Russia Defence Forum

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


+70
Kimppis
Rmf
szo
Kyo
type055
kvs
tempestii
2SPOOKY4U
EKS
Mike E
navyfield
bantugbro
mutantsushi
gaurav
mig7
RTN
Morpheus Eberhardt
Indian Flanker
Zinuru
Djoka
George1
Airbornewolf
lulldapull
Hannibal Barca
Alex555
Hachimoto
Giulio
havok
eridan
etaepsilonk
magnumcromagnon
Cyberspec
ali.a.r
Werewolf
CaptainPakistan
GJ Flanker
macedonian
Arrow
zg18
BlackArrow
Vann7
flamming_python
KomissarBojanchev
a89
JPJ
Rpg type 7v
Department Of Defense
collegeboy16
quetzacol
dionis
AlfaT8
sepheronx
NickM
TheArmenian
coolieno99
nemrod
Zivo
Firebird
mack8
Mindstorm
Sujoy
Deep Throat
Stealthflanker
SOC
TR1
Flanky
medo
Viktor
Austin
GarryB
74 posters

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #2

    avatar
    Austin


    Posts : 7617
    Points : 8014
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #2 - Page 29 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #2

    Post  Austin Thu Jun 19, 2014 6:58 pm

    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    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?

    Not just BM but the more difficult and futuristic Hypersonic Platform that are under development and can travel within upper atmosphere at very high speed.
    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon


    Posts : 8138
    Points : 8273
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #2 - Page 29 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #2

    Post  magnumcromagnon Fri Jun 20, 2014 3:30 am

    Austin wrote:
    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    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?

    Not just BM but the more difficult and futuristic Hypersonic Platform that are under development and can travel within upper atmosphere at very high speed.

    Well from the theoretical S-500 design floating on the internet, the S-500 missile canister doesn't look much larger than that of S-400 canister, of course it could be much wider, and the question is how many missiles per TEL? Interestingly enough they could of went with the brute force approach to create a ABM SAM (Not named A-135) and used the same TEL as the TOPOL-M complex and used a missile and canister of similar size of the TOPOL-M complex (maybe with versions that are quad-packed canisters, multiple missiles with different ranges and speeds, single stage to 4 stage missles), with ranges well-over several thousands of KM's in range. Of course if they do that then they would need to make a radar with sufficient range, using the same TEL they can have lengthy radar arrays that open up and unfold in to a much larger arrays, maybe even utilize encoded up-links to communicate with strategic early-warning land based radars to improve range and accuracy of a mega SAM complex's massive unfolding radar arrays. Lastly it'll need tons of energy to power such massive mobile unfolding radar arrays, again using the same TEL they could create a  a small compact LFTR reactor that's armored to withstand 30mm caliber fire or armor even comparable to tank frontal armor to insure safety of the crew.
    TR1
    TR1


    Posts : 5435
    Points : 5433
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #2 - Page 29 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #2

    Post  TR1 Tue Jun 24, 2014 12:49 am

    http://news.usni.org/2014/06/23/breaking-fire-breaks-f-35-eglin-air-force-base-pilot-safe

    Fires fires everywhere.
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 40579
    Points : 41081
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #2 - Page 29 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #2

    Post  GarryB Tue Jun 24, 2014 2:18 am

    Well from the theoretical S-500 design floating on the internet, the S-500 missile canister doesn't look much larger than that of S-400 canister... <snip>

    There is no reason for S-500 to be that much bigger than S-400.

    Making a missile smaller and lighter means less powerful boosters can be used, or it can go further and faster.


    The S-400 has to be able destroy a range of targets including cruise missiles and UCAVs right through to B-2s and B-52s and SR-71s etc etc. It has the capability to engage long range ballistic targets too.

    The S-500, on the other hand is primarily designed to hit small fast ballistic targets, but as a consequence is also able to hit larger targets like hypersonic bombers... the closing speed alone means that S-500 could use a bucket of nails outside the atmosphere to kill the target... as it spreads then a collision becomes more and more likely while the lethality of even a single nail traveling at a closing speed of perhaps 10-15km/s means any manned vessel would be totally penetrated and explosive decompression would kill all on board and destroy the craft...

    The S-500 system will be fully mobile and there are rumours it will have a rather large X band AESA array radar with a range of 2,500km or so, but it will also be tied in to the IADS of Russia and therefore be warned about threats fairly early on.

    I am sure China will be interested in an export version too.
    Zivo
    Zivo


    Posts : 1487
    Points : 1511
    Join date : 2012-04-13
    Location : U.S.A.

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #2 - Page 29 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #2

    Post  Zivo Tue Jun 24, 2014 2:29 am

    TR1 wrote:http://news.usni.org/2014/06/23/breaking-fire-breaks-f-35-eglin-air-force-base-pilot-safe

    Fires fires everywhere.

    I'm not a believer in karma, but the Lockmart fanboys should have kept their mouth shut.

