5th gen light mulltirole fighter/Mikoyan LMFS

I think they translated it wrong on english version of news , I saw the russian version it said it would be a strike fighter that would replace Su-25SM and Sukhoi will be its designer , it didnt say it will be based on Su-25SM and also rejected it will be light fighter of YAK-131 type.

All indications are it will be a LMFS with a different name and optimised for ground strike

George1 wrote:

Austin wrote:

Viktor wrote:Well US intend to replace A-10 with F-35 and yet claim it to be top noch fighter so new Russian attack fighter might indeed replace Su-25 in a sense it will have decent ground attack capability but at the same time be true multirole light 5th gen fighter.

I bet it would be a dedicated ground attack fighter in Mig-29 class with Air Defence Capability as good if not better than JSF

That means a light strike fighter

However Zelin said that new CAS aircraft will be based on Su-25SM

Who knew PAK-FA will be that huge it turned out to be. When Russians finally start working on the project same design buiro will throw out dozens of different ideas completely different one from another. One of them will be elected to continue work on and there you have lots of space for this project to evolve from its original ideas.

I doubt Sukhoi could handle another stealth fighter program right now... Mig have repeatedly said they have a light alternative to PAK FA and that they are waiting till the PAK FA is in production before they start active progress.

The US certainly wants the F-35 to do everything, but I suspect that was just an excuse to inflate projected numbers so they can artificially deflate the purchase costs.

As the Russian official pointed out a 5th gen light cheap fighter would be no good for CAS for all the same reasons a Mig-29 or F-16 would... they are simply not well protected from even just small arms fire.

Another problem is that they are simply too expensive for mud moving.

The best replacement for an Su-25 is an Su-25.

Note that by 2020 we will already have seen whether the new BMP class vehicles have 57mm or 45mm guns and I rather suspect that the new Su-25 will be armed with the weapon carried by the BMPs.

Against weakly armed targets a heavy gun with guided shells will be very effective... one shell per truck/light vehicle. MMW guided fire and forget weapons, satellite guided weapons, laser and IIR guided weapons... I am quite looking forward to it.

Even if they make a Su-25 class fighter by which i mean NTOW , Dimension and others basic stuff , they would still end up with a LCA/Gripen plus class of fighter , which is what a cheap light fighter is all about ..... if they introduce relaxed stability and Thrust Vectoring then it would be as good as any air defence fighter out there and relaxed stability . TVC is something well known to russian.

So its basicly a re-hashed LMFS the only difference it would being ground specialised fighter as that is what they want.

Garry they mentioned sukhoi will be designing it and right now all design bureau are amalgamated under UAC , so they dont have a strict bifurcation between Yak , Mig or Sukhoi ...they all participate in design and do peer review and stuff like that but its just that Sukhoi takes a lead role in such work.

They are talking about two very different aircraft... a new CAS and a new 5th gen fighter.

The CAS aircraft needs to be survivable and protected and able to deliver weapons to point targets close to friendly forces... that means low and slow.

5th gen fighter has a different role... they will likely only buy 200-250 PAK FA aircraft by 2025 yet they have lots of air space to cover and while capable the Su-35 is not a stealth fighter aircraft.

The CAS will be based on the SU-25 because there is little fundamentally wrong with the Su-25 and its replacement will therefore build on its features but make it more stealthy... in radar terms but also more importantly in IR terms too to make it less of a target. Its protection from anti aircraft fire will be modern strong composites and armour... It doesn't need to move fast because it will operate close to the front line, and it will be capable of carrying a wide range of air to ground weapons that will include guided and unguided weapons... the guided weapons will allow standoff engagements against harder targets while onboard systems like President-S that include DIRCMs and other defences will make it safer, and new sensors will allow it to find targets quicker and from safer distances and engage them day and night in all weathers.

The 5th gen light fighter on the other hand will have a completely different role... it will need supersonic flight performance to get where it is going faster, and it will need potent air to air weapons and light strike weapons carried internally for when stealth is important. For later in the conflict heavier air to ground weapons can be carried externally when stealth is not so critical and it can also operate with the PAK FA carrying heavy AAM loads using its small size and agility to accelerate and climb and launch weapons at enemy threats like cruise missiles or AWACS and JSTAR and then turn and leave and rearm while the PAK FAs monitor the missiles and assess damage for follow up attacks.

