- Joined
- Aug 14, 2009
- Messages
- 880
- Likes
- 60
New engines are already on the cards. The canopy too I guess will change...this one won't fit the tandem seater.
Sukhoi PAK FA
- Thread starter Anshu Attri
- Start date
Quickgun Murugan
New Member
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2009
- Messages
- 778
- Likes
- 22
Does this means total full stop to any Mig-35 hopes in RuAF?
Wish India too gets a fighter or two by 2013
FACTBOX: Russia's fifth-generation fighter T-50 (PAK FA)
MOSCOW, January 29 (RIA Novosti) - Russia's fifth-generation fighter performed its maiden flight on Friday.
* The T-50 is the domestic name of Russia's fifth-generation fighter plane which has been developed as the Advanced Front-Line Aviation Complex (PAK FA) for Russia's Air Force.
* The project started its development by the Sukhoi design bureau since it won the tender in April 2002.
* The Tikhomirov Institute of Instrument Design, which developed the Irbis radar for the Su-35BM Flanker, has been working on the T-50 radar. The new fighter's radar and fire-control system will be designed on the basis of the Su-35BM's systems.
* The new fighter's exterior design was approved on December 10, 2004.
* Last summer, the fighter's design was approved, and the prototype blueprints were delivered to the KNAAPO aircraft building company based in Komsomolsk-on-Amur, where three experimental fighters will be built for testing.
* In February 2009, the first prototype was constructed. After the plane was successfully tested on the runway, a decision was made to stage the maiden flight in Komsomolsk-on-Amur, rather than in Moscow.
* The prototype fifth-generation fighter made a 47-minute maiden flight on January 29, 2010, in Komsomolsk-on-Amur.
* Although T-50 specifications remain classified, fragmentary data on its engines imply that this heavy-duty fighter will have a take-off weight of more than 30 metric tons and will be close in dimension to the well-known Sukhoi Su-27 Flanker.
* The new fighter's exterior was designed using Stealth technology, also known as LO technology (low observable technology).
* The combat aircraft is fitted with 117S (upgraded AL-31) turbofan engines from the Russian aircraft engine manufacturer Saturn.
* The PAK FA can carry either eight next-generation air-to-air R-77 missiles, or two large controllable anti-ship bombs weighing 1,500 kg each.
* The new jet can also carry two long-range missiles developed by the Novator Bureau which can hit targets within a 400 kilometer range.
* The jet can use a take-off strip of just 300-400 meters, and perform sustained supersonic flight at speeds over 2,000 km/h, including repeated in-flight refueling. The highly-maneuverable plane has a range of about 5,500 kilometers.
* The fifth-generation fighter is equipped with advanced avionics to combine an automatic flight control system and a radar locator with a phased array antenna.
* The newest combat aircraft are planned to be mass produced in Komsomolsk-on-Amur from 2015.
http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20100129/157717728.html
MOSCOW, January 29 (RIA Novosti) - Russia's fifth-generation fighter performed its maiden flight on Friday.
* The T-50 is the domestic name of Russia's fifth-generation fighter plane which has been developed as the Advanced Front-Line Aviation Complex (PAK FA) for Russia's Air Force.
* The project started its development by the Sukhoi design bureau since it won the tender in April 2002.
* The Tikhomirov Institute of Instrument Design, which developed the Irbis radar for the Su-35BM Flanker, has been working on the T-50 radar. The new fighter's radar and fire-control system will be designed on the basis of the Su-35BM's systems.
* The new fighter's exterior design was approved on December 10, 2004.
* Last summer, the fighter's design was approved, and the prototype blueprints were delivered to the KNAAPO aircraft building company based in Komsomolsk-on-Amur, where three experimental fighters will be built for testing.
* In February 2009, the first prototype was constructed. After the plane was successfully tested on the runway, a decision was made to stage the maiden flight in Komsomolsk-on-Amur, rather than in Moscow.
* The prototype fifth-generation fighter made a 47-minute maiden flight on January 29, 2010, in Komsomolsk-on-Amur.
