Russia Defence Forum

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


+98
Cheetah
miketheterrible
A1RMAN
kopyo-21
pushkin
Viktor
OminousSpudd
eridan
Pincus Shain
ahmedfire
User 1592
HM1199
DerWolf
Singular_trafo
KiloGolf
auslander
william.boutros
Luq man
mack8
hoom
Rmf
Genjurooo
SeigSoloyvov
Redboy
tanino
Project Canada
triphosgene
KoTeMoRe
jaguar_br
Zivo
BKP
AK-Rex
Neutrality
Big_Gazza
artjomh
Sunbeam
Firebird
Vann7
Akula971
Isos
zg18
RTN
ult
Kimppis
x_54_u43
vultur
Hachimoto
TheArmenian
Berkut
JohninMK
marcellogo
Austin
Glyph
Mindstorm
VladimirSahin
GJ Flanker
mutantsushi
Pinto
havok
Mike E
kvs
par far
Cyrus the great
PapaDragon
chicken
max steel
Captain Nemo
Notio
franco
nemrod
magnumcromagnon
Cyberspec
Manov
2SPOOKY4U
Kyo
Morpheus Eberhardt
zepia
medo
Book.
GunshipDemocracy
Svyatoslavich
Flanky
wilhelm
Ranxerox71
collegeboy16
higurashihougi
George1
EKS
Stealthflanker
AlfaT8
Werewolf
victor1985
jhelb
flamming_python
GarryB
sepheronx
Alex555
type055
102 posters

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #3

    Werewolf
    Werewolf


    Posts : 5289
    Points : 5490
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #3

    Post  Werewolf Sun Jan 17, 2016 9:20 pm

    Berkut wrote:
    Werewolf wrote:Seems more like people are surrounded by yes men to often and as soon as someone disaggrees they act like someone is touching them inappropriate.

    You are disagreeing on straight out moronic grounds and you have yet to prove in any shape, form, or way, that the picture and info is tampered with. Burden of proof is on YOUR side.

    Brains is also on my side but nobody calls you out on being guillable besides those few who have.

    You do understand that half of the numbers are secret regardless of what has been tested or achieved because they are part of strategic doctrine of aviation. Believing everything just because some authory has put it out does not make it true.


    If Dr. Hawkins says 2+2=5 does not make it a fact just because he is some authority in physical field and knows mathematics. Just like the fact what Nii Stali has put out about T-72B with K5 vs M829A2 will be penetrated at 6km range is just as laughable nonsense.

    I do not have to proof anything because my comment wasn't about proving or disproving anything i just reminded you that scepticism and brains should be used rather believing every infographs that is all. Be sceptic or believe everything just because some authority said so, such people are usually the same that committ atrocities and then blame their commanders for it because "they just followed orders" no brains, idiots to say the least.
    sepheronx
    sepheronx


    Posts : 7088
    Points : 7356
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 32
    Location : Canada

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #3

    Post  sepheronx Sun Jan 17, 2016 9:28 pm

    Well, does it really matter what any of us think regarding such capabilities? No.  I on the other hand like to hear/read the news and see the nice pictures.

    So can we move on from this?
    x_54_u43
    x_54_u43


    Posts : 333
    Points : 349
    Join date : 2015-09-19

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #3

    Post  x_54_u43 Sun Jan 17, 2016 9:30 pm

    People here seem to forget that these kinds of numbers and specifications are some of the most classified numbers around, on the level of submarine noise characteristics, or thickness of armor for tanks.
    You won't find any information, and no one willing to give it to you. If that leak is real, then I feel sorry for the person that leaked it...



    I didn't believe the radioscanner info back then, and I don't believe infographics on the internet either. It will be a long time before we have something concrete.
    artjomh
    artjomh


    Posts : 150
    Points : 184
    Join date : 2015-07-17

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #3

    Post  artjomh Mon Jan 18, 2016 10:14 pm

    Berkut wrote:You are disagreeing on straight out moronic grounds and you have yet to prove in any shape, form, or way, that the picture and info is tampered with. Burden of proof is on YOUR side.