In many ways the 5th gen fighter can be the basis for a 6th gen armed UCAV... but that can wait till 2030 or so.

The new CAS will basically replace the Su-25 in service and as a two seater will in many ways be a fixed wing version of the Ka-52 where a common role might be to control and use UAVs and UCAVs near the front line to reduce operating costs by using direct link datalinks that are much cheaper than satellite links and can be made directional and therefore harder to hack or listen in on.

The light 5th gen fighter on the other hand will replace the Mig-29s and all the Su-27s. I can't see them replacing the Su-35s or Mig-31s and their might be a larger aircraft program like the PAK DA that will result in a large heavy long range interceptor for the VKO flown by the VVS to cover the Russian airspace... perhaps in conjunction with HALE or MALE UCAVs.

I have read that Altai Almaz is talking about the new ABM missiles after S-500 being airborne so a variant of PAK DA used to carry and launch such missiles would be a possibility which would make a dedicated air to air interceptor model to replace the Mig-31 realistic.

There is no new 5th gen Aircraft that is funded , so dont expect to see any.

The only 5th gen aircraft funded is the new ground attack aircraft , its officially called "promising ground attack aircraft" (PSSH)"

It will have stealth and is optimised from ground attack and twin seater from from startup.

I think thats good enough for that as in secondary role the new aircraft can also do air defence role.

We need to see if its subsonic or supersonic but i would bet it will be supersonic.

They already have a good aircraft for Air Defence Role in PAK-FA and now they need a optimised ground attack aircraft and PSSH it is the one they are funding.

Check the russian version of news what Zelin said the english news are not properly translated

http://ria.ru/defense_safety/20120517/651276921.html

There is no new 5th gen Aircraft that is funded , so dont expect to see any.

Correction... there is no new 5th gen aircraft CURRENTLY funded.

Look again at Viktors post above on the previous page (post number 22.)

Let me quote:

The second task is to develop a relatively simple and inexpensive combat aviation complex, or a «light» fighter plane that would be able to effectively compete with F-35.

A simple inexpensive light fighter plane to compete with the F-35. To compete it would need to be 5th generation if they are starting development so late...

The demands of CAS and to compete with F-35 are simply not compatible. They are talking about different aircraft.

The fundamental flaw in the F-35 was the combination of requirements that have ruined it. If they had separated the VSTOL capability from the design it would have been much cheaper and simpler to make. The requirements for VSTOL have led to an aircraft that is overweight... just as making it VSTOL would have ruined the aircraft later developed into the Su-24. The swing wing solution still had weight penalties but resulted in a better aircraft than any fixed wing design of the time, and much better than any lift jet options of the time too.

The only 5th gen aircraft funded is the new ground attack aircraft , its officially called "promising ground attack aircraft" (PSSH)"

There is no way this new CAS will actually be stealthy... it will have stealth features, but it will not be supersonic or stealthy... there is no need for either.

It will have stealth and is optimised from ground attack and twin seater from from startup.

A CAS will benefit from having two seats in my opinion but this aircraft will be a dedicated CAS and not a fighter.

I think thats good enough for that as in secondary role the new aircraft can also do air defence role.

They already rejected the Su-39 with air to air capability... and a subsonic aircraft can only have a limited role in air to air. A supersonic design would make it less useful in the CAS role.

We need to see if its subsonic or supersonic but i would bet it will be supersonic.

Supersonic would be necessary for light fighter, but counter productive for the CAS role.

They already have a good aircraft for Air Defence Role in PAK-FA and now they need a optimised ground attack aircraft and PSSH it is the one they are funding.

Not really. They already have the Su-34 for the long range supersonic strike role, what they need is a replacement for the Su-25... and that doesn't need supersonic flight performance.

In 2020 they should have about 160 PAK FAs, perhaps 100 Su-35s and about 200 Su-34s and perhaps 60 Mig-31s with upgrades. They will likely have a hundred Su-30s and Su-27SMs as well, but their Mig-29s will be getting long in the tooth and in need of replacement. They might introduce a replacement for the Mig-31 or perhaps a specialised model of the PAK FA, but either way they will likely buy another 100 odd PAK FAs and then they will start looking for a new lighter cheaper stealth fighter to replace the old 4th gen fighters.