* Although T-50 specifications remain classified, fragmentary data on its engines imply that this heavy-duty fighter will have a take-off weight of more than 30 metric tons and will be close in dimension to the well-known Sukhoi Su-27 Flanker.
* The new fighter's exterior was designed using Stealth technology, also known as LO technology (low observable technology).
* The combat aircraft is fitted with 117S (upgraded AL-31) turbofan engines from the Russian aircraft engine manufacturer Saturn.
* The PAK FA can carry either eight next-generation air-to-air R-77 missiles, or two large controllable anti-ship bombs weighing 1,500 kg each.
* The new jet can also carry two long-range missiles developed by the Novator Bureau which can hit targets within a 400 kilometer range.
* The jet can use a take-off strip of just 300-400 meters, and perform sustained supersonic flight at speeds over 2,000 km/h, including repeated in-flight refueling. The highly-maneuverable plane has a range of about 5,500 kilometers.
* The fifth-generation fighter is equipped with advanced avionics to combine an automatic flight control system and a radar locator with a phased array antenna.
* The newest combat aircraft are planned to be mass produced in Komsomolsk-on-Amur from 2015.
http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20100129/157717728.html
StealthSniper
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2009
- Messages
- 1,111
- Likes
- 61
This goes to show people who have doubted the Russian aircraft manufacturing body that Russia can and will make great things if they have the support like India gave from day one. A lot of people like to say that Russia is using old stuff from the Soviet Union and their projects are stalled and the engineers are gone. Now after they see the plane they won't say it's "JUST A MODIFIED FLANKER" and maybe their ignorance won't get the best of them now.
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2009
- Messages
- 1,624
- Likes
- 423
I'm not an expert on fighter jets, however even my untrained eye noticed a few problems with the Russian stealth fighter.
1) Framed cockpit. The metal frame that runs across the middle of the pilot's glass cockpit will reflect radar energy. That is not stealthy.
2) Lack of sawtooth edges. "Sawtooth edges on cockpit edges, landing gear doors and other openings also break up radar." See http://science.howstuffworks.com/f-22-raptor3.htm
3) Air intakes are not canted. From the side, an enemy fighter that shines its radar at the Pak Fa will get a nice radar reflection. On the F-22 Raptor, the air intakes are angled downward. An approaching enemy fighter's radar waves are reflected downward towards the ground and away from the enemy fighter's radar detectors.
4) The rear of the Pak Fa looks huge (i.e. has a huge cross-section). Compare images of the Pak Fa's tail section (including engines) to the flat and small cross-section of the F-22. I don't think the Pak Fa is stealthy from the rear. If an enemy fighter points its radar at the Pak Fa from the rear, the radar signature will be large.
Bottom line: I give the Russians a grade of "B" for a good effort. However, the aforementioned four and possibly more problems will prevent the Russian Pak Fa from seriously approaching F-22 stealthiness.
1) Framed cockpit. The metal frame that runs across the middle of the pilot's glass cockpit will reflect radar energy. That is not stealthy.
2) Lack of sawtooth edges. "Sawtooth edges on cockpit edges, landing gear doors and other openings also break up radar." See http://science.howstuffworks.com/f-22-raptor3.htm
3) Air intakes are not canted. From the side, an enemy fighter that shines its radar at the Pak Fa will get a nice radar reflection. On the F-22 Raptor, the air intakes are angled downward. An approaching enemy fighter's radar waves are reflected downward towards the ground and away from the enemy fighter's radar detectors.
4) The rear of the Pak Fa looks huge (i.e. has a huge cross-section). Compare images of the Pak Fa's tail section (including engines) to the flat and small cross-section of the F-22. I don't think the Pak Fa is stealthy from the rear. If an enemy fighter points its radar at the Pak Fa from the rear, the radar signature will be large.
Bottom line: I give the Russians a grade of "B" for a good effort. However, the aforementioned four and possibly more problems will prevent the Russian Pak Fa from seriously approaching F-22 stealthiness.