    Hmmm.... What say you?

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #3 - Page 26 B2UEMYO
    Berkut
    Berkut


    Posts : 190
    Points : 215
    Join date : 2015-05-05

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #3

    Post  Berkut Tue Jan 19, 2016 4:37 am

    What about it? I noticed it ages ago and yes it should be Il-78 and not -76 but how does that mean it has been tampered with? As if no one has ever written wrong designation or had brainfart before. Even Sukhoi site has wrong designations floating around i dont see how that means anything.
    Morpheus Eberhardt
    Morpheus Eberhardt


    Posts : 1928
    Points : 2037
    Join date : 2013-05-20

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #3

    Post  Morpheus Eberhardt Tue Jan 19, 2016 8:58 am

    Berkut wrote:You are disagreeing on straight out moronic grounds and you have yet to prove in any shape, form, or way, that the picture and info is tampered with.

    -1




    Berkut wrote:Burden of proof is on YOUR side.

    -10
    Berkut
    Berkut


    Posts : 190
    Points : 215
    Join date : 2015-05-05

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #3

    Post  Berkut Tue Jan 19, 2016 2:07 pm

    He is making the claim - he has to prove his claim. Are you completely unaware how a legal system works, everywhere, always? Logic 101, meet it;

    When two parties are in a discussion and one asserts a claim that the other disputes, the one who asserts has a burden of proof to justify or substantiate that claim.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophic_burden_of_proof

    Maybe i should accuse you of a couple of crimes and see how you fare proving your innocence?

    What kind of parallel universe is this forum anyway to think anything otherwise.

    If you are accusing of someone of lying - it is on your end to prove that they are lying. It is not up to the one accused to prove that he is not unless he is challenged with actual accusations. So again; any proof of the slide being a fake? Other than "Hurr durr T-50 has plazma stealth and will be able to cruise at Mach 4 fo sho!"
    sepheronx
    sepheronx


    Posts : 7088
    Points : 7356
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 32
    Location : Canada

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #3

    Post  sepheronx Tue Jan 19, 2016 2:14 pm

    Berkut

    Since the engine placement isnt the new in word "s-duct" for the case of decreasing the RCS of PAK FA, do you happen to have seen, heard of or read of any sort of intake mesh or something to reduce that RCS?  I have heard mention of it but only by forum members of various sites but nothing else.
    Berkut
    Berkut


    Posts : 190
    Points : 215
    Join date : 2015-05-05

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #3

    Post  Berkut Tue Jan 19, 2016 2:31 pm

    Yes, there will be a radar blocker. It is called "device 9";

    Устройство 9 в канале воздухозаборника для снижения ЭПР двигателя в передней полусфере может быть установлено в канал любой формы перед ВНА, но преимущественно устанавливается в «прямые» каналы. Устройство 9 выполняет роль экрана, частично перекрывающего ВНА в приосевых направлениях от попадания ЭМ волн. Помимо экранирования устройство 9 разделяет канал ВЗ перед ВНА на ряд отдельных полостей, образованных цилиндрическими (или концентрическими, или неконцентрическими) или плоскими поверхностями, при этом плоские поверхности могут быть параллельными или пересекающимися. Каждая полость имеет меньшую площадь поперечного сечения, чем канал ВЗ в этой зоне. Подобное сегментирование с одновременным покрытием стенок сегментов РПП позволяет уменьшить величину ЭМ сигналов, отраженных от ВНА и переотраженных на стенки полостей устройства 9, тем самым общий уровень ЭПР ВЗ в ППС снижается.

    Full patent including a very basic sketch of "device 9"; http://www.freepatent.ru/images/patents/500/2502643/patent-2502643.pdf

    There are some pics around of few blockers but i am unsure which, if any, are actual T-50 blockers and not just prototypes to test out the technology. LEVCON's will also contribute in hiding RCS of the engines.

