PAK-FA, T-50: News #3

magnumcromagnon wrote:

Re-read my post...It's clearly stated that they will be working to together.

I will not re-read garbage.


You clearly don't understand what Himalaya is..

It is all the radars, all the passive receivers, etc integrated into one system that is tasked with objectives.

If the PAK-FA can already track low RCS targets like in your "scenario", then what the fuck is the point of firing a EMP weapon?

And a EMP weapon won't make the radar emit. Guaranteed.


Love this forum, one article from RU Aviation makes people think the PAK-FA is going to be firing EMP weapons.


http://russianpatents.com/patent/245/2453955.html

If you want to know something about Himalaya, read above.

2SPOOKY4U wrote:

magnumcromagnon wrote:

Re-read my post...It's clearly stated that they will be working to together.

I will not re-read garbage.


You clearly don't understand what Himalaya is..

It is all the radars, all the passive receivers, etc integrated into one system that is tasked with objectives.

If the PAK-FA can already track low RCS targets like in your "scenario", then what the fuck is the point of firing a EMP weapon?

And a EMP weapon won't make the radar emit. Guaranteed.


Love this forum, one article from RU Aviation makes people think the PAK-FA is going to be firing EMP weapons.


http://russianpatents.com/patent/245/2453955.html

If you want to know something about Himalaya, read above.

Calm down internet-badass, a person having differing opinion doesn't warrant an apoplectic fit lol!

Berkut wrote:

OminousSpudd wrote:How many aircraft are now in testing? Last I heard there were to be 12 pre-series production aircraft by the end of 2015... Any news regarding how many of these have been completed?

That is pretty easy to find out by yourself tbh. But anyway, there were 5 flying prototypes made and the latest of those, T-50-5 had a fire last summer but will fly again any day now. It will be then called T-50-5R and it cannibalized T-50-6 which is now cancelled. Next flying prototype is T-50-6-2 and current plans put the first flight in September.

Otherwise there are two static testing frames where the latest one, T-50-7 (formerly known as T-50-6-1), was delivered in January. Then there is T-50-KNS which isn't a static frame but not a flying either. So 8 in total so far if we include T-50-5R.

Not sure what the news entailed with the 12 pre-series aircraft, but probably it 12 flying prototypes in mind. They are far behind on that.

Morpheus Eberhardt wrote:

Berkut wrote:... the picture above is stolen from this one;

I got that picture from Karpenko's site.

You mean Burtsev works for Sukhoi?

No, it is obvious Karpenko stole it and edited away the rp.net bar on the bottom. Or he stole it from someone who stole it, doesn't matter.

Thanks Berkut, I should of mentioned that I was looking for a reliable summary, which you have provided, complete with designations.

magnumcromagnon wrote:

Calm down internet-badass, a person having differing opinion doesn't warrant an apoplectic fit lol!

I am very calm, and I am no internet-badass.

If PAK-FA having EMP capabilities (outside of Atropus integration) is your opinion, then fine.

At least keep it realistic, we don't want this to become Mp.net.

Cyberspec wrote:

Himalayas EW suite developed by Radioelectronic Technologies Concern (KRET, part of Rostec Corporation) not only increases the survivability of the Russian fifth-generation fighter T-50 (PAK FA), but also neutralizes stealth technologies used by enemy aircraft, RIA Novosti reports with reference to KRET.

http://www.ruaviation.com/news/2015/7/15/3331/

There are here two posibilities:
Either they listen f22 radars in time its comunicate with its missiles either they use another band that behaves differently when meet metal meaning to go trought metal not refractate. Also i have a idea : target ilumination with laser could work for aircrafts too?

In this case the missile could be make to follow a certain frecvency laser for not being foolish by countermeasures.

The laser must not necesary hit the aircraft if the aircraft is shiny but just to take missile close. Also the missile could be maked to follow only the beam that was close from the beginning while it was in own plane. Thus will not confunde with reflected from plane laser.

Also smoke countermeasures on plane are irrelevant cause at that speed the smoke is fastly left behind. And you can always point the observable part of plane. And also like i said the laser isnt necesarry to be on enemy aircraft but near it. Then missile own radar could handle.

A land to air ilumination laser would be useful.

Berkut wrote:

Morpheus Eberhardt wrote:

Berkut wrote:... the picture above is stolen from this one;

I got that picture from Karpenko's site.

You mean Burtsev works for Sukhoj (corrected—Morpheus Eberhardt)?

No, it is obvious Karpenko stole it and edited away the rp.net bar on the bottom. Or he stole it from someone who stole it, doesn't matter.

