PAK-FA, T-50: News #2

Can some one help me compare the rear side view of PAK-FA with similar rear view of F-22 and F-35.

I am referring to this picture of PAK-FA http://img-d.photosight.ru/b30/5532111_xlarge.jpg

Here is JSF Pic    http://www.ausairpower.net/USAF/F-35A-SDD-Ventral+Bays-1.jpg

I find the Engine similar to Flanker is that a RCS enhancer or will be see some covering over the engine or just RAM Coating ?


Can some one provide more details on how Sukhoi is trying to deal with rear aspect of RCS , Including Engine ? If some patients says so

Just read on Ria T-50 landed with slight Fire on one engine which was quickly extinguished.

The incident occurred at the airport Gromov Flight Research Institute in Ramenskoye.


"According to preliminary data, the T-50 was a failure of one of the power plants, and during landing was a slight fire plating. People were not injured, the hearth fire was extinguished quickly," - said the agency interlocutor.


Circumstances of the incident are being investigated.

Here is a picture - hopefully they will fix it soon

I hope they could repair it.

Viktor wrote:Here is a picture - hopefully they will fix it soon

The assholes at MP.net are probably masturbating over this, don't worry the Pentagon has countless problems with their stealth assets of their own...F-22 Raptor, B-2 Spirit, and now the F-35 lightning are claimed to be kings of skies but most of those "chess pieces" prefer being queens of the hangars lol!

medo wrote:I hope they could repair it.

Well the T-50 is still in prototype stage, but circumstances such as this are bound to happen.

magnumcromagnon wrote:


The assholes at MP.net are probably masturbating over this, don't worry the Pentagon has countless problems with their stealth assets of their own...F-22 Raptor, B-2 Spirit, and now the F-35 lightning are claimed to be kings of skies but most of those "chess pieces" prefer being queens of the hangars lol!

WHo cares what they say..  But the Pak-FA anyway is a total irrelevant plane in Russian nation security ,Nobody can fly over Russian Airspace anyway with their strong air defenses. What Russia needs is PAK-DA..



They need Stealth Bomber that looks as cool as this..  
An offensive strategic Long Range Bomber ,which purpose is to fly around the wrold in enemy territory or near it , and is the game changing weapon that could give Russia a major military advantage over adversaries in case of a major conflict. Their SU-35s will be more than enough to handle 99% of NATO combat planes.

Viktor wrote:Here is a picture - hopefully they will fix it soon

Looks pretty bad. They will probably not repair it as it wouldn't be cost effective. But it's usually the case that the early prototypes of any new plane are retired early anyway. I'd say much of the avionics could be recovered and the avionics test programme continued on another airframe.

magnumcromagnon wrote:[

The assholes at MP.net are probably masturbating over this, !

It's expected anyway.

Glad that no loss of life.

Is small info..

But it have been confirmed that MIG corporation is working on a 5th Generation Stealth Plane too..

http://actualidad.rt.com/actualidad/view/130705-mig-caza-quinta-generacion-rusia

It will not compete with Pak-FA they say and will have other functions.
It will be based on the Mig-35 design and probably will be a much cheapier stealth plane . This is good news
because Migs are nicer looking than Sukhois for me.. LOL

I have long supported the idea of a cheaper lighter simpler stealth aircraft as long as it actually is cheaper and simpler and lighter.

There are many missions where a Yak-130 with a radar can do the same job as a MiG-35 or Su-35, like drop a 250kg or 500kg guided bomb on a target from medium altitude.

When PAK FA is operational you want it to be a hunter but you wont be able to afford more than maybe 250 of them so having perhaps 4-500 smaller lighter stealth aircraft to fill the gaps and operate with the more expensive aircraft makes a lot of sense.

The critical thing is not to make the cheaper lighter more expensive to buy and operate than the bigger stealth plane.

In areas where it operates alone it can be a stealthy light fighter that clears the skies of enemy aircraft and enemy ground radar... and when the enemy air defence is in a bad way it can start carrying heavy external loads and act as a bomb truck while other light and also heavy stealth fighters support it by keeping the skies clear of threats.