StealthSniper
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2009
- Messages
- 1,111
- Likes
- 61
I knew you would reply back, considering you are on the attack of anything Russian from the beginning. I like how you point at everything that might be bad about Russia even though the US is using fighters designed in the 1970's like the F-16 and F-15 and even had a F-15 disintegrate in mid air because it had cracks and it's too old.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2R7BWrqmgac&feature=player_embedded
"As a result of the crash, the US Air Force grounded the entire F-15 fleet in November 2007. The crash investigation revealed that the crash was caused by the failure of the upper right longeron, a critical support structure in the aircraft's frame. The pilot of the F-15, Major Stephen Stilwell, successfully ejected from the stricken aircraft but sustained serious arm and shoulder injuries. The crash caused minimal damage to private property on the ground, but there were no fatalities or other injuries.
By January 9 2008, 60 percent of the Air Force's F-15 fleet had been approved to return to active duty. Nine other aircraft were found to have longeron cracks and some of them may be retired from duty permanently rather than repaired."
Even the richest country in the world have planes that are old and have cracks in them so stop your biased Russian hatred. I am not going to post anymore because i'm going more off-topic but I don't care if it is 4 years late or whatever, it has flown and it will have an updated engine, avionics and other significant changes in airframe before India and Russia make it operational. I am an optimist and I believe it will be a great airplane, and so far I am right. Your looking in the past to prove to yourself they can't do it, but you will see day by day that India and Russia will be a force to be reckoned with.
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2009
- Messages
- 880
- Likes
- 60
Beam me the source, though soviet weapons are still great. Are you planning to dump the Rafale during the next decade?
So? Delays happen...you know the financial difficulties they encountered before India stepped in & their hydrocarbon industry got on its feet again. Before that they had to cancel 1149 R&D projects just to keep the PAK-FA going. BTW ever heard of the A400M?
Posted on this very thread yesterday only
Of course that is only your opinion, you talk as if you write columns in Aviation Week or Airforces Monthly.
Again you blow more hot air than substance. It's like saying that Martians developed the F-22. The current USAF air superiority fighter has inherited stuff from its predecessor. Everybody is comparing it to the YF-23....not the F-22. While you're at it can you tell what commonality it shares with the F-22?
& you were able to deduce that only with the first prototype making it's first flight but anyways you are known to keep rambling about Russian weapons to it isn't too surprising.
Anshu Attri
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2009
- Messages
- 1,218
- Likes
- 679
have a look
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&newspaperUserId=27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckPostId=Blog:27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post:021e786e-04be-426b-ad32-dcbb54b90d00&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest
Well, this brings back the old days when Flug Revue would pop out some over-the-fence shots obtained from the Military Missions in East Germany, and the assembled reptiles at Flight would adjourn to our secret analysis facility to figure out what it all meant.
First of all, for anyone contemplating the use of the word "Raptorski": don't. While this is an airplane that could have been the answer to the Advanced Tactical Fighter requirement, way back when, it's not an F-22 in many important ways.
In a lot of ways, the T-50 reflects the heritage of the T-10 Flanker series - it's much more like them than Sukhoi's last fighter prototype, the forward-swept-wing Su-47 Berkut, ever was. From the Flanker family, the T-50 gets the massive "centroplane" - a wide central body that blends the fuselage and inner wing - three-surface aerodynamic control and true three-dimensional thrust vectoring. The main weapons bay has been seen on a Flanker model, too.
Look at some of these in detail. The centroplane is huge, extending well outside the engines and terminating at the rear in a broad beaver-tail between the exhaust nozzles.
It accommodates a boatload of fuel on the Flanker and will do the same here. After the canard hokey-pokey in the T-10 family (in on the Su-30MK, out on the Su-35) the T-50 has something different: the forward part of the leading edge extension is movable. According to the usually well informed Flateric over at Secret Projects, it is called the Povorotnaya Chast Naplyva (PChN) or movable LEX section.
3-D thrust vectoring is also used on the Su-35. The T-50 and the T-10 family are distinguished by widely separated engines, which is important because that's the only way to use vectored thrust in roll. What's new on the T-50 is that the designers have cashed in on TVC by shrinking the tail surfaces, saving on drag, weight and signature.
