Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    PAK FA, T-50: News #1

    avatar
    Rpg type 7v

    Posts : 374
    Points : 228
    Join date : 2011-05-01

    PAK FA, T-50: News #1 - Page 36 Empty Re: PAK FA, T-50: News #1

    Post  Rpg type 7v on Sat Jun 29, 2013 11:48 am

    Laughing 
    maybe 1st point is the truth ,everything rest is bunch of half-truths or lies....
    Sujoy
    Sujoy

    Posts : 886
    Points : 1044
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    PAK FA, T-50: News #1 - Page 36 Empty Re: PAK FA, T-50: News #1

    Post  Sujoy on Sat Jun 29, 2013 12:17 pm

    Viktor wrote:How reliable is Dmitry Litovkin ?

    Most of all that Litovkin has said ( in this article ) has been said before by other Govt/Pvt individuals in Russia .

    Dmitry Litovkin was a correspondent for Izvestiya ( am not sure if he still is ) .

    His research has been used as references not just in Russia but also in the US by organizations like Jamestown Foundation and Washington Post . I read a number of his articles and what I can say is that they are certainly not sales pitch . Also , in my experience Rossiya Gazzetta will not hyperventilate though it is a Govt. mouthpiece.

    I just found the timeline for induction interesting , i.e 2013 . That's why I posted it .


    In other news Foreign Policy is reporting Bing Maps has revealed , supposedly a Russian Secret Stealth Fighter Jet

    http://gizmodo.com/bing-maps-has-revealed-russias-secret-stealth-fighter-605080559

    You need to opt in to access this Foreign Policy report .
    http://killerapps.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/06/26/russias_mysterious_first_stealth_fighter_found_on_bing_maps?wp_login_redirect=0

    For the benefit of those who do NOT have access I am reproducing the article below :

    John Reed in Foreign Policy wrote:This might be the easiest ever find of an MIA airplane. You're looking at a Bing Maps image of the Mikoyan (MiG) Project 1.44, Russia's first attempt at building a flyable stealth fighter and the jet that some said was sent to China to help kick-start Beijing's stealth development program. The jet is the larger of the two shown above sitting just outside of Moscow at Zhukovsky airfield (we have no idea what the smaller, darker plane alongside the 1.44 is).

    [url=/image_preview.php?i=52&u=17812518]PAK FA, T-50: News #1 - Page 36 13062610[/url]

    Project 1.44 was meant to be the Soviet Union (and later Russia's) super-fast, super-maneuverable answer to the United States' premier fighter, the F-22 Raptor.  However, the jet was underfunded in the days following the collapse of the Soviet Union. When the plane finally took its maiden flight in 2000, its designers found multiple flaws with the aircraft and the project was abandoned.

    The 1.44 was designed with stealth-like angles, an internal weapons bay and supposedly used electronic countermeasures and special coatings to help reduce its radar signature. It also featured digital flight controls along with thrust vectoring engines and canards (little wings) on the front of the fuselage aimed at making the jet incredibly maneuverable.

    But, in 2001, Russian officials shelved Project 1.44 in favor of a more modern design from MiG's rival Sukhoi -- the T-50 PAK FA. The 1.44 supposedly disappeared into storage after that. A quick Google Images search reveals recent-looking photos of the jet in storage -- some of which claim they are from 2009 and taken near Moscow. (Google Maps also shows grainy satellite imagery the plane sitting on the ramp at Zhukovsky airfield.)

    In late 2010 China unveiled its J-20 stealth fighter, a jet that struck many as an updated version of the Project 1.44 design. Just look at the tail-end of both jets and you'll see where this idea comes from. The J-20, like the 1.44, is a big, single seat, twin-engine jet complete with an internal weapons bay and canards on the front. The obvious differences disappear there. The lines of the J-20 are a lot stealthier than the 1.44's. The engines are laid out differently on the two jets (the 1.44's air intakes are slung below the fuselage while the J-20's hug the plane's sides).

    While MiG has denied giving information on Project 1.44 to the Chinese, Reuters in August 2011 cited a senior Russian official as saying "it looks like they got access . . . to documents related to the Mikoyan."

