General Questions Thread:

They might be interested if a Russian company was involved like Mig, but otherwise I don't think so.

In 10 years time they might look at a lighter 5th gen fighter, but the PAK FA will be a medium weight fighter too, so I doubt they will want such similar aircraft programs.

GarryB wrote:They might be interested if a Russian company was involved like Mig, but otherwise I don't think so.

In 10 years time they might look at a lighter 5th gen fighter, but the PAK FA will be a medium weight fighter too, so I doubt they will want such similar aircraft programs.

PAK-FA is a heavy fighter at 35 tons. HAL MCA is a medium weight like F-35

I think MiG and Sukhoi are capable to design and build MCA by their own without HAL.

PAK-FA is a heavy fighter at 35 tons. HAL MCA is a medium weight like F-35

PAK FA is smaller and lighter than the Su-27 series... the weight class of a fighter is normally taken as normal weight not maximum weight. The PAK FA is expected to have a normal operating weight of 20-22 tons which pretty much puts it directly between the Mig-29 and Su-27 in weight.

And the simple fact is that the Mig-29 and Su-27 are already too close in terms of weight and other areas... the Mig-29 would have benefitted greatly from being in the 10-15 ton class to reduce purchase and operational costs.

It would be the same for stealth aircraft... the lighter aircraft needs significantly lower purchase and operational costs because the whole point of its existence is to be the numbers aircraft that can replace the large numbers of existing non stealthy aircraft in service.

The F-35 is failing because it will end up more expensive than the F-22 and few countries will be able to afford it in the numbers they need. The ironic result will likely be greatly reduced order volumes which will drive prices up even further because the economies of scale only work with large numbers of products made.

Most countries will reduce the order numbers of the F-35 and use it as their F-22 with their 4th gen fighters getting upgrades and life extensions or even remaining in production much longer than intended and they will change doctrine.

Previously the large numbers of F-35s were going to clear the enemy skies of aircraft and then when enemy air power is no longer a threat they would use external stores and lose their stealth and engage ground targets.

With fewer aircraft it is likely that they will use the F-35s to gain air supremacy and then use older models for the ground support role along with the reduced number of F-35s.

What is the S-57 trainer?

I mean S-54

The S-54 exists in model form only and AFAIK there is no actual service requirement for such an aircraft.

Lead in fighter trainers really don't benefit much in being supersonic... it burns a lot of fuel very rapidly and greatly reduces effective range.

I rather suspect interception and fighter missions will be largely left to fighters and interceptors.

Note the Yak-130s belong to the Air Force... most of the Army air corp operate helos, so only the frogfoot pilots would benefit from flying the Yak-130 and to be honest they could probably go from piston engined aircraft to the Yak-130 briefly to the Su-25UB fairly rapidly.

Sujoy wrote:A fighter jet has 1 m^2 rcs and is located at 200nmi. Where would a flock of birds with 0.0015 m^2 rcs should be located in order to have the same detectability?

Use our famous and commonly used 4th root equation for radar range...

200 NMI is 370,4 km so..

((0.0015/1)^(0,25))*370,4=72,89 km or 32 NMI

Thanks StealthFlanker . Will try this.

Well, just like the title says... I went to a quick wiki-freefall with this one but I failed to find an equivalent(maybe I didn't search that hard )
But anyways, I find the AC-130 very effective when it comes to pulverizing targets rapidly,relatively cheaply and for an extended period of time. However, I do find it very vulnerable to modern ADS that would just chew the ~200 million dollar aircraft.

There is no equivalent to the spooky gunship.

I was wondering if Russia has program similar to Pentagon Black Program ?

We have recently seen how stealth UAV got exposed when it was down in Iran.

Never heard of such classified Black Project program in Russia

Make a Good Read

The Secrecy Issue

http://in.zinio.com/reader.jsp?issue=416246009&o=ext

Everything (well, a lot of things) used to be black projects in USSR days.

These days military has become much more open, but if they want details to stay secret (until they deem it fine to release) like in the case of T-50, they stay secret.

In this case Black just means secret... so of course Russia has plenty of Black programs... including the next generation replacement small arms family that they say little about while the AK12 takes all the attention, or the Armata, Kurganets, Boomerang vehicle families that we have only seen models of thus far.

We haven't seen new model Vityaz missile systems, little has been released about the Kh-32, etc etc.

The problem with real black Russian programs is that they really do know how to keep a secret.

