Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    PAK FA, T-50: News

    Share

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: PAK FA, T-50: News

    Post  TR1 on Sat Jul 06, 2013 9:48 pm

    He sure proved everyone wrong in the Pantsir thread, lmao!

    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7302
    Points : 7612
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    Location : Canada

    Re: PAK FA, T-50: News

    Post  sepheronx on Sat Jul 06, 2013 10:36 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.

    So you are saying that you dont have a link, right? So you are just shooting from the hip?

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15458
    Points : 16165
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: PAK FA, T-50: News

    Post  GarryB on Sun Jul 07, 2013 11:01 am

    So you are saying that you dont have a link, right? So you are just shooting from the hip?

    I believe the correct technical term is "Shooting from the lip..." Smile

    AESA elements are initially expensive to make and you will have an initial high number of rejects too until production is improved and increased.

    A fighter radar might have 1,000 individual elements but the large radar arrays for Ships or land based SAM batteries could have 20 times that number, not to mention the variety of platforms and vehicles that could use such equipment.

    I have read that they are working on conformal arrays for the PAK FA so that the skin of the aircraft can be used as a radar array to allow 360 degree scanning and detection.

    The point is that right now PESAs do the job required so the only reason to rush AESAs into service is to satisfy a few internet fanbois that want to be able to boast "they" have AESAs too... often without being able to say exactly why they are even better than a mature PESA.

    The fact is that AESA does have a few minor advantages over PESA, and lots and lots of very important advantages over standard radar types.

    For a start with each module actually being a radar element you can put in your noise suppression rules so the data coming to your radar processors is greatly reduced with the noise removed and partially processed already greatly reducing the processing load on the computers.

    Of course there are some problems with AESAs having a more limited field of view... something clearly the PESA on the Mig-31 does not suffer from as it had a very wide field of view... there was some talk of putting Russian AESAs on mechanical steering mounts to deal with this.

    Right now PESAs are doing the job without costing too much. AESAs have the potential to do better and when they are ready they will be very much like thermal imaging cameras and change the way some platforms can fight in a revolutionary way... but not till they are ready.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Rpg type 7v
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 420
    Points : 284
    Join date : 2011-05-01

    Re: PAK FA, T-50: News

    Post  Rpg type 7v on Sun Jul 07, 2013 11:26 am

    11:20:46
    TR1 wrote:He sure proved everyone wrong in the Pantsir thread, lmao!
    yep i sure did . all the while you trolled like a parrot.
    and even you admitted you were wrong in that thread, cant remember  now about what it was...

    sepheronx wrote:
    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.

    So you are saying that you dont have a link, right? So you are just shooting from the hip?
    i have info , technical newspaper , link ,even russian forum discussion about AESA, but im sorry im not interested in providing you with anything anymore....

    all my pictures and links i posted before were trashed and spitted on without a reason ,even you slammed me when i posted the link about high altitude coverage in russia from a parliamentary debate being no mere then 50ish % and aiming for 100% in 2020.

    So you have only yourself to blame ,you can call me out whatever, i dont care ,and aint falling for that, because insulting someone is all that you and your buddies here know....so good luck with you dumb troll mates here im sure youll get along just nicely....

    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7302
    Points : 7612
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    Location : Canada

    Re: PAK FA, T-50: News

    Post  sepheronx on Sun Jul 07, 2013 9:57 pm

    Rpg type 7v wrote:11:20:46
    TR1 wrote:He sure proved everyone wrong in the Pantsir thread, lmao!
    yep i sure did . all the while you trolled like a parrot.
    and even you admitted you were wrong in that thread, cant remember  now about what it was...

    sepheronx wrote:
    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.

    So you are saying that you dont have a link, right? So you are just shooting from the hip?
    i have info , technical newspaper , link ,even russian forum discussion about AESA, but im sorry im not interested in providing you with anything anymore....

    all my pictures and links i posted before were trashed and spitted on without a reason ,even you slammed me when i posted the link about high altitude coverage in russia from a parliamentary debate being no mere then 50ish % and aiming for 100% in 2020.

    So you have only yourself to blame ,you can call me out whatever, i dont care ,and aint falling for that, because insulting someone is all that you and your buddies here know....so good luck with you dumb troll mates here im sure youll get along just nicely....

