Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    PAK-DA: News

    Share
    avatar
    eehnie
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1147
    Points : 1172
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  eehnie on Sat Dec 31, 2016 2:34 am

    A1RMAN wrote:
    eehnie wrote:

    This was only one example to see numerically the effect of the speed. But still, surface-surface missiles like the one I commented are a fact today, and a Surface-Air application of them is likely.

    There is a huge difference between targeting an air target and surface target. Simple fact that surface stays where it is - you cant just put in the coordinates, fire and forget.
    But air target can travel big distances, maneuver use EW and other defense systems.

    Try to open your mind. How would you try to solve it? It is not too difficult to find some option. The necessary technology exists today, but it is used not on this application.
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16054
    Points : 16685
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  GarryB on Sat Dec 31, 2016 7:54 am

    About the fuel bill do not go too fast... First you are talking about a country with big oil and gas resources, and state owned resources and production. The government of Russia pays the fuel bill at price of production costs. And second to include the loses of one Tu-154, two Mi-24/25/35 or two Mi-8/... in the economic balance puts the things in the right place. Two units of the Mi-8/..., the cheapest of them, maybe $35-40 millions to add to their operational costs, without talking about the costs related to the death people.

    I agree that when it comes to their nuclear triad they don't care about money as long as the job gets done.

    However having said that having a rolls royce pulling a plough when a tractor can do the same job is not something they are known for either.

    Actually having a supersonic bomber increases its cost without making it safer in its strategic role.

    Both the Tu-160 and the Tu-22M3 can fly at supersonic speed but I would wager a lot of money that during their strikes on Syria they never broke the sound barrier once.

    In the case of the Backfire the altitude it was being used kept it safe no matter what speed it was flying at. In the case of the Bear and the Blackjack it was the standoff range by firing 3,000km range cruise missiles that kept them safe.

    The problem with the BMP-1 and BMP-2 was a problem with the main armament. This is not the case, because the Tu-160 and the Tu-PAK-DA will be able to use the same armament. In this case there is not a single reason why the upgraded Tu-160, or even the old Tu-160 can not do the role that is being explained for the Tu-PAK-DA. Also the Tu-160 will be able to use the new hypersonic missiles.

    I mentioned the BMP and BMP-2 because when they were designed it was thought in the west that the latter would replace the former because they were both designed for the same job... ie troop transportation on the battlefield.

    When they were working on the BMP-2 they probably thought the same... a replacement for the BMP. In practise in combat in Afghanistan it was found the BMP-2 didn't replace the BMP... there were targets the 73mm gun was more effective at dealing with and others where the 30mm cannon was better. They complimented each other... the end result is that the actual replacement had both weapon types.

    That solution is not practical with the Blackjack and PAK DA... you can't make a supersonic bomber cheaper to operate simply by making it fly slower.

    In the case of a Tu-PAK-FA moving at Mach 0.8, the aircraft only would be able to move 1000 Km away the hostile missile, surely not enough to put the aircraft out of the range of the hostile missile, and would be hit roughly in 1 hour and 15 min. The importance of the speed in the safety is key, and even it is increased operating inside the own air space, where the hostile fire can be detected many time before to hit your aircrafts. And Russia would pay happily the fuel bill.

    In the WWIII scenario by the time a subsonic plane (Tu-95 and PAK DA) or supersonic plane (Tu-160) arrive to their launch position all of Russias ICBMs and SLBMs would have obliterated the targets and threats hours before...

    In the case of a Tu-PAK-FA moving at Mach 0.8, the aircraft only would be able to move 1000 Km away the hostile missile, surely not enough to put the aircraft out of the range of the hostile missile, and would be hit roughly in 1 hour and 15 min. The importance of the speed in the safety is key, and even it is increased operating inside the own air space, where the hostile fire can be detected many time before to hit your aircrafts. And Russia would pay happily the fuel bill.

    Speed has an effect on bomber performance but not with no effect.

    If the choice is a supersonic PAK DA then why even bother with the restarting of production of the Tu-160? Just withdraw the Tu-160 and Tu-95 and replace them all with PAK DA.

    The problem is that a supersonic stealthy PAK DA would be enormously expensive to buy and to operate.

    A subsonic PAK DA could be used for a range of roles including conventional bomber, which is a role the Tu-160 seems to have dropped.

    this means the PAK DA could replace the Tu-95 and the Tu-22M3, without duplicating the role of the supersonic Tu-160.

    They become complimentary.

    Sharing major components between the Blackjack and PAK DA further improves both aircraft and makes their operation cheaper and simpler.

    To be honest I would prefer to see a supercruising capable PAK DA but that would add cost and complication.


    Also PAK-DA will not have primary role of cruise missile launch platform but conventional bombing. Its supposed to be replacement for Tu-22Ms and then to partially replace TU-95 and to be suplemented by Tu-160M2. While it will be capable of carrying cruise missiles it wont be its primary role. B-2 was almost always used in such role too, conventional high-precision extremly long range bombing. They flew from the US to Yugoslavia, hit targets with PGMs and flew back to States. That would be sort of main role of PAK-DA.

    I don't quite agree.

    The PAK DA will replace the Tu-22M3 as heavy bomber for theatre missions, but for strategic missions it will be a cruise missile carrier just like the Blackjack.

    I rather suspect a very long range scramjet powered cruise missile will likely be developed... with folding wings and external fuel tanks of its own... when launched it will start its scramjet engine and climb and accelerate... at some mid range point it will drop its external fuel tanks and possibly even part of its wing to improve high speed low drag performance after which it will accelerate to full flight speed in the hypersonic range to its target... perhaps 6,000km away.

    It might even have multiple nuclear warheads it can drop as it flies. two external missiles with say 10-20 small nuke warheads in the 2-5KT range.


    Then both of you would design the Tu-PAK-DA to face only the current weapons. In this case I'm not surprised with your arguments.

    The spending required to give the US an IADS would bankrupt them over night...

    It wont happen any time soon.

    Try to open your mind. How would you try to solve it? It is not too difficult to find some option. The necessary technology exists today, but it is used not on this application.

    Even if you put an IIR seeker in its nose and sent it constant course corrections to get it within visual range even a basic AAM could probably bring such a large missile down... and such missiles would be very very expensive.


    _________________
    “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
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16054
    Points : 16685
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  GarryB on Sat Dec 31, 2016 7:58 am

    Keeping an open mind is good, but you need to be responsible when spending the hard earned tax dollars of the Russian citizens.

