PAK-DΑ: News #2

Think of the new bombers as delivery systems and their weapons as the defence penetrators.

Traditionally the aircraft is the unpredictable manouvering defence penetrator that delivers the weapon to a release point and then vacates the area on to the next target.

New weapons, either flying very low and hard to detect, or very high and just to fast to intercept reliably do a better job of evading enemy air defences than the very large aircraft that carry them.

Defending against 200 PAK DAs or 200 B-2s trying to enter your airspace and drop a nuclear bomb on target means 200 targets to engage.

If those aircraft carry long range hypersonic or stealthy missiles then the problem is multiplied, and with extended range the need for the aircraft to expose itself to enemy fire diminishes to the point where it is not worth exposing your aircraft to enemy air defences to launch attacks.

Obviously when the enemy are ISIS an at that state are not getting air protection from the democratic peace loving west then Iron bombs can do the job cheaply and effectively, but if the expected problem might include US fighters or Turkish fighter offering air defence then sneaking in a few low flying cruise missiles makes sense instead to avoid confrontation and yet still take down those terrorist targets.

When America is the problem, or a group of American ships then low flying stealthy and high flying hypersonic make a good attack combination if you can time it so the stealthy missiles arrive first and make the ships focus on the wrong direction and down low, then attacks from up high at very high speed become even more shocking and effective.... against any navy on the planet... no matter who is supporting or funding them.

A subsonic bomber is cheaper because less energy is used to fly it around, so PAK DA will likely be cheaper to operate than the Tu-160 and the Tu-22M3, but should be stealthier than the Bears.

Having said that their Bears and Backfires still have plenty of hours left and could be used in a range of roles with lots of potential... I mean if their PAK DA and Tu-160 are getting air to air missile capability imagine a Tu-22M3M version with its Mach 2 capacity but also an enormous nose mounted AESA radar and 24 tons of air to air missiles patrolling the far east and far north...

Mir wrote:I' m speaking under correction here but I think the Russian MOD said that the PAK-DA would be able to hit any target on the globe from within the Russian borders, which is very useful indeed, but why would one then bother to develop an expensive "stealth" bomber?...

That's the thing: it won't be expensive

In it's original planned version (large stealth supersonic) it would have been crazy expensive but with Tu-160 back in the game requirements changed and now it's medium sized subsonic flying wing

It also shares production facilities and even some structural components with Tu-160

This means that only potentially expensive part is stealth materials and they already have some of those from Su-57 and S-70 programs​ plus flying wing setup is inherently less visible on radar unlike what old plan envisioned

To say nothing of the fact that subsonic aircraft are cheaper to operate than supersonic ones, in the end cost per hour should be less than Tu-160

I' m speaking under correction here but I think the Russian MOD said that the PAK-DA would be able to hit any target on the globe from within the Russian borders, which is very useful indeed, but why would one then bother to develop an expensive "stealth" bomber?

They have mentioned a missile called Gzur, which is a relatively small Mach 6 missile with a range of 1,500km that will be used to penetrate enemy defences to reach launch positions.

It is supposed to be ready for service very soon to replace the Mach 5 Kh-15 Kickback short range attack missile.

There is another follow on weapon that is about 10m long or double its length that is going to be very hypersonic (mach 9+) which has a projected range of 12,000km that is going to going into service in the early 2030s as a strategic weapon replacement and be called Gzur II, but also long range subsonic or perhaps transonic cruise missiles with similar flight ranges to replace existing models with half that range.

The point is that for most of the time it is cheaper to make stealthy or hypersonic missiles in numbers than it is to make hypersonic or super stealthy bombers to fly to extreme range targets and attack them.