    Just advice for you in the future:

    If you want to prove someone wrong, you need evidence to back it up. You did not provide much evidence in the other threads as you were merely posting either yourself or some other forum member, or you never posted a link at all. Which the later, seems to be quite common.

    If you want to debate, please provide your findings. Till then, I will call you out on what you are saying.

    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5629
    Points : 6282
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Re: PAK FA, T-50: News

    Post  Viktor on Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:20 pm

    By its looks (more angled wings than F-22 - meaning faster plane) and stunning amount of surfaces producing lift it was obvious from the start that PAK-FA will

    fly well above and faster. Now I know that Izvestia is highly contaminated but check this out: Interview with deputy chief designer of the enterprise "Zvezda".

    LINK

    23 km altitude / 9G ejection seat + pilot suit for 23 km altitude. Meaning PAK-FA will be able to fly at 23km altitude

    Things are going interesting - PAK-FA is a monster in making.



    Deep Throat
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 100
    Points : 132
    Join date : 2013-05-22

    Re: PAK FA, T-50: News

    Post  Deep Throat on Mon Jul 08, 2013 9:23 pm

    Viktor wrote:Meaning PAK-FA will be able to fly at 23km altitude
    Then what's the need for a new aircraft to replace the MIG 31 ?

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9422
    Points : 9914
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: PAK FA, T-50: News

    Post  George1 on Mon Jul 08, 2013 9:57 pm

    Deep Throat wrote:
    Viktor wrote:Meaning PAK-FA will be able to fly at 23km altitude
    Then what's the need for a new aircraft to replace the MIG 31 ?

    exactly and consider that strategic bombers arent the bulk anymore of enemy nuclear threat

    Hachimoto
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 153
    Points : 167
    Join date : 2013-02-08
    Age : 31

    Re: PAK FA, T-50: News

    Post  Hachimoto on Mon Jul 08, 2013 10:27 pm

    Deep Throat wrote:
    Viktor wrote:Meaning PAK-FA will be able to fly at 23km altitude
    Then what's the need for a new aircraft to replace the MIG 31 ?

    Speed & longue range at same time ?

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: PAK FA, T-50: News

    Post  TR1 on Mon Jul 08, 2013 10:33 pm

    Hachimoto wrote:
    Deep Throat wrote:
    Viktor wrote:Meaning PAK-FA will be able to fly at 23km altitude
    Then what's the need for a new aircraft to replace the MIG 31 ?

    Speed & longue range at same time ?

    PAK-FA looks to be king of supersonic range.

    However MiG-31 is on another level when it comes to Mach 2 + supersonic endurance. The airframe is totally specialized for the role, much more so than any 5th gen can hope to be (today at least).

    Hachimoto
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 153
    Points : 167
    Join date : 2013-02-08
    Age : 31

    Re: PAK FA, T-50: News

    Post  Hachimoto on Mon Jul 08, 2013 10:50 pm

    Exact and russia (very large territories) could not afoard the benefit of designing a new Mig-31 replacement.

    Hope it comes out sooner.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15458
    Points : 16165
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: PAK FA, T-50: News

    Post  GarryB on Tue Jul 09, 2013 9:27 am

    To add what has been said the Mig-25 carried the huge R-40TD missiles on its wing hard points so it would not be a huge stretch to expect the Mig-31 could do the same... so with a modified belly to carry 6 x R-37M plus a further four R-37M missiles under the wing a single Mig-31 can carry 10 missiles that a PAK FA can carry 4 of.

    2.5 times the weapon capacity per plane is important.

    Of course Mig-31s can operate together with Su-35s and it could certainly operate with PAK FAs too.

    No other armed aircraft can fly at mach 2.4 for its entire flight out (700km) and its entire flight back (700km) like a Mig-31 can.

    Keep in mind that the Mig-31 does all this with 15.5 ton thrust engines... certainly new 5th gen 18 ton thrust engines could improve performance even further especially if the bypass air can be configured in a ramjet propulsion state like the SR-71s engines so the blades of the engine are not spinning so fast and most of the thrust is ramjet generated in the bypass air tubes.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Deep Throat
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 100
    Points : 132
    Join date : 2013-05-22

    Re: PAK FA, T-50: News

    Post  Deep Throat on Tue Jul 09, 2013 10:41 am

    GarryB wrote:Of course Mig-31s can operate together with Su-35s and it could certainly operate with PAK FAs too

    That's what I am asking . The Foxhound can always operate with the PAK FA . I understand that the Foxhound needs upgradation BUT why a complete replacement ?