It will need to be smaller and cheaper than the PAK FA so that for every PAF FA they can buy 4-5 LMFs.

They can't afford to make enough PAK FAs to defend all of Russia so the purpose of the LMF is as a numbers aircraft. The PAK DA will start replacing the Bear and Blackjack and Backfire from 2025 and perhaps there will be an interceptor version too that could replace the Mig-31... or an enlarged PAK FA could be adapted to the role.

Any way you cut it they are in the same boat as the US... they can't afford enough F-22/PAK FAs to just have one fighter. The advantage the Russians have is the experience of the F-35.

By trying to make the new light fighter able to replace F-16s, F-18s, and AV-8s and A-10s they produced a compromised design that is expensive and will likely not be that great in any role it is used for.

The clear lesson is to make the LMF a replacement for the Mig-29 and the shorter range missions of the Su-27 family and leave the longer range stuff for the PAK FA. They can make the LMF more multi role than the in service Mig-29 was and make it a swing fighter bomber which will also make it more attractive on the export market too.

Check the russian version of news what Zelin said the english news are not properly translated

That article is talking about the Su-25SM and its CAS replacement that is due in 2020.

The article Viktor posted... ie:

http://english.ruvr.ru/2012_05_16/74828078/

Talks about the period after 2020 and the lack of a light 5th gen fighter to compete on the international market against the F-35. It is talking about a light fighter... not a ground support aircraft... ie it means more of a Mig-21 swing role aircraft rather than a dedicated shturmovik or CAS aircraft.

With Sukhoi making the PAK FA and the Su-34 and this new CAS replacement for the Su-25 I really can't see them also developing a light 5th gen fighter aircraft... and to be honest I really wouldn't trust them with the PAK DA program either... though there has been talk they will get it... I would prefer to see a Tu in front of the new bombers name. Tupolev might not be in great shape, but perhaps that is because they have been abandoned...
the solution should be to give them something to get their teeth into rather than abandoning them... if you keep cutting branches off a tree and only favour one or two branches the tree will lose its balance and collapse.

Garry , the link that victor has posted is based on some analyst discussion that took place but as far as SAP 2020 goes no Light Strike Fighter is funded.

This new aircraft will be CAS or CAS plus that needs to be seen how it develops , it would certainly be stealth both Zelin and Dirk has said so , most likely it will have ability to carry both internal and external weapon.

I will reserve and see how they develop it wheather low supersonic or high subsonic , the twin seater concept is interesting as it can allow rear operator to be dedicated WSO and can also interact/control with assets like UAV/UCAV.

I think if a light fighter ever gets funded ( LMFS ) it would be 2020-2030 SAP

Garry , the link that victor has posted is based on some analyst discussion that took place but as far as SAP 2020 goes no Light Strike Fighter is funded.

Discussion about the future and outlook of the Russian Air Force.

Even they see the coming gap where the PAK FA will be too expensive to buy in numbers large enough to replace all of Russias fighters... just the same as the US has found that the F-22 was too expensive to replace all its planes and the planes of her allies. The difference is that the US has developed the F-35 and has made her allies pay for part of the development costs and order x number of aircraft without handing over any technology or control.
The Russians on the other hand will likely develop a light fighter to compliment the heavier PAK FA... everything the F-35 should have been and isn't.

It is very much like the period when the F-15 and F-14 were in service and it was realised they needed cheaper lighter more modern aircraft because the big heavy powerful but complicated older aircraft were too expensive to buy and operate... so they developed the F-16 and F-18 to be numbers aircraft to replace all the old obsolete types like the F-4 and A-4 and other interceptor types like the F-104 etc.

Very simply the analyst from CAST has identified a gap in their inventory, and it is OK because they created that gap because they wanted to make sure the PAK FA was a success before they started working on a smaller lighter aircraft to suppliment it. The Russian situation is quite different from the US situation because the Russians can produce Su-35s and Mig-35s if they want a temporary gap filler that is nothing like as expensive as the F-35 yet will be able to perform many of its functions, and the Mig-35 will allow them to introduce the first Russian fighter fitted with an AESA radar as standard which will be a little milestone for them.