    Intakes on T-50 will be extremely complex between supersonic ramp, clamshell FOD protector and "Device 9". (Insiders has apparently described the whole thing as "Work of art.")
    sepheronx
    sepheronx


    Posts : 7088
    Points : 7356
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 32
    Location : Canada

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #3

    Post  sepheronx Tue Jan 19, 2016 2:41 pm

    Very interesting, thanks.  But with being quite complex, wouldnt it be quite expensive? If so, what prevented them during research stage to forego the s duct concept of reducing rcs? Are there performance limitations of using such a design?
    artjomh
    artjomh


    Posts : 150
    Points : 184
    Join date : 2015-07-17

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #3

    Post  artjomh Tue Jan 19, 2016 5:21 pm

    Berkut wrote:What about it? I noticed it ages ago and yes it should be Il-78 and not -76 but how does that mean it has been tampered with?

    Personally, I don't think anyone tampered with it. I just question the provenance of this entire document. I do not know how it was sourced, who provided it, how did they get it. How reliable are they and what is their motive for sharing this. This has to be at the very least classed DSP.

    Trust me, these Russiastronk wankers are annoying to me just as much as they are to you, but you gotta be a little bit suspicious about such internal presentations suddenly appearing.

    Controlled leak? Not with those inferior numbers.

    Needless to say, I am a bit sceptical.
    Neutrality
    Neutrality


    Posts : 888
    Points : 906
    Join date : 2015-05-02

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #3

    Post  Neutrality Tue Jan 19, 2016 7:53 pm

    @artjomh and @Berkut

    You two are amongst the most knowledgeable members of the forum. How come I never see you guys post in the Syrian/Ukrainian war thread? I think some of your insight would be very appreciated.
    Berkut
    Berkut


    Posts : 190
    Points : 215
    Join date : 2015-05-05

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #3

    Post  Berkut Tue Jan 19, 2016 8:30 pm

    artjomh wrote:
    Berkut wrote:What about it? I noticed it ages ago and yes it should be Il-78 and not -76 but how does that mean it has been tampered with?

    Personally, I don't think anyone tampered with it. I just question the provenance of this entire document. I do not know how it was sourced, who provided it, how did they get it. How reliable are they and what is their motive for sharing this. This has to be at the very least classed DSP.

    Trust me, these Russiastronk wankers are annoying to me just as much as they are to you, but you gotta be a little bit suspicious about such internal presentations suddenly appearing.

    Controlled leak? Not with those inferior numbers.

    Needless to say, I am a bit sceptical.

    Fair enough. I disagree with you, but i can respect this opinion far more.

    And actually i initially though the numbers were very low but since the 800/1000 km/h figures are *instrumented* speed, the actual speeds are much higher. For example the 800km/h instrumented speed translates to about 1400km/h actual speed which is not bad with open bays at this point of testing. (at that time only 400 flights in)

    Since then i expect the speed figures to have increased a fair bit but the G ones are apparently the same. (doesnt bother me, with 6-2 and Phase 2 in mind)

    Neutrality wrote:@artjomh and @Berkut

    You two are amongst the most knowledgeable members of the forum. How come I never see you guys post in the Syrian/Ukrainian war thread? I think some of your insight would be very appreciated.

    I am sick as fuck of the Ukraine debacle and have no interest of debating it. One half of my family is close to the frontlines of the conflict and it is just a sucky situation for everyone all in all. And for me personally my actual knowledge of both Syrian and Ukrainian conflicts are minimal i would say unlike about T-50 for example. And i wouldnt bother to join in a discussion i know i am reasonably ignorant in.
    artjomh
    artjomh


    Posts : 150
    Points : 184
    Join date : 2015-07-17

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #3

    Post  artjomh Tue Jan 19, 2016 9:29 pm

    Berkut wrote:And actually i initially though the numbers were very low but since the 800/1000 km/h figures are *instrumented* speed, the actual speeds are much higher. For example the 800km/h instrumented speed translates to about 1400km/h actual speed which is not bad with open bays at this point of testing. (at that time only 400 flights in)

    How did you convert IAS into TAS?