If Burtsev doesn't work for Sukhoj and doesn't have permission from "Sukhoj" and also the Russian Federation to photograph T-50, then he would be the primary "thieve" that is "stealing" this photograph of T-50.

Keep in mind that the value in this kind of photo is in the aircraft and the pilot, not the one who "takes" a camera and points and clicks it at the aircraft.

It is also "interesting" that Karpenko hasn't added his characteristic signature to this photo.

By the way, I corrected the credit to the picture under discussion. You should correct yours too.



I really "feel" for Sukhoj here, because whenever I see an image of one of my designs on the net without me being credited, I get "upset". Some of the images are also sold by those who take ("steal"?) the images.

Plagiarists upset me more, however. We have a user on this forum, who is a terrible plagiarist. I have already indirectly warned him and told him to come forward with his admission of his act. He has yet to come forward with his admission.

Morpheus Eberhardt wrote:
If Burtsev doesn't work for Sukhoj and doesn't have permission from "Sukhoj" and also the Russian Federation to photograph T-50, then he would be the primary "thieve" that is "stealing" this photograph of T-50.

Dude, are you drunk? I hope you are, because your post is one of the most... "interesting" posts i have read as of late.

There are plenty of pictures taken by spotters of T-50 outside of Zhukovsky perimeter and that is 100% legal. The picture in question is taken at a very common spot towards the end of the landing strip. He doesn't have to contact Tsar Putin or Sukhoi to have permission to take pictures of it. Like this one;



Or this one;



And literally thousands of other pictures of T-50 taken at Zhukovsky.

Berkut wrote:

Morpheus Eberhardt wrote:
If Burtsev doesn't work for Sukhoj and doesn't have permission from "Sukhoj" and also the Russian Federation to photograph T-50, then he would be the primary "thieve" that is "stealing" this photograph of T-50.

Dude, are you drunk? I hope you are, because your post is one of the most... "interesting" posts i have read as of late.

There are plenty of pictures taken by spotters of T-50 outside of Zhukovsky perimeter and that is 100% legal. The picture in question is taken at a very common spot towards the end of the landing strip. He doesn't have to contact Tsar Putin or Sukhoi to have permission to take pictures of it. Like this one;

...

Or this one;

...

And literally thousands of other pictures of T-50 taken at Zhukovsky.

I don't think you understood anything of what I said. Clever up, kiddo! This is RMF, not mp.ret.

Your response and the pictures you posted were quite funny though. Actually it was so funny that I should up-vote it, maybe.

You went through all of that trouble too. Trying to explain what?

But definitely read my post a few times! Pay special attention to the quotation marks!

GarryB wrote:

And a EMP weapon won't make the radar emit. Guaranteed.

I agree, but as part of an EW system I would think the enormous power potential of the AESA to be fitted has potential as a sort of EMP system against things like incoming AMRAAMs, or even high power but sensitive enemy radar... sort of dazzling it with lots of power like DIRCMs work against IR and optical sensors...

I suspect they wont know the full potential in that direction till they get a bit more experience with AESAs.

Either they listen f22 radars in time its comunicate with its missiles either they use another band that behaves differently when meet metal meaning to go trought metal not refractate.

I rather suspect the combination of IRST information, plus L band radar in the wings and X band and Ku band radar in the nose would offer sufficient information to at least detect the presence and general location of a stealth aircraft... with several aircraft looking, along with ground sensors and even sensors in A-100 AWACS and space based sensors I am sure the combined data should allow the triangulation of most stealth targets to an accuracy level that would allow a long range IIR guided missile to be used to engage.

Also i have a idea : target ilumination with laser could work for aircrafts too?

At close range if the Su-35 can't get a lock with its radar then using a targeting pod and laser homing missiles could be an option... but only over fairly short range.

The laser must not necesary hit the aircraft if the aircraft is shiny but just to take missile close. Also the missile could be maked to follow only the beam that was close from the beginning while it was in own plane. Thus will not confunde with reflected from plane laser.

You mean laser beam riding rather than semi active laser homing (SALH).

A land to air ilumination laser would be useful.

Or a dozen cheap light UAVs with laser target markers and autotrackers... the F-35 would have trouble flying low over a battlefield with 57mm guns with laser guided shells...

Or the UAV could mark the target for land based unit with rockets. Only problem would be how the missile would not mistake and hit the UAV. And how it will reach to target till get into laser path.
Your idea is fine. Some cheap ( but high or at least decent altitude) UAVs with some machineguns. Thus the simple bullet will be usefull against the complicated f22. But...what to do with f22s missiles ? I understad the UAVs are cheap and can be exposed to f22 missiles... but some protections would be necessary. The laser beam could very fast mark the incoming missile if the missile take evasive movements? If yes then this is the future...