    The wire service also cited an "independent analyst" named Adil Mukashev as saying that China bought the tail section of the MiG 1.44.

    It's important to note that the Russians refused to sell Beijing Sukhoi Su-33 aircraft carrier-borne fighters after it was discovered China was attempting to reverse-engineer and build an unlicensed version of the Su-33's predecessor. Beijing's J-11B land-based fighter and the J-15 carrier-based fighter are the results of that effort. (Though there are rumors that the work on these Chinese jets actually occurred under a secret contract with Russia.)

    As you can see from the image above, Project 1.44 still sits in Russia. Maybe the Chinese bought the tail of a non-flying mock up of the aircraft or just got access to the designs. Heck, maybe the Russians aren't lying about not giving information on the 1.44 to the Chinese. Maybe someone like China's Red Star hacking crew stole the designs. Red Star is suspected by Russian cybersecurity giant Kaspersky Lab of stealing defense, industrial and diplomatic secrets on behalf of the Chinese government, with a focus on victims in Russia and Asia.
    avatar
    Rpg type 7v

    Posts : 374
    Points : 228
    Join date : 2011-05-01

    PAK FA, T-50: News #1 - Page 36 Empty Re: PAK FA, T-50: News #1

    Post  Rpg type 7v on Sun Jun 30, 2013 11:42 am

    GarryB wrote:
    How is Meteor (100km+) a huge advantage over R-37M (300km)?

    The fact that the US has all sorts of useful stuff like AIM-9X high off boresight AAMs doesn't mean much when their F-22s can't even use it so in a dog fight it would be like a Mig-29 against an F-16 in the early 1990s... which means instant victory to the Mig as the F-16 just couldn't compete.
    it can use it.
    granted i dont know much about else but ramjet powered meteor is better in many areas , then r-37.
    like you said its much more then 100km. and r-37 300km range is in ideal conditions, realistic range for a chasing target will be 1/4 that at best ,...lets not forget the weight difference means you can carry much more meteor missiles and need less space.
    sepheronx
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7091
    Points : 7359
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 30
    Location : Canada

    PAK FA, T-50: News #1 - Page 36 Empty Re: PAK FA, T-50: News #1

    Post  sepheronx on Sun Jun 30, 2013 8:28 pm

    TR1 wrote:I was mostly, admittedly, talking about radar. In terms of this primary sensor, the Su-35 is light years ahead of EF and its Captor.
    The IRST also enjoys a much larger aperture.

    Datalink is very secretive stuff, but is nothing new for Russian birds- they had them back in USSR days. Of course back then they were criticized by West for being "reliant on GCI" but really it was a natural step in providing fighters with more complete radar picture.

    Missiles are a matter of integration, so I don't see how that's an EF exclusive advantage. Of course if we talk about weapons, the Su-35 is cleared with FAR more A2G munitions than the EF is. The typhoons path to full multi-role capability has been long and painfull. Today they can....drop guided bombs and that's pretty much it.
    Of course, this isn't really the fault of the bird, but the situation it was born in.

    With pods Russia is behind. We will see if this new pod is integrated into Su-35, hopefully sooner than later.

    Yes, but Captor-E is AESA and it has been in development, about the same time as Zhuk-A. Problem is, I bet we will see Captor-E being fielded before Zhuk-A in numbers as the Russian MOD does not seem interested in AESA technology other than for PAK FA. Really sad actually, since Zhuk-A is getting 1000-1100 T/R module variant and would work on MiG-35, but so far, no orders on MiG-35, so we may see Zhuk-A only on Ka-52 and that is about it. Unless India does indeed decide to go with Irkutsk and buys Zhuk-A for the Su-30MKI. Other than that, it may only be T-50 that has AESA, and everything else in Russian use will be PESA, which will be bad for technical reasons (it will be susceptible to EW, as well as interception from enemy sensors as PESA requires a lot of power output for it to work.

    This is why I think Russian MoD is kind of incompetent. The new technologies is right in their face, it is right there for the grabbing and it is done by their own people, yet they are not purchasing it. So this will end up being shelved technology and will end up dead. Instead, they are going after old technology (PESA), and it is even evident (If RPG is correct) on Vityaz. They developed other AESA like Gamma-DE and Nebo-M but decided to go with a cheap and less capable PESA?