Of course their first ESA radar entered service in 1977 with the Mig-31...

This new aircraft will be CAS or CAS plus that needs to be seen how it develops , it would certainly be stealth both Zelin and Dirk has said so , most likely it will have ability to carry both internal and external weapon.

Stealth features, not stealth. For most CAS aircraft the threat is not enemy radar or even enemy radar guided weapons. It is the reason why the Commanche failed. It is the reason why there are no calls for a stealthy replacement for the A-10. Full stealth makes an aircraft expensive and any small arms damage will eliminate and stealth effect immediately. By all means reduce IR signature and redesign the engine intakes to minimise RCS... that should be easy because the aircraft will be subsonic so the intakes will be fixed simple affairs.
Perhaps even go for turboprop propulsion or other exotic solution, but turning it into an F-117 would be a worse mistake than the Americans have made with the F-35.

I will reserve and see how they develop it wheather low supersonic or high subsonic , the twin seater concept is interesting as it can allow rear operator to be dedicated WSO and can also interact/control with assets like UAV/UCAV.

I doubt they will go for a low subsonic aircraft... the Su-25 was a difficult target because of its higher speed, and while armoured it is better to avoid ground fire than to simply be able to absorb it.

Having two crew is a good idea in my opinion too though the modern avionics should allow easy piloting and targeting capability, I think an extra set of eyes and ears on board will be useful... especially operating at night, or using UAVs to find or mark targets and of course to communicate with forces on the ground.

Hopefully they will have a fully 5th gen avionics suite that allows the aircraft to transmit its aerial view of the ground to the commander on the ground and the commander on the ground can pick targets directly off the video feed from the aircraft for the aircraft to engage. The US had that capability with their F-14s in Afghanistan, so it should be perfectly possible by 2020 for a new CAS aircraft.

I think if a light fighter ever gets funded ( LMFS ) it would be 2020-2030 SAP

Of course... that will be when it is needed. In the mean time they can upgrade existing aircraft... ie 60 Mig-31s will be upgraded by 2020, the Su-27SM upgrades will likely continue, Su-30 new build aircraft will likely continue to be bought in small batches as two seat trainers for the Su-35s, and there are three possibilities with the Migs... SMT upgrades and Mig-29M2 purchases as a budget upgrade to keep the Mig units flying till 2020 when the new PAK LMF will replace it first and then older model Su-27s and Su-30s and then finally the Su-35s, though the latter might be replaces with new build PAK FAs along with Mig-31s replaced with modified PAK FAs or modified PAK DAs. The other Mig option would be to buy Mig-35s with a Mig PAK LMF follow on light 5th gen fighter which is the option I would prefer to see... for the same reason I prefer they have both the Ka-52 and Mi-28N and Mi-28M in the budget plans.

When the T-95 got cancelled they didn't just throw out the plans... if they didn't have the T-95 developed the Armata design would have taken till 2020 to develop all the new technologies that would be needed for it.

The 15xmm gun and likely the engine and much of the electronics have been worked on for a very long time, which meant when the Russian Army finally decided what it actually wanted it will be quicker and easier to meet their needs quickly because although the actual design is started from scratch they have all the night vision and main gun and engine problems sorted out already.

It will be the same for the LMFS or whatever they end up calling it... it will be new and it will have its design optimised for the duties they want to use it for, but there will be a lot of the work that has been done in the past and work that has been done now and work that has been done in 2018 that will be included in the new design. You can't design everything new from scratch for a new design... that is just too much risk with no guarantee the result would be any better than if you used the best available at the time.

Keep in mind, a light fighter not being included in GVP-2020 does not mean a program cannot start before then- GVPs have changed well before running out, and frankly I find it unbelievable that this GVP will stay in its original form even halfway through the decade.

Garry I think we both are needlessly speculating but I agree they should have developed a light and heavy fighter but i think they figured out Su-35/Mig-35 and PAK-FA combo should do well for the next 20 years , meanwhile they get time to develop new light fighter for next decade.