    In other words what is it that a MIG 31 replacement can do that a PAK FA can't ?

    TR1 wrote:However MiG-31 is on another level when it comes to Mach 2 + supersonic endurance

    The MIG 31 was designed to protect vast Soviet airspace with few aircrafts . The situation is different today as there are more specialized aircrafts in the RuAF and more airfields have been constructed across Siberia .

    Mach 2 + ensures fast scramble but dogfights need far lesser speed .

    More importantly I am questioning why a replacement for the MIG 31 ? And not whether the MIG 31 should exist .

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15458
    Points : 16165
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: PAK FA, T-50: News

    Post  GarryB on Tue Jul 09, 2013 10:59 am

    In other words what is it that a MIG 31 replacement can do that a PAK FA can't ?

    You wouldn't use a Rolls Royce to pull a Plow would you?

    The PAK FA is a very special aircraft that will be able to occupy the high ground and will be a very capable fighter.

    The problem is that there wont be a huge number of them because of their cost and their design is focussed on stealth so they are a precision instrument designed for a very specific task... they will be working together with Su-35s to deal with potentially thousands of F-35s and perhaps up to 180 odd F-22s that could be deployed to Europe or Japan.

    The Mig-31 is all about speed and range at speed and carrying large heavy weapons.

    A Mig-31 replacement doesn't need to fly very high up... in fact for part of its mission it actually needs to fly fast and low... what is often ignored is the fact that the Mig-31 can fly at 1,500km/h at sea level which makes it the fastest low flying aircraft... now add that puzzle piece together with the 6 barrel 23mm gatling gun it carries and you realise it is equipped to chase down and shoot down cruise missiles and aircraft... if the R-37s are all gone but the B-2s and B-52s are still coming then a slashing attack with a 23mm cannon is the next step... and at 12,000 rpm with a 23mm cannon a very short burst of 5-10 rounds would hit like a shotgun blast.
    (Note the Mig-31 is a huge 50 ton aircraft yet it has a gun magazine capacity of 260 rounds... these shells are the size of large HMG rounds with the nose expanded to accept 23mm shells with large heavy HE payloads)

    The Mig-29 has a laser rangefinder and radar/IRST tracking system so that the pilot with a target locked can squeeze the trigger and the computer will only fire the gun when the angle of the gun to target is right and will shut the gun down when it has calculated it has ensured a kill. During testing the gun was firing 5-7 rounds yet the targets were still being destroyed which led to the designer saying if he had known the gun would be so accurate he would have only fitted it with 100 rounds instead of the 150 round in the original design.

    I rather suspect the Mig-31 can do the same.

    On an upgraded Mig-31 perhaps they will deal with the problems with the 23mm gatling and fit a new mount that can be raised and lowered and aimed at targets  to give better performance...

    Equally long range and high speed and large capacity for AAMs would also be useful and a large radar antenna apeture would all be desirable features.

    Stealth would not be that much use to a high speed long range aircraft that would use its radar a lot and also transmit and receive datalink communications...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Deep Throat
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 100
    Points : 132
    Join date : 2013-05-22

    Re: PAK FA, T-50: News

    Post  Deep Throat on Tue Jul 09, 2013 11:34 am

    GarryB wrote:A Mig-31 replacement doesn't need to fly very high up...
    (Note the Mig-31 is a huge 50 ton aircraft yet it has a gun magazine capacity of 260 rounds... these shells are the size of large HMG rounds with the nose expanded to accept 23mm shells with large heavy HE payloads)

    Indications are that the MIG 31's role will be played by the PAK FA in the near future .

    http://www.aviaport.ru/digest/2013/07/09/258875.html

    " Там же, где эта проблема является острой (районы Арктики), ведущую роль действительно должны играть тяжелые истребители - сегодня это МиГ-31, в перспективе - ПАК ФА. "

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15458
    Points : 16165
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: PAK FA, T-50: News

    Post  GarryB on Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:19 pm

    There are going to be a few different variants of the PAK FA... a navalised version for one, but that will all be in the future.