    The Chinese should just keep quiet. At this rate, the J-20 is next. There's a serial arsonist on the loose.
    Morpheus Eberhardt
    Morpheus Eberhardt


    Posts : 1925
    Points : 2032
    Join date : 2013-05-20

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #2 - Page 29 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #2

    Post  Morpheus Eberhardt Tue Jun 24, 2014 2:48 am

    TR1 wrote:http://news.usni.org/2014/06/23/breaking-fire-breaks-f-35-eglin-air-force-base-pilot-safe

    Fires fires everywhere.

    Were in the hell is Greenpeace now, with F-35 being a Baby Seal.
    AlfaT8
    AlfaT8


    Posts : 2489
    Points : 2480
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #2 - Page 29 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #2

    Post  AlfaT8 Tue Jun 24, 2014 3:56 am

    TR1 wrote:http://news.usni.org/2014/06/23/breaking-fire-breaks-f-35-eglin-air-force-base-pilot-safe

    Fires fires everywhere.
    Wasn't aware that spontaneous combustion was also one the F-35s "features", maybe they should start installing fire suppression systems on all F-35 variants.  Wink 
    collegeboy16
    collegeboy16


    Posts : 1135
    Points : 1134
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 28
    Location : Roanapur

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #2 - Page 29 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #2

    Post  collegeboy16 Tue Jun 24, 2014 5:03 pm

    AlfaT8 wrote:
    Wasn't aware that spontaneous combustion was also one the F-35s "features", maybe they should start installing fire suppression systems on all F-35 variants.  Wink 
    easy fix, just install the F-22s oxygen reduction system.
    Werewolf
    Werewolf


    Posts : 5931
    Points : 6120
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #2 - Page 29 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #2

    Post  Werewolf Tue Jun 24, 2014 5:06 pm

    Actually it would be a miracle with all the new and fancy aircrafts if even one would leave prototype phase without any failures like engine fires.
    AlfaT8
    AlfaT8


    Posts : 2489
    Points : 2480
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #2 - Page 29 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #2

    Post  AlfaT8 Tue Jun 24, 2014 11:18 pm

    collegeboy16 wrote:
    AlfaT8 wrote:
    Wasn't aware that spontaneous combustion was also one the F-35s "features", maybe they should start installing fire suppression systems on all F-35 variants.  Wink 
    easy fix, just install the F-22s oxygen reduction system.
    Wouldn't the poisonous gas be flammable??
    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon


    Posts : 8138
    Points : 8273
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #2 - Page 29 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #2

    Post  magnumcromagnon Tue Jun 24, 2014 11:47 pm

    collegeboy16 wrote:
    AlfaT8 wrote:
    Wasn't aware that spontaneous combustion was also one the F-35s "features", maybe they should start installing fire suppression systems on all F-35 variants.  Wink 
    easy fix, just install the F-22s oxygen reduction system.

    ...Or they could leave it the hangar 30-40 hours for ever hour of flight... Wink ...and If that fails then they could just let the garage doors on the hangar close, and if aircraft maintenance in the real world is anything like Grand Theft Auto than the airplane will be fixed automatically by the time the garage doors open up again... Cool
    AlfaT8
    AlfaT8


    Posts : 2489
    Points : 2480
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #2 - Page 29 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #2

    Post  AlfaT8 Wed Jun 25, 2014 4:08 am

    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    collegeboy16 wrote:
    AlfaT8 wrote:
    Wasn't aware that spontaneous combustion was also one the F-35s "features", maybe they should start installing fire suppression systems on all F-35 variants.  Wink 
    easy fix, just install the F-22s oxygen reduction system.

    ...Or they could leave it the hangar 30-40 hours for ever hour of flight... Wink ...and If that fails then they could just let the garage doors on the hangar close, and if aircraft maintenance in the real world is anything like Grand Theft Auto than the airplane will be fixed automatically by the time the garage doors open up again... Cool
    Thx Magnum, you reminded me of a question i had about the PAK-FA.

    How many hours of maintenance does the PAK-FA need per hour of flight, and how does it stack up compared to the F-35??  scratch
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 40579
    Points : 41081
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #2 - Page 29 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #2

    Post  GarryB Wed Jun 25, 2014 6:24 am

    Not really that important on a prototype... once they go into serial production to operational units then we will know if it is a hangar queen or not.

    They will have calculations... but they likely also predicted rather better numbers for F-22 than they actually got with the in service aircraft.
    AlfaT8
    AlfaT8


    Posts : 2489
    Points : 2480
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #2 - Page 29 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #2

    Post  AlfaT8 Sun Jun 29, 2014 11:28 pm

    Well.....this is offward, apparently the PAK-FA also has this "spontaneous combustion" feature, go-figure.  Embarassed 
    PAK-FA, T-50: News #2 - Page 29 10974611
    http://englishrussia.com/2014/06/10/t-50-jet-caught-fire/
    sepheronx
    sepheronx


    Posts : 8855
    Points : 9115
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 35
    Location : Canada

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #2 - Page 29 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #2

    Post  sepheronx Mon Jun 30, 2014 12:05 am

    AlfaT8 wrote:Well.....this is offward, apparently the PAK-FA also has this "spontaneous combustion" feature, go-figure.  Embarassed 
    PAK-FA, T-50: News #2 - Page 29 10974611
    http://englishrussia.com/2014/06/10/t-50-jet-caught-fire/