I agree any aircraft designed as part of LMFS will be 6th gen fighter ,even US is working on 6th gen fighter I would expect even Russia would do the same.

I think they might go for a manned 6th gen fighter with the option to make it unmanned later on.

Right now I am least worried about a new LMFS fighter , I just hope Sukhoi do a good job of PAK-FA program and hopfully all tests go well till induction and then simultaneously focus on Indo-Russian FGFA which will also be an interesting fighter in hand for the export market.

By 2020 like it or not the F-35 should be in relatively widespread service which will give NATO forces the advantage of having a stealth fighter in service in large numbers.

The Su-35 in my opinion is actually better than the F-35 because it combines a larger airframe with larger weapon capacity with powerful sensors... higher speed and longer flight range which will give it advantages in most situations. I also don't think the F-35s stealth will be effective enough to give it an advantage against air or ground threats.

However I also think that the Su-35 will not be that useful in 2025 and by then the Russians need a numbers aircraft and PAK FA aircraft in numbers.

The PAK FA needs to be in service in numbers to replace the Su-35 and Mig-31 so 250 is a bare minimum plus any naval versions, but I really don't think they will be able to afford more than 250, so they need a cheaper lighter fighter that can be stealthy when needed but can also carry a useful payload over a reasonable distance when stealth is not needed. That is the gap a new light 5th gen fighter will fill.

Sukhoi will be too busy to make this aircraft so I would give it to Mig and Yak, because Sukhoi will be producing PAK FAs for the Russian military, it will be working on the FFGA with India, and could be looking at an extended range less manouverable... less stealthy model with vastly greater range and heavy air to air armament to replace the Mig-31 that like the Indian model will have two seats. Sukhoi will also be building an Su-25 replacement and is reportedly working on HALE and MALE type UCAVs too.

For this reason I prefer Tupolev to handle the PAK DA program too.

It is perfectly normal when a project is completed and the product enters service that the focus splits into upgrades and the future replacement. Most often the upgrades during a designs operational life can be based on work on the new generation replacement... case in point Mi-28 systems and components being fitted to the Mi-35M2 to upgrade the older aircrafts performance and to get new technology in service earlier so it can be tested and produced in larger batches and to replace obsolete components quicker.

Much of the stuff in the Su-35 will be adapted for the PAK FA and many of the new items created for the PAK FA can be used on the Su-35. The same should be applicable to the PAK LMFS and Mig-35.

The critical problem there is that the Mig-29 was not light enough to make it useful weights and expenses should have been limited to force the Mig to remain light and cheap, but the reality was that it was a short range point interceptor... and a very good one, while the Su-27 was designed for a longer range longer endurance mission it was a case of the larger aircraft being able to do both jobs yet not be that much more expensive so it was easier to use it for both roles and just have one aircraft.

The competition for sales meant both aircraft expanded in roles and features... late model Migs almost matching the Flankers in terms of weapons and payload and range, but not all at once but there was simply not enough difference in cost to buy and cost to operate to warrant the risk of buying the smaller aircraft.

They need to avoid this mistake with the new program... a weight limit of 8 tons empty weight would go a long way to keeping the program cost and purchase and operational costs down.

In the air to air role a dozen small AAMs like 9M100 plus fuel and a jammer pod with towed decoys would make it a potent little fighter, while for light attack missions 2-3 tons of guided bombs should suffice as CAS will be handled by the new Sukhoi CAS aircraft, and longer range strike will be handled by Su-34 and PAK DA.

The problem is that adding capabilities adds weight and cost and soon you need a bigger engine and the empty weight goes up and soon you end up with F-35 that is looking to work out more expensive than the F-22 it is supposed to operate with.

5th gen doesn't need to be expensive, and it doesn't need to be able to do everything... all it needs to be is a shorter range, slower but stealthy Mig-35... and when I say slower I mean it doesn't need to travel at Mach 2.4 for 5 minutes, it needs to fly at Mach 1.4 for an hour or more. In practise the Mig-35 will not waste fuel to fly at mach 2.4, but spending a lot of time supercruising would greatly increase its range and flight performance.

With external weapons the Mig-35 is unlikely to supercruise... with internal weapons the PAK LMFS should be both stealthy and super cruise capable.