    You can spend all day thinking of what the enemy might or might not have or do... at the end of the day having a supersonic cruise missile carrier (tu-160M2) and a subsonic stealthy flying wing bomber (PAK DA) is a good compromise in terms of performance and capability.

    As engine technology improves the potential for super cruising Blackjacks with greatly extended range and perhaps even supercruising flying wing can be kept in reserve for the future.

    Right now a hypersonic attack missile is much cheaper and easier than a hypersonic bomber or even manned aircraft.

    It would be likely that a hypersonic interceptor will be developed as the first scramjet powered manned aircraft.


    _________________
    “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
    avatar
    eehnie
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1147
    Points : 1172
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  eehnie on Thu Jan 05, 2017 7:38 am

    I answered it before, but it is necessary to say it clearly again.

    The production of the Tu-160 is being restarted because the model remains the best Strategic Bomber worldwide, allowing still bigger development, and because Russia thinks they need more units of new strategic bombers befor the new Tu-PAK-DA can be ready for serial production.

    As I commented in the topic about procurement:

    eehnie wrote:About the Tu-160 there are reports that talk about 50 units to be ordered.

    Looking at the numbers, the reserves of Strategic Bombers are still far from a saturation. It would be necessary between 50 and 60 units to reach the saturation until the degree that today have the Interceptors. Then this the new order of production for the Tu-160 would replace the Tu-95 in the active service, but the Tu-95 (47 active and 12 in the reserve according to decent sources) would remain in the reserve, to complete the current fleet until the saturation of the reserve. The cathegory of Strategic Bomber has been in question for some decades, and the required production of Tu-160 was not completedd at the time. But the concept is proving to be still modern and useful as military concept, and the production is being restarted in the short-mid term. The new production line should be active by 2019-2020, and the production of the aircraft can remain until 2030 aproximately.

    The Tu-PAK-DA needs still a lot of research and development. I hope to see the first unit by 2025, but the serial production surely will not be ready until 2030. And then yes, the orders of the Tu-PAK-DA will be likely mean a total decommission of the Tu-92, and a bigger presence of the Tu-22 in the reserve.

    In the refered to the technologies, the speed is today the main variable to assure the safety on air warfare, as explained before. Speed is still today over the stealth technologies that fall easier to technological improvements in detection.

    Then Russia needs not to sacrifice the good values and techonological level that they reached on speed for Strategic Bombers in the past to improve on Stealth technologies. To do it would be a killer mistake for the future of the Tu-PAK-DA adding to the project a high risk of failure. This is a mistake the US did but I do not expect Russia to repeat. Stealth technologies alone, without speed, are likely to fail.

    With the design of the Su-PAK-FA, Russia proved to be able to introduce stealth technologies on supersonic aircrafts without any sacrifice on speed and mobility, and I do not expect less in the case of the Tu-PAK-DA.

    The US instead has been giving wrongly more importance to stealth technologies over speed. On strategic bombers they decided to sacrifice totally the speed, leaving the aircraft in very poor features when the stealth advantage is lost by improvements on detection technologies. And now their stealth fighter is plagued of problems by poor performance vs other fighters except on stealth features. It is a logical consequence of their previous mistake.
    avatar
    eehnie
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1147
    Points : 1172
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  eehnie on Thu Jan 05, 2017 8:21 am

    GarryB wrote:
    In the case of a Tu-PAK-FA moving at Mach 0.8, the aircraft only would be able to move 1000 Km away the hostile missile, surely not enough to put the aircraft out of the range of the hostile missile, and would be hit roughly in 1 hour and 15 min. The importance of the speed in the safety is key, and even it is increased operating inside the own air space, where the hostile fire can be detected many time before to hit your aircrafts. And Russia would pay happily the fuel bill.

    In the WWIII scenario by the time a subsonic plane (Tu-95 and PAK DA) or supersonic plane (Tu-160) arrive to their launch position all of Russias ICBMs and SLBMs would have obliterated the targets and threats hours before...

    Then both of you would design the Tu-PAK-DA to face only the current weapons. In this case I'm not surprised with your arguments.

    The spending required to give the US an IADS would bankrupt them over night...

    It wont happen any time soon.

    Try to open your mind. How would you try to solve it? It is not too difficult to find some option. The necessary technology exists today, but it is used not on this application.

    Even if you put an IIR seeker in its nose and sent it constant course corrections to get it within visual range even a basic AAM could probably bring such a large missile down... and such missiles would be very very expensive.

    Note that the Tu-PAK-DA will not happen any time soom. You can expect expect less than 5 Tu-PAK-DA by 2030.

    Also note that Russia is developping today the MiG-41, a fighter interceptor close to the features that I was exposing for a potential future anti-aircraft missile (as application of today's Surface-Surface missiles). The reality is going one step forward from what you see as impossible or unlikely.

    Azi
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 107
    Points : 109
    Join date : 2016-04-05

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Azi on Thu Jan 05, 2017 10:38 am

    eehnie wrote:
    In the refered to the technologies, the speed is today the main variable to assure the safety on air warfare, as explained before. Speed is still today over the stealth technologies that fall easier to technological improvements in detection.
    Speed is not better than "stealth"! Bullshit!!! Speed and stealth are only two different concepts. No one would suggest that a ninja should take over the role of a knight and otherwise.
    Speed is good to leave AD zone, but you can't evade really from a fired rocket. And the enemy has one big advantage...he saw you coming from thousands of miles Wink and is good prepared, stealth don't gives him the big preparation time!

    In the beginning was the B2 planned to infiltrate soviet airspace. Soviet airspace was not really covered good with radar stations. You remember Mathias Rust???
    He started 1987 in Hamburg, flew over Finland and landed with a Cessna direct in Moskow, near to the red square. So it was in the 80ies possible to penetrate soviet airspace with a low flying and low observable aircraft. For this time (80ies) the B2 was good enough, if it avoided radar stations! The B2 was a first strike aircraft, speed was not needed!

    But today russian airspace is not soviet airspace, they are not living in the 80ies anymore! Russia has a lot of radar stations, observing the sky in different wavelenghts. Today it's impossible to penetrate russian airspace with a stealth bomber.