    I rather suspect that a model optimised for long range interception is certainly possible but would not need the level of stealth or the level of manouver performance of the PAK FA and would also benefit from having more than one crew and a much larger weapon capacity and much larger fuel capacity along with reduced drag design to allow for higher speeds.

    At the end of the day a light bomber converted for speed and air to air payload actually makes more sense than a converted PAK FA because the bomber will already have lots of range and if it is a bomber like a Tu-22M3M then it will have speed as well already.

    A belly covered in 20 R-37M launchers and the internal rotary launcher with 12 scramjet powered R-77Ms plus 6 or so Morfei short range highly manouverable IIR guided AAMs for defence against enemy AAMs and SAMs, plus a huge front mounted radar array and a reduction to two crew and an increase in internal fuel and an engine upgrade and we are talking about a serious heavy long range interceptor... a much more efficient use of old airframes and engines...

    As a more direct answer... the reason why they should spend money on something to replace the Mig-31 instead of using a modified PAK FA is because the PAK FA was designed number one for manouver capability.... and number two for Stealth. Neither factor is important for a Mig-31 or its replacement.

    For PAK FA flying high and fast for long periods is to allow longer range missile launches against enemy aircraft and to reduce the effective range of enemy missiles (SAM and AAM).

    For Mig-31 speed means getting to launch positions faster and hitting enemy aircraft and cruise missiles at greater distances from their targets so they have more time to return to base... rearm and refuel and do it again.

    High for speed is good but super high is no advantage, stealth means nothing as AB will be used a lot and so will radar. Manouver is not of great use as it is a long range missile carrier that strikes down from max range and then heads back to rearm and refuel.

    High speed long range missiles and long range radar means it can cover more area, while doing so it will be generating a lot of engine and skin (friction) heat, and will be using datalinks and comms and radar so there will be little question of its location.

    With high speed and a flight range of 300km the R-37M could cover a 600km diameter of a border area... carried in enormous numbers in an AN-70... released out the back like a pallet of cargo to fire up the engines and fly towards its target using data transmitted by high flying PAK FAs and ground and space based radars is of course another option to replace them perhaps... dunno 


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5664
    Points : 6070
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: PAK FA, T-50: News

    Post  Austin on Tue Jul 09, 2013 5:19 pm

    Russia close to completing its F-22 aircraft rival

    According to United Aircraft Corporation CEO Mikhail Pogosyan, five T-50s are participating in the testing program, which has allowed Russian designers to speed up the process and close the gap with the United States.

    The F-22 has been serving in the U.S. Air Force for a long time and, for good reason, is still considered to be the most advanced fighter. Far less is known about its Russian rival.

    According to its designers, the T-50 is the embodiment of the latest in Russian aircraft technology.

    A number of innovative solutions have been implemented in the machine, including stealth technology, new construction materials and coatings, artificial intelligence and the element base, which have brought Russia’s military aircraft building to a qualitatively new technological level.

    A whole range of the latest polymer carbon plastics have made their debut on the T-50. They weigh 50 percent less than titanium or aluminum of comparable rigidity, and they are 20-25 percent lighter than steel.

    New materials cover 70 percent of the fighter’s surface. Its weight has been reduced to just a quarter of that of a fighter made of conventional materials, allowing the designers to increase its combat load.

    The Sukhoi Design Bureau has mentioned “the PAK FA’s unprecedentedly low level of radar, optical and infrared visibility.” The T-50’s effective reflective area will amount to 5.3 square feet (its predecessor, the Sukhoi-30MKI, has 215 square feet).

    This means that the Sukhoi-30MKI appears on the radar screen as a large metal object, while the T-50’s reflection would only be one-fortieth of that, making it much more difficult to notice or aim weapons at it — especially since the machine benefits from the exceptional maneuverability that has been a hallmark of Sukhoi fighters.

    In addition, the T-50 meets the main requirement of modern fighters—a high degree of intellectualization.

    Its radar, complete with an active electronically-scanned array (AESA), can “see” everything that is going on in the air or on the ground at a distance of hundreds of miles.

    It can track multiple airborne and surface targets simultaneously, while keeping them in the crosshairs of its weapons.