I like how the Russians emphasize layers upon layers of defence in a platform instead of relying on just one or more components that can be vitiated in real world engagements. America's emphasis on stealth is obscene considering that radars can be jammed, IFF detectors are not truly reliable and long range missiles have never really worked... but what happens when stealth is paired with lasers that can travel faster than the speed of light? Source: http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2000/jul/19/laser-smashes-light-speed-record

So that means that aircraft like the F-22 [optimized for stealth] will be able to detect enemy aircraft first and get the essential first shot/kill. But then again the quantum radar really could spell the end of stealth as we know it.

Cyrus the great wrote:I like how the Russians emphasize layers upon layers of defence in a platform instead of relying on just one or more components that can be vitiated in  real world engagements.  America's emphasis on stealth is obscene considering that radars can be jammed, IFF detectors are not truly reliable and long range missiles have never really worked... but what happens when stealth is paired with lasers that can travel faster than the speed of light? Source: http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2000/jul/19/laser-smashes-light-speed-record

So that means that aircraft like the F-22 [optimized for stealth] will be able to detect enemy aircraft first and get the essential first shot/kill. But then again the quantum radar really could spell the end of stealth as we know it.

There are no universal EM-spectrum blocking stealth shape and coatings. It's a myth created by inane MSM reporting. An
absorbing coating by definition will radiate the energy it absorbs. The detail is that it will be some other set
of wavelengths in the case of RAM coatings and in all cases there will be some infrared re-emission. These wavelengths
will radiate in random directions so even a slanted surface will reflect part of the incident radar energy back to the radar location.

Stealth was conceived during the 1960s when radars were very primitive and used a few frequencies and had no ability
to detect the necessary regions of the EM spectrum. Those days are long gone. Phased arrays based on gallium nitride
detectors (super high gain) are able to intercept any EM frequency back-scatter from stealth aircraft. Stealth is already
obsolete but the average MSM-fed sheep does not know this.

kvs wrote:

Cyrus the great wrote:I like how the Russians emphasize layers upon layers of defence in a platform instead of relying on just one or more components that can be vitiated in  real world engagements.  America's emphasis on stealth is obscene considering that radars can be jammed, IFF detectors are not truly reliable and long range missiles have never really worked... but what happens when stealth is paired with lasers that can travel faster than the speed of light? Source: http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2000/jul/19/laser-smashes-light-speed-record

So that means that aircraft like the F-22 [optimized for stealth] will be able to detect enemy aircraft first and get the essential first shot/kill. But then again the quantum radar really could spell the end of stealth as we know it.

There are no universal EM-spectrum blocking stealth shape and coatings.   It's a myth created by inane MSM reporting.   An
absorbing coating by definition will radiate the energy it absorbs.  The detail is that it will be some other set
of wavelengths in the case of RAM coatings and in all cases there will be some infrared re-emission.   These wavelengths
will radiate in random directions so even a slanted surface will reflect part of the incident radar energy back to the radar location.

Stealth was conceived during the 1960s when radars were very primitive and used a few frequencies and had no ability
to detect the necessary regions of the EM spectrum.   Those days are long gone.  Phased arrays based on gallium nitride
detectors (super high gain) are able to intercept any EM frequency back-scatter from stealth aircraft.   Stealth is already
obsolete but the average MSM-fed sheep does not know this.

Stealth technology certainly isn't obsolete yet. While stealth fighters do not have such a massive technological advantage as they did as recently as a few decades ago, they certainly do have a big improvements in survivability over pervious generation aircraft. Basically 5th generation fighters helped keep dogfighting relevant in the onset of BVRAAMs and growing radar capabilities for some time. Most of technologies capable of detecting low observable aircraft and still to big to be fitted to fighter planes. Within the next decade, current generation stealth will be fully obsolete. But because it is in everyone's interest to improve survivability of their aircraft, new stealth technologies will have to be developed. A continuous cat and mouse game.

Ivan the Colorado wrote:

kvs wrote:

Cyrus the great wrote:I like how the Russians emphasize layers upon layers of defence in a platform instead of relying on just one or more components that can be vitiated in  real world engagements.  America's emphasis on stealth is obscene considering that radars can be jammed, IFF detectors are not truly reliable and long range missiles have never really worked... but what happens when stealth is paired with lasers that can travel faster than the speed of light? Source: http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2000/jul/19/laser-smashes-light-speed-record

So that means that aircraft like the F-22 [optimized for stealth] will be able to detect enemy aircraft first and get the essential first shot/kill. But then again the quantum radar really could spell the end of stealth as we know it.