    So and why is USA developing a B21 Bomber? Russia is not the world! A stealth bomber is in the 21st century good enough to kick asses of developing countries with poor to medium air defense.

    eehnie wrote:With the design of the Su-PAK-FA, Russia proved to be able to introduce stealth technologies on supersonic aircrafts without any sacrifice on speed and mobility, and I do not expect less in the case of the Tu-PAK-DA.
    Speed and stealth combined sounds good, but there are a few problems...
    The PAK-DA will be bigger, than a F-35 or a Su T-50, supersonic means in that case a gigantic IR siganture. Aerodynamic shape and stealth shape don't like each other, is the second problem! Even a supersonic PAK-DA means more cost, it will be really expensive in production and maintaining, so your considered 5 planes are realistic.

    By the way...
    This is a big problem for the F-35, his engine is soooo powerful that it have a really great IR-signature.

    ---

    Main role for the PAK-DA is carrier of cruise missles, the role of the TU-95 only better! It can start complete secret, fly for hours and days over a area and strike at the right moment with cruise missles. For example, cruising 300 NM away from the eastcoast of USA, when firing the air defense will maybe not have enough time to react!
    In some case it's a first strike weapon, but it don't have to penetrate enemy air space for a single second. It will have a role similar to a SSBN at ocean.

    Second role of course is penetration of enemy air space and unload a shit of bombs on enemy heads! In this role it will be the replacement of Tu-22M. Very good for enemies with up to medium air defense (95% of all countries worldwide).

    No one should forget the following...
    Russia had to handle for decades the stealth technology of USA, but western countries had never to handle soviet or russian stealth technology. The Su T-50 and PAK-DA will have a big impact on western air defense. It will take 15 - 20 years and the "NAZO" can handle russian stealth aircraft, but now they will have problems!
    avatar
    kvs
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2929
    Points : 3056
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  kvs on Fri Jan 06, 2017 2:08 am

    That Rust was not shot down does not mean he was not detected. High level decisions during Gorbachev's regime are an important element
    in this story. Rust was probably leveraged by some faction to undermine the Soviet military. The military was more than likely prevented from
    taking action and in the typical fashion would later take the blame for "failing" to take action.

    It's amusing to see how the stealth concept is dangled over the USSR/Russia as something beyond its ability even though the concept originated
    in the USSR during the 1960s. The USSR had more than enough wide spectrum and multi-system detection capability in the 1980s to see the
    B2 at every stage of its flight. The notion that it would fly into Soviet air space undetected is just whack and makes the USSR look like some
    banana republic with a single 1950s monochrome radar system. This is obvious BS. Serbs managed to network some 1960s radars to bring
    down the F-117A. Western racist chauvinists need to put the crack pipe of hubris down.
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16054
    Points : 16685
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  GarryB on Fri Jan 06, 2017 6:59 am

    The production of the Tu-160 is being restarted because the model remains the best Strategic Bomber worldwide, allowing still bigger development, and because Russia thinks they need more units of new strategic bombers befor the new Tu-PAK-DA can be ready for serial production.

    The Russians have followed a clear policy of upgrading old stuff to their max point while at the same time working on the from scratch new design replacement.

    It offers the best compromise because the new technology being developed for the new equipment can be used in the upgrade of existing types so it gets into service and tested making the new technology less of a risk while improving performance of the actual force in service.

    The new factories to make the Blackjacks will be used to make the PAK DAs so the precision and performance of making them will likely be vastly superior to the manufacture of the existing Blackjack. New materials and production techniques can be used that didn't exist in the 1980s.

    The T-90 was their best tank and so they upgraded it to T-90AM... they also upgraded their T-72s and T-80s, but when Armata MBTs and kurganets MBTs and Boomerang MBTs are ready those older upgraded types will go into reserve.

    The technology from the new types will be used during the lifetime of the force to further upgrade the old models so if needed in 2025 a T-72BM8 wont have 1980s communications and optics and ammo.

    It will be the same with the Strategic bombers.

    Costs will be reduced and spread across rather more air frames to reduce operational costs.

    Initially the existing types will get upgrades... the new engines for the new aircraft could be retrofitted to existing types to improve performance.

    A gift of 16 Tu-22M4s with capacity to carry 10 Brahmos-M missiles would be an interesting offer for India...

    The US instead has been giving wrongly more importance to stealth technologies over speed. On strategic bombers they decided to sacrifice totally the speed, leaving the aircraft in very poor features when the stealth advantage is lost by improvements on detection technologies. And now their stealth fighter is plagued of problems by poor performance vs other fighters except on stealth features. It is a logical consequence of their previous mistake.

    I totally agree... and it has been an ongoing issue with US products.

    But just a quick look at Russian tanks with NERA and APS and SHTORA and other layers of systems to defend the vehicle... the Russians like alternatives and use them together to each compliment each other.

    The US would not keep a 73mm gun armed BMP and BMP-2 in service together... they prefer rigid standardisation... which is ironic really... NATO 223 rifle magazines are not even standardised... try an cheap crappy M16 mag in a Steyr AUG... Half of the problems with the SA80 was the cheap M16 mags...

    The PAK DA will have been designed from scratch to be properly stealthy but they will also likely include Jamming and ECCM equipment and probably plasma stealth and photonic radar with active jamming and other features.

    Note that the Tu-PAK-DA will not happen any time soom. You can expect expect less than 5 Tu-PAK-DA by 2030.

    If they start producing them in the late 2020s they could probably bang out 10-20 by 2030 in addition to the 50-60 odd Tu-160s.

    Also note that Russia is developping today the MiG-41, a fighter interceptor close to the features that I was exposing for a potential future anti-aircraft missile (as application of today's Surface-Surface missiles). The reality is going one step forward from what you see as impossible or unlikely.

    The sophistication needed will make the MiG-41 rather more expensive than could be affordable if it was a missile.

    It would also be rather more useful during peacetime and totally reusable.

    Soviet airspace was not really covered good with radar stations. You remember Mathias Rust???
    He started 1987 in Hamburg, flew over Finland and landed with a Cessna direct in Moskow, near to the red square. So it was in the 80ies possible to penetrate soviet airspace with a low flying and low observable aircraft. For this time (80ies) the B2 was good enough, if it avoided radar stations! The B2 was a first strike aircraft, speed was not needed!

    If Rusts cessna had been a strike aircraft MiG-23s would have shot it down near the border. It was identified as a civilian aircraft and so the job of intercepting it was handed over to Mi-24 hinds which were sent to intercept.