    I am starting to lose faith in MoD's decisions. I guess it is a let us wait and see at MAKS
    Deep Throat
    Deep Throat

    Posts : 94
    Points : 122
    Join date : 2013-05-22

    PAK FA, T-50: News #1 - Page 36 Empty Re: PAK FA, T-50: News #1

    Post  Deep Throat on Sun Jun 30, 2013 8:43 pm

    The exact nature of the AESA for the PAK FA is a closely guarded secret . Nothing is known even about the number of T/R modules in that AESA radar .
    NickM
    NickM

    Posts : 178
    Points : 123
    Join date : 2012-11-09
    Location : NYC,USA / Essex,UK

    PAK FA, T-50: News #1 - Page 36 Empty Re: PAK FA, T-50: News #1

    Post  NickM on Sun Jun 30, 2013 8:54 pm

    TR1 wrote:
    The Su-35 uses already a much more technologically advanced array.
    Russia has been flying AESAs for as long as Europe
    Yeah, it doesn't look good for Europe, thats for sure.

    Have you been declared Clinically Insane yet ? If not it's a crime against humanity .

    Your diatribe is simply mental masturbation . Only an idiot will say that the SU 35 has a more advanced technologically advanced array . A good question to ask you is why has the SU 35 failed in all the competitions that it took part in , worldwide inspite of such advanced technologies .

    When it comes to radar and sensor fusion Russia is half a decade behind EU . There isn't a single company in Russia or Asia that can develop AESA radars as advanced as those designed by Selex.

    Simultaneous/interleavedA/A andA/G Modes , Wide Field of Regard re-positioner , Extended Missile Guidance, Fully solid state GalliumArsenideAESA technology with high MeanTime Between critical Failures are just some of the features that puts the Captor light years ahead of anything that Zuk can come up with .
    sepheronx
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7091
    Points : 7359
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 30
    Location : Canada

    PAK FA, T-50: News #1 - Page 36 Empty Re: PAK FA, T-50: News #1

    Post  sepheronx on Sun Jun 30, 2013 9:04 pm

    NickM wrote:
    TR1 wrote:
    The Su-35 uses already a much more technologically advanced array.
    Russia has been flying AESAs for as long as Europe
    Yeah, it doesn't look good for Europe, thats for sure.

    Have you been declared Clinically Insane yet ? If not it's a crime against humanity .

    Your diatribe is simply mental masturbation . Only an idiot will say that the SU 35 has a more advanced technologically advanced array . A good question to ask you is why has the SU 35 failed in all the competitions that it took part in , worldwide inspite of such advanced technologies .

    When it comes to radar and sensor fusion Russia is half a decade behind EU . There isn't a single company in Russia or Asia that can develop AESA radars as advanced as those designed by Selex.

    Simultaneous/interleavedA/A andA/G Modes , Wide Field of Regard re-positioner , Extended Missile Guidance, Fully solid state GalliumArsenideAESA technology with high MeanTime Between critical Failures  are just some of the features that puts the Captor light years ahead of anything that Zuk can come up with .

    Is there something about Zhuk-A (get the name right please) that we are not aware of? Su-35 was not in any competition other than the one for Brazil, and Brazil has not gone for anything yet except for promises. Apparently, according to Austin, GaS and GaN is indeed in development in Russia, so I don't know what you are getting at, as AESA technology relies on GaS/GaN. So Zhuk-A has to run off of something. The radar used for PAK FA is not really mentioned much, other than it is around 1500+ T/R modules. There is little information as it is for EU's AESA radar, and it isn't even fielded yet. But, I will admit, they will probably field it more than Russia will, seeing as the incompetence of MoD is, they rather invest in obsolete equipment.
    TR1
    TR1

    Posts : 5556
    Points : 5566
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    PAK FA, T-50: News #1 - Page 36 Empty Re: PAK FA, T-50: News #1

    Post  TR1 on Sun Jun 30, 2013 10:10 pm

    NickM wrote:
    TR1 wrote:
    The Su-35 uses already a much more technologically advanced array.
    Russia has been flying AESAs for as long as Europe
    Yeah, it doesn't look good for Europe, thats for sure.