When it comes up against an F-35 the IIR guided missiles of both aircraft should allow each aircraft to engage the other... the stealthiness of both aircraft will make ARH medium and long range missiles useless and their DIRCMs should deal with the others IIR guided missiles, which leaves guns and dogfight performance and I would think a light 5th gen fighter developed by Mig should beat an F-35 as that will be one of its design considerations...

Lets leave talk about 6th gen fighters till the Americans work out what they think it might be... right now it is vapourware... each generation is designed to counter the previous generation... 6th gen could be a 5th gen with passive sensors replacing their AESAs and passive homing AAMs replacing the current ARH and fitting the aircraft with longer wave radar antennas... pretty much what the Russians have done with the Su-35.

If Su-35 is good to counter the F-35 which we agree then they need to build like 500 Su-35 for immediate needs in the next 10-15 years Why waste money in LMFS for the next 2 decade Su-35/PAK-FA is good as air superiority fighter.

For the same reason they don't mass produce the T-90AM.

They have made the decision to upgrade their military and replace obsolete items in service.

The T-90 is considered an upgrade of a T-34, and the Su-35 is an upgrade of an Su-27 from the 1970s.

If they produce 500 Su-35s it just means that by 2025 they will need even more light 5th gen fighters to replace those Su-35s and there will be less money available to make them because all the money was spent on 4++ generation fighters instead of new 5th gen ones.

As a responsible company Mig will have been working on a 5th gen fighter for some time and a responsible company will be looking at a replacement for the Mig-29 and Mig-31. It might be that the best replacement for the Mig-31 is a less stealthy larger PAK FA with a much bigger radar, a second crewman and a belly that can be covered in long range AAMs. Or it might be the case that Mig have already designed a replacement for the Mig-31... the Mig-37 perhaps? or Mig-39... depending on what they call the new Mig-29K2s the navy is getting and whether the Mig-35 title is adopted or not.

By 2020 the Su-35s will not need urgent replacement, but with perhaps 250 PAK FA stealth fighters plus perhaps by then 150 Su-35s used as multi role aircraft they will need to start retiring Mig-29s and Su-30 and Su-27SMs still in service will certainly need replacement... and a cheap light 5th gen fighter would be ideal to replace them like the PAK FA and the Su-35 never could... ie one for one replacement.

By 2025 you will have PAK FAs... land and naval variants... plus perhaps some dedicated interceptor models for the VKO optimised for long range supercruise and less stealth but more powerful radar and heavier AAM capacity... and a large wing mounted long wave radar array to detect B-2s.
You will have Su-35s... and instead of Mig-35s they will have Mig PAK LMFS fighters in expanding numbers, with perhaps 300 Su-34s, and a growing number of Su-25 replacements in the CAS role.

As long as Su-35 and its upgrade remains competitive compared to F-35 see no reason why they should replace this aircraft for the next 30 years with upgrade.

Considering for the same period F-35 is unlikely to be replaced.

If they think Su-35 is a good match for F-35 plus some then they should mass produce the Su-35 and through out its life keep it competitive with regular upgrade.

Plus they already have the PAK-FA and a new CAS aircraft plus the new PAK-DA .......not many countries are funding three 5th gen aircraft barring the US and Russia does not really have money to fund any more than that.

The Su-35 is a very good aircraft and bang for buck it runs rings around the F-35 as we know it today.

The Su-35 could have all the 5th gen electronics from the PAK FA fitted to it, but at the end of the day it is not a stealth aircraft and that is a disadvantage... in many ways the PAK FA is its replacement, but the PAK FA will never be produced in the numbers needed to replace all the existing fighters they have in service.

The Su-35 is a new aircraft and can soldier on for decades but they need something to replace the other aircraft in service... something that has stealth and modern technology like wing and tail and surface mounted radar and other antenna designed into it from the start. The new plane doesn't need to be super stealthy... that would make it too expensive and defeat the purpose of a cheaper lighter aircraft that might not have the payload of the planes it replaces but it can be made in numbers so the actual payload carried is multiplied by the number of extra aircraft they have. The improved sensors and weapons should make it possible to do more with less and be much more efficient anyway.