GarryB wrote:I have long supported the idea of a cheaper lighter simpler stealth aircraft as long as it actually is cheaper and simpler and lighter.

There are many missions where a Yak-130 with a radar can do the same job as a MiG-35 or Su-35, like drop a 250kg or 500kg guided bomb on a target from medium altitude.

When PAK FA is operational you want it to be a hunter but you wont be able to afford more than maybe 250 of them so having perhaps 4-500 smaller lighter stealth aircraft to fill the gaps and operate with the more expensive aircraft makes a lot of sense.

The critical thing is not to make the cheaper lighter more expensive to buy and operate than the bigger stealth plane.

In areas where it operates alone it can be a stealthy light fighter that clears the skies of enemy aircraft and enemy ground radar... and when the enemy air defence is in a bad way it can start carrying heavy external loads and act as a bomb truck while other light and also heavy stealth fighters support it by keeping the skies clear of threats.

I agree, I'll add my input:

With the high-low mix of 5th gen aircraft with PAK-FA and LMFS, you'd want a 2-to-1 ratio or even a 3-to-1 ratio with the 2 or 3 LMFS for every T-50. They should scout 50-100 km's ahead clearing the skies of pests and future iterations of Su-34's can act as flying command posts controlling 4-6 attack drones. May'be specialized Su-34's with elongated cockpit/sleeping quarters capsule but without beds instead with 6 control interfaces to control UCAV's.

BlackArrow wrote:Looks pretty bad. They will probably not repair it as it wouldn't be cost effective. But it's usually the case that the early prototypes of any new plane are retired early anyway. I'd say much of the avionics could be recovered and the avionics test programme continued on another airframe.

I'm no expert but it doesn't look worth repairing. It depends on how much of the internals are damaged I guess

Cyberspec wrote:

BlackArrow wrote:Looks pretty bad. They will probably not repair it as it wouldn't be cost effective. But it's usually the case that the early prototypes of any new plane are retired early anyway. I'd say much of the avionics could be recovered and the avionics test programme continued on another airframe.

I'm no expert but it doesn't look worth repairing. It depends on how much of the internals are damaged I guess

They'll restore it:

RIA Novosti wrote:“The jet will be restored. No one was injured. Sukhoi company has set up a commission to investigate the reasons of the accident. But the accident will not change the schedule of test runs slated for the T-50 program,” the company said in a statement.

RIA Link

I agree, I'll add my input:

The biggest mistake they could make is to try to make the smaller new fighter into something better and more capable than the bigger fighter... with the result being the small cheap fighter is too expensive to buy in numbers... which defeats the whole purpose.

I'm no expert but it doesn't look worth repairing. It depends on how much of the internals are damaged I guess

I am not expert either, but it probably looks rather worse than it really is with lots of surface smoke damage. Most of the skin will need replacing and likely some of the internal structure will need replacing, but I doubt it would be that much of a problem to fix it.

Wonder what caused the fire... it looks too far forward to be engine related...

Maybe it was gun testing related?

Can some one provide more details on how Sukhoi is trying to deal with rear aspect of RCS , Including Engine ? If some patients says so

There was talk of development of a flat exhaust but they were still working on it.

Equally it is possible they might develop sawtooth exhaust nozzles for the engines themselves and the ability to vector them and hide the internal compressor blades should reduce RCS too, but with ground radar support they should know where all enemy aircraft and threats are and generally face and attack the nearest first so radar cross section of the rear is not as critical as it is for the F-22 which is supposed to operate on its own over enemy airspace.

Imho.. Russia will be Rich with China Gas deals.. there is Japan ,South Korea and India saying me too.. and there is also another
pipeline in discussion for the western side of CHINA. And Building Nuclear reactors Russia is going to make a lot of money too ..
Turkey, Egypt ,Jordan ,Iran ,India ,Britain ,Armenia ,Kazakistan ,Argentina .Vietnam,Sooth Africa etc... is just a few names of the complete list of Nations that wants a Nuclear Reactor from Russia.Each reactor can cost as much as $300 millions dollars to make and many wants more than one reactor.. Iran for example wants 8 of them.