    Have you been declared Clinically Insane yet ? If not it's a crime against humanity .

    Your diatribe is simply mental masturbation . Only an idiot will say that the SU 35 has a more advanced technologically advanced array . A good question to ask you is why has the SU 35 failed in all the competitions that it took part in , worldwide inspite of such advanced technologies .

    When it comes to radar and sensor fusion Russia is half a decade behind EU . There isn't a single company in Russia or Asia that can develop AESA radars as advanced as those designed by Selex.

    Simultaneous/interleavedA/A andA/G Modes , Wide Field of Regard re-positioner , Extended Missile Guidance, Fully solid state GalliumArsenideAESA technology with high MeanTime Between critical Failures  are just some of the features that puts the Captor light years ahead of anything that Zuk can come up with .

    Tell us how the Captor, is better than Irbis.

    I will wait, my mentally challanged friend Smile.


    Irbis beats the shit out of Captor, today.
    No ifs, buts, anythings about it.
    Deal with it.
    You have no clue what you are babbling about, like always.

    Su-35 hasn't failed on technical grounds, anywhere. In fact can you show us when it has been present @ fly-offs vs other birds?
    EF is an export failure compared to Su-27 family.
    sepheronx
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7091
    Points : 7359
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 30
    Location : Canada

    PAK FA, T-50: News #1 - Page 36 Empty Re: PAK FA, T-50: News #1

    Post  sepheronx on Mon Jul 01, 2013 3:33 am

    TR1 wrote:
    NickM wrote:
    TR1 wrote:
    The Su-35 uses already a much more technologically advanced array.
    Russia has been flying AESAs for as long as Europe
    Yeah, it doesn't look good for Europe, thats for sure.

    Have you been declared Clinically Insane yet ? If not it's a crime against humanity .

    Your diatribe is simply mental masturbation . Only an idiot will say that the SU 35 has a more advanced technologically advanced array . A good question to ask you is why has the SU 35 failed in all the competitions that it took part in , worldwide inspite of such advanced technologies .

    When it comes to radar and sensor fusion Russia is half a decade behind EU . There isn't a single company in Russia or Asia that can develop AESA radars as advanced as those designed by Selex.

    Simultaneous/interleavedA/A andA/G Modes , Wide Field of Regard re-positioner , Extended Missile Guidance, Fully solid state GalliumArsenideAESA technology with high MeanTime Between critical Failures  are just some of the features that puts the Captor light years ahead of anything that Zuk can come up with .

    Tell us how the Captor, is better than Irbis.

    I will wait, my mentally challanged friend Smile.


    Irbis beats the shit out of Captor, today.
    No ifs, buts, anythings about it.
    Deal with it.
    You have no clue what you are babbling about, like always.

    Su-35 hasn't failed on technical grounds, anywhere. In fact can you show us when it has been present @ fly-offs vs other birds?
    EF is an export failure compared to Su-27 family.

    It is no secret that Su-27 series have had a good run export wise. Although, as I do not know what the Captor radars capabilities are, there is indeed an AESA derivative and that in itself allows it to be more technologically advanced than Irbis-E PESA radar, as it would then be able to work in LPI mode while Irbis cannot. Irbis on the other hand is a very powerful radar that is capable of tracking/engaging at longer distances (my best bet). But, with that brute power, it would be easier to pick up with Radar warning sensors than what the Captor-E would be, as well, in todays world, Electronic warfare is even more potent and import, thus AESA has better ECM, ECCM and EW capabilities than PESA, which would make the Irbis-E more susceptible to being attacked and or countered. Maybe they will rely more on wingtipped EW/ECCM/ECM pods to protect the Su-35, but technically, if the ET is using AESA radar, in itself, makes it more advanced technologically.
    Cyberspec
    Cyberspec

    Posts : 2729
    Points : 2884
    Join date : 2011-08-08
    Location : Terra Australis