    Neutrality wrote:How come I never see you guys post in the Syrian/Ukrainian war thread?

    I can tell you exactly why.

    In about mid 2014 I saw this video from Donetsk. Basically it had some rebel fighters talking to this kid, must have been 14-15 years old. So this kid is asking those guys if they can come and help him bury his mum and dad, who were killed in the bombing, because he needed help digging the graves.

    After seeing that, I thought, fuck this shit. I cannot and will not participate in these "debates" about weapons and tactics when things like that are the reality. This is some kind of emotional torture. And anyone who enjoys just discussing war like it's some sort of a military adventure game... Well, I just thought I didn't want to be the guy who is that desensitized.


    Last edited by artjomh on Tue Jan 19, 2016 9:32 pm; edited 1 time in total
    Werewolf
    Werewolf


    Posts : 5289
    Points : 5490
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #3

    Post  Werewolf Tue Jan 19, 2016 9:31 pm

    I aggree that the burden of proof would be upon me however like i said before it is not upon me because that wasn't my intention just to sharpen you that it is very naive to believe in such infographs that have no direct meaning. The numbers are not high neither small regardless if true during the state of time they were tested they just published it for no reason which is either small missinformation attempt trying to throw off or give the enemy an impression of not valueing it as much meaning to underestimate it.

    It is not "russiastronk" it is just simple fact that it has no other meaning but to be suspiscious about it which you obviously are not which makes you rather the naive guy.
    Morpheus Eberhardt
    Morpheus Eberhardt


    Posts : 1928
    Points : 2037
    Join date : 2013-05-20

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #3

    Post  Morpheus Eberhardt Tue Jan 19, 2016 9:42 pm

    Berkut wrote:He is making the claim - he has to prove his claim. Are you completely unaware how a legal system works, everywhere, always? Logic 101, meet it;

    You are making a claim; a copy-and-paste is, at best, merely a claim; "somebody has made the claim", and you are doubly guilty of propagating it.

    Why do you think that I gave you a "-10" then? Logic 000.


    Last edited by Morpheus Eberhardt on Tue Jan 19, 2016 10:37 pm; edited 1 time in total
    Berkut
    Berkut


    Posts : 190
    Points : 215
    Join date : 2015-05-05

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #3

    Post  Berkut Tue Jan 19, 2016 10:18 pm

    artjomh wrote:
    Berkut wrote:And actually i initially though the numbers were very low but since the 800/1000 km/h figures are *instrumented* speed, the actual speeds are much higher. For example the 800km/h instrumented speed translates to about 1400km/h actual speed which is not bad with open bays at this point of testing. (at that time only 400 flights in)

    How did you convert IAS into TAS?

    The one i liked the most after some googling was the second reply here;

    http://www.pprune.org/questions/333787-ias-tas-formula.html

    Another variation of same formula as seen in the post by Bio15 here,

    http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/tech_ops/read.main/21064/


    Last edited by Berkut on Wed Jan 20, 2016 12:53 am; edited 1 time in total
    Neutrality
    Neutrality


    Posts : 888
    Points : 906
    Join date : 2015-05-02

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #3

    Post  Neutrality Tue Jan 19, 2016 11:14 pm

    Morpheus Eberhardt wrote:
    Berkut wrote:He is making the claim - he has to prove his claim. Are you completely unaware how a legal system works, everywhere, always? Logic 101, meet it;

    You are making a claim; a copy-and-paste is, at best, merely a claim; "somebody has made the claim", and you are doubly guilty of propagating it.

    Why do you think that I gave you a "-10" then? Logic 000.

    How exactly is he making a "claim" when he's simply posting a picture? It's not him who made that picture. Are you being thick on purpose?
    Isos
    Isos


    Posts : 8166
    Points : 8150
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #3

    Post  Isos Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:54 pm

    I have a question about escaping infra red missiles. Not really the subject here but it's a little question.