There are no universal EM-spectrum blocking stealth shape and coatings.   It's a myth created by inane MSM reporting.   An
absorbing coating by definition will radiate the energy it absorbs.  The detail is that it will be some other set
of wavelengths in the case of RAM coatings and in all cases there will be some infrared re-emission.   These wavelengths
will radiate in random directions so even a slanted surface will reflect part of the incident radar energy back to the radar location.

Stealth was conceived during the 1960s when radars were very primitive and used a few frequencies and had no ability
to detect the necessary regions of the EM spectrum.   Those days are long gone.  Phased arrays based on gallium nitride
detectors (super high gain) are able to intercept any EM frequency back-scatter from stealth aircraft.   Stealth is already
obsolete but the average MSM-fed sheep does not know this.

Stealth technology certainly isn't obsolete yet. While stealth fighters do not have such a massive technological advantage as they did as recently as a few decades ago, they certainly do have a big improvements in survivability over pervious generation aircraft. Basically 5th generation fighters helped keep dogfighting relevant in the onset of BVRAAMs and growing radar capabilities for some time. Most of technologies capable of detecting low observable aircraft and still to big to be fitted to fighter planes. Within the next decade, current generation stealth will be fully obsolete. But because it is in everyone's interest to improve survivability of their aircraft, new stealth technologies will have to be developed. A continuous cat and mouse game.

That is a rather optimistic view. The RAM coatings will lose all advantages when the phased arrays develop to a certain point.
RAM coatings are based on the known elements of this universe and cannot have arbitrary properties limited only by the imagination
of the designers.

Gallium nitride detectors are revolutionary in terms of phased array sensitivity. There is not much future left for "stealth".

kvs wrote:

Ivan the Colorado wrote:

kvs wrote:

Cyrus the great wrote:I like how the Russians emphasize layers upon layers of defence in a platform instead of relying on just one or more components that can be vitiated in  real world engagements.  America's emphasis on stealth is obscene considering that radars can be jammed, IFF detectors are not truly reliable and long range missiles have never really worked... but what happens when stealth is paired with lasers that can travel faster than the speed of light? Source: http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2000/jul/19/laser-smashes-light-speed-record

So that means that aircraft like the F-22 [optimized for stealth] will be able to detect enemy aircraft first and get the essential first shot/kill. But then again the quantum radar really could spell the end of stealth as we know it.

There are no universal EM-spectrum blocking stealth shape and coatings.   It's a myth created by inane MSM reporting.   An
absorbing coating by definition will radiate the energy it absorbs.  The detail is that it will be some other set
of wavelengths in the case of RAM coatings and in all cases there will be some infrared re-emission.   These wavelengths
will radiate in random directions so even a slanted surface will reflect part of the incident radar energy back to the radar location.

Stealth was conceived during the 1960s when radars were very primitive and used a few frequencies and had no ability
to detect the necessary regions of the EM spectrum.   Those days are long gone.  Phased arrays based on gallium nitride
detectors (super high gain) are able to intercept any EM frequency back-scatter from stealth aircraft.   Stealth is already
obsolete but the average MSM-fed sheep does not know this.

Stealth technology certainly isn't obsolete yet. While stealth fighters do not have such a massive technological advantage as they did as recently as a few decades ago, they certainly do have a big improvements in survivability over pervious generation aircraft. Basically 5th generation fighters helped keep dogfighting relevant in the onset of BVRAAMs and growing radar capabilities for some time. Most of technologies capable of detecting low observable aircraft and still to big to be fitted to fighter planes. Within the next decade, current generation stealth will be fully obsolete. But because it is in everyone's interest to improve survivability of their aircraft, new stealth technologies will have to be developed. A continuous cat and mouse game.

That is a rather optimistic view.   The RAM coatings will lose all advantages when the phased arrays develop to a certain point.
RAM coatings are based on the known elements of this universe and cannot have arbitrary properties limited only by the imagination
of the designers.  

Gallium nitride detectors are revolutionary in terms of phased array sensitivity.   There is not much future left for "stealth".

