Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Share
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 3103
    Points : 3145
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 76
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Thu Aug 23, 2018 3:54 am

    LMFS wrote:

    rrrright, you can fold 50% longer length of Su-57 too?  OK size of hangar an deck is flexible with Su-35.
    Nooo, you are not exaggerating a bit right?  lol1

    Su-57 is 19.8 m long, MiG-29 is 17,3 m, Yak-141 was 18.4 m, F-35 is 15,5 m. So Su-57 is 28% longer than the thick and short F-35 which is hopeless as supersonic fighter... but we don't know if it would be narrower. F-35C is 20% wider than Su-33 once folded, mind you!


    Su-33 / MiG-29K are not in picture anymore mind you. I took F-35 as an example of modern design and more less features you could exp3ct with new fighter hre.
    Talking about size:

    F-35 after wiki:
    Length: 50.5 ft[487] (15.67 m)
    Wingspan: 35 ft[c] (10.7 m)

    Su-57
    Length: 19.8 m (65 ft) - without dingy (pitot tube? antena? )
    Wingspan: 13.95 m (45 ft 10 in)

    wingspanratio: 1,3
    length ratio: 1.26 (with thingy: 1.4)

    surface ratio: 1.64
    1.82 with thingy


    so from 20 you have 10-12 fighters on board.


    So you say Su-57 has foldable  wings?


    No it hasn't, no reason for it, until MoD decides to create a carrier version, the same way Su-27 has no folding wings but Su-33 has. F-22 had many issues to be navalized...

    [/quote]

    looks like Su-57 undergone similar exercise and perhaps that's why this decision.





    This, apart from other political issues that may have been more important than mere technical considerations.
    Same here - light fighter of new generation more cost effective and great asset for fleet.



    [qute] A carrier designed with it in mind could house good amounts of them (new light carrier with 44 k would have one squadron Su-33 and one squadron MiG-29 apparently, plus 4 AWACS and one squadron helos)[/quote]

    mind Su-33/ MiG-29k are out of pic. Check Borisov statement last year. AWACS - in net centric world swarm of drones linked to control room on AC is air replacement and less costly and much less space requirements.
    Wtih size of AC we both of course speculating bt it is nice exercise anyway bounce bounce bounce





    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 3103
    Points : 3145
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 76
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Thu Aug 23, 2018 4:17 am

    GarryB wrote: Let me guess  "heavy aviation cruiser" concept is back. Uparm Wasp class and you can have either small AC (~24 VSTOL) or LHD or helo antisub carrier. Simply cost effectiveness.

    Funny because I have not heard the EMALS is cancelled....
    [/quote]
    and I ve never heard it was ordered ether  Razz  Razz  Razz



    Remember the Yak-41 was funded too... right up until they cancelled it
    and Soviet Union was dissembled because of this? mind both were about same time.





    Of course... a super cheap 5th gen fighter that takes off vertically and will be produced in numbers of perhaps 50 or 100 max... yeah... that is going to be real cheap... Of course if they want to operate them for more than 5 years they will need to make 200... to allow for operational losses...


    are you saying Russians didn't calculate/brainstorm over and over  cost/benefits before taking decision? just Putins after-party hangover? and who told you it cannot be ised as army fighter replacing MiG-35 . Mind why so short series is bought?




    Yak -141 (actually Yam41M) wasn't latest. Yak-141M was latest then Yak43 and Yak-201 according to Yefn Gordon books. Perhaps some blueprints remained?

    Why not try to find some Nazi plans from WWII to base it on?


    Surely, Tu-160M2 is like nazi project ot you? MiG-35 even older design? af forgot designs are updated iwth new materials and avionics and weapons.  

    All in all deal with this decision is made  lol1  lol1  lol1 e






    Yeah... that is what Russia needs... very short range low payload fighters...

    F-35B has payload same as MiG-29K and about same range.


     but lets equip them with something even less capable than a MiG-35... I mean how could they possibly manage a long runway in Russia... there is simply no room... or am I confusing Russia with Hong Kong?

    You do Smile In Russia in cold climate (Arctic) are fairly hard to make, number of bases will grow.  Long runway are also more expensive in building. We do not know yet will the new fighter will be less capable then MiG-35.

    NK-32
    thrust  137 kN   with afterburner  245 kN


    MiG-35  
    thrust2x55kN or  88kN (186kN)  with afterburner.






    Su 57 wont start from Kuz. Too short lane and Su-57 takes 2x so much space on AC then F-35B.

    Who told you that?

    Take Off - 350m. Wiki for example.





