5th gen light mulltirole fighter/Mikoyan LMFS

MiG-31s are not expected to meet enemy fighters.... the PVO had both MiG-31s and Su-27s so I would suspect any risk of air to air combat the Su-27s would be vectored in to the fight rather than the 31s.

It would be vectored by GCi to launch its missiles at the fighters. Then if it miss su-27 will go in and have the advantage as the enemy would try to dodge r-33/37 and not see the su-27.

Is MIG involved in the Chinese FC-31 program at all? Perhaps they are a consultant and agreed to do this with the Chinese as long as they could also use the IP.

https://www.militarynews.ru/story.asp?rid=1&nid=542829&lang=RU

Rostec is developing the concept of a light single-engine fifth-generation fighter with its own funds, head of the state corporation Sergei Chemezov told reporters.

"According to the plan, it can be a universal platform, in manned and unmanned versions.

I feel tempted to claim victory, but knowing how many things have been said about this issue I better don't

LMFS wrote:Rostec is developing the concept of a light single-engine fifth-generation fighter with its own funds, head of the state corporation Sergei Chemezov told reporters.

"According to the plan, it can be a universal platform, in manned and unmanned versions.

I feel tempted to claim victory, but knowing how many things have been said about this issue I better don't

Please don't. They'll find a way to fuck it up.

Isn't this plane the FC-31? (already flying in China) its clear Russia is not that keen on buying single engined fighters and the FC-31 really looks in spec like a stealth Mig-29 successor. Even uses RD-33 variants and MIG is involved in its development.

mnztr wrote:Isn't this plane the FC-31? (already flying in China) its clear Russia is not that keen on buying single engined fighters and the FC-31 really looks in spec like a stealth Mig-29 successor. Even uses RD-33 variants and MIG is involved in its development.

Is MiG involved? I was not aware of that, and I really hope Russia is capable of doing better than that, the plane does not look to have a very ambitious or innovative approach. But the claim is that the new design is single engine (однодвигательного), at least if the journo did not make that up, while the FC-31 is twin engine.

FC-31 is done on the basis of what they hacked from f-35.

Small fighter can't be good 5th generation fighters because their weapon bays are small which means most of the time they will carry weapons externally too increasing their RCS and their systems are less powerfull than on bigger 5th gen fighters.

If they make it they need to keep the price down to give it a chance to be bought. That's the only advantage they can have over a su-57 or f-22.

F-35 is the exemple of how to fail a small 5th gen fighter.

LMFS wrote:
Is MiG involved? I was not aware of that, and I really hope Russia is capable of doing better than that, the plane does not look to have a very ambitious or innovative approach. But the claim is that the new design is single engine (однодвигательного), at least if the journo did not make that up, while the FC-31 is twin engine.

There are rumors. Perhaps the MIG group worked with the Chinese on the base platform and will reserve the rights to use the IP in their own version.

Isos wrote:FC-31 is done on the basis of what they hacked from f-35.

Industrial espionage probably but even if the Chinese hacked into Lockheed's computer systems how did they get hold of such classified data? Such confidential data will not be stored in servers that are connected to the Internet, isn't it.

Sujoy wrote:

Isos wrote:FC-31 is done on the basis of what they hacked from f-35.

Industrial espionage probably but even if the Chinese hacked into Lockheed's computer systems how did they get hold of such classified data? Such confidential data will not be stored in servers that are connected to the Internet, isn't it.

Believe it not, it mostly is.

But also engineer(s) in Lockheed also sold data on f-35 to China.

GarryB wrote:Yeah, a Russian company decides to develop an aircraft is not the same as a government contract to make a new aircraft.

AFAIK this is just Rostec fishing... I would expect MiG has already done a lot of ground work on the design of a lighter 5th gen fighter... do you think Rostec has an advantage... are you honestly suggesting a cheap 5th gen fighter is possible?

Would a 5th gen fighter that is actually considered light still be effective, or will it put the dog in dogfighter like the Gripen does?

I was missing you already

Rostec is a big structure and it must be difficult to keep track of all the companies belonging to the group, but I am pretty sure Chemezov is aware that MiG is among them...

We have already discussed this many times so you now single engine + manned / unmanned versions is what I have proposed to make the initiative versatile and cheap enough, if they would use the unmanned version as a base of a STOVL plane it would be even better, but I am not holding my breath for it. But of course this is just one more among many contradictory statements, so we have to see. I think they are actually interested in international participation for this project, which is more about market and mass production than about sheer technology as the PAK-FA was, so they may be trying to attract interest too. But sooner or later the lighter fighter will be produced, this is almost for sure.

I don't see  how a single engine fighter is cheaper then a 2 engine, I think F-35 blew apart that notion. What engine would they use? NK-32? Maybe that is the plan, restart production and build a fighter around that beast!!! Is it suitable for a fighter in terms of power/weight ratio?

mnztr wrote:I don't see  how a single engine fighter is cheaper then a 2 engine, I think F-35 blew apart that notion. What engine would they use? NK-32? Maybe that is the plan, restart production and build a fighter around that beast!!! Is it suitable for a fighter in terms of power/weight ratio?

If we are to use the US MIC as a price reference then nothing of what Russia does would be even remotely possible.

Izd. 117 should be enough, or even better izd. 30, for a fighter up to 10 t empty weight. NK-32 is not a fighter engine and it is simply massive, but they had other bigger engines like the one in the Yak-141 if the empty weight of the fighter would demand it. That would defeat the purpose of the single engine plane using the same engine of the heavy fighters for economic and logistical reasons though.