    Is it possible to use liquid azote around the egines while using flares to hide them ?

    How will it be seen by the missile's seeker ?
    Neutrality
    Neutrality


    Posts : 888
    Points : 906
    Join date : 2015-05-02

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #3

    Post  Neutrality Thu Jan 21, 2016 6:47 pm

    Isos wrote:I have a question about escaping infra red missiles. Not really the subject here but it's a little question.

    Is it possible to use liquid azote around the egines while using flares to hide them ?

    How will it be seen by the missile's seeker ?

    AFAIK heat-seeking missiles track the exhaust trail, they don't lock on the IR signature of the engine itself.
    Werewolf
    Werewolf


    Posts : 5289
    Points : 5490
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #3

    Post  Werewolf Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:04 pm

    Neutrality wrote:
    Isos wrote:I have a question about escaping infra red missiles. Not really the subject here but it's a little question.

    Is it possible to use liquid azote around the egines while using flares to hide them ?

    How will it be seen by the missile's seeker ?

    AFAIK heat-seeking missiles track the exhaust trail, they don't lock on the IR signature of the engine itself.

    Imagine Infra-red seekers are designed and programmed that way to distinguish exhaust trail and the body and have often programmed IR signatures of engines to hit aircrafts where it hurts most and not to chase exhaust gases and do insignificant damage almost cosmetic compared with direct body/engine damage.
    Isos
    Isos


    Posts : 8166
    Points : 8150
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #3

    Post  Isos Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:55 pm

    Werewolf wrote:
    Neutrality wrote:
    Isos wrote:I have a question about escaping infra red missiles. Not really the subject here but it's a little question.

    Is it possible to use liquid azote around the egines while using flares to hide them ?

    How will it be seen by the missile's seeker ?

    AFAIK heat-seeking missiles track the exhaust trail, they don't lock on the IR signature of the engine itself.

    Imagine Infra-red seekers are designed and programmed that way to distinguish exhaust trail and the body and have often programmed IR signatures of engines to hit aircrafts where it hurts most and not to chase exhaust gases and do insignificant damage almost cosmetic compared with direct body/engine damage.

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #3 - Page 26 My_pla10

    If they have programmed signature, the liuid azot can affect it.

    Look at my beautifull Pak Fa lol!

    If you mix during some time ( let's say 5 sec) azote with the exhaust trail that is just behind the aircraft and you release flares around, the temperature will dicrease but not the temperature of the exhaust wich is far of the aircraft. So the missile will follow these and then will go on the flares because they will look more like an aircraft than the aircraft itself.

    AK-Rex
    AK-Rex


    Posts : 47
    Points : 47
    Join date : 2015-12-22

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #3

    Post  AK-Rex Sat Jan 23, 2016 7:32 pm

    Head of RuAF: We expect to begin serial production of PAK FA in 2017
    Head of RuAF: PAK FA goes into service in 2017. We'll begin tests of 2 stage (new engine) in 2018.
    Head of RuAF: RuAF expects to get about 50 PAK FA until 2020.
    Head of RuAF: We have been building 11-th T-50 (PAK FA). 11-th PAK FA is the last test a/craft.
    Export version of PAK FA is expected in 2020

    https://twitter.com/KURYERSAT/
    max steel
    max steel


    Posts : 2930
    Points : 2955
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #3

    Post  max steel Sat Jan 23, 2016 9:34 pm

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #3 - Page 26 10256910
    avatar
    Austin


    Posts : 7618
    Points : 8015
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #3

    Post  Austin Mon Jan 25, 2016 7:51 am

    Indian, Russian negotiators agree on FGFA development: Cost of project reduced to $4 billion each

    The Indian Air Force (IAF), once an ardent backer of the proposed Indo-Russian fifth generation fighter aircraft (FGFA), has for the last two years sharply attacked the project. Critics say the FGFA is on the back burner to clear the way for the French Rafale fighter.

