PAK-DΑ: News #2

The only thing that matters for modern bombers is stand off weapons.

For that matter they could use even an Il-76, if it has the right missile (5000km range) it will be a good strategic bomber.

Flying wing or not, supersonic or not, it will be detect early on and enemy will send modern jets with 300km range radars guiding 150km range missiles and no bomber will go through this sort of defence.

Stand off weapons is the only way to keep big bombers alive and usefull.

Its probably better they make that structure from composites then Ti.

Titanium is very light and strong... composites are impressive but don't really have the strength of Ti yet.

Making sections out of single pieces is best for low radar signature too, which also makes them stronger...

The fewer parts the plane is made of the fewer joins and reflective edges and corners there are...

they can then use more composites on the exterior and absorb/disrupt radar internally instead of relying on coatings.

They could use multiple layers of composites and coatings to build up the structure to absorb different frequencies.

As for the FAB can they not just dump it out of an IL-76? The US dumped theirs out of the back of a C-130 lol.

The US have used C-130s to drop daisy cutters, but the Soviets have traditionally used proper bombers... the reason the Tu-16 was kept in service in the 1980s was because of its enormous bomb bay originally designed for old large nuke bombs... they used Tu-16s to drop FAB-9000s in Afghanistan.

The new Father of All Bombs is supposed to be carried by Blackjacks but I suspect its primary carrier will be PAK DA and that will be carried internally.

If a Blackjack can carry a FOAB then it is likely with the rotary launchers removed and one bomb in each weapon bay.

Su-70s have like a F-117 strategic role but with a better stealth design and longer ranges for deep strike missions.

S-70 is probably more of a fighter escort/jammer platform though low level strike would certainly be part of its planned design.... but equally a high flying hypersonic missile that rushes through enemy air defences might become the dominant choice....

Su-57s are sufficient enough with air to air roles against F-35s and F-22s.

But S-70 support would be force multipliers that would help even the odds with numerically stronger enemies... of course Su-57s would be operating with Su-35s and MiG-35s as well... and eventually a numbers lighter 5th gen fighter as well as its drone no doubt.

and for bombing roles and being support for Su-70s in deep strike missions.

I would think Su-57 and S-70s might support Su-34 attacks but long range standoff cruise missiles developed for strategic bombers to keep them safe from enemy air defences would also be useful in conventional operations too...

[qutoe]Mig-41s or PAK-DP https://qr.ae/pNUsPf will be future replacements which by default destroy 5th gens in air to air engagements. AFAIK there are no claims of other countries claiming high speeds and altitudes like this aircraft.[/quote]

If enough are made then it could take the role of the MiG-31 and take it a step further as a high speed sprinter that can zip out and launch long range attacks at HATO force multipliers near the front line like AWACS and JSTARS and inflight refuelling planes, but also surface ships with a scramjet powered replacement for Kinzhal. It could even be used to take on satellites if the get too close.

I expect the PAK-DA to be designed with stealth, huge payload, and a very long distance to carry that, if not than its a waste of time.

PAK DA and S-70 are completely different things...

It could be that yeah. The link surmised that it will be 4 seats per prototype.

The tu-160 has a crew of 4. The prototypes will likely be used for training later on. So it's possible that they want to have the 4 seats right away.

I guess we won't know. But if it is 4 seats , it gives a clue about how big the thing is going to be.

The Tu-22M3 is a four seat aircraft, but the Tu-22M3M is supposed to be a two seat aircraft isn't it?

And the Su-35 and Su-57 are single seat aircraft... suggests automation of tasks and processes.

For all we know there might be 6 prototypes with three flying ones...

Is there any real evidence that the PAK-DA is a flying wing? The information control on this program has been rather
effective to the point that people think it is a paper project.

Multiple official sources describe it as being a stealthy subsonic flying wing design.

Which makes sense because it is replacing the subsonic Tu-95 and possibly Tu-142... they already have the supersonic Blackjack which will cost a bit operationally so having a cheaper slower aircraft with fast say hypersonic standoff weapons makes sense too.

Let stealthy slow or hypersonic fast weapons penetrate the enemy air defences instead of expecting the bomber to do that...

Also, the B-2 is not a standoff platform but a bomber. I seriously doubt that such a nonsensical concept would be
applied to the PAK-DA. Americans may think it is WWII forever, but reality is quite different.

PAK DA might carry conventional bombs in a role like bombing ISIS in Syria, but it will be a standoff cruise missile carrier like the Blackjack in strategic conventional and nuclear roles.

For that matter they could use even an Il-76, if it has the right missile (5000km range) it will be a good strategic bomber.

