PAK-FA, T-50: News #2

But with stating that Russia does not want a attack capability I simply must protest. S-300 and S-400 systems are defensive, but they have enough range to shoot down planes across the border. An S-300 in Damascus can shoot down a plane over Tel Aviv.

A car can be used to murder someone... that does not imply that all car designers and manufacturers intend cars to be used as murder weapons.

S-300 and S-400 were designed for the purpose of removing enemy air assets from the skies.

The fact that they can bring down aircraft 400km from the the launchers does not mean they are intended as a substitute for strike aircraft and bombers or cruise missiles for the invasion of an enemy state.

they are merely evolutions of previous generation systems with incrementally higher range performance.

Between two superpowers, there is no aggressor or defender, there is the victor.

Between Russia and the USA/West there is clearly an aggressor and a defender that reacts to the aggression... the amusing part is that if you listen to what they actually say it would be the aggressor claiming to be the defender...

When it comes down to it, there is only the victor. In a war, no side will care. Russia will not sit back and let NATO/US have at it with there IADS. They will open up with cruise missile strikes and Iskanders. They will try to punch through defending areas with PAK-FA and other aircraft. The best defense is the offensive that destroys the opponents offensive.

I agree the best defence includes offensive technology, but the PAK FA is not intended to fly over Washington or London or Brussels... the PAK FA will be part of a defence... there will be a range of long range cruise missiles that will be perfectly adequate to deliver offensive blows.

PAK FA will spend most of its time defending Russian airspace from western equivalents.

Ballistic and cruise missiles will deal with enemy forces quickly enough.

One could say that in all out war there are no winners... the Soviets lost 20 odd million people... the only silver lining is that they won. If they had lost it would have been much worse.

Agreed, but the situation is a definite possibility. Let's agree to this, the PAK-FA is an excellent plane with some serious capabilities that can be used in a very wide range of missions.
Although, when I mean offensive missions that would be undertaken by the PAK-FA, I mean missions such as SEAD/DEAD, destroying enemy AWACS, and striking at command and control centers that are out of range of Iskander and too time sensetive for a Kalibre or Kh-101 strike.

I agree highly, Russia is not interested in ruling the world or bombing Washington. But they know the capability to do so is important and the PAK-FA has serious attack capability.

Excellent innovation that further reduces complications and increases reliability. I am interested in the benefits other than the obvious being able to start with out oxygen.


Does this affect any other factors like heat emission, fuel consumption etc?

2SPOOKY4U wrote:Excellent innovation that further reduces complications and increases reliability. I am interested in the benefits other than the obvious being able to start with out oxygen.


Does this affect any other factors like heat emission, fuel consumption etc?

Sad news, it means it won't deprive pilots of oxygen like our beloved F-22A, how will the PAK-FA ever compete if it doesn't asphyxiate Russian pilots?

And the birth of the beast

Demonstrator new engine for the fighter T-50 will be in 2015

Viktor wrote:And the birth of the beast  

Demonstrator new engine for the fighter T-50 will be in 2015

Yay... 10-25% increase.. i wonder what's that mean.. If taken as dry and afterburning thrust.. hmmm the PAKFA's new engine might have hmm 9680 Kgf (21511 Lbf) of full dry thrust and 18125 (40278 Lbf) Kgf of afterburning thrust.

quite powerful beast.. and there's two of it.

2SPOOKY4U wrote:It is unlikely that Russia would invade a country the western way. But with stating that Russia does not want a attack capability I simply must protest.

Indeed..

Russia will not be invading nations anytime soon.. for Me CRIMEA was not an invasion ,but an invitation by the autonomous government of Crimea. But if Russia is attacked.. by X or Y country..  Perhaps in a provocation .. Russia will need to switch from defense to offense and might have a need to Use Pak_FA to penetrate enemy lines and bomb something there. It could be used too.. to sink a war ship...or aircraft carrier. flying under the radar + Low RCS + cruise missile . So for offensive capabilities Pak-FA do have its role. and Russia could be facing an scenario when they will need to slap the face of a nation for attacking them.

This is from the Paralay forums, could this be the reason why their isn't flat nozzles on the PAK-FA? Round nozzles that reduce IR-signature without getting rid of 3-D vectoring?

http://savepic.su/4719528.jpg

http://savepic.su/4719528m.htm

Via an aerosol system. Wonder if it actually pans out....looks like it was seriously tested.

That flat nozzle design is from the 1980s when they were testing TVC nozzles and their IR signature.

I remember seeing a photo up close of a MiG-29 engine nozzle that had two layers of petals with cold bypass air blowing between the two petal layers to reduce IR signature of the metal engine structure of the exposed engine nozzles.

Haven't seen an IR images of them to confirm how effective that was but I believe the flat nozzles reduced thrust by something like 15% which they were not happy about... hense they weren't actually used operationally on a Russian aircraft design.

This ones for a good laugh, straight from F-16.net:

magnumcromagnon wrote:This ones for a good laugh, straight from F-16.net:

Wow.... 

collegeboy16 wrote:

Your picture doesn't load for me.

Werewolf wrote:

collegeboy16 wrote:

Your picture doesn't load for me.

Here's collegeboy's image lol:

[edited at authors request]

GarryB wrote:

+1 Garry
Same for magnum if i could've voted twice in one day.

magnumcromagnon wrote:

Werewolf wrote:

collegeboy16 wrote:

Your picture doesn't load for me.

Here's collegeboy's image lol:

[edited at authors request]

Well then....

damn, i feel really bad for that one- guys can you please remove it? pretty please. and im really sorry to the makers of that plane, really inconsiderate of me to berate the thousands of engineers and the millions of man hours or work they put in it.

collegeboy16 wrote:damn, i feel really bad for that one- guys can you please remove it? pretty please. and im really sorry to the makers of that plane, really inconsiderate of me to berate the thousands of engineers and the millions of man hours or work they put in it.

There's no need to be ashamed, the image is brilliant and hilarious, thanks for sharing lmao! Hell it's even worth re-posting for future purposes.

magnumcromagnon wrote:

collegeboy16 wrote:damn, i feel really bad for that one- guys can you please remove it? pretty please. and im really sorry to the makers of that plane, really inconsiderate of me to berate the thousands of engineers and the millions of man hours or work they put in it.

There's no need to be ashamed, the image is brilliant and hilarious, thanks for sharing lmao! Hell it's even worth re-posting for future purposes.

well, its not even correct- dunno what happened and the image hosting butchered it, anyway please just take it away. the bundle of leaves i sweeped this morning is starting to smoke now, and its just outside the window from where i sit- must be work of that airborne laser