With separated engines and a wide body, the T-50 designers have been able to install dual front and rear weapon bays. Added to this are side bays outboard of the engines. Flateric reports that each bay is designed to hold "at least two" missiles and that the outer bays are designed for short-range AAMs. The centerline bays could each hold two large weapons (like R-33s) or three-to-four of the newly announced RVV-MD. The latter has folding wings, as does the RVV-SD development of the R-73 (AA-11 Archer) family - the latter explaining why the underwing bays are small.
The big new feature of the T-50 is stealth. The aircraft that flew today is a prototype - and it does not show visible features like a frameless canopy and panel alignment that you'd expect on a production aircraft. Other not-very-stealthy-looking features include the gaps around the inlet (compare the YF-23) and a spherical infrared search and track housing in front of the windshield. And, of course, the nozzles are round. But it has a chined forebody, edge alignment and (probably) inlet line-of-sight blockage and internal weapons.
Apparently the designers and systems analysts have looked at the thorny question of "how much stealth do we want to pay for?" and have come up with a different answer than the F-22 designers. The fact that the armed forces of potential adversaries don't have S-300 and S-400 missiles may have something to do with that answer.
Supercruise? Definitely. The aircraft has a lot of power, and you would not go with that sharply swept delta wing if that wasn't the goal.
The big question is how long the aircraft will take to enter service, which is a product of three factors - how much money is available, how many resources industry can muster to get the job done, and where the design, technically, stands at this point.
The first question depends largely on the Russian economy, and on the priority which the military gives to the fighter. At the moment, the strategic rocket forces are the priority and are elbowing all others away from the trough; also, the military could decide that the Su-35 is a good upgrade route for now. The X-factor: whether and when India will join the program, and how much cash it will involve.
The second - industry's ability to execute the program - is hard to estimate. On the downside, Russia has not inducted a brand-new aircraft into service since the 1980s. However, there are signs of a new development strategy at work here: the T-50's engines are outgrowths of the Su-35's and are being test-flown on a T-10 airframe, and the flight control system and (very likely) cockpit and avionics may be similar.
How far along is the program? Russian practice historically has been to start development with a series of prototypes that successively conform more to the production design. That's followed by an early series of aircraft that are "pre-operational" - flown by service units. Today's T-50 is, in US terms, something between a technology demonstrator and a systems development and demonstration aircraft.
Upshot - I would expect to see quite a few Su-35S regiments operational before we see a combat-ready T-50 -but with the caveat that a lot of Indian money could change things.
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&newspaperUserId=27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckPostId=Blog:27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post:021e786e-04be-426b-ad32-dcbb54b90d00&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest
Well, this brings back the old days when Flug Revue would pop out some over-the-fence shots obtained from the Military Missions in East Germany, and the assembled reptiles at Flight would adjourn to our secret analysis facility to figure out what it all meant.
First of all, for anyone contemplating the use of the word "Raptorski": don't. While this is an airplane that could have been the answer to the Advanced Tactical Fighter requirement, way back when, it's not an F-22 in many important ways.
In a lot of ways, the T-50 reflects the heritage of the T-10 Flanker series - it's much more like them than Sukhoi's last fighter prototype, the forward-swept-wing Su-47 Berkut, ever was. From the Flanker family, the T-50 gets the massive "centroplane" - a wide central body that blends the fuselage and inner wing - three-surface aerodynamic control and true three-dimensional thrust vectoring. The main weapons bay has been seen on a Flanker model, too.
Look at some of these in detail. The centroplane is huge, extending well outside the engines and terminating at the rear in a broad beaver-tail between the exhaust nozzles.
It accommodates a boatload of fuel on the Flanker and will do the same here. After the canard hokey-pokey in the T-10 family (in on the Su-30MK, out on the Su-35) the T-50 has something different: the forward part of the leading edge extension is movable. According to the usually well informed Flateric over at Secret Projects, it is called the Povorotnaya Chast Naplyva (PChN) or movable LEX section.
3-D thrust vectoring is also used on the Su-35. The T-50 and the T-10 family are distinguished by widely separated engines, which is important because that's the only way to use vectored thrust in roll. What's new on the T-50 is that the designers have cashed in on TVC by shrinking the tail surfaces, saving on drag, weight and signature.
