PAK FA, T-50: News #1

Viktor wrote:How reliable is Dmitry Litovkin ?

John Reed in Foreign Policy wrote:This might be the easiest ever find of an MIA airplane. You're looking at a Bing Maps image of the Mikoyan (MiG) Project 1.44, Russia's first attempt at building a flyable stealth fighter and the jet that some said was sent to China to help kick-start Beijing's stealth development program. The jet is the larger of the two shown above sitting just outside of Moscow at Zhukovsky airfield (we have no idea what the smaller, darker plane alongside the 1.44 is).

[url=/image_preview.php?i=52&u=17812518][/url]

Project 1.44 was meant to be the Soviet Union (and later Russia's) super-fast, super-maneuverable answer to the United States' premier fighter, the F-22 Raptor.  However, the jet was underfunded in the days following the collapse of the Soviet Union. When the plane finally took its maiden flight in 2000, its designers found multiple flaws with the aircraft and the project was abandoned.

The 1.44 was designed with stealth-like angles, an internal weapons bay and supposedly used electronic countermeasures and special coatings to help reduce its radar signature. It also featured digital flight controls along with thrust vectoring engines and canards (little wings) on the front of the fuselage aimed at making the jet incredibly maneuverable.

But, in 2001, Russian officials shelved Project 1.44 in favor of a more modern design from MiG's rival Sukhoi -- the T-50 PAK FA. The 1.44 supposedly disappeared into storage after that. A quick Google Images search reveals recent-looking photos of the jet in storage -- some of which claim they are from 2009 and taken near Moscow. (Google Maps also shows grainy satellite imagery the plane sitting on the ramp at Zhukovsky airfield.)

In late 2010 China unveiled its J-20 stealth fighter, a jet that struck many as an updated version of the Project 1.44 design. Just look at the tail-end of both jets and you'll see where this idea comes from. The J-20, like the 1.44, is a big, single seat, twin-engine jet complete with an internal weapons bay and canards on the front. The obvious differences disappear there. The lines of the J-20 are a lot stealthier than the 1.44's. The engines are laid out differently on the two jets (the 1.44's air intakes are slung below the fuselage while the J-20's hug the plane's sides).

While MiG has denied giving information on Project 1.44 to the Chinese, Reuters in August 2011 cited a senior Russian official as saying "it looks like they got access . . . to documents related to the Mikoyan."

The wire service also cited an "independent analyst" named Adil Mukashev as saying that China bought the tail section of the MiG 1.44.

It's important to note that the Russians refused to sell Beijing Sukhoi Su-33 aircraft carrier-borne fighters after it was discovered China was attempting to reverse-engineer and build an unlicensed version of the Su-33's predecessor. Beijing's J-11B land-based fighter and the J-15 carrier-based fighter are the results of that effort. (Though there are rumors that the work on these Chinese jets actually occurred under a secret contract with Russia.)

As you can see from the image above, Project 1.44 still sits in Russia. Maybe the Chinese bought the tail of a non-flying mock up of the aircraft or just got access to the designs. Heck, maybe the Russians aren't lying about not giving information on the 1.44 to the Chinese. Maybe someone like China's Red Star hacking crew stole the designs. Red Star is suspected by Russian cybersecurity giant Kaspersky Lab of stealing defense, industrial and diplomatic secrets on behalf of the Chinese government, with a focus on victims in Russia and Asia.

GarryB wrote:
How is Meteor (100km+) a huge advantage over R-37M (300km)?

The fact that the US has all sorts of useful stuff like AIM-9X high off boresight AAMs doesn't mean much when their F-22s can't even use it so in a dog fight it would be like a Mig-29 against an F-16 in the early 1990s... which means instant victory to the Mig as the F-16 just couldn't compete.

TR1 wrote:I was mostly, admittedly, talking about radar. In terms of this primary sensor, the Su-35 is light years ahead of EF and its Captor.
The IRST also enjoys a much larger aperture.

Datalink is very secretive stuff, but is nothing new for Russian birds- they had them back in USSR days. Of course back then they were criticized by West for being "reliant on GCI" but really it was a natural step in providing fighters with more complete radar picture.

Missiles are a matter of integration, so I don't see how that's an EF exclusive advantage. Of course if we talk about weapons, the Su-35 is cleared with FAR more A2G munitions than the EF is. The typhoons path to full multi-role capability has been long and painfull. Today they can....drop guided bombs and that's pretty much it.
Of course, this isn't really the fault of the bird, but the situation it was born in.