    The Su-57 is smaller and lighter than an Su-33 but has more powerful engines... and is getting even more powerful engines soon...


    soon = after 2023




    Guess why USN builds 100k monsters?
    Invasions require a lot of planes.

    wrong, because they are exclusive  lol1  lol1  lol1
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 3103
    Points : 3145
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 76
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Thu Aug 23, 2018 4:28 am

    And if new fighter is not going to be produced by Yak but MiG?


    Last year Butoski's drawing of new MiG LMFS


    drawing form 2017

    https://bmpd.livejournal.com/2430909.html



    Yak STOL concept in article on iParalay site. Article form 2009...






    speed max. 2100 km / h
    range 4000 km





    and Izdleye 201 (Yak-43)




    hoom

    Posts : 1073
    Points : 1065
    Join date : 2016-05-06

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  hoom on Thu Aug 23, 2018 8:58 am

    That Yak canard is pretty interesting.
    No V, just STOL right?

    Big canards, big flaps, limited thrust vectoring on the main nozzle & bleed air from the compressor run forward to a what?
    Fan powered by the compressed air? Combustion chamber directly producing thrust? or With a turbine also powering a fan?

    This is in my thinking the right way to do it: Design explicitly for a ski-jump takeoff & slow rolling landing with wings always expected to be significantly contributing to lift.
    Should mean significantly less downside than full Vertical capability.

    Hot air forward of the engine inlets is problematic Suspect
    Was watching a video the other day of one of the Skunkworks engineers who did propulsion for K-35 program & he was very explicit that cold air fan was key to X-35 winning, specifically blocks the hot air from swirling forward to be ingested.
    If its always moving forward at decent speed (STOL no V) that'd be much less of an issue though.
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 3103
    Points : 3145
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 76
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Thu Aug 23, 2018 10:20 am

    hoom wrote:That Yak canard is pretty interesting.
    No V, just STOL right?


    project 1 (white plastic Very Happy:D:D ) project 2 down is VSTOL AFAIK with NK-32 modification (245kN thrust...)



    Big canards, big flaps, limited thrust vectoring on the main nozzle & bleed air from the compressor run forward to a what?
    Fan powered by the compressed air? Combustion chamber directly producing thrust? or With a turbine also powering a fan?

    This is in my thinking the right way to do it: [].
    If its always moving forward at decent speed (STOL no V) that'd be much less of an issue though.




    Sounds reasonable, and cheaper Very Happy:D:D nobody optimizes better Russian Army than Suilianov. But izdleye 201 had also VSTOL version - I hope there will be both thumbsup thumbsup thumbsup

    I was just struck by similarities of STOL version and JANES Butowski's drawing about LMFS... supposedly MiG LMFS bounce bounce bounce
    avatar
    Hole

    Posts : 817
    Points : 817
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 42
    Location : Merkelland

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  Hole on Thu Aug 23, 2018 11:22 am

    Yak-41 was cancelled by Jelzin.

    hoom

    Posts : 1073
    Points : 1065
    Join date : 2016-05-06

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  hoom on Thu Aug 23, 2018 12:56 pm

    project 1 (white plastic Very Happy:D:D ) project 2 down is VSTOL
    Are you positive they're different?
    Drawing looks like its illustrating the white plastic model.
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 3103
    Points : 3145
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 76
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Thu Aug 23, 2018 1:48 pm

    Hole wrote:Yak-41 was cancelled by Jelzin.

    it was his t.reasonable decision What a Face What a Face What a Face






    hoom wrote:
    project 1 (white plastic Very Happy:D:D ) project 2 down is VSTOL
    Are you positive they're different?
    Drawing looks like its illustrating the white plastic model.


    It was in iparalay or at least I identified like that. Perhaps I was wrong and this is one and the same fighter.
    In every case there were two options described. And if you look at reasonable sources Yak-43 did exist.


    Its gonna be funny if new VSTOL fighter will be MiG instead of Yak Cool Cool Cool
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 7071
    Points : 7167
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  PapaDragon on Thu Aug 23, 2018 2:39 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote:.....
    Even if they are they will still be wasting far less money than they would if they tried to do super-carrier....

    Of course... a super cheap 5th gen fighter that takes off vertically and will be produced in numbers of perhaps 50 or 100 max... yeah... that is going to be real cheap... Of course if they want to operate them for more than 5 years they will need to make 200... to allow for operational losses...
    .......