    Not exactly unusual as the Hind can fly faster than the cessna involved... I remember some balloons that were racing in europe that strayed off course and were shot down by Hinds... can't remember if they were Bulgarian or Hungarian...
    Some guy died... very bad publicity.

    Rust was no threat so was not intercepted by the PVO. A B-2 would be intercepted and shot down.

    Hinds are not interceptors and have no radar and were not trained for the job of interception... so by the time they located him he had landed.

    It's amusing to see how the stealth concept is dangled over the USSR/Russia as something beyond its ability even though the concept originated
    in the USSR during the 1960s. The USSR had more than enough wide spectrum and multi-system detection capability in the 1980s to see the
    B2 at every stage of its flight. The notion that it would fly into Soviet air space undetected is just whack and makes the USSR look like some
    banana republic with a single 1950s monochrome radar system. This is obvious BS. Serbs managed to network some 1960s radars to bring
    down the F-117A. Western racist chauvinists need to put the crack pipe of hubris down.

    I remember in the late 1980s when we heard rumours about the B-2 and then claims it was going to be the great killer of Soviet Truck mounted ICBMs.

    Of course the pathetic performance of the US in Iraq regarding Scud missile launchers led to such talk stopping immediately, though it was not until after the US got its hands on an S-300V that they switched to low level penetrations with their B-2s... makes you wonder why if they were so invisible...


    _________________
    “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

    Azi
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 107
    Points : 109
    Join date : 2016-04-05

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Azi on Fri Jan 06, 2017 8:51 am

    GarryB wrote:If Rusts cessna had been a strike aircraft MiG-23s would have shot it down near the border. It was identified as a civilian aircraft and so the job of intercepting it was handed over to Mi-24 hinds which were sent to intercept.
    Rust was intercepted 1 hour after violating soviet airspace (entering soviet airspace at Kohtla-Järve) by a Mig 23. No Mi-24!

    Even in the 21st century it's not possible to identify easy an aircraft. From the refelction of the radar cross section you can't identify 100 % a aircraft, you can only estimate it's a big bird or a small one!

    GarryB wrote:
    Rust was no threat so was not intercepted by the PVO. A B-2 would be intercepted and shot down.
    That's correct! But soviet air defense reacted too late and not consequent (lucky Rust!). Around 300 officers and the defense minister lost their jobs, because something was not soo fine (ok, also some political reasons!).

    kvs wrote:
    That Rust was not shot down does not mean he was not detected. High level decisions during Gorbachev's regime are an important element
    in this story. Rust was probably leveraged by some faction to undermine the Soviet military. The military was more than likely prevented from
    taking action and in the typical fashion would later take the blame for "failing" to take action.
    As I wrote, there was some reaction, but too late and too weak!

    He was only a idealistic idiot, no agent or something like this. Later he went to prison for many reasons (stabbing a wife with a knife, stealing a pullover lol1 etc.)

    kvs wrote:
    It's amusing to see how the stealth concept is dangled over the USSR/Russia as something beyond its ability even though the concept originated
    in the USSR during the 1960s. The USSR had more than enough wide spectrum and multi-system detection capability in the 1980s to see the
    B2 at every stage of its flight. The notion that it would fly into Soviet air space undetected is just whack and makes the USSR look like some
    banana republic with a single 1950s monochrome radar system. This is obvious BS. Serbs managed to network some 1960s radars to bring
    down the F-117A. Western racist chauvinists need to put the crack pipe of hubris down.
    The concept of "stealth" is known since 1936. First RAM coating was invented in Netherland 1936 and later used by Nazis to hide their submarines (the snorkel) from radar detection!

    It's a fairy tale that RAM coating does not adsorb in long wave radar spectrum. It does, only much worse! RAM coating is one point, the shape of airplane is the other point. Stealth airplanes have special geometric shape with smooth surface (the smooth and clean surface is a really big problem!), so the radar beams doesn't reflect back to the radar station.
    So with planes like B2 you haven't a complete invisible plane to radar, that's bullshit, no one is talking about that. But the plane is low observable, so you need a denser net of radar stations.
    The soviet union in the 80ies had a good net of radar staion in the west, but central asia and the far east was a bit behind (also due political treatments with USA). The soviet air defense had enough holes to slip behind for a F-117 or a B-2, but i doubt really the US had bomb something of worth, because in the near of military objects the AD was good.

    kvs wrote: Serbs managed to network some 1960s radars to bring
    down the F-117A. Western racist chauvinists need to put the crack pipe of hubris down.
    Interview Konstantin Katschalin with Dragan Matic (the man who pushed the button):
    sputniknews wrote:
    It is true, the signal of this machine is weaker than that of the ordinary aircraft, but it can still be seen on the radar screens. Perhaps the pilot had been wrong or lost, but he flew at a height of only five kilometers, and got into our visor.

    I'm half german and half serb and i must write...
    Yeah, 38.000 NAZO sorties and we Serbs managed to shoot down a single F-117 (F-16 crashed somwhere near Metic)! Great statistic! WOW! affraid

    If stealth is soo crap, so bullshit and so on...
    WHY is RUSSIA building STEALTH planes??? Su T-50 and Pak-Da!?
    avatar
    Militarov
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5428
    Points : 5473
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Militarov on Fri Jan 06, 2017 1:46 pm

    eehnie wrote:
    GarryB wrote:
    In the case of a Tu-PAK-FA moving at Mach 0.8, the aircraft only would be able to move 1000 Km away the hostile missile, surely not enough to put the aircraft out of the range of the hostile missile, and would be hit roughly in 1 hour and 15 min. The importance of the speed in the safety is key, and even it is increased operating inside the own air space, where the hostile fire can be detected many time before to hit your aircrafts. And Russia would pay happily the fuel bill.

    In the WWIII scenario by the time a subsonic plane (Tu-95 and PAK DA) or supersonic plane (Tu-160) arrive to their launch position all of Russias ICBMs and SLBMs would have obliterated the targets and threats hours before...

    Then both of you would design the Tu-PAK-DA to face only the current weapons. In this case I'm not surprised with your arguments.

    The spending required to give the US an IADS would bankrupt them over night...

    It wont happen any time soon.

    Try to open your mind. How would you try to solve it? It is not too difficult to find some option. The necessary technology exists today, but it is used not on this application.

    Even if you put an IIR seeker in its nose and sent it constant course corrections to get it within visual range even a basic AAM could probably bring such a large missile down... and such missiles would be very very expensive.

