BTW it is not just experts, but obviously engine companies are trying to sell product so they will of course promote their new products to fill every role and do every job, but engines have designs that suit some flight regimes and don't suit others...
For instance the PD-35 is going to be very powerful, but being a high bypass turbofan engine it will not be suitable for supersonic use no matter what plane you put it into.
For super cruise performance you need a low bypass turbofan... almost a pure turbojet because high airflow speed is important for super cruising.
Saturn is very good at making Subpar products. Tumansky has made a lot of revolutionary products in the past
I can't agree with that, the Al-31 was a very good engine in its time and the Al-41 is a natural development that further improves on performance.
Saturn has dominated for a while now with export sales of Flankers and domestic purchases of the range of Flanker types and their association with Sukhoi, and sometimes that leads to complacency, and the other engine makers have to work harder despite there being very few scraps left over for them to work towards... they become more innovative and take risks because if they don't they will remain in the shadows... the same with MiG really.
I have always had a soft spot for the underdog... except when it is contrived... growing up with American cartoons like Road Runner and Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck etc etc it was always predator prey and the natural predator... would always lose... Elmer Fudd always defeated by Bugs Bunny, Foghorn Leghorn always beats the dog, Tweety always beating Sylvester... the opposite of reality... I was always rooting for the natural winner because Disney portrayed them as lifes losers... how ironic is that.
The new model 30 engine is supposed to be a new from scratch design 5th gen engine with much better performance in all regards to their previous models...
And of course Klimov and Saturn and Soyuz are in the background already very busy making lots of other things like helicopter engines and ship propulsion systems and systems for pumping stations and power stations... at sea or on land... both have an interesting and expanding range of engine expertise and I would be very interesting in seeing any engine types they are coming out with.
Its just a monster for something about the same size as a Klimov RD33 which is a little smaller than a GE-F414.
I had heard talk of an evolution of the RD-33 using new engine technology that was going to be in the 12 ton thrust range that was specifically designed for twin engined light fighters... both land and carrier based... for a while it was speculated to be the RD-45 or something but very little official information was available.
They say they use a revolutionary compressor technology, but if they were heads and shoulders above the rest of the world then they would not be needing to make such outlandish claims.
When it is Saturn or Sukhoi you often take them at their word LMFS... making outlandish claims is pointless for them because everyone who buys will want to see proof and if you can't deliver you wont sell.
And the Russian military are not impressed by claims... if it does not work they wont buy it.
Perhaps more suitable for either a larger twin engined combat jet than the Su-57, or in single engined configuration.
The R-79 is a very big engine and was designed for single engined aircraft (not counting lift jets)... actually on a weird tangent... the lift engines in the Yak-141 are amazingly light for their power... they are like 400kg each but put out comparable thrust to the engines in the Su-25.... amazing...
If you see the available material from UEC about their roadmap, the engine for the PAK-DP should be also a development of the izd. 30, which only makes sense, since the very point of creating a conglomerate like UEC is to avoid replicating the same work at several companies,
Another point of the UEC is to keep the different companies up to date and state of the art in engine design and development... if you give all the jobs to the designer of one engine what are the other design companies going to be doing?
Traditionally they set specs for engines and all the engine companies make engines to compete for that job... the winner gets their engine put into production... the losers normally adapt their designs for other jobs... but the odds on one engine being suitable for every job is very low... for instance the engine in the Su-30, Su-34, Su-35, and Su-57 and Su-75 could be one and the same... because flight speeds and ranges and operational envelopes are all very similar and they are also similarly sized aircraft too.
The exception might be the Su-75 because if they choose a different light 5th gen fighter it might have two engines instead of one or they might decide a more powerful single engine is needed.
The PAK DP is going to be an interceptor that will spend most of its time at supersonic speeds normally operating at high to very high altitudes... it will likely also be able to supercruise very easily... the high speed will require at the very least ramjet use... which none of these other aircraft would need or use.
I think the PAK DP will have a unique engine in the same way the MiG-31 used a different engine from the Su-27... different levels of thrust and also different flight ranges.
No offense meant to Soyuz, but optimization of any parameter at modern jet engines is an extremely difficult endeavor and hence any claim about revolutionary efficiency increases needs to be taken with a healthy dose of skepticism.
So Saturns claims are true but Soyuz can't be trusted?
Both are trying to sell engines... why can't we trust them both?
but maybe the easiest way is to enlarge the izd. 30 by adding a larger compressor (like F119 -> F135) or enlarging the core itself. Starting a parallel development path at two different companies within UEC does not seem an intelligent way of using resources.
There is no way they will find one engine that can do absolutely everything, so having different engine types is a good thing and not a bad thing.
Twin engined light fighters make sense, and as such smaller buts still powerful and fuel efficient engines are needed too...