The plane is more powerful? MiG-35 or Su-35 ! Such points dogfight, BVR, WVR?

MiG-35

Aircraft performance
Technical characteristics

    Crew: 1 or 2 people (MiG-35/MiG-35D)
    Length: 17.3 m
    Wingspan: 11.99 m
    Height: 4.73 m
    Wing Area: 42m ²
    Weight:
        empty: 11000 kg
        off weight: 17,500 kg
        Maximum takeoff: 23,500 kg
        Fuel: 4800 kg
    Engines: 2 × turbofan with thrust vectoring "RD-33MKV"
        Thrust:
            max: 2 × 5400 kg
            afterburner: 2 × 9000 kg
        Thrust vector deflection angles: ± 15 ° vertical, ± 8 ° in any direction
        A thrust speed: 60 ° / sec
        Engine weight: 1055 kg
    EPR: <1 m ² (without external suspensions) [source not specified 484 days]

Flight characteristics

    Maximum speed:
        at ground level: 1,400 km / h
        at a height of 2400 km / h (M = 2.25)
    Practical range:
        without drop tanks: 2,000 km
        with drop tanks: 3,000 km
    Flight Duration: 2.2 hours
    Service ceiling: 17,500 m
    Thrust:
        at normal take-off weight: 1.03
        with a maximum take-off weight: 0.77
    Wing loading:
        at normal take-off weight: 468 kg / m ²
        with a maximum take-off weight: 618 kg / m ²
    Maximum operating load: 9 g

Armament

    Cannonball: 30 mm cannon built GS-30-1
    Suspension points: 10
    The combat load: 6500 kg
    Armament:
        URVV:
            short-range missiles: R-73
            medium range: R-27 and RVV-AE
        Anti: X-31 and X-35
        Anti-radiation: X-31P
        URVP: X-25, X-29, NAR
        Svobodnopadayuschie and bombs, aerial mines.

Avionics

    Radar with an active phased array Zhuk-A:
        AFAR diameter: 688 mm (500 mm for export)
        Number of MRP: 1016 (680 in the export)
        Weight: about 280 kg (240 kg for export)
        Volume: 0,275 m ³
        The maximum detection range:
            aerodynamic purposes: up to 200 kilometers (up to 148 km on export)
            ground targets: up to 60 km


http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9C%D0%B8%D0%93-35
http://defense-update.com/products/m/mig35.htm
http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/mig35/



Su-35




Technical specifications

    Crew: 1 person
    Length: 22.18 m
    Wingspan: 14.75 m
    Height: 6.43 m
    Wing Area: 62.04 m ²
    The angle of the leading edge sweep 42 °
    Chassis: tricycle, with the front desk, retractable
    Weight:
        empty: 19000 kg
        Normal take-off weight: 25,500 kg
        Maximum takeoff weight: 34,500 kg
        Fuel Weight: 11,500 kg
    Engine:
        Engine Type: Turbofan with afterburner and thrust vector control (turbofan with thrust vectoring)
        model: "AL-41F1S"
        Thrust:
            max: 2 × 8800 kg
            afterburner: 2 × 14500 kgs
        thrust vector control:
            A thrust angle: ± 15 ° in the plane
            A thrust speed: 60 ° / sec
        Motor weight: 1520 kg
    EPR: 0.5-2 m ² [29]

Flight characteristics

    Maximum speed:
        at ground level: 1,400 km / h (1.17 M)
        in height: 2,500 km / h [18]
        Maximum besforsazhny:> 1,300 km / h (on the first prototype, the acceleration without using afterburner - 1.1 M)
    Range:
        at the ground 1580 km
        the mark:
            without drop tanks: 3,600 km
            with drop tanks: 4,500 km
    Service ceiling: 19,000 m [30]
    Length:
        runway: 400 m
        mileage: 650
    Thrust:
        at normal take-off weight: 1.14
        with a maximum take-off weight: 0.76
    Wing loading:
        normal takeoff weight of 410 kg / m ²
        with a maximum take-off weight: 611 kg / m ²

Armament

source [31]

    Cannonball: 30 mm aircraft cannon GSH-30-1
    The combat load: 8000 kg
    Suspension points: 12
    Armament:
        The air-to-air:
            Long-range missile:
                HAEDAT
            medium range:
                6hR-27ER, R-27P, R-27T
                10hRVV-AE
            short range:
                4hR-73
        The air-to-ground:
            Anti-ship missiles:
                6xx-31-2XX 59M
                Air-to-ground missile long range
            Precision-guided munitions:
                6xx-29
                X 25
                C-25LD
                6hKAB-500
                KAB-1500
            Unguided munitions:
                C-25 (NAR)
                C-8
                bombs of various purpose and caliber up to 1,500 kg

Avionics

On the Su-35S is used radar with a passive phased array antenna N035 Irbis.