    I hope you can read, because this has already been discussed.
    AlfaT8
    AlfaT8


    Posts : 2489
    Points : 2480
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #2 - Page 29 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #2

    Post  AlfaT8 Mon Jun 30, 2014 12:18 am

    sepheronx wrote:
    I hope you can read, because this has already been discussed.
    Woops, sorry, this is what happens when i lose Internet connection for a few days, missed a lot of stuff. pale 
    sepheronx
    sepheronx


    Posts : 8855
    Points : 9115
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 35
    Location : Canada

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #2 - Page 29 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #2

    Post  sepheronx Mon Jun 30, 2014 4:14 am

    AlfaT8 wrote:
    sepheronx wrote:
    I hope you can read, because this has already been discussed.
    Woops, sorry, this is what happens when i lose Internet connection for a few days, missed a lot of stuff. pale 

    Sorry if I was harsh. Don't mean to be like Metberkut guy on mp.net
    AlfaT8
    AlfaT8


    Posts : 2489
    Points : 2480
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #2 - Page 29 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #2

    Post  AlfaT8 Mon Jun 30, 2014 5:14 am

    sepheronx wrote:
    Sorry if I was harsh.  Don't mean to be like Metberkut guy on mp.net
    Not at all, and i don't know many guys on MP.net other then Demian, no worries, at least AA (Average American) isn't on this forum.
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 40579
    Points : 41081
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #2 - Page 29 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #2

    Post  GarryB Mon Jun 30, 2014 1:40 pm

    Regarding the fire... the location suggests to me a fire started by using the cannon... sometimes if the area is not vented properly (and on stealth aircraft it is sealed to ensure stealth) there can be gas build ups that can be explosive.

    Another issue of course is that because it is often sealed then a long burst can heat up the gun and then when it goes back into stealth with a closed muzzle area the heat does not dissapate and the area can catch fire.

    Of course it could just as easily have been an electrical fire.

    BTW Regarding
    easy fix, just install the F-22s oxygen reduction system.

    Wouldn't the poisonous gas be flammable??

    The F-22 has been suffocating pilots by not supplying oxygen... oxygen deprivation puts fires out.. ie smothers them.
    AlfaT8
    AlfaT8


    Posts : 2489
    Points : 2480
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #2 - Page 29 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #2

    Post  AlfaT8 Mon Jun 30, 2014 2:05 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    easy fix, just install the F-22s oxygen reduction system.

    Wouldn't the poisonous gas be flammable??

    The F-22 has been suffocating pilots by not supplying oxygen... oxygen deprivation puts fires out.. ie smothers them.

    Got it, thx.  thumbsup
    Viktor
    Viktor


    Posts : 5796
    Points : 6429
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 44
    Location : Croatia

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #2 - Page 29 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #2

    Post  Viktor Thu Jul 31, 2014 5:52 pm

    They know the cause

    The Board found the causes of fire fighter PAK FA in Zhukovsky
    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon


    Posts : 8138
    Points : 8273
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #2 - Page 29 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #2

    Post  magnumcromagnon Thu Jul 31, 2014 7:00 pm

    Viktor wrote:They know the cause

    The Board found the causes of fire fighter PAK FA in Zhukovsky


    ...It's good to hear that it won't push back the Pak-Fa's schedule, let's hope that there's no negative consequences for not pushing it back... angel
    TR1
    TR1


    Posts : 5435
    Points : 5433
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #2 - Page 29 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #2

    Post  TR1 Thu Jul 31, 2014 7:51 pm

    They said the same when a Su-35 crashed, and it did indeed slow the program.

    So I don't believe this media PR bull-shit, it will have an affect on the program. These things happen however, and are to be expected. At least no pilot has yet (crossing fingers) died in the test program.
    TheArmenian
    TheArmenian


    Posts : 1880
    Points : 2025
    Join date : 2011-09-14

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #2 - Page 29 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #2

    Post  TheArmenian Thu Jul 31, 2014 11:36 pm

    TR1 wrote:They said the same when a Su-35 crashed, and it did indeed slow the program.

    So I don't believe this media PR bull-shit, it will have an affect on the program. These things happen however, and are to be expected. At least no pilot has yet (crossing fingers) died in the test program.

    Don't recall any Su-35 crash.
    The third prototype burned as it was still on the ground.
    sepheronx
    sepheronx


    Posts : 8855
    Points : 9115
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 35
    Location : Canada

    PAK-FA, T-50: News #2 - Page 29 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #2

    Post  sepheronx Fri Aug 01, 2014 1:55 am

    Such things are good it happens, especially when no one gets hurt. Reason is that it happens now before mass production, thus they can find and fix the issue. Progress should slow down so that they can spot any other issues too. In the mean time, more Su-35's and Su-30's should make do quite well.

    Sponsored content


    PAK-FA, T-50: News #2 - Page 29 Empty Re: PAK-FA, T-50: News #2

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Mon Nov 25, 2024 8:16 am