So with the big boost Russia will receive from its economy , they should seriously consider developing a 5th Generation airforce from top to button and in this order ....

1) A mesosphere high altitude ,supersonic or hypersonic tactical Stealth Bomber that can launch conventional or nuclear precision strikes.
with super long range replacement for TU-160.
2)A heavy weight Stealth fortress ,with Huge capabilities to carry almost any bomb or ICBM.. Similar to B-2 but much bigger and more lethal.to replace the TU-95. (Pak-da)
3) A 5th generation stealth version of Su-31 interceptor ..
4)A 5th Generation stealth version of SU-34 bomber.
5)A 5th generation stealth version of Tu-22M
6)Sukhoi Pak-FA
7)5th generation version of Mig-35.
8)a Stealth Attack drone

The first two heavy bombers ,just a couple of dozens of each will be fine ~30 of them..
the Interceptor too.. and the for the smaller multi role combat planes from 200-300s will be fine of each.

Vann7 wrote:

So with the big boost Russia will receive from its economy , they should seriously consider developing a 5th Generation airforce from top to button and in this order ....

1) A mesosphere high altitude ,supersonic or hypersonic tactical Stealth Bomber that can launch conventional or nuclear precision strikes.
with super long range replacement for TU-160.
2)A heavy weight Stealth fortress ,with Huge capabilities to carry almost any bomb or ICBM.. Similar to B-2 but much bigger and more lethal.to replace the TU-95.  (Pak-da)
3) A 5th generation stealth version of Su-31 interceptor ..
4)A 5th Generation stealth version of SU-34 bomber.
5)A 5th generation stealth version of Tu-22M
6)Sukhoi Pak-FA
7)5th generation version of Mig-35.  
8)a Stealth Attack drone

The first two heavy bombers ,just a couple of dozens of each will be fine ~30 of them..
the Interceptor too..  and the for the smaller multi role combat planes from 200-300s will be fine of each.

I'm an aviation fan, but I think it's money stolen to the Russian citizens. They told me that the land and house in Russia are very expensive (like in Italy ...) and the Russia is the bigger country in the world! The land should cost less, not more!!
A large economy to make big weapons? For what? Making enrich a few few people?
In Italy, the lobby wants at all costs the F-35, but the Italy now is a country on its knees!!! The F-35 is absurd to Italy! The Italian Police has problems with the gasoline for its cars!! Many families have problems with the money for books for the childrens to the school and they would like to buy the F-35 ... We are surviving thanks to Russian and Chinese tourists and their rolls of 500 Euros banknotes, but also in Italy: "they should seriously consider developing a 5th Generation airforce from top to button and in this order", or a: "mesosphere high altitude ,supersonic or hypersonic tactical Stealth Bomber ..." .................................... Thus, only the Banks celebrate with champagne, thanks to the debt that the State will do with them for the next fifty years!!!!!!!!!!

I'm an aviation fan, but I think it's money stolen from the Russian citizens. They told me that the land and house in Russia are very expensive (like in Italy ...) and the Russia is the bigger country in the world! The land should cost less, not more!!

They have plenty of cheap land... just not down the main street in Moscow.

In places where people don't want to live they have land cheaper...

But I agree that spending big on uber hypersonic stealth bombers would be a total waste of time and money.

Doing it in smaller steps... get hypersonic missiles into service first and then look at hypersonic aircraft.

I must admit super high speed aircraft are exciting to me mainly because a plane with scramjet engines just has the heat barrier to defeat and then really high speeds including orbital speed become possible...

A large economy to make big weapons? For what? Making enrich a few few people?

Exactly. You should aim for the best, but also for a high standard of living for the people of Russia. A lot of the high tech stuff developed for the military will have spinoffs for the civilian population... they have developed a DARPA like organisation to look at new technologies and how the military can use them... they also want a civilian DARPA that looks at how technology can help in civilian life too... and commercialise the technology developed for the military and use it to make things better for civilians.
For instance electric motors for tanks can be used in cars and trains, more powerful, more efficient batteries etc etc. Stored hydrogen to power fuel cells as a means of storing energy that is not effected by extreme cold like a battery... so you send electricity and store it in batteries... the extreme cold means battery life is extremely reduced, but using a fuel cell and distilled water to separate the hydrogen and store it means any time you want electricity and a little bit of heat byproduct you run the hydrogen through the fuel cell...

