PAK-FA, T-50: News #3

http://sputniknews.com/military/20150528/1022662230.html#ixzz3bUZrdUD9

I know sputnik can be natorious for misinformation, but they are quoting an official.

Something new, it appears that 052 has intake hardpoints added.

magnumcromagnon wrote:

And there's no need to discuss something that's been discussed to ad nauseam.

I saw only one page of "discussion", and it didn't look as a real discussion to me, but rather as a collection of emotionally upset accusations to a forum member that he is a troll...

I do not pay much attention to emotionally immature posts like that...

I prefer links to some solid sources...

If you have some, feel free...

Captain Nemo wrote:

magnumcromagnon wrote:

And there's no need to discuss something that's been discussed to ad nauseam.

I saw only one page of "discussion", and it didn't look as a real discussion to me, but rather as a collection of emotionally upset accusations to a forum member that he is a troll...

I do not pay much attention to emotionally immature posts like that...

I prefer links to some solid sources...

If you have some, feel free...

POGONOVO RANGE, Astrakhan Region (Sputnik) — The purchase volume of Russia's fifth-generation T-50 PAK-FA fighter jets, to be produced in 2017, will be limited only by on the manufacturer's production capability, Russian Air Force Commander Col.Gen. Viktor Bondarev said Thursday.


"The aircraft will enter mass production in 2017. We will order as many [fighter jets] as the industry can provide," Bondarev told reporters.

http://sputniknews.com/military/20150528/1022662230.html#ixzz3dYn9NnHZ

Vann7 wrote:

POGONOVO RANGE, Astrakhan Region (Sputnik) — The purchase volume of Russia's fifth-generation T-50 PAK-FA fighter jets, to be produced in 2017, will be limited only by on the manufacturer's production capability, Russian Air Force Commander Col.Gen. Viktor Bondarev said Thursday.


"The aircraft will enter mass production in 2017. We will order as many [fighter jets] as the industry can provide," Bondarev told reporters.

http://sputniknews.com/military/20150528/1022662230.html#ixzz3dYn9NnHZ

Well this is not Nemo´s fault, West is fed 24/7 bu sick anti-Russian BS. Good that he asked about truth to source

http://www.arms-expo.ru/news/novye_razrabotki/t_50_pak_fa_v_blizhayshee_vremya_eksportirovatsya_ne_budet/

PAK-FA will not be exported in the near future.

Nice

Ah the engine... everything else is prepared but the engine...
Have anyone seen a virtual model of a jetengine?
No not the one where you see 3d model... i mean a one where every aspect of the engine is modeled using equations and tested using transfer functions to see the actual output and tuning of equipment...
I would like to see that...

Anyways atleast its good to see that they have been doing weapon tests....

Officially confirms PAKFA has a RCS between 0.1 to 1 square meters (or average of 0.5 m2). The stated 0.5m2 RCS is on the official Russian Government Embassy in India website. This is official Russian government information. Chief designer of PAKFA, Davidenko says the real RCS of F-22 is 0.4 meters.

I'm uploading an image just let me know whether it's correct or incorrect .




PAK-FA Stealth feature publsihed : http://www.janes.com/article/32190/pak-fa-stealth-features-patent-published(link might not work)

Your first picture is bullshit. And has been for a long time. Saw this picture years ago. Already called out on. So get real Max.

max steel wrote:Officially confirms PAKFA has a RCS between 0.1 to 1 square meters (or average of 0.5 m2). The stated 0.5m2 RCS is on the official Russian Government Embassy in India website. This is official Russian government information. Chief designer of PAKFA, Davidenko  says the real RCS of F-22 is 0.4 meters.

I'm uploading an image just let me know whether it's correct or incorrect .



[

Saw this image on some Chinese or Indian fanboy forum.

Laughable and amateurish.

@max - mate there is WAR declared on Russia. Stakes are high - survival. West is using prov3n Goebbels way to build Russian perception. You know Russian economy is in shambles, people hate Putin and want to be homosexuals. What´s more 50% of Russians want to move to US and next 50% is just not admitting this

I saw other paper - Armata super tank but stropped...

Thanx for clearing my doubt . Rest info on PAk-fa's RCS and F-22 is legitimate .

I will make a few counterpoints to the image, just to ease people's minds.

1. "Russian T-50/Pak-Fa third prototype is not stealthy.

Well for one, it is a prototype.

2. "Engine fan blades in straight airdict reflect radar. Need S-duct redesign."

There is a serpentine shape in the intakes, however the fan blades are still exposed.

That is why there is a radar blocker on the intakes.

For those who think that radar blockers are unstealthy, plenty of American aircraft prototypes had radar blockers, and passed trials for RCS tests.

3. "Metal-framed canopy"

With proper coatings, it is not a problem.

And again, prototype, it will most likely be single-piece in the later versions.

4."Protruding IRST"

Spherical shapes are actually pretty stealthy, and again, prototype.

5."Same round and tall Su-30 fuselage"

T-50 fuselage is neither round nor tall, I suggest looking at the front end of the aircraft, and taking note of the edge alignment.

