Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
ArrowRather very unlikely.
+70
BenVaserlan
Swgman_BK
Werewolf
Broski
lancelot
Finty
Kiko
franco
TMA1
Backman
limb
x_54_u43
Firebird
thegopnik
mnztr
Tsavo Lion
nero
Cyberspec
Isos
LMFS
Stealthflanker
Borschty
Labrador
eehnie
hoom
dino00
william.boutros
sda
GunshipDemocracy
Hole
Arrow
GarryB
The-thing-next-door
ZoA
BM-21
PapaDragon
T-47
eridan
SeigSoloyvov
Pierre Sprey
miketheterrible
marcellogo
kvs
Big_Gazza
Mindstorm
HM1199
Azi
OminousSpudd
Rmf
sepheronx
NEURONAV
gaurav
Mig-31BM2 Super Irbis-E
Austin
Backinblack
Flanky
jhelb
George1
medo
victor1985
KomissarBojanchev
mutantsushi
higurashihougi
magnumcromagnon
flamming_python
Kimppis
Morpheus Eberhardt
Viktor
Vann7
nemrod
74 posters
PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor
Arrow- Posts : 3492
Points : 3482
Join date : 2012-02-12
Rather very unlikely.
flamming_python likes this post
lancelot- Posts : 3175
Points : 3171
Join date : 2020-10-18
1. The project is called PAK DP. There is no such thing as a MiG-41. Aircraft names are only assigned after they enter service.
2. The developer's claim is that it will be able to launch hypersonic weapons. Not necessarily that the aircraft will be hypersonic unlike what many people continue to wrongly say.
3. There is nothing surprising about it having anti-satellite capabilities. The MiG-31D had the 79M6 ASAT missile.
4. The claim in 2018 was that the aircraft would enter service somewhere in the mid 2020s and that design started in 2017. There have been no official news since that I know of.
2. The developer's claim is that it will be able to launch hypersonic weapons. Not necessarily that the aircraft will be hypersonic unlike what many people continue to wrongly say.
3. There is nothing surprising about it having anti-satellite capabilities. The MiG-31D had the 79M6 ASAT missile.
4. The claim in 2018 was that the aircraft would enter service somewhere in the mid 2020s and that design started in 2017. There have been no official news since that I know of.
GarryB, flamming_python and GunshipDemocracy like this post
Isos- Posts : 11602
Points : 11570
Join date : 2015-11-06
Mig 41 name is unofficially used for the new heavy interceptor from Mig.
True. Hypersonic missile is one thing. Hypersonic plane another. The missile end up in pieces after it single lunch through its life. The plane need to be reused again and again. It changes the whole situation. Not easy at all to create a hypersonic plane because the hypersonic speeds impacts it way too much.
The mig-31 HAS anti sat weapons. Not "had".
They always fail to predict any date. So that proves nothing.
True. Hypersonic missile is one thing. Hypersonic plane another. The missile end up in pieces after it single lunch through its life. The plane need to be reused again and again. It changes the whole situation. Not easy at all to create a hypersonic plane because the hypersonic speeds impacts it way too much.
The mig-31 HAS anti sat weapons. Not "had".
They always fail to predict any date. So that proves nothing.
GarryB, flamming_python and GunshipDemocracy like this post
GarryB- Posts : 40551
Points : 41053
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
The design bureaus always propose number designations for their new designs and often the military accepts those proposed designations unless there is good reason not to.
The Su-57s designation changed multiple times and for a while the LMFSs designation was supposed to be MiG-35 or MiG-37 but likely wont be.
MiG-41 was first mentioned as a project codename and its number reflects that it is a development or replacement of the MiG-31... much like the Su-34 replaced the Su-24... it suggests a similar role but does not suggest they are related, with the Su-34 being based on the Su-27 design.
Claims the MiG-41 is not needed because the Su-57 can do the job or that the MiG-41 will use the next gen Su-57s engines don't make sense, the MiG-41 will be an interceptor, so speed and range of important, but manouver performance is not so important, and stealth is not so critical either.
The new fibreglass material they are making for making stealthy aircraft might be suitable but it would be important that it is heat resistant otherwise there is no point in using it.
The new engine for the Su-57 is not designed to operate for very long periods at max thrust like the engine of the MiG-31 is, or the MiG-41 will be.
Some sort of ramjet propulsion system is needed for mach 4 speeds, but it might use a scramjet motor and be limited to mach 4 by its size and weight... which would be the reverse of the MiG-25 and MiG-31 where the speed of the aircraft was limited by the speed performance of the engines.
It is not about thrust, the MiG-25 and the MiG-31 had similar flight speeds despite the MiG-25 having 11 ton thrust engines and the MiG-31 having 15 ton thrust engines.
Putting 18 ton thrust engines in either aircraft would not make them faster if said engine was not designed to go faster.
A higher flying aircraft that can operate at 35km with full fuel and weapons at mach 4 would massively expand the performance of most weapons it could carry.
The MiG-25RB had a computer based bombing system that was probably what the Gefest & T bombing system evolved from... releasing at medium to high altitude at very high speed would allow massive standoff bombing range even without glide kits... add glide kits that can take the speed and you are looking at going back to bombs instead of using missiles against a range of SEAD targets.