    PAK FA, T-50: News #1 - Page 36 Empty Re: PAK FA, T-50: News #1

    Post  Cyberspec on Mon Jul 01, 2013 3:55 am

    Personally, I think anyone trying to equate little toy fighters like the EF and Rafale with Su-35 is kidding themselves. They're good fighters in their class but it's like comparing a F-16 with a F-15
    TR1
    TR1

    Posts : 5556
    Points : 5566
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    PAK FA, T-50: News #1 - Page 36 Empty Re: PAK FA, T-50: News #1

    Post  TR1 on Mon Jul 01, 2013 7:15 am

    sepheronx wrote:

    It is no secret that Su-27 series have had a good run export wise.  Although, as I do not know what the Captor radars capabilities are, there is indeed an AESA derivative and that in itself allows it to be more technologically advanced than Irbis-E PESA radar, as it would then be able to work in LPI mode while Irbis cannot.  Irbis on the other hand is a very powerful radar that is capable of tracking/engaging at longer distances (my best bet).  But, with that brute power, it would be easier to pick up with Radar warning sensors than what the Captor-E would be, as well, in todays world, Electronic warfare is even more potent and import, thus AESA has better ECM, ECCM and EW capabilities than PESA, which would make the Irbis-E more susceptible to being attacked and or countered.  Maybe they will rely more on wingtipped EW/ECCM/ECM pods to protect the Su-35, but technically, if the ET is using AESA radar, in itself, makes it more advanced technologically.

    EF does not use an AESA today, nor will it for sometimes.
    NIIP also has AESA radars of similar size for Flankers, for India (Super MKI) and a slightly smaller array for PAK-FA, so they are hardly behind Eurofighter in this aspect as well.
    Of course they is also Zhuk-AE which has been flying for years, but lets stick to Flanker marker for now.

    As of today, Irbis is tested and operational, and its EF equivalent is Captor, which is a simple mechanical array.
    Irbis absolutely crushes Captor in this comparison.


    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22321
    Points : 22865
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    PAK FA, T-50: News #1 - Page 36 Empty Re: PAK FA, T-50: News #1

    Post  GarryB on Mon Jul 01, 2013 12:29 pm

    it can use it.
    granted i dont know much about else but ramjet powered meteor is better in many areas , then r-37.
    like you said its much more then 100km. and r-37 300km range is in ideal conditions, realistic range for a chasing target will be 1/4 that at best ,...lets not forget the weight difference means you can carry much more meteor missiles and need less space.

    Missiles with a flight range of more than 100km are going to be used against very specific target types... mostly large transports, large aircraft like JSTARS or AWACS, or inflight refueling tankers... because most other aircraft will either be low RCS or just lost in the jamming environment.

    Such missiles will very rarely be used in a chasing situation... most will be used in an ambush type attack to reduce an enemies force multipliers.
    sepheronx
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7091
    Points : 7359
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 30
    Location : Canada

    PAK FA, T-50: News #1 - Page 36 Empty Re: PAK FA, T-50: News #1

    Post  sepheronx on Mon Jul 01, 2013 2:43 pm

    TR1 wrote:
    sepheronx wrote:

    It is no secret that Su-27 series have had a good run export wise.  Although, as I do not know what the Captor radars capabilities are, there is indeed an AESA derivative and that in itself allows it to be more technologically advanced than Irbis-E PESA radar, as it would then be able to work in LPI mode while Irbis cannot.  Irbis on the other hand is a very powerful radar that is capable of tracking/engaging at longer distances (my best bet).  But, with that brute power, it would be easier to pick up with Radar warning sensors than what the Captor-E would be, as well, in todays world, Electronic warfare is even more potent and import, thus AESA has better ECM, ECCM and EW capabilities than PESA, which would make the Irbis-E more susceptible to being attacked and or countered.  Maybe they will rely more on wingtipped EW/ECCM/ECM pods to protect the Su-35, but technically, if the ET is using AESA radar, in itself, makes it more advanced technologically.

    EF does not use an AESA today, nor will it for sometimes.
    NIIP also has AESA radars of similar size for Flankers, for India (Super MKI) and a slightly smaller array for PAK-FA, so they are hardly behind Eurofighter in this aspect as well.
    Of course they is also Zhuk-AE which has been flying for years, but lets stick to Flanker marker for now.