With separated engines and a wide body, the T-50 designers have been able to install dual front and rear weapon bays. Added to this are side bays outboard of the engines. Flateric reports that each bay is designed to hold "at least two" missiles and that the outer bays are designed for short-range AAMs. The centerline bays could each hold two large weapons (like R-33s) or three-to-four of the newly announced RVV-MD. The latter has folding wings, as does the RVV-SD development of the R-73 (AA-11 Archer) family - the latter explaining why the underwing bays are small.
The big new feature of the T-50 is stealth. The aircraft that flew today is a prototype - and it does not show visible features like a frameless canopy and panel alignment that you'd expect on a production aircraft. Other not-very-stealthy-looking features include the gaps around the inlet (compare the YF-23) and a spherical infrared search and track housing in front of the windshield. And, of course, the nozzles are round. But it has a chined forebody, edge alignment and (probably) inlet line-of-sight blockage and internal weapons.
Apparently the designers and systems analysts have looked at the thorny question of "how much stealth do we want to pay for?" and have come up with a different answer than the F-22 designers. The fact that the armed forces of potential adversaries don't have S-300 and S-400 missiles may have something to do with that answer.
Supercruise? Definitely. The aircraft has a lot of power, and you would not go with that sharply swept delta wing if that wasn't the goal.
The big question is how long the aircraft will take to enter service, which is a product of three factors - how much money is available, how many resources industry can muster to get the job done, and where the design, technically, stands at this point.
The first question depends largely on the Russian economy, and on the priority which the military gives to the fighter. At the moment, the strategic rocket forces are the priority and are elbowing all others away from the trough; also, the military could decide that the Su-35 is a good upgrade route for now. The X-factor: whether and when India will join the program, and how much cash it will involve.
The second - industry's ability to execute the program - is hard to estimate. On the downside, Russia has not inducted a brand-new aircraft into service since the 1980s. However, there are signs of a new development strategy at work here: the T-50's engines are outgrowths of the Su-35's and are being test-flown on a T-10 airframe, and the flight control system and (very likely) cockpit and avionics may be similar.
How far along is the program? Russian practice historically has been to start development with a series of prototypes that successively conform more to the production design. That's followed by an early series of aircraft that are "pre-operational" - flown by service units. Today's T-50 is, in US terms, something between a technology demonstrator and a systems development and demonstration aircraft.
Upshot - I would expect to see quite a few Su-35S regiments operational before we see a combat-ready T-50 -but with the caveat that a lot of Indian money could change things.
Last edited:
Anshu Attri
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2009
- Messages
- 1,218
- Likes
- 679
R-77, R-73 Missile Upgrades Emerge
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/R77081309.xml
Russia's leading guided-weapons manufacturer will wheel out revised--if long- touted--versions of its two key air-to-air missile products this month, as it tries to bolster its position in the export arena.
Tactical Missile Corp.--also known as TRV--will formally unveil its so-called RVV-SD and RVV-MD missiles for the first time at the Moscow air show later this month. The RVV-SD is an improved version of the R-77 (AA-Adder), while the RVV-MD is a variant of the R-73 (AA-11 Archer).
The radar-guided R-77 has been sold widely, with China and India placing significant orders for the weapon, as was the case for the R-73. The baseline R-77 was designed in the 1980s, with development complete by around 1994. India was the first export customer for the export variant, known as the RVVAE, with the final batch delivered in 2002.
A problem for the company was the lack of adequate funding during the 1990s and the first part of this decade to support further evolution of the R-77, either for the Russian air force or the export market. The basic version of the R-77 is not thought to have entered the Russian air force inventory in significant numbers.
Meanwhile, Western suppliers have been pushing into some traditionally Russian markets--while major customers such as India and China have been pursuing their own missile programs such as the Astra and the PL-12, respectively.
The RVV-SD and RVV-MD already appear to be part of Russia's bid for India's medium multirole combat aircraft competition. Both designations were included by MiG on a presentation covering MiG-35 Fulcrum armament during Air Show India in February.