Actually the Il-76 has been chosen for a few different roles because of its short field operational abilities... if its runway gets damaged it could often reduce weight by offloading fuel and take off from the grass strip next to the runway and then have inflight refuelling aircraft top it up in flight...

A properly modified IL96 with a horizontal UKSK launch tube pointing forward that could have onboard missiles rolled into it and fired forward could be ideal... just have a large rack system inside the aircraft to store missiles in multiple layers on dozens of racks able to be rolled forward and inserted into the launcher and fired with the empty tube ejected forward out the aircraft.

Fly it to Cuba and then refuel it and have it fly over Cuba launching anti ship missiles and land attack missiles at targets around Venezuela to help blunt an invasion for instance... vertical launch tubes for TOR or S-350 SAMs along its spine for self protection from SAMs and AAMs....

Source: several PAK DA are assembled in Russia for flight and ground tests at once

Two or three objects are already being launched into production, said an interlocutor in the military-industrial complex.

MOSCOW, December 24. / TASS /. Several prototypes of the promising strategic stealth missile carrier PAK DA (a promising long-range aviation complex) are being manufactured in Russia in parallel for flight and ground tests. A source in the military-industrial complex told TASS about this on Thursday.

"Two or three objects are already being launched [into production] - for" statics ", for flight [tests]," the interlocutor said, answering a question about the progress of work on the PAK DA.

TASS has not yet received an official comment from the United Aircraft Corporation on this matter.

The source clarified that the difference in the timing of the availability of vehicles will be only a few months. "They are already making according to design documentation [design documentation]. Part of the tooling, part of the first parts are made in full," added the agency's source.

The source did not name the exact timing of the completion of the final assembly of the first PAK DA, but confirmed that it will be carried out at the Kazan Aviation Plant. S.P. Gorbunova.

At the same time, the interlocutor confirmed the information that the cabin of the newest strategist is being assembled at the Novosibirsk aircraft plant named after V.P. Chkalov. "They will make several cabins there," the interlocutor said, specifying that some of the products are intended for testing ejection seats at the ground stand.
PAK DΑ

In December 2019, Deputy Defense Minister of Russia Alexei Krivoruchko in an interview with the Krasnaya Zvezda newspaper said that the preliminary design of the PAK DA aircraft had been approved and Tupolev PJSC had begun to develop working design documentation. In May, TASS sources in the military-industrial complex reported that the production of the first prototype of the new "strategist" had begun.

A promising long-range aviation complex is designed according to the "flying wing" scheme. In the design of the machine will be widely used technologies and materials that reduce visibility (technology "stealth"). The aircraft will be capable of carrying existing and future strategic cruise missiles, precision bombs, hypersonic weapons, and will be equipped with the latest communications and electronic warfare. The machine will receive a subsonic flight speed.

https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/10341363

dino00 wrote:Engine tests for promising missile carrier PAK DA will begin in 2021

According to Rostec, a number of engine components have already been tested, the production facilities of the enterprise have been prepared.

SAMARA, December 23. / TASS /. The assembly of the first engine for the promising long-range aviation complex (PAK DA) has begun; in 2021, the engine, called the RF Product, will be transferred to bench tests. This was announced to reporters by the Deputy General Director - Managing Director of UEC-Kuznetsov (part of the United Engine Corporation of the Rostec State Corporation) Alexei Sobolev.

"This year, the first engine" in iron "has been manufactured, [it] is being assembled. By the end of the year, the engine will be assembled to start bench tests. During 2021, the first promising engine will undergo bench tests in order to work out the parameters set in the terms of reference The Ministry of Defense, "he said, specifying that in 2021 a number of samples of a new promising product will be assembled.

Sobolev also clarified that a number of engine components have already been tested, and the production facilities of the enterprise have been prepared. “The product was already designed in digital form, which made it possible to promptly manufacture the first sample, which is currently being assembled”, he noted.

https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/10330055

If the engine is manufactured by Kuznetsov, it almost certainly means it would be a derivative of the NK-32. PAK DA may well be supersonic after all.

owais.usmani wrote:...If the engine is manufactured by Kuznetsov, it almost certainly means it would be a derivative of the NK-32. PAK DA may well be supersonic after all.

It won't be

PapaDragon wrote:

owais.usmani wrote:...If the engine is manufactured by Kuznetsov, it almost certainly means it would be a derivative of the NK-32. PAK DA may well be supersonic after all.