    As of today, Irbis is tested and operational, and its EF equivalent is Captor, which is a simple mechanical array.
    Irbis absolutely crushes Captor in this comparison.



    All I remember reading was that Captor-E (CAESAR) was introduced in 2007 and was offered to all EF customers in 2010. Zhuk-A has been offered for quite some time and as far as I know, a 1000-1100 T/R Module variant is being tested as we speak. But after all this, they end up purchasing Zhuk-A for Ka-52K...

    I am aware that NIIP has an AESA radar, hence why PAK FA (It is the 4th model, right?) had a model that tested with it onboard the aircraft. Phazotron could probably easily upsize the radar to be able to fit a Flanker variant as they were able to upsize Zhuk-M radar to fit on one (was offered to China for their Su-30MKK). If the Zhuk-A is being offered right now, especially with the benifits I mentioned above, would it not be best to start fitting current jets and other inbetween jets (Inbetween being old 4th gen jets to PAK FA) with the AESA radar to provide it with the best possible equipment to deal with current and future threats, more effectively? If they are worried about cost and its effectiveness, it isn't a bad idea to purchase a few to equip them on their current jets, so that they can work out whatever bugs they have they may detect, as it would be easier to spot issues when it is actually being used.

    But as they are not purchasing AESA radar besides the one for Ka-52K and PAK FA (I'll Mention MiG-35 when they do decide to purchase it), is indication they are not really interested in newer technology. I mean heck, the Vityaz radar could very well be PESA as well, and that is pretty sad, especially when there are delays.
    TR1
    TR1

    Posts : 5556
    Points : 5566
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    PAK FA, T-50: News #1 - Page 36 Empty Re: PAK FA, T-50: News #1

    Post  TR1 on Tue Jul 02, 2013 1:24 am

    Captor-AESA still has a long way to become an actual in service item. If you notice the Eurofighter has really been screwed by the political climate it was born from. Just look @ tranche capability development, it is snails pace.

    You can't just take Zhuk-AE make it bigger, and stick it into Flanker. It is a long process with lots of integration and trials. This is why NIIP has a monopoly on the Flanker radar market. N035 is a working product with years of development, and that is why it is being bought. Don't be tricked into thinking it is not cutting edge just because it is not AESA.

    Ka-52 won't be serially produced with AESA for several years at best either.

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22321
    Points : 22865
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    PAK FA, T-50: News #1 - Page 36 Empty Re: PAK FA, T-50: News #1

    Post  GarryB on Wed Jul 03, 2013 3:15 am

    The jet is the larger of the two shown above sitting just outside of Moscow at Zhukovsky airfield (we have no idea what the smaller, darker plane alongside the 1.44 is).

    The folding wings on the smaller plane makes it almost certainly a Mig-33 (Mig-29K)... the fact that they didn't know this suggests they are not specialists.

    Zhuk-A has been offered for quite some time and as far as I know, a 1000-1100 T/R Module variant is being tested as we speak. But after all this, they end up purchasing Zhuk-A for Ka-52K...

    I doubt any Russian AESAs have been offered for export yet and the set for the Ka-52K is for the naval model only.

    But as they are not purchasing AESA radar besides the one for Ka-52K and PAK FA (I'll Mention MiG-35 when they do decide to purchase it), is indication they are not really interested in newer technology. I mean heck, the Vityaz radar could very well be PESA as well, and that is pretty sad, especially when there are delays.

    I really don't understand your strange fixation with AESA radars. They are very expensive and don't have many advantages over a mature PESA that are actually that useful in a combat environment.

    Once they have perfected production and got them into service the price will reduce and they will become a logical choice... but until then it makes rather more sense to continue with what works yet is a fraction of the cost.

    The US also went nuts over Stealth a while back and that has so far proved expensive and largely not that pivotal either.

    Ka-52 won't be serially produced with AESA for several years at best either.