    Hey even if it's a complete failure on every single parameter (which it won't be) it will be money well spent because it will keep them from wasting time and money on nonsense like supercarriers and will redirect remaining cash into building ships that Navy actually needs instead of some white elephants that will go down the way of Riga AKA Liaoning once project is abandoned... (but I doubt Chinese will be buying that hulk this time)

    avatar
    LMFS

    Posts : 611
    Points : 607
    Join date : 2018-03-03

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  LMFS on Thu Aug 23, 2018 3:42 pm

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:Su-33 / MiG-29K are not in picture anymore mind you. I took F-35 as an example of modern design and more less features you could exp3ct with new fighter hre.
    Who says that? MiG-29K were received in 2016 IIRC.
    F-35 is an example of an airframe that is not good for AD... fineness ratio too low, optimization for subsonic strike. And weapon bays small. I sincerely hope they do not repeat that, they cannot print the money the same way or force other countries to buy their planes.
    Talking about size... 

    so from 20 you have 10-12 fighters on board.
    Cannot agree, see my numbers in the previous post. If you have a 20 m space you only fit one plane, be it 19 m long or 15. A Su-33 is narrower than a F-35 in any version and by a good margin so it depends in implementation, not only in size of airframe. Considering the low wing loading of the Su-57, a fold as small as the one of Su-33 is thinkable.

    looks like  Su-57 undergone similar exercise and perhaps that's why this decision.
    ?? Do you have any source? There has been no decision not to navalize the PAK-FA BTW.

    mind Su-33/ MiG-29k are out of pic. Check Borisov statement last year. AWACS - in net centric world swarm of drones linked to control room on AC is air replacement and less costly and much less space requirements.
    Wtih size of AC we both of course speculating bt it is nice exercise anyway  bounce  bounce  bounce
    Can agree in distributed AWACS role in the future. As said MiG-29s are brand new and apparently the Su-33s will remain in the K for a while.
    avatar
    LMFS

    Posts : 611
    Points : 607
    Join date : 2018-03-03

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  LMFS on Thu Aug 23, 2018 3:50 pm

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:And if new fighter is not going to be produced by Yak but MiG?
    I love aircraft concepts but those ones are simply rather generic delta-canard platforms, similar to what Lockheed did before JSF (CALF if I am not wrong). Not seeing any evidence this is going to be developed, in fact they are promoting the MiG-35 as the future... maybe they just try to hide the development of a new fighter in order not to harm the MiG-35's export potential? If MiG had a project like LMFS at hands the -35 would be a lesser concern I guess...

    Is there any hint as to how the Yak proposal is expected to take off or land vertically? Do you happen to know what is the propulsion concept, apart from the NK-32 as main engine?
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 3103
    Points : 3145
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 76
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Thu Aug 23, 2018 7:17 pm

    LMFS wrote: Cannot agree, see my numbers in the previous post. If you have a 20 m space you only fit one plane, be it 19 m long or 15.

    and if you have 18 m you cannot fit any 19m and you can 15m right?


    looks like  Su-57 undergone similar exercise and perhaps that's why this decision.
    ?? Do you have any source? There has been no decision not to navalize the PAK-FA BTW.

    Source: no orders and order to build VSTOL fighter instead of Su-57?
    By analogy to F-22 looks like large stealth fighters  are not really suitable for small decks of ships.





    Can agree in distributed AWACS role in the future. As said MiG-29s are brand new and apparently the Su-33s will remain in the K for a while.

    Deputy Prime Minister general Borisov disagrees with you tho.


    Deputy Defense Minister Borisov said that the naval aviation variants of the MiG-29 and Su-33 fighters in use by the Navy today face becoming obsolete in the next decade.
    Accordingly, he said, it's logical to start development of a new plane to replace them.



    https://sputniknews.com/military/201712151060040750-new-russian-vtol-aircraft-analysis/
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 3103
    Points : 3145
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 76
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Thu Aug 23, 2018 7:23 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:

    Hey even if it's a complete failure on every single parameter (which it won't be) it will be money well spent because it will keep them from wasting time and money on nonsense like supercarriers and will redirect remaining cash into building ships that Navy actually needs instead of some white elephants that will go down the way of Riga AKA Liaoning once project is abandoned...