Features radar:

    Frequency range: X (8-12 GHz)
    PAR diameter: 900 mm
    The number of landmines: 1772
    Viewing angles: 240 ° (± 120 °)
    Average power: 5000 W
    Peak power: 20000 W
    Detection range:
        EPR with 3 M ²:
            on a collision course: 350-400 km (in the area of ​​100 square meters. degrees on the sky background)
            on the Dogon: 150 km [32]
        with SCS 0.01 M ²: up to 90 km [33]
    Objectives:
        Detection and Cueing: 4 ground or air 30
        Simultaneous firing of 2 (for illumination of R-27)


http://defense-update.com/newscast/0208/news/news_260208_su35.htm
http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D1%83-35
http://www.milavia.net/aircraft/su-35/

The MiG-35 is powerful avionics, Zhuk AESA radar.
The Su-35 is powerful Irbis-E radar range remote tumbledown, super speed, super portable engine super maneuverability.
They both minimize RCS.

History support Su-35, Su-27 has ever won before Mig 29 in Africa

This is about as pointless as comparing an F-22 with an F-35.

Size gives the Su-35 certain advantages in flight range and performance, but that also means the cost of operating and owning it will be higher too.

The simple fact is that while the Su-35 might be better in some areas Russia cannot afford an entire air force with only Su-35s. In several places its range and performance are superflous.

One Su-35 cannot do the job of two Mig-35s so given the choice having a larger number of Mig-35s (perhaps including some Mig-29M2s) will provide better coverage than a lessor number of Su-35s.

Good Afternoon

AEW aircraft together with some FGAs or BBRs enters the airspace of Russia.
How does it defend Russia?
Would it uses the S-400 system?
Would it uses MiG-31 armed with Vympel R-77 missile?
Another answers, I don´t know.

Also, Is it true that Russia has got a air to air missile with a range of 398 kms.?

Depends where the border crossing takes place... the local airfield would send up interceptor aircraft to investigate the incursion first... most often Su-27 or Mig-29 to either escort the lost aircraft back into international airspace with a complaint likely made at the UN.

Use of SAMs would not likely be authorised as their use would obviously result in loss of life and cannot be set to stun or warning shot.

Some areas would result in an interception by Mig-31s and in the new upgraded model could be armed with R-77 and R-37... the latter being a 300km range missile.

Also, Is it true that Russia has got a air to air missile with a range of 398 kms.?

The R-37M and the undeveloped KS-172 are both reported to have flight ranges of about 400km for anti AWACS use and also for use against large aircraft like troop transports and tankers.

If strange combat training is not visible by Russian radar, due to the action of the AWACS. How to detect them Russia?
Perhaps, Are there modern radars capables to detect this combat training?

Diego-9 wrote:If strange combat training is not visible by Russian radar, due to the action of the AWACS. How to detect them Russia?
Perhaps, Are there modern radars capables to detect this combat training?

?

Planes are detected as to where they are going, and if they have entered the airspace of said country. Russia has UHF radar, VHF radar, etc to detect missiles, planes, ships, etc that could enter its territory, before the plane would detect anything other than passive systems telling it, that it has some radiation reaching it. Then Russia's jets would fly towards said aircraft (as they would be sent to intercept such aircrafts) and will be either forced to turn around or land, and if not, would then be shot down.

Previously it was just the PVO branch of the VVS (Russian Air Force) that had radar and interceptors looking for incoming threats to Russian air space.

Right now it is the VKKO which is the PVO and Space Defence Forces combined that have ground and air radar and will be getting lots of satellites and of course they still control interceptors that can protect Russian air space.

The unified picture of ground and air and space based radar with a wide range of scanning frequencies from VHR and UHF through to X band means that no large aircraft the size of an AWACS aircraft could possibly slip by unnoticed... even stealth aircraft would have serious trouble not being noticed.

Hello..

I was watching this video..