If they think Su-35 is a good match for F-35 plus some then they should mass produce the Su-35 and through out its life keep it competitive with regular upgrade.

The one thing they can't do to the Flanker is make it stealthy, which means the Flanker pilot has to rely on range and speed and weapon capacity to outfight an F-35 pilot.

For many jobs stealth is no real advantage, but for some it is useful.

Remember Sukhoi will be busy upgrading the Su-35, plus the Su-34, plus the PAK FA, plus developing a naval PAK FA no doubt, and will be working on a new CAS aircraft... working on a new light LMFS will be good for MIG and its suppliers... remember Saturn are making lots of money from all their Flanker engine sales, but Klimov needs some love too... though they are reportedly starting to make the new helicopter engines from about 2014 onwards. Equally it was the NIIP radar company that works with Mig that has the first Russian AESA radar ready... we don't want that work just thrown away... continuing on the Mig-35 development I think Mig are best placed and would get the most out of a LMFS program in about 5-6 years time.

Plus they already have the PAK-FA and a new CAS aircraft plus the new PAK-DA .......not many countries are funding three 5th gen aircraft barring the US and Russia does not really have money to fund any more than that.

What else are MIG to do then? They will not make enough of Mig-29Ks to remain viable as a department or OAK.

Giving them this program will keep the Russian aircraft industry viable... and the product will actually save Russia money because there is no way they can afford to have an all PAK FA fleet.

Upgrading a few Mig-29s to SMT standard will allow them to use modern weapons and systems and give MIG enough work to allow them to stay in the aircraft game. A contract to make the LMFS would be enormously important to them and their contractors and would benefit the Russian AF.

Lets face it... the Ka-52 and Mi-28N are different enough to warrant buying both, where the Ka-52 has advantages on ships and in mountains and at altitude, while the Mi-28N is just a good hard well protected and eventually well armed attack helo.

The LMFS needs to be different enough and cheap enough to be worth it.

Lots of countries wont need a PAK FA type fighter, but an LMFS will be cheaper and simpler yet have at its base high tech capable sensors and weapons that will appeal to export customers.

If they get it right their might be a shift by some western oriented countries away from the F-35 if they can get the program going quickly enough... perhaps they should start it in 2015 and just release the basic parameters and ask for those countries interested in having input. Too many cooks spoil the broth so to speak, but they can make sure the design supports the needs of the potential customers so those customers can pay for the extra features they want... something the US certainly didn't do with the F-35.

i agree here with TR1, Russians tend to alter their 5 year plan often. I can see them easily modify 2015-2020 plan where they will put some money to LMF development just to have finished airframe design by 2020 and engines (18.5 tons for PAK-FA), radar, missiles, avionics can take from PAK-FA making its design phase easy ride. Russians for instance in they 2010-2015 plan did not include any space for UAV/UCAV and that quickly changed after 2008 war. Same will I think happen here after RuAF sees gap in numbers of 5th gen fighter.

I also agree with TR-1... these plans are just that... they are plans and have to be flexible.

That is why they re-examine them... not just to make sure everything is going to plan, or if it isn't then what needs to be done to make it go to plan (ie production of S-400 wasn't happening fast enough so they decided to change the plan to add an extra production plant so they could cope with the requirements), or if the plan was unrealistic then to change the plan.

Good planning requires flexibility... the longer the term planning the more flexibility it needs.

For instance in the Navy there is no sense in planning to build 4 new aircraft carriers right now. First of all there is no production capacity for that, and even if there was then those carriers would need lots of support infrastructure including upgraded ports and lots of supply ships and support ships that simply aren't ready yet.

A simple change in one area will require a check through the entire plan to look at how that effects other programs, like the upgrades of in service vessels etc etc.

The reason the LMFS was given a low priority and not given funding in the 2020 plans is because they wanted to get the PAK FA ready and into service before they even considered funding another aircraft. There were no guarantees... when the GVP was written that India would be on board, or that things would be relatively smooth... and there are problems with cracking so it hasn't been perfect. There is no rush in Russia for an F-35 like aircraft because the Su-35s and Mig-35s are available if needed and able to be produced and are very competitive and capable aircraft. Delaying the final development of the LMFS means lessons from the F-35 program can be absorbed and adopted which reduces risk.