    Krylov Center some time ago mentioned that Storm (1 piece) is going to be in range of 1 trillion Rubles (till recently ~16billions $) . including R&D. For thsi you can get 10 mistrals or 6 Wasp LHDs (using pricing for US navy)
    avatar
    LMFS

    Posts : 611
    Points : 607
    Join date : 2018-03-03

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  LMFS on Thu Aug 23, 2018 7:41 pm

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:and if you have 18 m you cannot fit any 19m and you can 15m right?
    You can fit two Su-33 side by side but only one F-35 Razz Razz

    Source: no orders and order to build VSTOL fighter instead of Su-57?
    By analogy to F-22 looks like large stealth fighters  are not really suitable for small decks of ships.
    It will be ten years at least to develop the STOVL fighter, so they better get started. While Su-33 gets old, Su-57K or whatever it would be called can be developed in a much shorter time, since the baseline model is ready. Don't know what will happen but it is too soon to say Su-57 is incompatible with carrier operation. STOVL model as said is relevant to LHDs and similar ships, not to sky jump equipped carriers, from which fully loaded fighters can take-off perfectly with a high T/W ratio.

    Deputy Prime Minister general Borisov disagrees with you tho.
    Like said, the MiG-29Ks have spent two years out of 40 of operational life, and until 2030 lots of things will happen. As we have seen, Borisov likes to speak loud and not always 100% accurately, like his comments on the Armata, affecting the credibility of Russia just days before the first batch gets ordered... I keep my opinion on the guy for myself.
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 7071
    Points : 7167
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  PapaDragon on Thu Aug 23, 2018 7:43 pm

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote:

    Hey even if it's a complete failure on every single parameter (which it won't be) it will be money well spent because it will keep them from wasting time and money on nonsense like supercarriers and will redirect remaining cash into building ships that Navy actually needs instead of some white elephants that will go down the way of Riga AKA Liaoning once project is abandoned...

    Krylov Center some time ago mentioned that Storm (1 piece) is going to be in range of 1 trillion Rubles (till recently ~16billions $) . including R&D. For thsi you can get 10 mistrals or 6 Wasp LHDs (using pricing for US navy)

    16 billion??? Damn, that thing would make Ford-class look dirt cheap.... lol1


    GunshipDemocracy wrote:....
    Deputy Prime Minister general Borisov disagrees with you tho.

    Deputy Defense Minister Borisov said that the naval aviation variants of the MiG-29 and Su-33 fighters in use by the Navy today face becoming obsolete in the next decade.
    Accordingly, he said, it's logical to start development of a new plane to replace them.
    ..

    Looks like Borisov for some reason stopped being luddite fan of obsolete material. What happened all of a sudden?

    Did someone give him a call telling him to stop being flat-out idiot lest he loses his fancy job that he is not qualified to perform anyway?
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 3103
    Points : 3145
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 76
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Fri Aug 24, 2018 4:47 am

    PapaDragon wrote:

    Looks like Borisov for some reason stopped being luddite fan of obsolete material. What happened all of a sudden?

    Did someone give him a call telling him to stop being flat-out idiot lest he loses his fancy job that he is not qualified to perform anyway?

    He was qualified for both previous and current jobs. As PR he has certainly place for improvement tho.
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 3103
    Points : 3145
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 76
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Fri Aug 24, 2018 5:25 am

    LMFS wrote:
    GunshipDemocracy wrote:And if new fighter is not going to be produced by Yak but MiG?
    I love aircraft concepts but those ones are simply rather generic delta-canard platforms, similar to what Lockheed did before JSF (CALF if I am not wrong).



    form Yefim Gordon's book

    n 1983-84 the Yakovlev OKB embarked on the design of a next-generation multi-role V/STOL fighter intended to follow the
    Yak-41 M. In its general layout it had a marked resemblance to the Lockheed Martin
    F-22 Raptor
    (albeit the latter was designed to a somewhat later time-scale
    and had no VTOL capability).




    Not seeing any evidence this is going to be developed, in fact they are promoting the MiG-35 as the future... maybe they just try to hide the development of a new fighter in order not to harm the MiG-35's export potential? If MiG had a project like LMFS at hands the -35 would be a lesser concern I guess...

    Neither do I (if you mean canard) but I remember Butowski painted PAK FA very similar to Su-57 before it was fielded too Smile MiG-35 is for expert and testing LMFS tech to me

    BTW look at TSAGI makr on letf lower conrer...



    Unlike Yefim's book I have mixed feelings about sources form Parlay.


    Is there any hint as to how the Yak proposal is expected to take off or land vertically? Do you happen to know what is the propulsion concept, apart from the NK-32 as main engine?

    Sources is scarce so far Paralay (Yak and LMFS)
    http://paralay.world/index.html

    LMFS looks like VSTOL variant.



    other engines considered: AL-41F

    avatar
    LMFS

    Posts : 611
    Points : 607
    Join date : 2018-03-03

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  LMFS on Fri Aug 24, 2018 1:16 pm

    @Gunship:

    Yeah, manufacturers engage in studies to evaluate possible solutions even if they are not interested in actually building them, they need knowledge. Until now I see no clear signs that the STOVL and LMFS will be the same (rather hints at Yakovlev as designer) but who knows.