The basic R-77 is known as the Article 170, and the RVV-SD includes the upgrades associated with the Article 170-1 designation. The 170-1 development has been underway for some time, and testing is believed to have been carried out. The RVV-SD is in effect the export variant of the 170-1.
According to information released by the company, the missile is 15 kg. (33 lb.) heavier than the basic R-77/RVVAE, weighing 190 kg. rather than 175 kg. Maximum range claimed is increased to 110 from 80 km. (68 from 50 mi.). The missile is also slightly longer at 3.71 meters (12 ft.), rather than the 3.6 meters of the basic variant.
The radar seeker has also probably been upgraded. Russian missile manufacturer Agat previously confirmed it was working on seeker upgrades for the R-77, implying that at least two projects were underway, one for export and one for the Russian air force.
Vympel--which originally designed the R-77, and is now part of TRV--is also working on a more extensive upgrade of the missile than the 170-1. This project is designated the Article 180, and is in effect a mid-life upgrade for the weapon. This is intended to provide a further improvement in range, with the design including a dual-pulse motor configuration. Moving from the R-77's signature lattice fin configuration to a conventional fin is also part of this program.
The initial RVV-MD offering is likely no more than a stopgap to try to maintain its position, and to provide a credible radar-guided weapon to offer as part of fighter export packages and upgrade programs.
As for upgrades to the R-73, the RVV-SD variant appears to have a considerable amount in common with a development known as the K-74, which Vympel first discussed publicly in 1997. Both designations are associated with Archer variants with an improved seeker and an improved off-boresight limit. Data released by the company show the RVV-SD as 1 kg. heavier than the R-73 at 106 kg., and also slightly longer at 2.92 meters rather than 2.9 meters. The maximum launch range is also increased by 10 km.
As with the RVV-SD, the upgraded variant of the Archer is again a stop-gap to provide for the export arena--and possibly for the domestic customer-- until a more capable short-range air-to-air missile is available. Vympel's K-30 dogfight missile program is intended to provide an eventual successor to the Archer, and the program dates back to at least the 1990s. Development, again, has been hampered by a lack of sufficient resources.
Russian industry sources indicate that both the RVV-SD and RVV-MD will have folding fins to allow for internal carriage. This at least suggests the Russian air force may be keeping its options open should it acquire the domestic variants of these upgrades to include them in the weapons inventory of its fifth-generation fighter, known as PAK-FA. India is also "participating" in PAK-FA, and the internal carriage modification may also have been performed with this in mind.
As well as upgraded air-to-air systems, TRV will showcase an extended-range version of its Kh-35/3M-24 (AS-20 Kayak/SS-N-25 Switchblade) anti-ship missile. The Kh-35UE will have a maximum engagement range of 260 km., compared with the 130km. range for the basic Kh-35. Zvezda-Strela, the company which originally designed the Kh-35/3M-24, is also now part of TRV. In 1997, company literature discussed the 3M-24E1 variant of the missile as part of the Uranium anti-ship missile system for surface ships. This proposed version of the weapon had a claimed range of 250-300 km.
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/R77081309.xml
Russia's leading guided-weapons manufacturer will wheel out revised--if long- touted--versions of its two key air-to-air missile products this month, as it tries to bolster its position in the export arena.
Tactical Missile Corp.--also known as TRV--will formally unveil its so-called RVV-SD and RVV-MD missiles for the first time at the Moscow air show later this month. The RVV-SD is an improved version of the R-77 (AA-Adder), while the RVV-MD is a variant of the R-73 (AA-11 Archer).
The radar-guided R-77 has been sold widely, with China and India placing significant orders for the weapon, as was the case for the R-73. The baseline R-77 was designed in the 1980s, with development complete by around 1994. India was the first export customer for the export variant, known as the RVVAE, with the final batch delivered in 2002.
A problem for the company was the lack of adequate funding during the 1990s and the first part of this decade to support further evolution of the R-77, either for the Russian air force or the export market. The basic version of the R-77 is not thought to have entered the Russian air force inventory in significant numbers.