Remember that the Mig-35 and SU-35 only have a 9500 kg MTOW difference. I think Russia with their developments on the MIG-35 have signalled that short range fighters are of little use to them. The NK-32 is only 3500 kg. SU-35 has 64K lb of thrust, so 55K will make for a nice supercruising beast with some mods. NK-32 is also recently refeshed.

mnztr wrote:Remember that the Mig-35 and SU-35 only have a 9500 kg MTOW difference. I think Russia with their developments on the MIG-35 have signalled that short range fighters are of little use to them. The NK-32 is only 3500 kg. SU-35 has 64K lb of thrust, so 55K will make for a nice supercruising beast with some mods. NK-32 is also recently refeshed.

MiG-35 is hardly a proof of what Russia wants to do in the future right, because it was already determined by the 40+ old development of the MiG-29. The plane itself was extremely limited range-wise, and the modernization has tried to create a proper multirole plane with usable range that can be presented on the international market without it being an instant disqualification reason.

On the other hand what you say regarding the MiG being like 2/3 of the Sukhoi is right and has been commented, as a middle fighter it occupies the space between the light fighter roughly 1/2 the size of a Sukhoi and the heavy fighters. That is precisely the reason why I find it suboptimal if you already have heavy fighters and exactly the reasons some others find them better than light fighters, so it depends on your opinion and how you see things developing and different platforms balancing each other. I see a reduced number of high performance heavy fighters like the Su-57 augmenting their firepower and presence with strike assets like the Okhotnik and then a more numerous fleet of lighter fighters of which a fair proportion can be actually unmanned, for instance two squadrons unmanned vs one manned. That would be pretty optimal from a operational point of view I think. Remember we have not seen any purpose-built A2A UCAV, so that part of the combat remains a field for manned fighters. The new approach announced by Chemezov is a change for good IMHO and will allow to mix the reliability of manned operations with the increased numbers and capacity to take risks of unmanned platforms. This is the only way IMHO that the current air forces can transform into an unmanned fleet with acceptably low risk.

Re. the weight of the NK-32, that is more than twice the weight of a izd. 117 with far less than twice the thrust. The size is so huge that it would mean a plane way bigger than the Sukhoi would be needed to carry it. Of course those values of thrust you mention are with AB so no supercruising would apply.

Ok I see the sense in that, but why would they use 117 instead of 30 which is the final engine for the SU-57? Would they not want to maximize standardization on their 5G fleet?

mnztr wrote:Ok I see the sense in that, but why would they use 117 instead of 30 which is the final engine for the SU-57? Would they not want to maximize standardization on their 5G fleet?

Yeah you are right, I just mentioned it because it should be an engine with a more than decent performance and yet probably quite cheaper than the izd. 30, and also because supercruising may not be a hard requirement for a smaller, more economical and shorted ranged fighter. Of course the better engine may always be an improvement (VCEs can easily be better also in fuel consumption in subsonic, for instance) but it may not be as central as for the Su-57. An if izd. 30 is just and advanced low bypass turbofan, then the advantages of using it may depend just on the thrust gap that it has vs. izd. 117, since it has already been announced that in terms of fuel consumption it will not be worse than the AL-31.

mnztr wrote:Ok I see the sense in that, but why would they use 117 instead of 30 which is the final engine for the SU-57? Would they not want to maximize standardization on their 5G fleet?

30 is still under development whole Su-57 has been finalized and sent into production

No point delaying aircraft over engines, you can swap them later

I don't ever see this coming out to be honest. If the government isn't funding it, I doubt much beyond a flying model at best like Su-47.

On other hand, we know Putin has had requested a Jump Jet to be created in the newest SAP program. But no word on that.

There is a possibility of merging projects and that this ends up as a jump jet.

miketheterrible wrote:I don't ever see this coming out to be honest.  If the government isn't funding it, I doubt much beyond a flying model at best like Su-47.

On other hand, we know Putin has had requested a Jump Jet to be created in the newest SAP program.  But no word on that.

There is a possibility of merging projects and that this ends up as a jump jet.

Why would they make thier own f35 when it has been clearly shown that such aircraft are suboptimal at best.

Russia has had enough experience with such VTOL boutique fighters before to know that they are overpriced, over complicated and ineffective wastes of time.

It would be cheaper to build and operate 5 super duper carriers that make the nimitz look like a bath toy than to operate a fleet of 5th generation VTOLs.

The-thing-next-door wrote:

miketheterrible wrote:I don't ever see this coming out to be honest.  If the government isn't funding it, I doubt much beyond a flying model at best like Su-47.

On other hand, we know Putin has had requested a Jump Jet to be created in the newest SAP program.  But no word on that.

There is a possibility of merging projects and that this ends up as a jump jet.

Why would they make thier own f35 when it has been clearly shown that such aircraft are suboptimal at best.

Russia has had enough experience with such VTOL boutique fighters before to know that they are overpriced, over complicated and ineffective wastes of time.

It would be cheaper to build and operate 5 super duper carriers that make the nimitz look like a bath toy than to operate a fleet of 5th generation VTOLs.

The F-35 as a VTOL jet is FANTASTIC, as a pure fighter, mediocre. LM paid YAK about 350M for the YAK 141 technology that underpins the F-35. The US went with shaft driven lift fan which requires a large radius. I am not sure what other ideas are possible The smart thing for the US to do would be to make the fuse/wing of the F-35 non-VTOL much differnt then then VTOL. That said I have no idea what engineering/political constraints they were under.