframe, materials etc.). But these 16 test flights(the number of flights up to June 2010) of the T-50-1 were nothing to do with a trials of stealth technology.

- PAK-FA would get new generation of air-air missiles (R-77 and R-73 successors more likely) that also incudes ultra-long range missile (~400 km range, the R-73 successor) in its compartments (internal bays).

If what this says is true then many of the assumptions about the PAK-FA would turn out to be wrong....

 

[Anshu Attri]

mod...please delete this post......

 

[Minghegy]

Kopp is right, Australia has huge territory and coast, what they need is long-range and big payload, nothing anymore. And there is no clear threat to Australia, so stealth is almost useless for them. F111 fits Australia, I can't understand why they have F111 retired. If USA updates F111 with modern devices and single pilot, that will be the best choice.

 

[p2prada]

Kopp is right, Australia has huge territory and coast, what they need is long-range and big payload, nothing anymore. And there is no clear threat to Australia, so stealth is almost useless for them. F111 fits Australia, I can't understand why they have F111 retired. If USA updates F111 with modern devices and single pilot, that will be the best choice.

They can always go for F-15SE unless US keeps them in the F-35 program diplomatically. F-111 is too old for Australia to continue using. They will never see a proper MLU because US is no longer using them.

 

[Minghegy]

They can always go for F-15SE unless US keeps them in the F-35 program diplomatically. F-111 is too old for Australia to continue using. They will never see a proper MLU because US is no longer using them.

Thanks for explanation.

Here is an information: http://www.sukhoi.ru/forum/showthread.php?t=60932&page=81
It said T50 has some problems, low strength of the fuselage made the keel fail.
T50 is facing the same problems as T10, will it be redesigned?

 

[p2prada]

Thanks for explanation.

Here is an information: http://www.sukhoi.ru/forum/showthread.php?t=60932&page=81
It said T50 has some problems, low strength of the fuselage made the keel fail.
T50 is facing the same problems as T10, will it be redesigned?

I did not know that. Thanks for pointing it out.
If Sukhoi cannot make changes with minor design changes or even changes in composition in alloys used, then I guess there will be a major design change.

No idea if this may delay the program or if the problem is just miscalculation or a manufacturing defect. So, it's impossible to speculate on problems without official endorsement. There would be newer designs being tested on computers too.

In a year from now, we will see more prototypes flying in the air. If there are changes, we will see the changes. If there are no changes then we will know what happened 25 or 30 years from today, when Sukhoi will declassify such information.

 

[black eagle]