    Several dozen sensors attached to different parts of its hull not only enable it to monitor the surroundings but also to exchange real-time data with ground control and within its airborne unit at the same time.

    The T-50’s “e-pilot” functionality is constantly analyzing the situation, offering the pilot several options on which to act.

    The pilot will receive the bulk of flight and combat data in the form of symbols and signs, making it easier to process and substantially easing the pressure on the pilot, while allowing him to focus on the tactical mission at hand.

    The T-50 can take off and land from a runway that is only roughly 1,100 feet long. Going forward, it will serve as a basis for a navy variant. Weapons will be stored completely in internal compartments, to meet the stealth technology’s requirements.

    According to certain reports, those compartments would be able to carry up to eight R-77 air-to-air missiles, or two 3,300-pound, guided aerial bombs.

    Additionally, two long-range missiles could be suspended externally, to allow the fighter to engage targets located as far as 250 miles away.

    The fact that India has joined in development of the fighter suggests that the program is promising and meets the highest standards. New Delhi has allocated almost $25 billion for this purpose and expects to obtain a proprietary version of the fifth-generation fighter by 2018.

    It is this machine that will be exported, according to Russian specialists, while the Russian-made T-50 will remain an exclusively domestic model—like the American F-22. Russian airmen expect to take delivery of the first serially produced fighters as soon as 2013, and they plan to purchase at least 70 units.

    Rpg type 7v
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 420
    Points : 284
    Join date : 2011-05-01

    Re: PAK FA, T-50: News

    Post  Rpg type 7v on Tue Jul 09, 2013 10:58 pm

    GarryB wrote:There are going to be a few different variants of the PAK FA... a navalised version for one, but that will all be in the future.

    I rather suspect that a model optimised for long range interception is certainly possible but would not need the level of stealth or the level of manouver performance of the PAK FA and would also benefit from having more than one crew and a much larger weapon capacity and much larger fuel capacity along with reduced drag design to allow for higher speeds.

    At the end of the day a light bomber converted for speed and air to air payload actually makes more sense than a converted PAK FA because the bomber will already have lots of range and if it is a bomber like a Tu-22M3M then it will have speed as well already.

    A belly covered in 20 R-37M launchers and the internal rotary launcher with 12 scramjet powered R-77Ms plus 6 or so Morfei short range highly manouverable IIR guided AAMs for defence against enemy AAMs and SAMs, plus a huge front mounted radar array and a reduction to two crew and an increase in internal fuel and an engine upgrade and we are talking about a serious heavy long range interceptor... a much more efficient use of old airframes and engines...

    As a more direct answer... the reason why they should spend money on something to replace the Mig-31 instead of using a modified PAK FA is because the PAK FA was designed number one for manouver capability.... and number two for Stealth. Neither factor is important for a Mig-31 or its replacement.

    For PAK FA flying high and fast for long periods is to allow longer range missile launches against enemy aircraft and to reduce the effective range of enemy missiles (SAM and AAM).

    For Mig-31 speed means getting to launch positions faster and hitting enemy aircraft and cruise missiles at greater distances from their targets so they have more time to return to base... rearm and refuel and do it again.

    High for speed is good but super high is no advantage, stealth means nothing as AB will be used a lot and so will radar. Manouver is not of great use as it is a long range missile carrier that strikes down from max range and then heads back to rearm and refuel.

    High speed long range missiles and long range radar means it can cover more area, while doing so it will be generating a lot of engine and skin (friction) heat, and will be using datalinks and comms and radar so there will be little question of its location.

    With high speed and a flight range of 300km the R-37M could cover a 600km diameter of a border area... carried in enormous numbers in an AN-70... released out the back like a pallet of cargo to fire up the engines and fly towards its target using data transmitted by high flying PAK FAs and ground and space based radars is of course another option to replace them perhaps...  dunno 

    Interesting garry..
    why did you said on this topic
    http://www.russiadefence.net/t1803p420-is-russia-safe-from-f22
    in post Post n°429:

    BTW it would make no sense to use a variant of PAK FA as a Mig-31 replacement... an interceptor of bombers and cruise missiles has no requirement for stealth... there will be no enemy fighters to deal with... they will all be trying to shoot down incoming Russian cruise missiles heading for the US.