I don't think so, again it is in everyone's interest to increase the survivability of their aircraft. The purpose of reducing the RCS isn't to make fighter aircraft invisible but to greatly reduce detection at as much as possible. Back when the idea for fifth generation fighters incorporating stealth was conceived, it was thought that fifth generation fighters would be like snipers against forth gen aircraft, shooting opposing fighters down before the enemy knew what was going on (F-35 design philosophy regarding air to air combat reflects this greatly). Fifth generation fighters were also designed to get as close to enemy ground installations (and now opposing fith gen fighters) and destroy their targets while forth gen fighters couldn't get close because of their RCS signature. Saving the lives of aviators and saving on the cost of machines really helps everyone. Especially in a world where weapons systems are becoming increasingly expensive and everyone is obsessed with cutting costs, this trend will continue on.

Current RAM coating technologies will decrease in effectiveness due to advancements in radar technology, but because there is demand to improve the survivability of the aircraft. Newer technologies will be developed to reduce the RCS. Be it RAM or something else. Radars too, are limited in what they can do. We are nowhere near reaching the peak of either technology.

Stealth aircraft are a joke (80% of the time) and I'll tell you why... As soon as they start searching for targets with radar, other aircraft will pick up the emitted signals. This isn't always true in regards to single-band, but it certainly is in regards to AESA. If anything the "transition to stealth" will make aircraft act more like submarines, where passively "listening" (to signals in this case) is more important than "hunting" (emmiting such signals). 

IMHO opinion stealth aircraft are primarily useful for use against "low tech" countries, and not ones like Russia, China, or the US for that matter.

kvs wrote:

Gallium nitride detectors are revolutionary in terms of phased array sensitivity.   There is not much future left for "stealth".

Power aperture. Not sensitivity.

You can actually cool the receiver to get more sensitivity or just lower down your detection threshold BUT You will receive more false alarms and it will complicate the pilot's job and perhaps making automatic detection more difficult .

Gallium Nitride TR module is known to have higher "breakdown voltage" than Gallium Arsenide, allowing you for pumping more power inside it which it will convert to EM Wave. Thus why GaN module can have high emitted power ability (80-100 Watt or perhaps more) Compared to GaAs (some tens of Watt)

With that you can go "brute force" in improving detection range against a target by having large numbers of modules and preferably large antenna. The price however is massive heat flux to cool. This brute force method however might be less desirable since the gain might not worth the investment. By 4th root law or radar range equation doubling the power aperture will net you only around 19% increase in detection range

Mike E wrote:Stealth aircraft are a joke (80% of the time) and I'll tell you why... As soon as they start searching for targets with radar, other aircraft will pick up the emitted signals. This isn't always true in regards to single-band, but it certainly is in regards to AESA. If anything the "transition to stealth" will make aircraft act more like submarines, where passively "listening" (to signals in this case) is more important than "hunting" (emmiting such signals). 

IMHO opinion stealth aircraft are primarily useful for use against "low tech" countries, and not ones like Russia, China, or the US for that matter.

Stealth isn't useless but it will never be used as americans have shown it does not work as one single defensive mean with their useless and decommisioned F-117.

The future for all machinery in warfare is the approach that was kept and established by Soviets and Russia a multi-layered means of defence along with entire tactics are build around to avoid getting into troublesome situations that could comprimize the use of some defensive means or entire layers.

Stealth will be never be used as the only means ever again, not even with such dumb Lockheed Martin EA like money milker companies.

It is like relying on only getting a full Royal flush while in 99% of all games all the rest of players are winning with doubles, tripples full houses or flashes and you sit their with your superiority in mind of a Royal flash...

So many people here thinking they know what stealth it is or how to counter it...

Low Observability offers a 3 dimensional positional advantage

Forget the wild claims made by imbeciles on the fanciful ideas in relation to stealth aircraft.

Stealth aircraft merely provide a AWAC-type advantage over non-stealth aircraft.

Stealthflanker wrote:

kvs wrote:

Gallium nitride detectors are revolutionary in terms of phased array sensitivity.   There is not much future left for "stealth".

Power aperture. Not sensitivity.

I am not sure where you are getting this false dichotomy from. The GaN parts are amplifiers. They are orders of magnitude
more efficient at amplifying signals compared to anything deployed today. This directly implies that they can increase the detection
of very weak signals for a given phased array size.

@Werewolf, @Mike:
Stealth is not useless but the problem with U.S. stealth is that Russia has already used low-band long-wavelength radar both on ground and air. SAM-2 and SAM-3 already used L-band to track, while early warning radars has already used VHF and UHF. On the air, MiG-31 and T-50 is using L-band thanks to the gigantic size of radars and thanks to the use of synchronized multi-station system - which is used to compensate the low angular resolution of an individual radar.

Correct me if I am wrong, but the iron ball stealth cloak on F-22 is already outdated, because at the moment both U.S. and Russia have already developed much better material.