    The one from TsAGI has not even intakes, what kind of aircraft is that? Rocket engine propelled?

    What would be surprising is if the Yak design you showed in a previous post (with canard and LO design) was from 1983-84, probably isn't, right?
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 3103
    Points : 3145
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 76
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Fri Aug 24, 2018 2:47 pm

    LMFS wrote:@Gunship:

    Yeah, manufacturers engage in studies to evaluate possible solutions even if they are not interested in actually building them, they need knowledge. Until now I see no clear signs that the STOVL and LMFS will be the same (rather hints at Yakovlev as designer) but who knows.

    Agreed. I only speculated that perhaps MiG sill do this as Yak is only focusing on Yak-130, MiG has not much to do... and progress with MiG-35 is very slow.


    The one from TsAGI has not even intakes, what kind of aircraft is that? Rocket engine propelled?
    research model of light maneuverable plane in subsonic tunnel (that's what subtitle says Smile


    What would be surprising is if the Yak design you showed in a previous post (with canard and LO design) was from 1983-84, probably isn't, right?
    Im not sure this was response to LMFS (stol variant) . I guess I was wrong this wasnt same as Izdelye 201/ Yak-43 but untill I'll find any other sources I will stop here Smile

    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 2261
    Points : 2282
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  eehnie on Fri Aug 24, 2018 5:40 pm

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote:

    Hey even if it's a complete failure on every single parameter (which it won't be) it will be money well spent because it will keep them from wasting time and money on nonsense like supercarriers and will redirect remaining cash into building ships that Navy actually needs instead of some white elephants that will go down the way of Riga AKA Liaoning once project is abandoned...  

    Krylov Center some time ago mentioned that Storm (1 piece) is going to be in range of 1 trillion Rubles (till recently ~16billions $) . including R&D. For thsi you can get 10 mistrals or  6 Wasp LHDs (using pricing for US navy)

    This is not right. Is false.

    http://www.russiadefence.net/t7631p75-future-russian-aircraft-carriers-3#232713
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 18067
    Points : 18627
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  GarryB on Sun Aug 26, 2018 4:11 am

    are you saying Russians didn't calculate/brainstorm over and over cost/benefits before taking decision? just Putins after-party hangover? and who told you it cannot be ised as army fighter replacing MiG-35 . Mind why so short series is bought?

    Of course they made calculations... but it was all theory and guesswork because they didn't have an actually useful VSTOL aircraft to base their calculations upon.

    It wasn't until they were actually test landing Yak-41s on actual carriers that they realised the problems it would have taking off or landing vertically in combat...

    They tried smaller carriers in the form of the Kiev class, and it was rejected mainly because of the performance of the Yak-38M aircraft... expensive... low performance, fragile, high loss rate of aircraft. Its excellent ejection system meant it was not as lethal as some other aircraft but its crash rate was huge.

    VSTOL aircraft have enormous IR signatures and are very vulnerable to IR guided weapons... the old Strela was not a brilliant weapon against jet aircraft, but the Harrier would have been an exception...

    Surely, Tu-160M2 is like nazi project ot you?

    A long range strategic bomber is vastly more value to Russia than an F-35...

    F-35B has payload same as MiG-29K and about same range.

    Believe it when proven...

    We do not know yet will the new fighter will be less capable then MiG-35.

    NK-32
    thrust 137 kN with afterburner 245 kN


    MiG-35
    thrust2x55kN or 88kN (186kN) with afterburner.

    2 tons of engine in the back of this new VSTOL fighter has to be balanced by an equivalent level of power in the front of the aircraft that will be dead weight for the entire flight.

    And what sort of special super material will those airfields in Russia need to be made from to survive that sort of take off thrust?

    soon = after 2023

    So at least a decade before the carrier it will operate from is ready... all good.

    Yak-41 was cancelled by Jelzin.

    It would have just sucked funds away from upgrades on the Su-33...

    The only reason they got the MiG-29KR is because production was set up and paid for by the Indian order for same aircraft...


    Its gonna be funny if new VSTOL fighter will be MiG instead of Yak

    Not sure how it would make any difference?
    VSTOL is a dead end in fighter aircraft...