The amusing thing is that even if Russia spent trillions on these super bombers... what would protect them from ground based laser stations using megawatt or even gigawatt lasers? They don't exist now, but Russia having such bombers would create a requirement for solutions and these could be one solution.

GarryB wrote:

But I agree that spending big on uber hypersonic stealth bombers would be a total waste of time and money.

Doing it in smaller steps... get hypersonic missiles into service first and then look at hypersonic aircraft.

But Russia do have Hypersonic Missiles since soviet times.. there is nothing new with that.. ICBMs are mach 22 ,Iskanders are hypersonic ,
Scuds too , and they have hypersonic cruise missiles too and already testing a new generation Brahmos-2 missiles which are hypersonic too..
So Russia is already there. Moving to Hypersonic/Supersonic high altitude planes have enormous advantages ,like the ability to decapitate
any nation leadership and provoke a coup in a hostile country you know you will have to fight, and will make any nation hostile to Russia very worried if told there are flying planes above their heads with precision bombs. It can truly avoid wars.. because of the magnitude of the deterrence . Also with very high altitude bombers/spy planes you can be the eyes of your army and provide direct information of enemy movements and in real time ,the plane for example can illuminate the targets to bomb for the army artillery in the ground. And the High Altitude Stealth planes will remain at safe distance.. Drones can do that but they are very easy to shot down. The plane could also be used to sabotage satellites and intercept ICBMs from space.. Is a game changing weapon. Much more than any Pa-FA program..

There is still plenty of work to be done... most of their current hypersonic missiles are rocket powered... solid in the case of Iskander and liquid in the case of Scud and Kh-22M/32.

For practical hypersonic bombers and indeed hypersonic long range cruise missiles you need a fully functional and tested scramjet engine, and the technology to resist high skin temperatures for hours rather than minutes.

Another thing is that I think you over estimate the safety of hypersonic high flying aircraft... S-400 can already engage targets flying at rather more than 2km/s and S-500 will greatly increase the speed of the targets intercepted and the altitudes the can be intercepted to.

Personally I see hypersonic aircraft bringing Vladivostok and Kaliningrad closer together, and greatly reducing the cost of getting payloads into space.

Currently a MiG-31 with a modified rocket flying a zoom climb is a cheap way to get small satellites into space.

A Hypersonic bomber sized aircraft should be able to deliver multi ton payloads into space almost directly for the price of a few dozen tons of kerosene.

Interview with UAC General Director Victor Polyakov , Has some details on T-50/PAK-FA avionics/cockpit design etc

http://www.echo.msk.ru/programs/arsenal/1341492-echo/

GarryB wrote:Another thing is that I think you over estimate the safety of hypersonic high flying aircraft... S-400 can already engage targets flying at rather more than 2km/s and S-500 will greatly increase the speed of the targets intercepted and the altitudes the can be intercepted to.

For S-400 the number is rather 5 km/sec target speed

and for S-500 it is 7 km/sec

Austin wrote:

GarryB wrote:Another thing is that I think you over estimate the safety of hypersonic high flying aircraft... S-400 can already engage targets flying at rather more than 2km/s and S-500 will greatly increase the speed of the targets intercepted and the altitudes the can be intercepted to.

For S-400 the number is rather 5 km/sec target speed

and for S-500 it is 7 km/sec

If what you say is true then S-400 can intercept ballistic missiles traveling at speeds of Mach 14.6 and S-500 can intercept ballistic missiles traveling at speeds of Mach 20.5?

magnumcromagnon wrote:If what you say is true then S-400 can intercept ballistic missiles traveling at speeds of Mach 14.6 and S-500 can intercept ballistic missiles traveling at speeds of Mach 20.5?

Thats right. S-500 will therefore be able to shoot down even ICBMs