    Land based Ka-52s wont use AESA. It is just the naval models.
    sepheronx
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7091
    Points : 7359
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 30
    Location : Canada

    PAK FA, T-50: News #1 - Page 36 Empty Re: PAK FA, T-50: News #1

    Post  sepheronx on Wed Jul 03, 2013 2:42 pm

    "GarryB
    Zhuk-A has been offered for quite some time and as far as I know, a 1000-1100 T/R Module variant is being tested as we speak. But after all this, they end up purchasing Zhuk-A for Ka-52K...

    I doubt any Russian AESAs have been offered for export yet and the set for the Ka-52K is for the naval model only.

    I really don't understand your strange fixation with AESA radars. They are very expensive and don't have many advantages over a mature PESA that are actually that useful in a combat environment.

    Once they have perfected production and got them into service the price will reduce and they will become a logical choice... but until then it makes rather more sense to continue with what works yet is a fraction of the cost.

    The US also went nuts over Stealth a while back and that has so far proved expensive and largely not that pivotal either.

    As you very well may be right, I am more curious about AESA's capabilities over a mature PESA's. Cause last I checked, Irbis-E does not have LPI mode, so it would definately be interecepted first (even though it acts as a mini awacs) over jets with AESA even if they are premature (also, lacking engage/tracking range). As well, EW/ECM/ECCM charactoristics are supposed to be better with AESA over PESA. Which these two things listed alone would make the AESA radar much better, even if premature than Irbis-E for the fighterjet market. That is my perception of it. I may be completely wrong.
    TR1
    TR1

    Posts : 5556
    Points : 5566
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    PAK FA, T-50: News #1 - Page 36 Empty Re: PAK FA, T-50: News #1

    Post  TR1 on Wed Jul 03, 2013 8:26 pm

    LPI is a pretty contentious subject from what I understand.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22321
    Points : 22865
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    PAK FA, T-50: News #1 - Page 36 Empty Re: PAK FA, T-50: News #1

    Post  GarryB on Thu Jul 04, 2013 3:42 am

    What is the point of having a low powered low probability intercept mode on an aircraft with 14 external weapon pylons that is the size of an Su-35?

    The LPI mode for the Su-35 could be 6 widely separated aircraft with only one aircraft using their powerful radar to scan for threats while the other 5 aircraft listen like a bistatic radar array. Mig-31 radar can be linked together to cover airspace over a 1,200km width front using datalinks... why couldn't 6 much newer Su-35s with 5th gen avionics do this?

    The result will be on Su-35 standing out like a light house, but the other 5 aircraft can collect radar returns from different angles and when they get returns from what seems otherwise to be empty airspace do you think they could conclude that it might be worth scanning in IR or launching a lock on after launch IIR guided RVV-BD variant?

    It wasn't till the US got their AESAs operational that they started to find new uses for them like LPI mode and various ESM modes... who knows what the Russians will find with their L band wing mounted AESAs?
    TR1
    TR1

    Posts : 5556
    Points : 5566
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    PAK FA, T-50: News #1 - Page 36 Empty Re: PAK FA, T-50: News #1

    Post  TR1 on Thu Jul 04, 2013 12:21 pm

    So photos of j20 with only 2 missies per bay emerge.
    Yet another myth ( pakfa has low missile capacity) melts away.
    Also in revent testing shots the j20s skin is nothing to write home about at all, so there goes that as well...
    avatar
    Rpg type 7v

    Posts : 374
    Points : 228
    Join date : 2011-05-01

    PAK FA, T-50: News #1 - Page 36 Empty Re: PAK FA, T-50: News #1

    Post  Rpg type 7v on Thu Jul 04, 2013 7:00 pm

    there is very little production of aesa elements in Russia ,and all that is taken up by new massive search radars that they need for full coverage and their anti-stealth properties, thats why that russian decision is so critical ,no other country is building that low requencies aesa ,when you add fighters and upcoming S-500 ,nothing is left for vytaz and many other non-critical systems...
    on the other hand there is lots of spare capacity for factories that produce phase shifters , radar-emmiting twt or other tubes , high voltage equipment (aesa uses lower voltages so its not compatible).
    so that could be the reason they make even more pesas today ,which are good but not the best tongue  , aesa and pesa demand very different manufacturing products ,russia (or russian factories) need modernization Wink  ...
    SOC
    SOC

    Posts : 577
    Points : 624
    Join date : 2011-09-13
    Age : 41
    Location : Indianapolis

    PAK FA, T-50: News #1 - Page 36 Empty Re: PAK FA, T-50: News #1

    Post  SOC on Thu Jul 04, 2013 11:44 pm

    TR1 wrote:So photos of j20 with only 2 missies per bay emerge.