    Hey even if it's a complete failure on every single parameter (which it won't be) it will be money well spent because it will keep them from wasting time and money on nonsense like supercarriers and will redirect remaining cash into building ships that Navy actually needs instead of some white elephants that will go down the way of Riga AKA Liaoning once project is abandoned... (but I doubt Chinese will be buying that hulk this time)

    Unless they have cancelled funding for EMALs development I would say this would not effect carrier design at all.

    They have already stated they want carriers slightly bigger than the K and nuclear powered... so 80-90K ton is probably what they are going to get... whether they have VSTOL aircraft or Su-57 models will likely depend on which works out better... but considering what has happened so far... the Su-33 was chosen because of its better performance... the MiG-29KR were considered too expensive, less capable... and multirole at a time when they just wanted an air defence fighter.

    If they don't change... I suspect they will either introduce both aircraft or they will go for the larger more capable fighter that will be able to take off from an 80-90K ton carrier with the ski jump whether the EMALS is working or not...

    They might develop a light 5th gen fighter with VSTOL capabilities... and a variant with non of the V capabilities would probably be very useful and capable....

    I rather suspect two smaller engines than one really big one... That is still official policy for safety and having two engines where both have to operate for safety breaks the two engine rule too.

    [Is there any hint as to how the Yak proposal is expected to take off or land vertically? Do you happen to know what is the propulsion concept, apart from the NK-32 as main engine?

    Another aspect of course is that the NK-32 is an engine for a bomber... not a fighter... look at the F-111 and F-14A... same engine was great on the F-111 but not so good on the F-14... it wasn't until the engines were replaced in the F-14D model that it started to look impressive.

    Also on anything except a tiny little 20K ton carrier most aircraft will land via cables so vertical landing makes little sense... it would be safer and easier and quicker to land using arrester cables.

    Just as it would be more useful to use a rolling take off using the ski jump for VSTOL jets to maximise the payload and performance...

    Source: no orders and order to build VSTOL fighter instead of Su-57?

    The word instead is there as your creation. I am sure Sukhoi would love to sell some naval Su-57s...

    By analogy to F-22 looks like large stealth fighters are not really suitable for small decks of ships.

    The Russian Navy has already said it wants ships slightly bigger than Kuznetsov...

    For thsi you can get 10 mistrals or 6 Wasp LHDs (using pricing for US navy)

    Yet not so long ago they spend over a billion Euros and got ZERO Mistrals... imagine that...

    MiG has not much to do... and progress with MiG-35 is very slow.

    MiG-41 and MiG-35 is rather more than Yak-130.

    This is not right. Is false.

    Hahahahaha... in 2030 it is going to be 500 US dollars to a rouble... russia
    avatar
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1627
    Points : 1622
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  AlfaT8 on Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:53 am

    PapaDragon wrote:
    GunshipDemocracy wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote:

    Hey even if it's a complete failure on every single parameter (which it won't be) it will be money well spent because it will keep them from wasting time and money on nonsense like supercarriers and will redirect remaining cash into building ships that Navy actually needs instead of some white elephants that will go down the way of Riga AKA Liaoning once project is abandoned...  

    Krylov Center some time ago mentioned that Storm (1 piece) is going to be in range of 1 trillion Rubles (till recently ~16billions $) . including R&D. For thsi you can get 10 mistrals or  6 Wasp LHDs (using pricing for US navy)

    16 billion??? Damn, that thing would make Ford-class look dirt cheap.... lol1

    BS,
    Gerald R. Ford class:
    Cost:
    Program cost: US$37.30 billion (FY2018)
    Unit cost: US$12.998 billion (FY2018)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_R._Ford-class_aircraft_carrier
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 3103
    Points : 3145
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 76
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Sun Aug 26, 2018 12:49 pm

    GarryB wrote:

    VSTOL aircraft have enormous IR signatures and are very vulnerable to IR guided weapons... the old Strela was not a brilliant weapon against jet aircraft, but the Harrier would have been an exception...


    but you know Yak-43 was to be stealthy? BTW you seem to live in Harrier times didn notice 50 years in progress in tech. You have right to think VSTL sucks but truth is that Russian admiralty now decided to go for thsi for a reason.




    F-35B has payload same as MiG-29K and about same range.

    Believe it when proven...



    You dotn have to - Russian admirals did lol1 lol1 lol1


    soon = after 2023

    So at least a decade before the carrier it will operate from is ready... all good.



    Carrier will start around thsi time, this was discussed many times over and over first new fighter then new AC Twisted Evil Twisted Evil Twisted Evil





    Its gonna be funny if new VSTOL fighter will be MiG instead of Yak

    Not sure how it would make any difference?
    VSTOL is a dead end in fighter aircraft...