F-22 thrust vectoring nozzles

https://youtu.be/cTCGJAoAz_8

And was surprised/curious to see how the raptor control the air flow from its rear nozzles..
in comparison with Russian combat planes like Su-30/35 and Pak-fa.. Perhaps there is more
than what this video shows of F-22 vectoring. But as far i can see.. i have made the following observations.

1) The Raptor Engines in reality are not vector engines like Russian jets. Instead it is an external mechanism to the engines that
controls the flow of Air that leave the engines. that is part of its stealth airframe.
2) Unless there is more to see ,from that video. It appears that the Raptor external nozzles only move in the Up and Down direction
   and **both the same time**?..
3)It does appear that the The F-22 way of achieving "thrust vectoring" , is limited to low subsonic engine thrust only?
  Because using afterburners with the external rear nozzles blocking the airflow ,didn't this could break them the vector mechanism?
4)Could it be said that the F-22 does not have vector engine.. but instead achieve *1 dimension vectorial thrust* up and down (or the so called 'Y axis' ) , by the help of the body of the plane?

I have seen Sukhoi  Su-30/35 videos and it looks like contrary to F-22 1 dimension vectorial airframe system ,that is based on mini nozzle doors at the end of the engine that move up and down, to guide the direction of air ,Sukhois engines actually move and rotate ,not only up and down. but left and right and that can do it Independently ,one engine to the left and the other up or right, for very crazy maneuverability..  


finally will like to know the difference between Su-30/35 true thrust vectoring engines vs Pak-fa. if anyone knows..
i have read that 4th sukhois engines are 2d engines.. and pak-fa engines 3d. but not exactly sure what is the difference.
perhaps it is that in the pak-fa one engine can move air out while the second engine can work in reverse direction inward ?  

any thoughts ?

The engines on the F-22 are too close together to be very useful for roll control... ie point one up and one down and the moment angle is not great so the roll effect will not be huge.

Imagine you are trying to turn the steering wheel on a car by holding the steering wheel near the axis with your hands together on a single bar across the steering wheel... it is not easy. Spread your hands out on the bar and it becomes much easier.

The Su-35 and PAK FA engines are 3D thrust vectoring because they can be moved up and down and also side to side and each is independent so you could if you wanted to move one nozzle down and to the right and the other nozzle up and to the left... or in a stall when there is no airflow over the wings and tail so a normal aircraft loses control you can have roll control by putting one engine down and one up, but you can also manouver in the yaw by turning the nozzles sideways too... it means when the other guy is stalled and falling from the sky you can point your nose... and therefore also your radar and your main weapons at him and fire and recover from the super stall.

The main difference between 2D and 3D is the former is up and down, which in a twin engine aircraft is often enough for most needs as long as they are spaced well apart which means roll control as well as pitch.

3D adds the ability to induce yaw as well as roll and pitch control... on some flankers 2+D is achieved by angling the engines so the up down pitch includes a sideways component so some yaw control is added.

Whatever the PAK FA finally gets will likely also go into Super Flankers too.

The Mig-35 and Mig-29OVT have 3D thrust vector engines already.

Vann7 wrote:1) The Raptor Engines in reality are not vector engines like Russian jets. Instead it is an external mechanism to the engines that
controls the flow of Air that leave the engines. that is part of its stealth airframe.

Those are the actual exhaust nozzles for the F119 engine. Yes, they are shaped to provide better LO integration with the airframe. Russian aircraft are no different in the respect that they use engines fitted with vectoring nozzles, the main difference being that their nozzles aren't redesigned this much.

Vann7 wrote:2) Unless there is more to see ,from that video. It appears that the Raptor external nozzles only move in the Up and Down direction
   and **both the same time**?..

They do only activate in pitch only, they can be used at supersonic speeds, and I do think that they act together but I'm not sure on that one.

Vann7 wrote:3)It does appear that the The F-22 way of achieving "thrust vectoring" , is limited to low subsonic engine thrust only?
  Because using afterburners with the external rear nozzles blocking the airflow ,didn't this could break them the vector mechanism?

Uh, no. I've watched them do it in full 'burner more than once. The panels open and close the exhaust stream area just like a regular round nozzle does, closer together for low thrust and spread apart more for high thrust.

Vann7 wrote:4)Could it be said that the F-22 does not have vector engine.. but instead achieve *1 dimension vectorial thrust* up and down (or the so called 'Y axis' ) , by the help of the body of the plane?

It's just got 2D thrust vectoring. The only real item of significance is that it has much weirder nozzles compared to anything else.