    Note that the Tu-PAK-DA will not happen any time soom. You can expect expect less than 5 Tu-PAK-DA by 2030.

    Also note that Russia is developping today the MiG-41, a fighter interceptor close to the features that I was exposing for a potential future anti-aircraft missile (as application of today's Surface-Surface missiles). The reality is going one step forward from what you see as impossible or unlikely.

    MiG-41 is still just a concept, no real work has been done on it, and wont probably before 2020. at earliest. And it wont be even close to those numbers you see claimed by various clickbite articles saying it will be hypersonic and similar bs, judging by what certain MiG engineers said it will most likely be just major revision of MiG-31B design.
    avatar
    Militarov
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5428
    Points : 5473
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Militarov on Fri Jan 06, 2017 2:01 pm

    kvs wrote:That Rust was not shot down does not mean he was not detected.   High level decisions during Gorbachev's regime are an important element
    in this story.  Rust was probably leveraged by some faction to undermine the Soviet military.   The military was more than likely prevented from
    taking action and in the typical fashion would later take the blame for "failing" to take action.    

    It's amusing to see how the stealth concept is dangled over the USSR/Russia as something beyond its ability even though the concept originated
    in the USSR during the 1960s.   The USSR had more than enough wide spectrum and multi-system detection capability in the 1980s to see the
    B2 at every stage of its flight.   The notion that it would fly into Soviet air space undetected is just whack and makes the USSR look like some
    banana republic with a single 1950s monochrome radar system.   This is obvious BS.   Serbs managed to network some 1960s radars to bring
    down the F-117A.   Western racist chauvinists need to put the crack pipe of hubris down.  

    We never networked anything, it was just common P-18/SNR-125 mix as any other Neva batallion.
    avatar
    eehnie
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1147
    Points : 1172
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  eehnie on Fri Jan 06, 2017 2:02 pm

    Militarov wrote:
    eehnie wrote:
    GarryB wrote:
    In the case of a Tu-PAK-FA moving at Mach 0.8, the aircraft only would be able to move 1000 Km away the hostile missile, surely not enough to put the aircraft out of the range of the hostile missile, and would be hit roughly in 1 hour and 15 min. The importance of the speed in the safety is key, and even it is increased operating inside the own air space, where the hostile fire can be detected many time before to hit your aircrafts. And Russia would pay happily the fuel bill.

    In the WWIII scenario by the time a subsonic plane (Tu-95 and PAK DA) or supersonic plane (Tu-160) arrive to their launch position all of Russias ICBMs and SLBMs would have obliterated the targets and threats hours before...

    Then both of you would design the Tu-PAK-DA to face only the current weapons. In this case I'm not surprised with your arguments.

    The spending required to give the US an IADS would bankrupt them over night...

    It wont happen any time soon.

    Try to open your mind. How would you try to solve it? It is not too difficult to find some option. The necessary technology exists today, but it is used not on this application.

    Even if you put an IIR seeker in its nose and sent it constant course corrections to get it within visual range even a basic AAM could probably bring such a large missile down... and such missiles would be very very expensive.

    Note that the Tu-PAK-DA will not happen any time soom. You can expect expect less than 5 Tu-PAK-DA by 2030.

    Also note that Russia is developping today the MiG-41, a fighter interceptor close to the features that I was exposing for a potential future anti-aircraft missile (as application of today's Surface-Surface missiles). The reality is going one step forward from what you see as impossible or unlikely.

    MiG-41 is still just a concept, no real work has been done on it, and wont probably before 2020. at earliest. And it wont be even close to those numbers you see claimed by various clickbite articles saying it will be hypersonic and similar bs, judging by what certain MiG engineers said it will most likely be just major revision of MiG-31B design.

    The MiG-41 will be contemporary of the Tu-PAK-DA. I expect the first unit of both by 2025, and serial production around 2030. About the features announced, the MiG-41 will be a serious improvement from the MiG-31 (Mach 2.8 ), a design of 50 years old in 2025, and from the MiG-25 (Mach 3.2), a design of 56 years old by 2025. Mach 4.0? maybe.

    Svyatoslavich
    Master Sergeant
    Master Sergeant

    Posts : 312
    Points : 321
    Join date : 2015-04-21
    Location : Buenos Aires

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Svyatoslavich on Sat Jan 07, 2017 1:30 am

    kvs wrote:That Rust was not shot down does not mean he was not detected.   High level decisions during Gorbachev's regime are an important element
    in this story.  Rust was probably leveraged by some faction to undermine the Soviet military.   The military was more than likely prevented from
    taking action and in the typical fashion would later take the blame for "failing" to take action.
    Exactly. He was detected, by many ground stations. But after the infamous KAL 007 incident, local commanders lost the power to give orders to shoot down intruders and had to report to central PVO HQ who was the only one who could approve. Of course, no such orders were issued because no one wanted to take the blame again for shooting down a civilian aircraft.
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16054
    Points : 16685
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  GarryB on Sat Jan 07, 2017 9:47 am

    MiG-41 is still just a concept, no real work has been done on it, and wont probably before 2020. at earliest. And it wont be even close to those numbers you see claimed by various clickbite articles saying it will be hypersonic and similar bs, judging by what certain MiG engineers said it will most likely be just major revision of MiG-31B design.

    Actually I would say with the creation of the Aerospace defence forces that there will be real money put to this development.

    The development of new heat resistant materials (like that heat resistent aluminium they talked about a while back) would be ideal for high speed lightweight aircraft that are not too expensive (ie all made of titanium).

    The main problem with the MiG-25 and MiG-31 is that their engines operate as turbojets even at high speed. Development of scramjet technology means the bypass air from a turbofan design could be adapted so thrust can be generated at high speed.

    Very simply the engine in the MiG-31 is spinning so fast at speeds above mach 2.83 that they can be damaged or destroyed. By using bypass air only small amounts of air can go through the engines with the bypass air having fuel added and burnt like a ramjet. A scramjet design means more air can be used at high speed, so more thrust can be generated.

    Increasing speed to mach 4 should be all about new engine design and of course new materials for the structure to take the high temperatures in the high friction places... I would say 2025 for a first prototype is reasonable.


    _________________
    “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

    marcellogo
    Corporal
    Corporal

    Posts : 69
    Points : 73
    Join date : 2012-08-02

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  marcellogo on Mon Jan 09, 2017 1:25 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    MiG-41 is still just a concept, no real work has been done on it, and wont probably before 2020. at earliest. And it wont be even close to those numbers you see claimed by various clickbite articles saying it will be hypersonic and similar bs, judging by what certain MiG engineers said it will most likely be just major revision of MiG-31B design.