    US and Russian military disagree and invest in this billions. lol1 lol1 lol1



    They have already stated they want carriers slightly bigger than the K and nuclear powered... so 80-90K ton is probably what they are going to get... whether they have VSTOL aircraft or Su-57 models will likely depend on which works out better... but considering what has happened so far... the Su-33 was chosen because of its better performance... the MiG-29KR were considered too expensive, less capable... and multirole at a time when they just wanted an air defence fighter.

    If they don't change... I suspect they will either introduce both aircraft or they will go for the larger more capable fighter that will be able to take off from an 80-90K ton carrier with the ski jump whether the EMALS is working or not...
    +
    They might develop a light 5th gen fighter with VSTOL capabilities... and a variant with non of the V capabilities would probably be very useful and capable....



    you see , no you are in mid phase wrt VSTOL bounce bounce bounce
    denial aggression bargaining depression acceptance



    They will get 40-60 ktons universal carrier (LHA if you prefer) for VSTOL.





    I rather suspect two smaller engines than one really big one... That is still official policy for safety and having two engines where both have to operate for safety breaks the two engine rule too.



    Might be right well see, what will be with vertical fans - tho 2 + vertical engines?






    Another aspect of course is that the NK-32 is an engine for a bomber... not a fighter... look at the F-111 and F-14A... same engine was great on the F-111 but not so good on the F-14... it wasn't until the engines were replaced in the F-14D model that it started to look impressive.

    NK-32 is similar in size/thurst and wight to F-35B engine




    Also on anything except a tiny little 20K ton carrier most aircraft will land via cables so vertical landing makes little sense... it would be safer and easier and quicker to land using arrester cables.
    Just as it would be more useful to use a rolling take off using the ski jump for VSTOL jets to maximise the payload and performance...


    True yet you can use vSTOL on 20k carriers if you need too.




    Source: no orders and order to build VSTOL fighter instead of Su-57?

    The word instead is there as your creation. I am sure Sukhoi would love to sell some naval Su-57s...

    Sukhoi might want but Putin decided otherwise Anyway same corporation is gonna make VSTOL Razz Razz Razz



    Yet not so long ago they spend over a billion Euros and got ZERO Mistrals... imagine that...

    Mistral wa smostly political project as S-400 and Turkey. With France deal failed unlike wit Turkey.


    This is not right. Is false.
    Hahahahaha... in 2030 it is going to be 500 US dollars to a rouble...  russia

    iIt might or in 2030 USD might not exist anymore or itmight be 30 rubles USD.


    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 3103
    Points : 3145
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 76
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Sun Aug 26, 2018 12:51 pm

    AlfaT8 wrote:

    16 billion??? Damn, that thing would make Ford-class look dirt cheap.... lol1

    BS,
    Gerald R. Ford class:
    Cost:
    Program cost: US$37.30 billion (FY2018)
    Unit cost: US$12.998 billion (FY2018)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_R._Ford-class_aircraft_carrier[/quote]

    With RnD first ship is 14blns, if you add cost of upgrading and building yards in case of Russia...
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 18067
    Points : 18627
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  GarryB on Mon Aug 27, 2018 6:46 am

    and I ve never heard it was ordered ether

    No orders for EMALS or VSTOL aircraft... because they are in development.

    and Soviet Union was dissembled because of this? mind both were about same time.

    It was cancelled because there were fundamental problems in the design... the hot front lift engines were a critical problem... the Yak-41 was no super plane but the two lift jets just behind the pilot would be powerful enough to operate an Su-25... they are only slightly less powerful...

    And they are blowing hot air directly under the front of the aircraft... that is OK in mid flight, but when landing if that hot air goes into the air intake then you get a main engine stall... and that is bad because in that situation that is all that is holding the aircraft in the air....


    are you saying Russians didn't calculate/brainstorm over and over cost/benefits before taking decision?

    I am sure there were plenty of people who want to build a VSTOL fighter, but how can their calculations possibly be accurate without an actual test aircraft to prove the numbers are right?

    I am sure they probably did all the calculations and brainstorming over the Yak-41, but tests showed there were serious fundamental problems, for which there were no easy answers.

    In comparison the engine on the Harrier used cold gas from near the front of the single engine for lift, while the F-35 has a fan driven by the main engine... do you think they came up with that themselves... because they were going for separate jet engines like the Yak-41 until they talked to Yak...

    just Putins after-party hangover? and who told you it cannot be ised as army fighter replacing MiG-35 . Mind why so short series is bought?