6."Metal engine pods reflect radar"

Most 3-dimensional objects reflect radar

Again, prototype, will be covered in RAM.

7. "Vents reflect radar"

True, but only from side aspect.

Tradeoff for superior kinematic performance.

8."Gaps between air ducts and fuselage reflect radar"



Image speaks for itself.

9."Lack stealthy saw-toothed edges in bay doors."

PROTOTYPE

Why the fuck do you need saw-tooth on doors that are closed in regular flight anyway?

If you look at pic above, the F-22 bays are not even saw-tooth.

10. "Uneven heights of underside reflect radar"

From the bottom, sure, nothing you can do about it. Any stealth aircraft will be spotted from the bottom, B-2, F-22, Pak-Fa etc.

11. "Round shape reflects radar to emitter. Need angular duct cladding to deflect radar"

Again, prototype, and round shapes can be stealthy.

Won't be visible from the front anyway, waste of time trying to reduce side, top, bottom, or rear rcs.

Why you even boder to explain something which isn't fundamental characteristic of T-50 why? because main difference between Russian philosophy in making weapons and especially USA philosophy is that Russia making war machines, USA make flashy toys, best example is exactly F22 which need for every hour of PATROLE FLIGHT 13.5 hour of maintenance, Why for example Pierre Spray have not nice word neither for f22 and even less for F35, because his planes like is F16 which on paper have 8000 hours of flight whit out over houl  actually is shown that they can fly almost double of those numbers if they was maintenance always on time whit care and whit good mechanics, same is A-10, Already f-15 can't come close to those numbers, Why because Spray was make WAR MACHINE, which will be durable and which can be repair almost in any USA base, whit two mechanics,Hornet also have such kind of durability because he was made for navy which have by default much higher standards for durability because of weather to which they are exposed every day on the deck of carriers.  And that was last planes produced by USA in such manner. Whit T-50 Sukhoi also have not slightly intention to attached whole project on Stealthyness and other bs which was almost pure Pentagon Advertising in lack of other proper characteristics, B-2 is also shown like big time failur of bomber plain especially when comes to the "STEALTH" If that isnt so, they would not thinking about modernization of b-1 in big numbers, and they never ever think to make one more B-2...in short ...T-50 and Sukhoi making  balanced Air Plane which would not have proper competitors when comes to the maneuverability, when comes to the thrust to weight ratio also, he already is plane whit longest possible operational radius, whit new engines, his super cruise speed is estimate on 1.4-1.5 mach. and when comes to the system of Radars which he will have all around his body from AESA in radome, to L.Band in to Wings edge(like already have Su35 and Su30CM) side lobe AESA, etc etc, Second he has S shape air intakes but it is can be seen from out side because those S shape is achieved whit sculpturing Air intake it self, for iner side, on very begin of air intake from right side loking on to "mouth"  he have something like central edge whit two sloops which "fall" on to inner wall, from other side on place when wheels goes into part of outside air intake, again inside he have similar shaped wall which together whit those on begin of "mouths" made practically S duct , second he have much more sophisticated cooling of whole engines especially front blades, Then T-50 yet need to get full fledge 5. gen engines all in all , for two to three years maximum , we will see first production model of Sukhoi 50, whit already finished model of two sitter for India Air force. He would not have level of Stealthyness which raptor have for certain, but he not needed, from variouse reasons, main is capabilitys of Radars which already make that somebody secrifice almost 90% of real war capability because of level of Stealth look like full or do that intentionally for certain reasons.Like is making again brand new 5 gen on which will again be spended amount of money enough to feed until to the natural end of life  every hunger human bean on planeth earth. F35 Only if he will work whit out one glitch can become good plane for destroying enemy fortification and by Lockheed advertising enemy SAM locations defence, and that will be his best capability,But like Gen Bogdan(not Russian Command of Air Force ) said, he will probably will do that only whitin escort of fighters planes of USA Air force like is last modification of F-15 and F-16. I hope that i succeed to give little bit closer picture about what T-50 is need to become, Neither Stealthyest, neither most expensive air plane in history of the world.

Some of you are probably aware of similar discussion on the Pak Fa when it came out on the Key Pub forum....it lasted for over a year with a focus on the famous S-ducts ...please don't tell me we have to go through that all over again

Cyberspec wrote:Some of you are probably aware of similar discussion on the Pak Fa when it came out on the Key Pub forum....it lasted for over a year with a focus on the famous S-ducts ...please don't tell me we have to go through that all over again

Buckle up kids, we're in for a bumpy ride.



But seriously, if we have to, we will.

The myth of no s-ducts on the PAK-FA must be dispelled.

Cyberspec wrote:Some of you are probably aware of similar discussion on the Pak Fa when it came out on the Key Pub forum....it lasted for over a year with a focus on the famous S-ducts ...please don't tell me we have to go through that all over again

saw it before. well kinda messed up though.

PAK FA with the Type 30 engine will fly in 2017 according to Lenta.

http://lenta.ru/news/2014/12/04/2ndstage/

However, Pogosyan had stated that Type 30 will only be available in 2019.