    Actually I would say with the creation of the Aerospace defence forces that there will be real money put to this development.

    The development of new heat resistant materials (like that heat resistent aluminium they talked about a while back) would be ideal for high speed lightweight aircraft that are not too expensive (ie all made of titanium).

    The main problem with the MiG-25 and MiG-31 is that their engines operate as turbojets even at high speed. Development of scramjet technology means the bypass air from a turbofan design could be adapted so thrust can be generated at high speed.

    Very simply the engine in the MiG-31 is spinning so fast at speeds above mach 2.83 that they can be damaged or destroyed. By using bypass air only small amounts of air can go through the engines with the bypass air having fuel added and burnt like a ramjet. A scramjet design means more air can be used at high speed, so more thrust can be generated.

    Increasing speed to mach 4 should be all about new engine design and of course new materials for the structure to take the high temperatures in the high friction places...  I would say 2025 for a first prototype is reasonable.
    MiG-31 is basically the same frame that it was at the beginning given that the update it received were all concentered on the avionic part.
    So there are a lot of room for radical improvement of its performance just by rebuilding it at the current technological level.
    An updated version of its current engines giving a 10% power increase and a lighter frame to give it supercruise capability plus an enlarged and more robust wing to enhance its own maneouvrability, a reduced RCS and an ecquivalent of Su-35 and PAK-FA avionic suites would advance its combact effectiveness in a dramatic way even without the mach 4 speed they talked about.
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16054
    Points : 16685
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  GarryB on Tue Jan 10, 2017 1:04 am

    True, but in terms of performance a higher flight speed for an interceptor is a very desirable thing.


    _________________
    “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

    Azi
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 107
    Points : 109
    Join date : 2016-04-05

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Azi on Tue Jan 10, 2017 2:02 pm

    Svyatoslavich wrote:
    kvs wrote:That Rust was not shot down does not mean he was not detected.   High level decisions during Gorbachev's regime are an important element
    in this story.  Rust was probably leveraged by some faction to undermine the Soviet military.   The military was more than likely prevented from
    taking action and in the typical fashion would later take the blame for "failing" to take action.
    Exactly. He was detected, by many ground stations. But after the infamous KAL 007 incident, local commanders lost the power to give orders to shoot down intruders and had to report to central PVO HQ who was the only one who could approve. Of course, no such orders were issued because no one wanted to take the blame again for shooting down a civilian aircraft.
    It's partially correct!

    I read the book of Rust and some reports of the incident.

    He crossed the border to soviet union at Kohtla-Järve, near Nrawa (eastern part of Estona). After a while he was intercepted by a Mig-23 fighter for identification. The pilot identified the Cessna from long distance wrong as a soviet Yak-12 or similar. Because the pilot and other officers thought it must be a small soviet plane so it must have some kind of permission. Of course it had no permission! Rust tried the whole time to be in a height of 600 m, so visible that no bad intentions could be expected. On his way to Moscow he reached a new AD zone after 1-2 hours. In this zone he was again intercepted by a Mig-23. The Mig-23 flew so near that his "heart was near to stop", but no signs were given to land immediatly (wiggling with the wings). Maybe Rust interpret the signs wrong, he was very young and very naiv! He was followed for a longer time but was no real threat! In this period the radar station lost for a few minutes from time to time his signal, because he was changing height due to deep clouds and was flying very very low. He couldn't receive radio messages because his receiver was adjusted for the wrong wavelenghts. He flew, flew, flew and was arrested!

    The flight showed that soviet air defense worked! But at very low altitudes radar stations had problems to track the plane. Also the communication and organisation of the air defense group was not at it's best. The 300 officers and the defense minister lost their job not for nothing!

    So before that flight the air defense in western soviet union was known to be perfect, that no fly could pass without permission. After the flight it was shown it was not soo perfect as assumed. The mistakes were on many levels, political due to KAL 007 and communication of AD zones.

    The problems of detecting a plane at very low altitudes with radar is known for every side. This problem is known to the USA every day, because the drug mafia smuggles nearly EVERY day drugs from mexicao to USA with simple, small old planes. So the concept of B2 of penetrating enemy air defense, avoiding detection via flying low and being low observable, is a really good concept. Ok, destroying mobile russain (soviet) ICBM is bullshit, because the mobilty of such systems is too high. The PAK-DA is duplicating this concept only much better, because 30 years has passed. So PAK-DA will be more modern and cheaper than B-2 ever was. If B-21 comes to life Russia will have the next and better concept I think...
    avatar
    Militarov
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5428
    Points : 5473
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Militarov on Wed Jan 11, 2017 12:18 am

    GarryB wrote:
    MiG-41 is still just a concept, no real work has been done on it, and wont probably before 2020. at earliest. And it wont be even close to those numbers you see claimed by various clickbite articles saying it will be hypersonic and similar bs, judging by what certain MiG engineers said it will most likely be just major revision of MiG-31B design.

    Actually I would say with the creation of the Aerospace defence forces that there will be real money put to this development.

    The development of new heat resistant materials (like that heat resistent aluminium they talked about a while back) would be ideal for high speed lightweight aircraft that are not too expensive (ie all made of titanium).

    The main problem with the MiG-25 and MiG-31 is that their engines operate as turbojets even at high speed. Development of scramjet technology means the bypass air from a turbofan design could be adapted so thrust can be generated at high speed.

    Very simply the engine in the MiG-31 is spinning so fast at speeds above mach 2.83 that they can be damaged or destroyed. By using bypass air only small amounts of air can go through the engines with the bypass air having fuel added and burnt like a ramjet. A scramjet design means more air can be used at high speed, so more thrust can be generated.

    Increasing speed to mach 4 should be all about new engine design and of course new materials for the structure to take the high temperatures in the high friction places...  I would say 2025 for a first prototype is reasonable.

    Too many ifs for my taste. And i wouldnt keep high hopes for aircraft sized scramjets to be available in 10 years. I might be wrong but i thats my feeling as they still have issues with Izd-30 and scramjet would be major leap, much bigger leap than one currently being made with Izd-30.

    When its about heat resistant alloys, sure, they did some work on those even before 1991. question is where they stand atm, but its probably alot better position than with engines.