Apparently there is a new ejection seat being developed for this plane, via Bastion-Karpenko

“We are making a chair for PAK DA for testing, while everything is going according to plan. I hope that in the next couple of years we will put the seat on the plane, ”Pozdnyakov said. The ejection seat, which is being created for the promising long-range aviation complex (PAK DA), will be equipped with an enlarged parachute. This was announced to TASS at the International Aviation and Space Salon (MAKS) by Sergei Pozdnyakov, Director General of NPP Zvezda. “Now a parachute with an increased area is being created, because when a pilot is parachuting and landing a large mass not at ocean level or zero, but at 1000-1500 meters, the fall speed is higher and the dome area is needed more,” Pozdnyakov noted.
Источник: http://bastion-karpenko.ru/ ВТС «БАСТИОН» A.V.Karpenko

Why would a bomber ejection seat need a bigger chute? Something seems to be lost in translation

I can't wait until they rogll out the prototype and see the same old stories repeat, like with the Su-57 and 75. It has become a custom now

Maybe because of the great flight range of the aircraft leading to the potential for these pilots to land very far from Russia that an enlarged survival kit is needed so they need a bigger chute for that survival kit.

Have heard it includes a Tigr....

Im glad they saved the Pak Da for Maks 2023. But it will be like the su 57. Very secretive. Probably moreso than the su 57

Source: PAK DA demo will be ready by 2023

A prototype is currently being manufactured.

MOSCOW, August 2. / TASS /. A demonstration model of a promising long-range aviation complex (PAK DA) is expected to be assembled by 2023. This was reported to TASS by a source in the aircraft industry.

"At present, a prototype is being manufactured. It is assumed that the demonstration model will be ready by 2023," the source said.

TASS has no official confirmation of this information.

https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/12037515

Some slides apparently from UEC related to the NK-32M, the engine for the PAK-DA. I don't know how reliable this is, just posting it here for your consideration






Thanks to user Seerndv

I guess this aircraft will be the same as the Checkmate. We won't see anything of it till Maks.

Would Russia consider selling an export version of this thing to India ?

Probably related to the "pedigree" of the PAK-DA, the little known Myasishchev M-67LK-M of the eighties:



https://www.zona-militar.com/2020/03/25/myasischev-m-67-el-b-2-sovietico/

Would Russia consider selling an export version of this thing to India ?

India was not interested in Backfires or Blackjacks... or Bears in their strategic roles... I doubt the PAK DA would interest them either.

The PAK DA will be a flying wing but not necessarily a carbon copy of the American one...



Low drag is important but high internal volume is also important... I think the body section will be thicker than the usual boomerang shape we see in the B-2.

Interestingly larger internal volume would actually be a useful thing if you wanted to base a subsonic airliner on the aircraft design too...

LMFS wrote:Probably related to the "pedigree" of the PAK-DA, the little known Myasishchev M-67LK-M of the eighties:



https://www.zona-militar.com/2020/03/25/myasischev-m-67-el-b-2-sovietico/

Looks simple and workable, I like it

Actually liked the ancient Sukhoi T-4MS design myself, and it is constantly shown on the internet as what the PAK DA will look like... ignoring the fact that it was rejected in favour of the shape adopted for the Tu-160 and was from the 1960-70s...




What normally happens in these competitions is that several design bureaus will try brand new unique designs for the competition while at least one will adopt a design related to the western design that the product is competing against... sort of a benchmark design to ensure the winner is at least better than what it will be going up against.

The R-27 beat a missile that was similar to the Sparrow... though the Sparrow like missile did use paint to make it look more like a Sparrow that it actually was in real life... the R-27 was still proven to be better aerodynamically... the reverse butterfly wings almost acted like forward swept wings in the sense that they directed spanwise flow to the wing root where they created lift instead of the wing tip where they would create drag inducing vortexes.

GarryB wrote: India was not interested in Backfires or Blackjacks... or Bears in their strategic roles... I doubt the PAK DA would interest them either.

India was never offered the Tu 160. There is no evidence to suggest that Tu 22 was offered either. India was offered Tu 142 and India accepted it. India purchased 8 such aircraft.

Behind paywall:

Russia Pushes Ahead with New Strategic Bomber

https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/aircraft-propulsion/russia-pushes-ahead-new-strategic-bomber

At least we have a claimed Tupolev wind tunnel testing model, (not necessarily related to PAK-DA)

Looks like it has a central air intake for both engines... I would say that is a drone design, with the large space between the two engines giving enormous space for internal central bomb bays and the distance between the engines and the vertical line where the wings appear to be would leave even more space for fuel or light AAM weapon bays if needed for self defence...