    President Francois Hollande of France, who arrives in Delhi on Monday, has talked up the sale of 36 Rafales to India for an estimated $9 billion (Rs 60,000 crore).

    Yet the FGFA remains alive. Last month Indian and Russian negotiators achieved a major breakthrough, agreeing to develop the FGFA at a lowered cost of $4 billion (Rs 27,000 crore) in India. That would open the doors to building of 250 FGFAs to replace the Sukhoi-30MKI.

    Since 2008, the project was estimated to cost India and Russia $5.5 billion (Rs 37,000 crore) each. Adding inflation, that would be $6 billion (Rs 40,500 crore) each.

    Now negotiators from Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd and Sukhoi - the development agencies; have agreed to do this 40 per cent more cheaply, for $4 billion spread over seven years. In the first year after signing, each side would pay $1 billion (Rs 6,750 crore), and another $500 million (Rs 3,380 crore) in each of the following six years.


    Sukhoi is already test-flying the FGFA's precursor, which Russia calls the PAK-FA (Perspektivny Aviatsionny Kompleks Frontovoy Aviatsii, or "Prospective Airborne Complex of Frontline Aviation"). The FGFA project involves improving the PAK-FA significantly to meet the IAF's specifications. The IAF wants some 50 improvements to the PAK-FA, including a 360-degree radar and more powerful engines.

    The proposal for a $4 billion research and development contract (R&D contract) will now come before a defence ministry "cost negotiation committee", and then to the Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar.

    The R&D Contract visualises a prototype fighter flying in India within three years. In total, 11 prototypes would be built - eight of these PAK-FAs for the Russian Air Force, and three FGFAs for India.

    Each country has already spent $295 million (Rs 1483 crore) on a "preliminary design contract" (PDC), Parrikar told parliament on August 4, 2015. The PDC, which spelt out the fighter's detailed configuration, was completed in June 2013.

    The R&D contract should have followed immediately, but the IAF came out against the FGFA. As Business Standard reported (January 21, 2014, "Russia can't deliver on Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft: IAF") top air marshals alleged during a high-level ministry meeting in New Delhi that the FGFA would fall short of Indian expectations.

    According to the details of that meeting, IAF objections to the FGFA were: (a) The Russians would not share critical design information with India; (b) The PAK-FA's engines are inadequate, being mere upgrades of the Sukhoi-30MKI's engines; and (c) Paying $6 billion to co-develop the FGFA would mean that "a large percentage of IAF's capital budget will be locked up."

    On January 15, the IAF renewed its attack in a ministry meeting meant to review FGFA progress. It said the FGFA's engine was unreliable, radar was inadequate; stealth features were poor, India's work share being too low, and the price being too high. In a letter to the ministry, the IAF vice-chief raised 27 different objections to the FGFA.

    Yet, in a baffling volte-face last year, the IAF proposed the PAK-FA be bought over-the-counter, rather than co-developing the FGFA. There was no official response to questions over why the IAF was willing to buy a fighter it had roundly criticised.

    This resistance to the co-development also scuppered a Russian offer to co-develop a more powerful, fifth-generation engine for the FGFA. After roundly criticising the PAK-FA's AL-41F1 engines - upgraded versions of the Sukhoi-30MKI's AL-31FP engines, with 25 per cent more power - the IAF was ready to buy them in an over-the-counter sale.

    The FGFA was once the IAF's future. Former defence minister AK Antony rebuffed the US-built fifth generation F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, saying India would have the FGFA. Indian planners viewed the FGFA as a launch pad for India's fifth generation fighter, the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA).

    Now, with the Rafale's astronomical cost, a cheaper R&D Contract for a "Make in India" FGFA could turn the spotlight back in the Indo-Russian fighter.

    Sponsored content


    PAK-FA, T-50: News #3 - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #3

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sun Nov 28, 2021 9:27 pm