With pods Russia is behind. We will see if this new pod is integrated into Su-35, hopefully sooner than later.

TR1 wrote:
The Su-35 uses already a much more technologically advanced array.
Russia has been flying AESAs for as long as Europe
Yeah, it doesn't look good for Europe, thats for sure.

NickM wrote:

TR1 wrote:
The Su-35 uses already a much more technologically advanced array.
Russia has been flying AESAs for as long as Europe
Yeah, it doesn't look good for Europe, thats for sure.

Have you been declared Clinically Insane yet ? If not it's a crime against humanity .

Your diatribe is simply mental masturbation . Only an idiot will say that the SU 35 has a more advanced technologically advanced array . A good question to ask you is why has the SU 35 failed in all the competitions that it took part in , worldwide inspite of such advanced technologies .

When it comes to radar and sensor fusion Russia is half a decade behind EU . There isn't a single company in Russia or Asia that can develop AESA radars as advanced as those designed by Selex.

Simultaneous/interleavedA/A andA/G Modes , Wide Field of Regard re-positioner , Extended Missile Guidance, Fully solid state GalliumArsenideAESA technology with high MeanTime Between critical Failures  are just some of the features that puts the Captor light years ahead of anything that Zuk can come up with .

NickM wrote:

TR1 wrote:
The Su-35 uses already a much more technologically advanced array.
Russia has been flying AESAs for as long as Europe
Yeah, it doesn't look good for Europe, thats for sure.

Have you been declared Clinically Insane yet ? If not it's a crime against humanity .

Your diatribe is simply mental masturbation . Only an idiot will say that the SU 35 has a more advanced technologically advanced array . A good question to ask you is why has the SU 35 failed in all the competitions that it took part in , worldwide inspite of such advanced technologies .

When it comes to radar and sensor fusion Russia is half a decade behind EU . There isn't a single company in Russia or Asia that can develop AESA radars as advanced as those designed by Selex.

Simultaneous/interleavedA/A andA/G Modes , Wide Field of Regard re-positioner , Extended Missile Guidance, Fully solid state GalliumArsenideAESA technology with high MeanTime Between critical Failures  are just some of the features that puts the Captor light years ahead of anything that Zuk can come up with .

TR1 wrote:

NickM wrote:

TR1 wrote:
The Su-35 uses already a much more technologically advanced array.
Russia has been flying AESAs for as long as Europe
Yeah, it doesn't look good for Europe, thats for sure.

Have you been declared Clinically Insane yet ? If not it's a crime against humanity .

Your diatribe is simply mental masturbation . Only an idiot will say that the SU 35 has a more advanced technologically advanced array . A good question to ask you is why has the SU 35 failed in all the competitions that it took part in , worldwide inspite of such advanced technologies .

When it comes to radar and sensor fusion Russia is half a decade behind EU . There isn't a single company in Russia or Asia that can develop AESA radars as advanced as those designed by Selex.

Simultaneous/interleavedA/A andA/G Modes , Wide Field of Regard re-positioner , Extended Missile Guidance, Fully solid state GalliumArsenideAESA technology with high MeanTime Between critical Failures  are just some of the features that puts the Captor light years ahead of anything that Zuk can come up with .

Tell us how the Captor, is better than Irbis.

I will wait, my mentally challanged friend .


Irbis beats the shit out of Captor, today.
No ifs, buts, anythings about it.
Deal with it.
You have no clue what you are babbling about, like always.

Su-35 hasn't failed on technical grounds, anywhere. In fact can you show us when it has been present @ fly-offs vs other birds?
EF is an export failure compared to Su-27 family.

sepheronx wrote:

It is no secret that Su-27 series have had a good run export wise.  Although, as I do not know what the Captor radars capabilities are, there is indeed an AESA derivative and that in itself allows it to be more technologically advanced than Irbis-E PESA radar, as it would then be able to work in LPI mode while Irbis cannot.  Irbis on the other hand is a very powerful radar that is capable of tracking/engaging at longer distances (my best bet).  But, with that brute power, it would be easier to pick up with Radar warning sensors than what the Captor-E would be, as well, in todays world, Electronic warfare is even more potent and import, thus AESA has better ECM, ECCM and EW capabilities than PESA, which would make the Irbis-E more susceptible to being attacked and or countered.  Maybe they will rely more on wingtipped EW/ECCM/ECM pods to protect the Su-35, but technically, if the ET is using AESA radar, in itself, makes it more advanced technologically.

it can use it.
granted i dont know much about else but ramjet powered meteor is better in many areas , then r-37.
like you said its much more then 100km. and r-37 300km range is in ideal conditions, realistic range for a chasing target will be 1/4 that at best ,...lets not forget the weight difference means you can carry much more meteor missiles and need less space.