The question is, will it be a boomerang shaped flying wing or perhaps a different shaped wing like the Su-57 main wing shape...

India was never offered the Tu 160. There is no evidence to suggest that Tu 22 was offered either. India was offered Tu 142 and India accepted it. India purchased 8 such aircraft.

Despite a lot of western speculation about Backfires, as far as I am aware India has never shown any interest in Blackjacks or Backfires, and were only interested in Bears in their MPA role.

This patent MAY be related to PAK-DA, or not... but it is interesting nevertheless to consider the technical background

If related to the plane, first flight and/or disclosure should be relatively close.

AIRCRAFT ENGINE AIR INTAKE

IPC
B64D 33/02(2006.01)
B64C 39/10(2006.01)
Application:
2021124506, 2021.08.18
Start date of the patent validity report: 2021.08.18
Application date: 2021.08.18
Published: 2022.03.16
Authors:
Bukharov Oleg Vladimirovich (RU)
Gurov Vyacheslav Fedorovich (RU)
Kataev Oleg Olegovich (RU)
Patent holders:
Public Joint Stock Company (PJSC) "Tupolev" (RU)
Documents cited in the search report:
WO 2010061071 A3, 03.06.2010.
RU 192918 U1, 07.10.2019.
RU 113238 U1, 10.02.2012.
RU 2033945 C1, 30.04.1995.
US 20200307789 A1, 01.10.2020.
FR 2619074 A1, 10.02.1989.
Illustrations 2

Report
The utility model relates to the aircraft industry and can be used in creating aircraft designs in which the engine air intake in the aircraft contains an inlet device (2) located near the leading edge (3) of the wing, connected to an air duct (4) passing inside the airframe to supply air to the engine. The air intake installation device is equipped with a rigid shell (6) of the air duct (4). The air duct (4) is located and fixed (5) inside this shell (6). The shell (6) is fixed (7) to the power elements ( of the airframe.

The technical result consists in achieving the rigidity and strength of the air duct under all flight modes and possible changes in angles of attack, as well as reducing the load on the airframe. 1 z. p. f-ly, 4 il.

Claim of the invention
1. An aircraft engine air intake containing an inlet device located near the leading edge of the wing, connected to an air duct passing inside the airframe, characterized in that it is equipped with a rigid duct shell, while the duct is located and fixed inside this shell, and the shell is fixed to the power elements of the airframe frame.

2. The air intake of the aircraft engine according to claim 1, in which the shell is made with the possibility of fixing to the power elements of the airframe frame using articulated nodes.
Description
The utility model relates to the aircraft industry and can be used to create aircraft structures.

According to the design scheme, engines in an airplane can be installed inside the airframe body, for example, according to the scheme disclosed in patent document US 2011240804 (A1); IPC B64D 27/12, published 06.10.2011.  In this case, the air supply to the engine is made through a profiled air duct located inside the airframe.

The prototype of the utility model is a device for installing the air intake of a jet gas turbine engine installed in an aircraft made according to the "flying wing"scheme.

The air intake inlet device is located near the leading edge of the wing and is connected to the engine by an air duct passing inside the airframe (Application WO 2010061071 (A3); IPC: B64C 39/10; B64D 27/18; B64D 27/20; published 07.10.2010). Installation of the air intake is made in the form of an air duct directly attached to the structural elements of the airframe.

In the prototype, when the air flow passes, especially when changing flight modes or angles of attack, there are jumps in seals that cause additional loads on the walls of the air channel housing and it is necessary to perform local reinforcement of the housing, to avoid deformations that lead to loss of structural rigidity, affecting the stability of the air intake and, if the deformations exceed the permissible values, its strength.

When creating the utility model, the task was set to develop the design of the engine air intake in an airplane, in which air is supplied to the engine through a profiled air duct located inside the airframe, which ensures the rigidity and strength of the air duct under all flight modes and possible changes in angles of attack, as well as reducing the load on the airframe.