    Just to spite me? Right...
    Pak-fa is a (perspektivniy=futuristic) complex- like car factory complex producing caravan hedgeback saloon versions of the same car -not complexity ,why did you think all those talk about 1-2 seat versions ,1-2-3 engine versions (dfferent nozzles mostly) and ,L-band X-band radars was...
    Man i hate it when im right i just didnt want to go too much off cheers 

    The rest of your post is just too much sci-fi BS.

    Cyberspec
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1946
    Points : 2117
    Join date : 2011-08-08
    Location : Terra Australis

    Re: PAK FA, T-50: News

    Post  Cyberspec on Wed Jul 10, 2013 3:05 am

    According to certain reports, those compartments would be able to carry up to eight R-77 air-to-air missiles

    Unless they're planning on installing a different compartment, 8 AA missiles is impossible to achieve.

    ....

    On the MiG-31 vs Pak Fa

    the MiG-31's will remain in service for at least another 10-15 years....no chance of Pak Fa replacing them in the near term. And unless the announced successor of the MiG-31 is a version of the Pak Fa (not likely IMO) it will never replace it.

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9422
    Points : 9914
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: PAK FA, T-50: News

    Post  George1 on Wed Jul 10, 2013 3:44 am

    Cyberspec wrote:

    On the MiG-31 vs Pak Fa

    the MiG-31's will remain in service for at least another 10-15 years....no chance of Pak Fa replacing them in the near term. And unless the announced successor of the MiG-31 is a version of the Pak Fa (not likely IMO) it will never replace it.

    Why?

    SOC
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 595
    Points : 650
    Join date : 2011-09-13
    Age : 38
    Location : Indianapolis

    Re: PAK FA, T-50: News

    Post  SOC on Wed Jul 10, 2013 4:05 am

    George1 wrote:
    Cyberspec wrote:

    On the MiG-31 vs Pak Fa

    the MiG-31's will remain in service for at least another 10-15 years....no chance of Pak Fa replacing them in the near term. And unless the announced successor of the MiG-31 is a version of the Pak Fa (not likely IMO) it will never replace it.

    Why?

    Think about it. The BM upgrade keeps the MiG-31 viable for the near term. After that, they can start thinking about if they actually need a replacement, and if so, what to do about it. By that time the PAK-FA may be done with production, depending on how many are bought and how many they make per year. If it's out of production, its chances of being the basis for a FOXHOUND replacement aren't very large. Plus, Garry is right: there's no need for FOXHOUND's replacement to be that stealthy or that maneuverable.

    To be honest, with the updates in radar and missile capability these days, they'd almost be just as well off going with an adapted FLANKER airframe, and doing it right now instead of spending money on the MiG-31BM. FLANKER has excellent range, and a new radar mated with the R-37M would give it a combination of combat persistence, range, and avionics to pretty much kill everything FOXHOUND can. So it's not as fast, so what? Having a 300km range missile won't hurt. Semi-conformal inter-nacelle carriage and new engines might give you supercruise capability anyway to get out there fast. Plus, adapting a FLANKER would be cheaper, and if you use new airframes you've got a nice long service life.

    Or, spend a fraction of the cost, and spread around up north some of the S-400 and S-500 batteries. The S-400 has the range that Russia can actually consider defending the entire border with SAM systems if it wanted to.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15458
    Points : 16165
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: PAK FA, T-50: News

    Post  GarryB on Wed Jul 10, 2013 12:59 pm

    Interesting garry..
    why did you said on this topic
    http://www.russiadefence.net/t1803p420-is-russia-safe-from-f22
    in post Post n°429:

    BTW it would make no sense to use a variant of PAK FA as a Mig-31 replacement... an interceptor of bombers and cruise missiles has no requirement for stealth... there will be no enemy fighters to deal with... they will all be trying to shoot down incoming Russian cruise missiles heading for the US.


    Just to spite me? Right...

    Perhaps English is not your first language but in both the comments by me that you reproduce here I say the same thing... ie:

    it would make no sense to use a variant of PAK FA as a Mig-31 replacement... an interceptor of bombers and cruise missiles has no requirement for stealth...