Remember the LMFS program is not new and started out with the MFI program as the LFI program. Both became multi role programs... MFS and LFS and have evolved and changed over time, but there have been no complete and radical changes in requirements so existing designs can be modified and adapted. Both Sukhoi and Mig were working on 5th gen programs and have developed 5th gen technology... a lot of which they are putting in their -35s. Sukhoi have the advantage of actually putting theirs in service and having a 5th gen series of prototypes to fully test, but Mig will have supercomputers pounding away the numbers testing all sorts of options and combinations too.

The new 5th gen light fighter will actually be replacing Su-27s and Mig-29s.

It will be a numbers aircraft... there is no way Russia can afford to replace all its Su-27s with Pak fa and Su-35s... at most they will have about 250 PAK FAs and plans are for about 96 Su-35s.

A new light 5th gen fighter can replace the rest of the Su-27s and all of the Mig-29s.

Su-35s and new light 5th gen fighters could also be for export and will likely sell rather well as both will have features that make them attractive.

The Su-35 is a large aircraft with good flight range and large payload and lots of weapon pylons for lots of weapons and pods. It has a large nose with the potential for very large radars and has excellent flight performance. It does not have stealth.

The new 5th gen fighter will have stealth and be able to pull the same tricks western stealth aircraft can pull, so the combination would be very valuable... a flight of LMFSs, with a flight of Su-35s offer the best of both worlds as the Su-35 can locate enemy targets, including stealth aircraft while the LMFS can sneak around and surprise enemy forces and evade enemy air defence systems, or hit them with ARMs.

For an export customer the Su-35 and LMFS would compliment each other... especially of the LMFS is a true 5th gen fighter and is not too expensive.

The picture of the LMFS shows canards which are a nono for stealth designs so I hope they redesign that part. Also since its pretty much mandatory in the russian air force for the aircraft to incorporate twin engines I'm pretty sure the final design will look different from the original picture
I really hope the LMFS will have thrust vectoring.

Would it be possible for the LMFS to replace the Mig-29K and be the aircraft of the future russian carrier groups?

The picture of the LMFS shows canards which are a nono for stealth designs so I hope they redesign that part.

Why are canards not stealthy?

The Europeans claim their Eurocanards are at least low observable, yet they have canard foreplanes.

You might also want to tell the Chinese as their new stealth aircraft appears to have canards too.

If you can't make canards stealthy, how do they make the main wing stealthy?

Would it be possible for the LMFS to replace the Mig-29K and be the aircraft of the future russian carrier groups?

Current plans AFAIK are for the PAK FA to enter RuAF service and then be adapted for use on carriers, but if the decision to go ahead with a 5th gen light fighter it might be considered for naval use.

With the Sigma system however I suspect that the future for Russian Naval aircraft could be for drones, with the two main types being a radar equipped AWACS type platform and a missile carrier that can use information from the AWACS drone, surface ship radar and satellite based radar to find its targets. The missile carrier drones would operate similarly to a land based trailer full of ready to launch missiles with a datalink connection to the IADS, so threats near the trailer will result in a command from the IADS to launch a missile at the threat. The difference would be that from an aerial drone the missile will be launched at altitude and speed, so it will have better range and performance than surface launched missiles. The added bonus is that the drones wont give away to location of the fleet and can be moved fairly rapidly to meet new threats.

A third type drone could be a recon drone that is smaller and faster and can be sent out to inspect new contacts without killing them... like aircraft can, and missiles can't.

GarryB wrote:

The picture of the LMFS shows canards which are a nono for stealth designs so I hope they redesign that part.

Why are canards not stealthy?

That's one of the biggest lines of BS that keeps floating around. Northrop's NATF design used a canard, Lockheed's original JAST design was a canard delta, the J-20 uses canards, the Rafale (while not quite a true LO design) uses canards... If you can make a wing+tail combination LO, you can make a canard+wing combination LO. There are some different considerations and specifics to deal with, but the idea that canards cannot be used on an LO platform is complete BS. You could make a list of such BS arguments that refuse to die. #1, this one. #2, stealth makes you totally invisible. #3, SR-71s stopped flying in certain areas when MiG-31s were operational. The list goes on.