Read somewhere that the Type 30 engine is in bench testing.Dunno if it has progresed over to a flying labarotory yet?




http://bmpd.livejournal.com/1345874.html

First two experimental examples of the Second Stage engines to be ready this year.

max steel wrote:PAK FA with the Type 30 engine will fly in 2017 according to Lenta.

http://lenta.ru/news/2014/12/04/2ndstage/

However, Pogosyan had stated that Type 30 will only be available in 2019.

Read somewhere that the Type 30 engine is in bench testing.Dunno if it has progresed over to a flying labarotory yet?




http://bmpd.livejournal.com/1345874.html

First two experimental examples of the Second Stage engines to be ready this year.

Probably meant that the first test would be in 2017, and serial production would be in 2019.

No biggie, PAK-FA is already overpowered.

Whats with the propaganda in your posts?

T-50 having less operation capability than F-22

I'm following same PAK-FA somehwere else also and i got it from there . Just want to clear my dout . Forum.keypublishing is the one .

2SPOOKY4U wrote:I will make a few counterpoints to the image, just to ease people's minds.

1. "Russian T-50/Pak-Fa third prototype is not stealthy.

Well for one, it is a prototype.

2. "Engine fan blades in straight airdict reflect radar. Need S-duct redesign."

There is a serpentine shape in the intakes, however the fan blades are still exposed.

That is why there is a radar blocker on the intakes.

For those who think that radar blockers are unstealthy, plenty of American aircraft prototypes had radar blockers, and passed trials for RCS tests.

3. "Metal-framed canopy"

With proper coatings, it is not a problem.

And again, prototype, it will most likely be single-piece in the later versions.

4."Protruding IRST"

Spherical shapes are actually pretty stealthy, and again, prototype.

5."Same round and tall Su-30 fuselage"

T-50 fuselage is neither round nor tall, I suggest looking at the front end of the aircraft, and taking note of the edge alignment.

6."Metal engine pods reflect radar"

Most 3-dimensional objects reflect radar

Again, prototype, will be covered in RAM.

7. "Vents reflect radar"

True, but only from side aspect.

Tradeoff for superior kinematic performance.

8."Gaps between air ducts and fuselage reflect radar"



Image speaks for itself.

9."Lack stealthy saw-toothed edges in bay doors."

PROTOTYPE

Why the fuck do you need saw-tooth on doors that are closed in regular flight anyway?

If you look at pic above, the F-22 bays are not even saw-tooth.

10. "Uneven heights of underside reflect radar"

From the bottom, sure, nothing you can do about it. Any stealth aircraft will be spotted from the bottom, B-2, F-22, Pak-Fa etc.

11. "Round shape reflects radar to emitter. Need angular duct cladding to deflect radar"

Again, prototype, and round shapes can be stealthy.

Won't be visible from the front anyway, waste of time trying to reduce side, top, bottom, or rear rcs.

round things can be made from absorbing radar materials....... its just a calculus about photons and materials where best arangement of and density of particles of materials. its the coulombian force and strong force. just start from the thing that every electron absorb a photon

maibe a unhomogen material in which some high density electron material electrons on low state of energy is at surface of the metal. or maibe a material where the electrons that release a photon back to radar are free and flow in material.like a transistor.......

[quote="2SPOOKY4U"]

max steel wrote:




No biggie, PAK-FA is already overpowered.

Whats with the propaganda in your posts?

T-50 having less operation capability than F-22

For me it is even more funny to see Viggen NG sand Rafale above Su-35
F-35 on level with PAK FA is just paranoia and blatant lie.

For me it is even more funny to see Viggen NG sand Rafale above Su-35 Very Happy
F-35 on level with PAK FA is just paranoia and blatant lie.

I think you should take a look at the bottom right hand corner of the screen... where it says SAAB... and ask yourself what aircraft maker would think performance vs cost would make their product look good... especially when they over estimate their products performance... I mean the Gripen is good but certainly does not have better performance than an Su-35...

Also I would mention people claiming bare metal is not stealthy... duh.

the F-117 is mostly aluminium... WTF would they need that stupid faceted shape if it was super radar invisible composites and RAM?

If RAM was so effective why bother with new stealth aircraft... just make old aircraft out of this new super RAM crap and tadaaa you have a stealth plane... as long as you paint it black.

In the real world you don't want radar invisible skin on a stealth aircraft... two things make your aircraft stealthy... one certainly is absorbing radar waves, but the biggest is redirecting radar waves so they are not reflected back to the source...

think about a man in the middle of a field in the dead of night with a mirror and you trying to find him with a torch... if he holds the mirror flat so the light from the torch hits the mirror and is directed right back at you you will immediately see the reflection of your torch and immediately know where he is.

If he turns it 45 degrees to one side then you wont see where he is but you might see the light from your torch on the ground and work out roughly where he must be... using a bit of maths.

If he is smart he will face the mirror directly at you so he is totally covered by the full width of the mirror but angle it up so you will not see any light reflected from your torch... he will be invisible...

the F-117 is a plane made out of mirrors... it wasn't until the B-2 and F-22 and the PAK FA that they had the computing power to calculate curves that redirect radar in a direction that was not the source of the radar energy...