    Now what i doubt is that speed those clickbite articles claim of Mach 4, as there are atm very few platforms that would require such high intercept speeds. Like fastest aircraft in NATO atm is F-15 which will cease service in 2030s and you have F-22 only remaining basically, all other platforms are slower or allow only low supercruising. I find speeds similar to MiG-31 more plausible, just with hopefully ALOT more efficient engines and lower empty weight. I wouldnt be suprised also if dimensions would shrink abit compared to MiG-31. Now thats just what i imagine, there is nothing to work with atm as no real info exists.
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16054
    Points : 16685
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  GarryB on Wed Jan 11, 2017 8:28 am

    I read the book of Rust and some reports of the incident.

    So you say he was intercepted twice by MiG-23 and did not even see the Hind that also spotted him.

    If he had been in a military aircraft he would have been shot down.

    The failure of the air defence forces to shoot him down is not a failure. Plenty of civilian aircraft fly into and out of Soviet/Russian airspace every day... the purpose of the air defence system is to protect from threats, not little pricks in Cessnas.

    Now what i doubt is that speed those clickbite articles claim of Mach 4, as there are atm very few platforms that would require such high intercept speeds.

    For a bomber a high speed does not make you safe. For an interceptor it increases the effective range of the interceptor. there is a reason the big heavy R-37M AAMs fly faster than mach 4... they could have given it enormous range with subsonic speed, but instead they went for rocket power and high speed.

    A fast interceptor gets to the threat quicker and if it can attack the threat early in its attack the likelyhood of having to deal with one bomber instead of one bomber and 8 cruise missiles makes it rather more effective.

    I find speeds similar to MiG-31 more plausible, just with hopefully ALOT more efficient engines and lower empty weight. I wouldnt be suprised also if dimensions would shrink abit compared to MiG-31.

    Size is not important and nor is weight. Speed, range and weapon capacity.


    _________________
    “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

    Azi
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 107
    Points : 109
    Join date : 2016-04-05

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Azi on Wed Jan 11, 2017 10:11 am

    GarryB wrote:
    I read the book of Rust and some reports of the incident.

    So you say he was intercepted twice by MiG-23 and did not even see the Hind that also spotted him.

    If he had been in a military aircraft he would have been shot down.

    The failure of the air defence forces to shoot him down is not a failure. Plenty of civilian aircraft fly into and out of Soviet/Russian airspace every day... the purpose of the air defence system is to protect from threats, not little pricks in Cessnas.

    He even didn't saw the first Mig-23, he only recognized the second encounter! He was partially followed by a Hind, by I can't say at which point, clearly not the whole time.

    Of course he was no threat, but the AD officers are no fortune tellers and they made mistakes! When he first entered soviet air space he was mistakenly held for a Yak-12 or something similar. The chain of command was not respected and higher levels not informed!

    Wrong assessments can lead to catastrophic events! Best example is 9.11. where US air control and defense failed in a epic way...only civilian planes and more than 3000 dead persons.

    You can't really say the soviet reaction was brillant! He should have been shot down, because it was only a small plane with one person onboard. Or he should have been troubled by the Mig in such way, that he recognized in his small brain that is better to land. What if he crashed over a full place with people and with 20 or more dead? What if he crashed in the dome of the basilius cathedral? But in retrospect everything ended good, but not for the persons who lost their job due to the incident!

    Ok, the discussion is not over PAK-DA anymore lol1
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16054
    Points : 16685
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  GarryB on Thu Jan 12, 2017 8:30 am

    He even didn't saw the first Mig-23, he only recognized the second encounter! He was partially followed by a Hind, by I can't say at which point, clearly not the whole time.

    There was reportedly quite a time gap between the second MiG-23 interception and when the Hinds tracked him down... very simply the Hind is not designed for interception and has not onboard radar so would try to find the target based on verbal commands.

    You can't really say the soviet reaction was brillant! He should have been shot down, because it was only a small plane with one person onboard.

    Of course he should not have been shot down. They should have kept following him with the MiG-23s until the Hind got to him and he should have been diverted to a nearby airstrip and forced to land.

    Or he should have been troubled by the Mig in such way, that he recognized in his small brain that is better to land. What if he crashed over a full place with people and with 20 or more dead? What if he crashed in the dome of the basilius cathedral? But in retrospect everything ended good, but not for the persons who lost their job due to the incident!

    Today it could be claimed it was thought to be a terrorist attack... you could get about 100s of kgs of explosives in a small cessna and use it as a weapon... a manned cruise missile, so shooting it down would not be much of an issue now, but either way it was no more a measure of the effectiveness of the Soviet Air Defences than 11/9 or indeed the KAL007 shootdown.



    _________________
    “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
    avatar
    Pierre Sprey
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 21
    Points : 25
    Join date : 2017-02-01

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Pierre Sprey on Mon Feb 06, 2017 5:09 am

    Azi wrote:
    GarryB wrote:If Rusts cessna had been a strike aircraft MiG-23s would have shot it down near the border. It was identified as a civilian aircraft and so the job of intercepting it was handed over to Mi-24 hinds which were sent to intercept.
    Rust was intercepted 1 hour after violating soviet airspace (entering soviet airspace at Kohtla-Järve) by a Mig 23. No Mi-24!

    Even in the 21st century it's not possible to identify easy an aircraft. From the refelction of the radar cross section you can't identify 100 % a aircraft, you can only estimate it's a big bird or a small one!

    GarryB wrote:
    Rust was no threat so was not intercepted by the PVO. A B-2 would be intercepted and shot down.
    That's correct! But soviet air defense reacted too late and not consequent (lucky Rust!). Around 300 officers and the defense minister lost their jobs, because something was not soo fine (ok, also some political reasons!).

    kvs wrote:
    That Rust was not shot down does not mean he was not detected. High level decisions during Gorbachev's regime are an important element
    in this story. Rust was probably leveraged by some faction to undermine the Soviet military. The military was more than likely prevented from
    taking action and in the typical fashion would later take the blame for "failing" to take action.
    As I wrote, there was some reaction, but too late and too weak!