    Nope. It has apparent attachment points for a third pylon adapter in each bay, between the two already shown. Assuming a loadout of four BVRAAMs may prove erroneous.

    I don't care about the "which one is better" argument, but come on people, attention to detail!
    TR1
    TR1

    Posts : 5556
    Points : 5566
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    PAK FA, T-50: News #1 - Page 36 Empty Re: PAK FA, T-50: News #1

    Post  TR1 on Thu Jul 04, 2013 11:49 pm

    SOC wrote:
    TR1 wrote:So photos of j20 with only 2 missies per bay emerge.

    Nope.  It has apparent attachment points for a third pylon adapter in each bay, between the two already shown.  Assuming a loadout of four BVRAAMs may prove erroneous.

    I don't care about the "which one is better" argument, but come on people, attention to detail!

    People were automatically assuming 6 per bay as well. Until I see 6 in each bay, well, I am going to assume 4. We don't now if it can carry 6 of those AAMs at the same in the bay, the middle pylon, if it exists maybe for something else.
    Either way, the bay seems no larger in space than the PAK-FAs (though layout is ofc very different).
    I think both with clever spacing can carry 6 AAMs.
    sepheronx
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7091
    Points : 7359
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 30
    Location : Canada

    PAK FA, T-50: News #1 - Page 36 Empty Re: PAK FA, T-50: News #1

    Post  sepheronx on Fri Jul 05, 2013 9:28 am

    Rpg type 7v wrote:there is very little production of aesa elements in Russia ,and all that is taken up by new massive search radars that they need for full coverage and their anti-stealth properties, thats why that russian decision is so critical ,no other country is building that low requencies aesa ,when you add fighters and upcoming S-500 ,nothing is left for vytaz and many other non-critical systems...
    on the other hand there is lots of spare capacity for factories that produce phase shifters , radar-emmiting twt or other tubes , high voltage equipment (aesa uses lower voltages so its not compatible).
    so that could be the reason they make even more pesas today ,which are good but not the best tongue  , aesa and pesa demand very different manufacturing products ,russia (or russian factories) need modernization Wink  ...


    Do you any links regarding this? I know that I have heard that both GaN and GaS is produced in Russia but there is very little information on it. All I remember was watching an older RIAN video (I think it was) about production of GaS T/R modules in Russia and how they are used for the upcoming AESA radar for PAK FA and Zhuk-A radar. I would be more interested to know about their developments if you have any links to provide for it. Sorry, it is just with your recent post history, I don't entirely trust what you are saying but if you got links to back them up, I would be glad to hear.

    Thank you.
    avatar
    Rpg type 7v

    Posts : 374
    Points : 228
    Join date : 2011-05-01

    PAK FA, T-50: News #1 - Page 36 Empty Re: PAK FA, T-50: News #1

    Post  Rpg type 7v on Sat Jul 06, 2013 6:16 pm

    i have proven many people here wrong already, i have nothing more to prove. there is lots of open information .look them up yourself.
    Werewolf
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5252
    Points : 5455
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    PAK FA, T-50: News #1 - Page 36 Empty Re: PAK FA, T-50: News #1

    Post  Werewolf on Sat Jul 06, 2013 9:02 pm

    Rpg type 7v wrote:i have proven many people here wrong already, i have nothing more to prove. there is lots of open information .look them up yourself.

    Such an answer to a question for a source to back your claim up is just prove that you have no idea and tell bullcrap.

    Making claims and than running away when people ask for sources, coward.

    Sponsored content

    PAK FA, T-50: News #1 - Page 36 Empty Re: PAK FA, T-50: News #1

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Wed Nov 13, 2019 10:18 pm