It won't be

It doesn't make sense to take a super specialized supersonic engine and turn it subsonic, when they can use the PD-14 engine, and later switch to the P-35, P-50, etc. for heavy weapons bench tests.  Using the PD-14 series will make more sense overall because it'll be used in a wide range of military and civilian aircraft, making it and it's parts ubiquitous and thus cheaper overall. Future upgrades to the PD-14 series will be considered high priority (because of all the aircraft using it) well funded and implemented more so than a small batch engine design.

Ideally speaking it makes more sense to keep the NK-32 series supersonic (like it was specialized to be) if they plan on using it for PAK-DA. The issue of flying wing designs struggling with transonic turbulence is solved with 3D thrust vectoring engines, and we already see it implemented with the S-70 as VVP himself confirmed the top speed for it is as being 1,400km/h or Mach 1.1, and it's power plant derives from the PAK-FA program. The S-70 is a smaller scale stealthy flying wing that they can reliably collect data from, in which they could scale up a much larger flying wing bomber design.

magnumcromagnon wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:

owais.usmani wrote:...If the engine is manufactured by Kuznetsov, it almost certainly means it would be a derivative of the NK-32. PAK DA may well be supersonic after all.

It won't be

It doesn't make sense to take a super specialized supersonic engine and turn it subsonic, when they can use the PD-14 engine, and later switch to the P-35, P-50, etc. for heavy weapons bench tests.  Using the PD-14 series will make more sense overall because it'll be used in a wide range of military and civilian aircraft, making it and it's parts ubiquitous and thus cheaper overall. Future upgrades to the PD-14 series will be considered high priority (because of all the aircraft using it) well funded and implemented more so than a small batch engine design.

Ideally speaking it makes more sense to keep the NK-32 series supersonic (like it was specialized to be) if they plan on using it for PAK-DA. The issue of flying wing designs struggling with transonic turbulence is solved with 3D thrust vectoring engines, and we already see it implemented with the S-70 as VVP himself confirmed the top speed for it is as being 1,400km/h or Mach 1.1, and it's power plant derives from the PAK-FA program. The S-70 is a smaller scale stealthy flying wing that they can reliably collect data from, in which they could scale up a much larger flying wing bomber design.

It won't be supersonic, they were crystal clear on this

i assumed it will be similar to how they took off the afterburner section of the al-41 engine and used it for the s-70.

magnumcromagnon wrote: and we already see it implemented with the S-70 as VVP himself confirmed the top speed for it is as being 1,400km/h or Mach 1.1,

Sorry? Where did he said that?

@Rodion_Romanovic:

Yes, I know gas generators are used from anything from GTD and power generation to fighters, I was just asking about the source for that information about the speed of S-70 that would be new to me. I think this was just something Butowski said, but it makes no sense to me that the plane can fly low altitude at the same speed as a MiG-29 or a Su-27, in the later case with less than half the thrust and 50% more wingspan.

As to the engines for PAK-DA and eventual PD-24, few days ago Kuznetsov talked about a fifth gen engine on that power level. So this will apparently go ahead as a different line from the one developed by Aviadvigatel with PD-14 and 35.

They already have the Tu-160M and soon M2... they don't need both their strategic bombers to be supersonic... at the moment they have the Tu-160 and the Tu-95... the PAK DA will be replacing the Tu-95 in the strategic role and the Tu-22M3 in the theatre role.

Making the PAK DA subsonic means it can have a thicker profile and much more internal volume which it will need to store all weapons and fuel internally.

No matter what engines you fit to the aircraft you wont get it to go supersonic... more powerful engines will allow it to take off with heavier weights but will also burn fuel faster and reduce range.

It is a bit like the Yak-38 and Yak-38M.

Both are subsonic, and while the later Yak-38M has rather more powerful main engine it remains subsonic so while it can accelerate faster and carry more payload it also burns fuel faster which reduces flight range. Top speeds are similar so there is rather little benefit from the more powerful engine.

The NK-31 engine without the AB would be suitable for use in a subsonic flying wing... its dry thrust would be about 14 tons originally but with an improved engine they could perhaps improve that to 18 or even 20 tons thrust in dry mode which would allow a decent takeoff weight and good acceleration to high subsonic speeds.

GarryB wrote:
The NK-31 engine without the AB would be suitable for use in a subsonic flying wing... its dry thrust would be about 14 tons originally but with an improved engine they could perhaps improve that to 18 or even 20 tons thrust in dry mode which would allow a decent takeoff weight and good acceleration to high subsonic speeds.

Yes, it was already said by Kuznetsov that the core is big enough for a 23-24 tf engine if the cold part is changed. In reality the same core produces not so different levels of thrust in a low bypass (with AB) layout or a high bypass one. Thrust with AB of the NK-32 is 25 tf.