TR1 wrote:

sepheronx wrote:

It is no secret that Su-27 series have had a good run export wise.  Although, as I do not know what the Captor radars capabilities are, there is indeed an AESA derivative and that in itself allows it to be more technologically advanced than Irbis-E PESA radar, as it would then be able to work in LPI mode while Irbis cannot.  Irbis on the other hand is a very powerful radar that is capable of tracking/engaging at longer distances (my best bet).  But, with that brute power, it would be easier to pick up with Radar warning sensors than what the Captor-E would be, as well, in todays world, Electronic warfare is even more potent and import, thus AESA has better ECM, ECCM and EW capabilities than PESA, which would make the Irbis-E more susceptible to being attacked and or countered.  Maybe they will rely more on wingtipped EW/ECCM/ECM pods to protect the Su-35, but technically, if the ET is using AESA radar, in itself, makes it more advanced technologically.

EF does not use an AESA today, nor will it for sometimes.
NIIP also has AESA radars of similar size for Flankers, for India (Super MKI) and a slightly smaller array for PAK-FA, so they are hardly behind Eurofighter in this aspect as well.
Of course they is also Zhuk-AE which has been flying for years, but lets stick to Flanker marker for now.

As of today, Irbis is tested and operational, and its EF equivalent is Captor, which is a simple mechanical array.
Irbis absolutely crushes Captor in this comparison.

The jet is the larger of the two shown above sitting just outside of Moscow at Zhukovsky airfield (we have no idea what the smaller, darker plane alongside the 1.44 is).

Zhuk-A has been offered for quite some time and as far as I know, a 1000-1100 T/R Module variant is being tested as we speak. But after all this, they end up purchasing Zhuk-A for Ka-52K...

But as they are not purchasing AESA radar besides the one for Ka-52K and PAK FA (I'll Mention MiG-35 when they do decide to purchase it), is indication they are not really interested in newer technology. I mean heck, the Vityaz radar could very well be PESA as well, and that is pretty sad, especially when there are delays.

Ka-52 won't be serially produced with AESA for several years at best either.

"GarryB

Zhuk-A has been offered for quite some time and as far as I know, a 1000-1100 T/R Module variant is being tested as we speak. But after all this, they end up purchasing Zhuk-A for Ka-52K...

I doubt any Russian AESAs have been offered for export yet and the set for the Ka-52K is for the naval model only.

I really don't understand your strange fixation with AESA radars. They are very expensive and don't have many advantages over a mature PESA that are actually that useful in a combat environment.

Once they have perfected production and got them into service the price will reduce and they will become a logical choice... but until then it makes rather more sense to continue with what works yet is a fraction of the cost.

The US also went nuts over Stealth a while back and that has so far proved expensive and largely not that pivotal either.

TR1 wrote:So photos of j20 with only 2 missies per bay emerge.

SOC wrote:

TR1 wrote:So photos of j20 with only 2 missies per bay emerge.

Nope.  It has apparent attachment points for a third pylon adapter in each bay, between the two already shown.  Assuming a loadout of four BVRAAMs may prove erroneous.

I don't care about the "which one is better" argument, but come on people, attention to detail!

Rpg type 7v wrote:there is very little production of aesa elements in Russia ,and all that is taken up by new massive search radars that they need for full coverage and their anti-stealth properties, thats why that russian decision is so critical ,no other country is building that low requencies aesa ,when you add fighters and upcoming S-500 ,nothing is left for vytaz and many other non-critical systems...
on the other hand there is lots of spare capacity for factories that produce phase shifters , radar-emmiting twt or other tubes , high voltage equipment (aesa uses lower voltages so its not compatible).
so that could be the reason they make even more pesas today ,which are good but not the best   , aesa and pesa demand very different manufacturing products ,russia (or russian factories) need modernization   ...