    More complicated and expensive and fragile than a normal aircraft... what is not to love... Rolling Eyes


    F-35B has payload same as MiG-29K and about same range.

    Unit cost for the MiG-29K according to wiki is $16 million... you could buy enough for all four carriers and still have change compared to what it would cost for one carriers worth of F-35s.

    You do Smile In Russia in cold climate (Arctic) are fairly hard to make, number of bases will grow. Long runway are also more expensive in building. We do not know yet will the new fighter will be less capable then MiG-35.

    But you only pay for the long runway once... every time one of those crappy VSTOL F-35B wannabes crashes that will be 100 million plus each.

    By having a real runway your planes can take off with more fuel and ordinance and cover more area...

    NK-32
    thrust 137 kN with afterburner 245 kN


    MiG-35
    thrust2x55kN or 88kN (186kN) with afterburner.

    Yes... all that extra fuel burned in the bigger engine... and of course using full AB for landing and take off means even more fuel and more damage to the runway...

    wrong, because they are exclusive

    Invasions require heavy ordinance loads from heavy aircraft in large numbers... an air defence carrier only needs a much smaller carrier.

    Yak STOL concept in article on iParalay site. Article form 2009...

    Looks like that Yugoslavian super plane Novi Avion... they never make it for real and over time it just gets better and better.... like the Canadian Arrow or the UK Bluestreak missile.

    but you know Yak-43 was to be stealthy?

    Of course... I forgot stealthy planes can't get shot down...

    BTW you seem to live in Harrier times didn notice 50 years in progress in tech. You have right to think VSTL sucks but truth is that Russian admiralty now decided to go for thsi for a reason.

    I saw all the promises... can take off from anywhere... doesn't need runways... blah blah blah.

    They were effective in the Falklands war because they had a good primary missile that was better than the missile on enemy planes and the enemy planes were pretty mediocre.

    Reality is they can't operate anywhere and conventional planes can take off and land from strips of motor way too... for all the design compromises to allow them to take off from the deck of a carrier they would have been rather better off with conventional aircraft like MiG-29s and Su-27s.

    The cost for bigger carriers pays off because bigger carriers are better.

    So the F-35B has similar practical performance as a MiG-29K... $122 million dollars per aircraft vs $16 million... I don't see your point.

    Carrier will start around thsi time, this was discussed many times over and over first new fighter then new AC

    In practical terms it would not matter if they started laying down a carrier right now... they wont need carrier aircraft for it until well after the engines are ready...

    US and Russian military disagree and invest in this billions.

    No evidence of Russia investing billions...


    you see , no you are in mid phase wrt VSTOL

    Nope.

    VSTOL is pointless and expensive. They never actually take off vertically except at airshows, and they will certainly never land vertically either... it takes longer and burns too much fuel and is risky.

    They will get 40-60 ktons universal carrier (LHA if you prefer) for VSTOL.

    They have already said they want something slightly bigger than K so bigger than 60k tons.

    Might be right well see, what will be with vertical fans - tho 2 + vertical engines?

    How about two engines vertically stacked... one near the front and one near the back...

    NK-32 is similar in size/thurst and wight to F-35B engine

    It does, but it was designed as an engine for a bomber.... long range cruise.... high speed dashes... no hard manouvering or rapid throttle changes...

    How about two engines from a Bear bomber... one facing forward and one facing back both able to pivot upwards for vertical takeoff and landing.... Rolling Eyes

    True yet you can use vSTOL on 20k carriers if you need too.

    WTF would be the point? If you are so keen to save money don't make any carriers at all.... and all the money spent on BUK and TOR and S-300V... why bother with an air force? You could slash the budget by billions every year just having a surface navy and a surface army with no planes at all. Vann would love it... this year no planes flew and no planes crashed... it would still be Putins fault though... Wink

    Sukhoi might want but Putin decided otherwise Anyway same corporation is gonna make VSTOL

    Yeah, like Yak built some Yak-41s... you can see them in museums and old books about planes of the future...

    BS,
    Gerald R. Ford class:
    Cost:
    Program cost: US$37.30 billion (FY2018)
    Unit cost: US$12.998 billion (FY2018)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_R._Ford-class_aircraft_carrier

    With RnD first ship is 14blns, if you add cost of upgrading and building yards in case of Russia...[/quote]

    Compare apples with apples... the 16 billion for the Russian carrier includes programme costs, which means the equivalent costs for the Ford would be 13 billion plus 37 billion... so 50 billion.

    Now you can bitch and say but they can afford to waste money... they are declaring economic war with everyone... not they can't afford it.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Wed Sep 19, 2018 4:11 am