From a military blog: Russia's next-gen PAK-DA strategic bomber mockup.

This is a design by paralay that some guy has made with a 3D printer. Intakes on the lower side and those nozzles / winglets are a no go for such a plane I would say, but it is cool

Fan art. Winglets? Otherwise looks pretty good.

^ Making it look tu -160 like that would be cool.

It will probably look more like the S-70 Hunter though. Like the blue model posted above.

LMFS wrote:This is a design by paralay that some guy has made with a 3D printer. Intakes on the lower side and those nozzles / winglets are a no go for such a plane I would say, but it is cool

Why are winglets a no go? Because it compromises stealth? If that's the case how do they compromise stealth anymore than the ailerons on the B-2 Spirit? What stops them from having a mechanism that could make them vertical, and retract them back to the horizontal plane. I highly doubt the VKS will have them fly over enemy territory and their SAM's (like the B-2 Spirit), they'd launcher their +5,500km range cruise missiles thousands of km's away from their targets. When we consider how they'll use and apply their stealth bombers, the stealth compromising aspect of winglets are minimal at best.

magnumcromagnon wrote:Why are winglets a no go? Because it compromises stealth? If that's the case how do they compromise stealth anymore than the ailerons on the B-2 Spirit? What stops them from having a mechanism that could make them vertical, and retract them back to the horizontal plane. I highly doubt the VKS will have them fly over enemy territory and their SAM's (like the B-2 Spirit), they'd launcher their +5,500km range cruise missiles thousands of km's away from their targets. When we consider how they'll use and apply their stealth bombers, the stealth compromising aspect of winglets are minimal at best.

In principle the point of flying wings for RCS is that the physical dimensions of their geometry are big enough to avoid resonating effects at all but the lower radar frequencies. You also don't want surfaces that reflect on the beam aspect. It is not like the plane cannot do without winglets, even when I think they are maybe not as damaging as low placed intakes and circular nozzles. These are all elements that defeat the purpose of using a flying wing in the first place...

I personally think the PAK-DA will be much more than a strategic bomber, hence the low RCS placed apparently ahead of the speed in terms of priorities.

LMFS wrote:

magnumcromagnon wrote:Why are winglets a no go? Because it compromises stealth? If that's the case how do they compromise stealth anymore than the ailerons on the B-2 Spirit? What stops them from having a mechanism that could make them vertical, and retract them back to the horizontal plane. I highly doubt the VKS will have them fly over enemy territory and their SAM's (like the B-2 Spirit), they'd launcher their +5,500km range cruise missiles thousands of km's away from their targets. When we consider how they'll use and apply their stealth bombers, the stealth compromising aspect of winglets are minimal at best.

In principle the point of flying wings for RCS is that the physical dimensions of their geometry are big enough to avoid resonating effects at all but the lower radar frequencies. You also don't want surfaces that reflect on the beam aspect. It is not like the plane cannot do without winglets, even when I think they are maybe not as damaging as low placed intakes and circular nozzles. These are all elements that defeat the purpose of using a flying wing in the first place...

I personally think the PAK-DA will be much more than a strategic bomber, hence the low RCS placed apparently ahead of the speed in terms of priorities.

Again the winglets are their to help add range to the aircraft, while were speaking about range lets talk about the max range of weapons of these stealth bombers. Lets look at how the US envisioned how they will deploy the B-2 Spirit, and the weapons they have and their max range (none of which surpass even 1,000km in range). Now compare that with the VKS, who will NOT fly their bombers over advanced OPFOR territory/SAMs, like the US would. Kh-101 has a max range of 5,500km in the conventional variant, the Kh-102's with their thermonuclear tipped warhead would likely take less volumetric space on the cruise missile, leaving room for more propellant fuel. So the Kh-102 could reasonably have 6,000km range.

Let's ask this question: Which bomber would be easier to spot with radar?


PAK-DA with winglets, firing Kh-102's 1,000km off the coast, hitting strategic targets 5,000km in the interior.

OR

B-2 Spirits with fragile/delicate RAM coating flying over enemy OPFOR's airspace, attempting to hit strategic targets well within 1,000km of launch, exposing it's massive weapon bays, which are several times larger than winglets.

Does anyone think the Pak DA will have a higher payload than the TU-160?

I would love to see a FAB-60000.

Dozens of smaller bombs are more effective then one big m...fucker.

Winglets are great for civil planes for better fuel efficiancy and so on but are they really neccessary for a long-range bomber?