    He was only a idealistic idiot, no agent or something like this. Later he went to prison for many reasons (stabbing a wife with a knife, stealing a pullover lol1 etc.)

    kvs wrote:
    It's amusing to see how the stealth concept is dangled over the USSR/Russia as something beyond its ability even though the concept originated
    in the USSR during the 1960s. The USSR had more than enough wide spectrum and multi-system detection capability in the 1980s to see the
    B2 at every stage of its flight. The notion that it would fly into Soviet air space undetected is just whack and makes the USSR look like some
    banana republic with a single 1950s monochrome radar system. This is obvious BS. Serbs managed to network some 1960s radars to bring
    down the F-117A. Western racist chauvinists need to put the crack pipe of hubris down.
    The concept of "stealth" is known since 1936. First RAM coating was invented in Netherland 1936 and later used by Nazis to hide their submarines (the snorkel) from radar detection!

    It's a fairy tale that RAM coating does not adsorb in long wave radar spectrum. It does, only much worse! RAM coating is one point, the shape of airplane is the other point. Stealth airplanes have special geometric shape with smooth surface (the smooth and clean surface is a really big problem!), so the radar beams doesn't reflect back to the radar station.
    So with planes like B2 you haven't a complete invisible plane to radar, that's bullshit, no one is talking about that. But the plane is low observable, so you need a denser net of radar stations.
    The soviet union in the 80ies had a good net of radar staion in the west, but central asia and the far east was a bit behind (also due political treatments with USA). The soviet air defense had enough holes to slip behind for a F-117 or a B-2, but i doubt really the US had bomb something of worth, because in the near of military objects the AD was good.

    kvs wrote: Serbs managed to network some 1960s radars to bring
    down the F-117A. Western racist chauvinists need to put the crack pipe of hubris down.
    Interview Konstantin Katschalin with Dragan Matic (the man who pushed the button):
    sputniknews wrote:
    It is true, the signal of this machine is weaker than that of the ordinary aircraft, but it can still be seen on the radar screens. Perhaps the pilot had been wrong or lost, but he flew at a height of only five kilometers, and got into our visor.

    I'm half german and half serb and i must write...
    Yeah, 38.000 NAZO sorties and we Serbs managed to shoot down a single F-117 (F-16 crashed somwhere near Metic)! Great statistic! WOW! affraid

    If stealth is soo crap, so bullshit and so on...
    WHY is RUSSIA building STEALTH planes??? Su T-50 and Pak-Da!?

    To add.. It is certainly a myth that Russia doesn't know stealth. They were using stealth technology on the water. If I could post a pic, i would but USSR frigates and destroyers had stealth shaped towers and just by looking at it, you can see the stealth shape

    The USSR used stealth where there was minimal opportunity cost to do so.

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 6092
    Points : 6498
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Austin on Mon Feb 06, 2017 5:31 am

    Came Across this PAK-DA design from UAC 2015 Annual Report

    Full Report here http://uacrussia.ru/uac_ar_2015_en



    avatar
    kvs
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2929
    Points : 3056
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  kvs on Thu Feb 09, 2017 12:24 am

    Azi wrote:

    kvs wrote:
    It's amusing to see how the stealth concept is dangled over the USSR/Russia as something beyond its ability even though the concept originated
    in the USSR during the 1960s. The USSR had more than enough wide spectrum and multi-system detection capability in the 1980s to see the
    B2 at every stage of its flight. The notion that it would fly into Soviet air space undetected is just whack and makes the USSR look like some
    banana republic with a single 1950s monochrome radar system. This is obvious BS. Serbs managed to network some 1960s radars to bring
    down the F-117A. Western racist chauvinists need to put the crack pipe of hubris down.
    The concept of "stealth" is known since 1936. First RAM coating was invented in Netherland 1936 and later used by Nazis to hide their submarines (the snorkel) from radar detection!

    It's a fairy tale that RAM coating does not adsorb in long wave radar spectrum. It does, only much worse! RAM coating is one point, the shape of airplane is the other point. Stealth airplanes have special geometric shape with smooth surface (the smooth and clean surface is a really big problem!), so the radar beams doesn't reflect back to the radar station.
    So with planes like B2 you haven't a complete invisible plane to radar, that's bullshit, no one is talking about that. But the plane is low observable, so you need a denser net of radar stations.
    The soviet union in the 80ies had a good net of radar staion in the west, but central asia and the far east was a bit behind (also due political treatments with USA). The soviet air defense had enough holes to slip behind for a F-117 or a B-2, but i doubt really the US had bomb something of worth, because in the near of military objects the AD was good.

    I am recounting the information given by a show on PBS (US public broadcaster) about how the F-117 was inspired by a Soviet manual on low EM backscatter
    design.  This includes shape and not just RAM.   I bet the Dutch "RAM" inventor did not do any detailed EM reflection calculations.


    kvs wrote: Serbs managed to network some 1960s radars to bring
    down the F-117A. Western racist chauvinists need to put the crack pipe of hubris down.
    Interview Konstantin Katschalin with Dragan Matic (the man who pushed the button):
    sputniknews wrote:
    It is true, the signal of this machine is weaker than that of the ordinary aircraft, but it can still be seen on the radar screens. Perhaps the pilot had been wrong or lost, but he flew at a height of only five kilometers, and got into our visor.

    I'm half german and half serb and i must write...
    Yeah, 38.000 NAZO sorties and we Serbs managed to shoot down a single F-117 (F-16 crashed somwhere near Metic)! Great statistic! WOW! affraid

    If stealth is soo crap, so bullshit and so on...
    WHY is RUSSIA building STEALTH planes??? Su T-50 and Pak-Da!?

    That's cute.  The key part is this:

    It is true, the signal of this machine is weaker than that of the ordinary aircraft, but it can still be seen on the radar screens. Perhaps the pilot had been wrong or lost, but he flew at a height of only five kilometers, and got into our visor.

    The F-117A was seen by 1960s radars, pathetic.   But it was hard to shoot down with 1960s missiles.   So your story is a non sequitur to my point:
    networking radars increases detection and the whole stealth wunderwaffe is so much irrelevant hype.   The T-50 demonstrates this since it only uses
    stealth elements and does not sacrifice any other function to achieve "pure stealth" like the F-22 with its sad 2D thrust vectoring.
    avatar
    eehnie
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1147
    Points : 1172
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  eehnie on Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:21 am


    The problem with stealth technologies begin when they are applied at the cost of other key features for the aircrafts, like the speed, in this case. The problem is that the people that thinks that more advanced stealth technologies allows to forget the speed as key feature of the strategic bombers are wrong.

    Otherwise stealth technologies are welcomed, like in the case of the Su-PAK-FA and also for the Tu-PAK-DA.


    Sponsored content

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Tue Jun 27, 2017 5:19 pm