The problem is solved by the design of the engine air intake in an airplane containing an inlet device located near the leading edge of the wing, connected to an air duct passing inside the airframe, the air intake is equipped with a rigid duct shell, while the duct is located and fixed inside this shell, and the shell is fixed to the power elements of the airframe.

The technical result achieved in the implementation of the utility model is to achieve the rigidity and strength of the air duct in all flight modes and possible changes in angles of attack, as well as reducing the load on the airframe.

To unload the elements of securing the shell to the power elements of the airframe frame, the shell can be made with the possibility of fixing to the power elements of the airframe frame using hinge assemblies.

To explain the essence of the utility model, the following graphic materials are used:

1 Aircraft, according to the utility model, front view;

2 Aircraft, in accordance with the utility model, top view;

3 Section A-A of Fig. 2;

4 Section B-B of Fig. 2.

The utility model is used for the design of an aircraft in which the engine air intake contains an inlet device 2 located near the leading edge 3 of the wing, connected to an air duct 4 passing inside the airframe for supplying air to the engine. 1, 2).

The air duct 4 is made in the form of an air channel. The air channel profile is determined taking into account the optimal aerodynamic drag and achieving maximum internal braking of the air flow inside the air duct under the calculated flight modes. Devices can be stirred in the air channel to create an abrupt compaction of the passing air.

The air intake of the aircraft engine is equipped with a rigid shell 6 of the air duct 4 (Fig. 2, 3). The shell can be made of composite material. The air duct 4 is located and fixed 5 inside this shell 6. The shell 6 is fixed 7 to the power elements 8 of the airframe frame (Figure 4). The inner surface of the shell 5 covers the outer surface of the air duct 4. The air channel is fixed relative to the shell in order to exclude their displacement relative to each other.

Fixing 5 can be carried out by means of threaded connections, such as bolt-anchor nut, installed "in the strut", or by creating one-piece connections using welding, soldering, etc.

Fastening 7 of the shell 6 to the power elements 8 of the airframe frame, for example, to the spars or ribs of the wing can be performed using articulated units.

During the flight of the aircraft, air passes through the inlet device 2 and then is directed to the air duct 4, inside which the air flow is compacted.

When compacting the flow, local loads occur acting on the walls of the air channel, which, due to rigid fastening, are transmitted to the shell through the locking elements and do not cause deformation of the air channel profile, ensuring its rigidity and strength.

The air duct 4, fixed to the rigid shell 6, forms a structure that has joint inertial characteristics that absorb local and vibration loads that occur in the air duct.

If a load moment greater than the moment of inertia of the joint structure is created in the air duct, it is transmitted to the airframe through the fastening elements 7 of the shell 6 to the airframe and compensated for by its inertial characteristics.

Thus, the stability of the air intake and its strength are achieved in all flight modes and possible changes in angles of attack, as well as reducing the load on the airframe.

To unload the fastening elements 7 of the shell 6 to the airframe, they can be made articulated, using articulated units, while, in case of excessive local deformations when loading the joint structure of the air pipeline and the shell, instead of loading the junction point, a rotation will occur relative to the axes of the hinges in the direction of this moment. And, on the contrary, local deformations during the operation of the airframe frame will not lead to loading of the air channel




https://yandex.ru/patents/doc/RU209424U1_20220316

Thanks to stealthflanker

The engine intakes should be sitting on top of the wing area of the very speculative drawing.

Yes, I mistook the bulges in the top of the wing as just being bulges and not intakes with the cockpit canopy being the intake like the intake on the MiG Skat.

An air intake above the wing proves its primary use will be at medium to high altitudes where its flight speeds will be highest and fuel burn lowest maximising flight range and endurance, while reducing RCS from below from any angle.

GarryB wrote:An air intake above the wing proves its primary use will be at medium to high altitudes where its flight speeds will be highest and fuel burn lowest maximising flight range and endurance, while reducing RCS from below from any angle.

Criminal waste of resources. Give me one good reason as to why there is a need for a PAK-FA when S-70 Okhotnik already exists?

Bombers came in handy when UCAVs did not exist. Today a Su-30SM, Su-35, Su-34 paired with a S-70 Okhotnik can perform the same operations far more effectively than a heavy bomber.