    And:

    I rather suspect that a model optimised for long range interception is certainly possible but would not need the level of stealth or the level of manouver performance of the PAK FA

    As a more direct answer... the reason why they should spend money on something to replace the Mig-31 instead of using a modified PAK FA is because the PAK FA was designed number one for manouver capability.... and number two for Stealth. Neither factor is important for a Mig-31 or its replacement.

    I think that is pretty clear... the Mig-31 and its replacement does not need stealth or manouverability any where near the level of PAK FA... what it needs is high speed and long range and lots of missiles.

    Because of this I don't think PAK FA could replace the Mig-31.

    The Su-35 has range and lots of missiles but lacks the very high speed of the Mig-31.

    why did you think all those talk about 1-2 seat versions ,1-2-3 engine versions (dfferent nozzles mostly) and ,L-band X-band radars was...
    Man i hate it when im right i just didnt want to go too much off

    India was a very strong supporter of a 2 seat version but it seems they are not interested in spending the money necessary to develop one... and if they are not interested then I doubt Russia will want one either.

    With 5th gen avionics there should be little need for a second crew.

    The X and L band radar are for detecting enemy stealth fighters... F-35 and F-22. Would not be so useful against B-2s but then that is what the enormous ground and space arrays will be for.

    And regarding engine number?

    There is only going to be the twin engined PAK FA. The new light fighter might use one engine but three engines don't bring enough returns to be worth it except in VSTOL aircraft.

    The only viable three engine aircraft I know of use the extra third engine for takeoff and run two engines for more efficient cruise.

    Unless they're planning on installing a different compartment, 8 AA missiles is impossible to achieve.

    If the Su-35 can fit two R-77s between its engine inlets then why couldn't PAK FA fit 4 R-77s abreast?

    The long narrow strakes and folding rear gridfins take up very little room and the launch pylons include a pneumatic ram to throw the missile down away from the aircraft before the engine is lit and the tail grid fins are extended.

    You could fit two of the missiles lower than the upper two missiles and stagger them to use the depth of the weapon bay as well as the width.

    ...regarding SOCs post... I pretty much agree and the Su-35 would be a better replacement for the Mig-31 in all areas than the PAK FA except in terms of speed. Fitting the new late model engines produced for the final PAK FA... if they do indeed put out 18 tons of thrust as promised should allow an increase in performance for the Su-35 but with all those weapon pylons I still can't see it flying faster than Mach 2.3, though its supercruising performance should be impressive.

    The point is that they have Mig-31s already and fitting a huge AESA radar in 5 years time and new more powerful engines could mean significant increases in range and top speed and all round performance.

    We need to keep in mind that a 21st century aircraft in the niche between the Foxhound and the Backfire but with much more sophisticated fixed wing and a more sophisticated propulsion arrangement that allows two large 5th gen turbojets to operate like turbo jets to get up to speed and up to altitude and then run like ramjets or even scramjets could open a whole new chapter in aviation. Remove manoeuvrability and stealth and focus on speed and range and a heavy armament that... with a larger aircraft can be internal for high speed long range flight and you can free up your expensive stealth fighters... heavy and light and 4+++ numbers aircraft like the Flankers and Fulcrums for tactical and theatre missions.

    As a bonus you could use these aircraft on long range conventional missions to support conventional long range bombing missions too using long weapon and sensor range to compensate for lack of stealth and manoeuvrability.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7302
    Points : 7612
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    Location : Canada

    Re: PAK FA, T-50: News

    Post  sepheronx on Thu Jul 11, 2013 7:52 am

    Just a note, I think the L-Band AESA arrays on the PAK FA are IFF/SSR Transponders.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15458
    Points : 16165
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: PAK FA, T-50: News

    Post  GarryB on Thu Jul 11, 2013 1:06 pm

    If they were only that then there would be no need for them to be AESA antenna arrays.

    Most PVO aircraft had datalinks without the need for such an array...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: PAK FA, T-50: News

    Post  TR1 on Thu Jul 11, 2013 9:12 pm

    It is confirmed it is for IFF:

    http://www.aviationunion.ru/Files/Nom_8_GRPZ.jpg

    Something like this I guess:

    http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/2012-07-08/selex-galileo-leads-europes-e-scan-drive

    Sponsored content

    Re: PAK FA, T-50: News

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 12:54 am


      Current date/time is Sun Dec 04, 2016 12:54 am