Meanwhile, Western suppliers have been pushing into some traditionally Russian markets--while major customers such as India and China have been pursuing their own missile programs such as the Astra and the PL-12, respectively.
The RVV-SD and RVV-MD already appear to be part of Russia's bid for India's medium multirole combat aircraft competition. Both designations were included by MiG on a presentation covering MiG-35 Fulcrum armament during Air Show India in February.
The basic R-77 is known as the Article 170, and the RVV-SD includes the upgrades associated with the Article 170-1 designation. The 170-1 development has been underway for some time, and testing is believed to have been carried out. The RVV-SD is in effect the export variant of the 170-1.
According to information released by the company, the missile is 15 kg. (33 lb.) heavier than the basic R-77/RVVAE, weighing 190 kg. rather than 175 kg. Maximum range claimed is increased to 110 from 80 km. (68 from 50 mi.). The missile is also slightly longer at 3.71 meters (12 ft.), rather than the 3.6 meters of the basic variant.
The radar seeker has also probably been upgraded. Russian missile manufacturer Agat previously confirmed it was working on seeker upgrades for the R-77, implying that at least two projects were underway, one for export and one for the Russian air force.
Vympel--which originally designed the R-77, and is now part of TRV--is also working on a more extensive upgrade of the missile than the 170-1. This project is designated the Article 180, and is in effect a mid-life upgrade for the weapon. This is intended to provide a further improvement in range, with the design including a dual-pulse motor configuration. Moving from the R-77's signature lattice fin configuration to a conventional fin is also part of this program.
The initial RVV-MD offering is likely no more than a stopgap to try to maintain its position, and to provide a credible radar-guided weapon to offer as part of fighter export packages and upgrade programs.
As for upgrades to the R-73, the RVV-SD variant appears to have a considerable amount in common with a development known as the K-74, which Vympel first discussed publicly in 1997. Both designations are associated with Archer variants with an improved seeker and an improved off-boresight limit. Data released by the company show the RVV-SD as 1 kg. heavier than the R-73 at 106 kg., and also slightly longer at 2.92 meters rather than 2.9 meters. The maximum launch range is also increased by 10 km.
As with the RVV-SD, the upgraded variant of the Archer is again a stop-gap to provide for the export arena--and possibly for the domestic customer-- until a more capable short-range air-to-air missile is available. Vympel's K-30 dogfight missile program is intended to provide an eventual successor to the Archer, and the program dates back to at least the 1990s. Development, again, has been hampered by a lack of sufficient resources.
Russian industry sources indicate that both the RVV-SD and RVV-MD will have folding fins to allow for internal carriage. This at least suggests the Russian air force may be keeping its options open should it acquire the domestic variants of these upgrades to include them in the weapons inventory of its fifth-generation fighter, known as PAK-FA. India is also "participating" in PAK-FA, and the internal carriage modification may also have been performed with this in mind.
As well as upgraded air-to-air systems, TRV will showcase an extended-range version of its Kh-35/3M-24 (AS-20 Kayak/SS-N-25 Switchblade) anti-ship missile. The Kh-35UE will have a maximum engagement range of 260 km., compared with the 130km. range for the basic Kh-35. Zvezda-Strela, the company which originally designed the Kh-35/3M-24, is also now part of TRV. In 1997, company literature discussed the 3M-24E1 variant of the missile as part of the Uranium anti-ship missile system for surface ships. This proposed version of the weapon had a claimed range of 250-300 km.
Anshu Attri
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2009
- Messages
- 1,218
- Likes
- 679
internal weapon way and Povorotnaya Chast Naplyva (PChN) or movable LEX section.
Last edited:
notinlove
New Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2009
- Messages
- 466
- Likes
- 23
look buddy all these are requirements for stealth .. even if france goes for a VLO design its design will have the same characterstics . just because the americans made it first doesn't mean that every other one that comes after there's is a copy.
F22 has CHINES PAK FA has LERX? f22 has S curve in horizontal plane PAK FA has them in vertical plane. F22 doen't have full moveable butterfly tails PAK FA has them. how can you call it copied?