Note the Soviets had to develop a range of special heat resistant FAB bombs for the project and the accuracy was OK but not amazing, and did not really approach guided weapon accuracy like the current version seems to manage.
The bombs used were 1,500kg bombs and the MiG-31 version could carry 6 bombs, four under the wings and two under the belly for a total of 9 tons.... a modern version that added toss bombing features would be rather interesting... especially if it could be fitted with a guided glide bomb kit to introduce accuracy at the terminal phase of the attack.
Would certainly devastate even a quite large bridge with 9 tons of explosives hitting it in 6 places...
The Su-57s designation changed multiple times and for a while the LMFSs designation was supposed to be MiG-35 or MiG-37 but likely wont be.
MiG-41 was first mentioned as a project codename and its number reflects that it is a development or replacement of the MiG-31... much like the Su-34 replaced the Su-24... it suggests a similar role but does not suggest they are related, with the Su-34 being based on the Su-27 design.
Claims the MiG-41 is not needed because the Su-57 can do the job or that the MiG-41 will use the next gen Su-57s engines don't make sense, the MiG-41 will be an interceptor, so speed and range of important, but manouver performance is not so important, and stealth is not so critical either.
The new fibreglass material they are making for making stealthy aircraft might be suitable but it would be important that it is heat resistant otherwise there is no point in using it.
The new engine for the Su-57 is not designed to operate for very long periods at max thrust like the engine of the MiG-31 is, or the MiG-41 will be.
Some sort of ramjet propulsion system is needed for mach 4 speeds, but it might use a scramjet motor and be limited to mach 4 by its size and weight... which would be the reverse of the MiG-25 and MiG-31 where the speed of the aircraft was limited by the speed performance of the engines.
It is not about thrust, the MiG-25 and the MiG-31 had similar flight speeds despite the MiG-25 having 11 ton thrust engines and the MiG-31 having 15 ton thrust engines.
Putting 18 ton thrust engines in either aircraft would not make them faster if said engine was not designed to go faster.
A higher flying aircraft that can operate at 35km with full fuel and weapons at mach 4 would massively expand the performance of most weapons it could carry.
The MiG-25RB had a computer based bombing system that was probably what the Gefest & T bombing system evolved from... releasing at medium to high altitude at very high speed would allow massive standoff bombing range even without glide kits... add glide kits that can take the speed and you are looking at going back to bombs instead of using missiles against a range of SEAD targets.
Note the Soviets had to develop a range of special heat resistant FAB bombs for the project and the accuracy was OK but not amazing, and did not really approach guided weapon accuracy like the current version seems to manage.
The bombs used were 1,500kg bombs and the MiG-31 version could carry 6 bombs, four under the wings and two under the belly for a total of 9 tons.... a modern version that added toss bombing features would be rather interesting... especially if it could be fitted with a guided glide bomb kit to introduce accuracy at the terminal phase of the attack.
Would certainly devastate even a quite large bridge with 9 tons of explosives hitting it in 6 places...
flamming_python, Big_Gazza, GunshipDemocracy and Hole like this post
George1- Posts : 18523
Points : 19028
Join date : 2011-12-22
Location : Greece
It looks like a further development of MiG-31 in the video
Backman- Posts : 2709
Points : 2723
Join date : 2020-11-11
^Which is Russia's philosophy. Evolutionary design. That thing looks like how Russia would build it.
flamming_python, Big_Gazza and GunshipDemocracy like this post
GarryB- Posts : 40551
Points : 41053
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
The video is fan art isn't it?
The MiG-31 is basically evolved from the MiG-25 because the targets were the same... similar speed and similar range, with rather more missiles and a big radar and someone to monitor the radar on the plane.
I rather suspect the requirements for speed and range will be rather higher for the replacement plane, its call it MiG-41 because I rather expect the flight speed will require internal weapon bays and a clever way of launching weapons into a highly supersonic airflow slipstream. which is going to be a challenge.
The pneumatic struct on the weapon pylon that throws the R-77 and R-33 and R-37 clear of the aircraft is likely to be repeated inside the weapon bay, perhaps with a screen that opens in front of the weapon bay to provide turbulence so the airflow does not ram the missile backwards too quickly as it leaves the weapon bay.
Or a rear slot might open and they get chucked out the back or even thrown upwards and outwards away from the plane.
The MiG-31 is basically evolved from the MiG-25 because the targets were the same... similar speed and similar range, with rather more missiles and a big radar and someone to monitor the radar on the plane.
I rather suspect the requirements for speed and range will be rather higher for the replacement plane, its call it MiG-41 because I rather expect the flight speed will require internal weapon bays and a clever way of launching weapons into a highly supersonic airflow slipstream. which is going to be a challenge.
The pneumatic struct on the weapon pylon that throws the R-77 and R-33 and R-37 clear of the aircraft is likely to be repeated inside the weapon bay, perhaps with a screen that opens in front of the weapon bay to provide turbulence so the airflow does not ram the missile backwards too quickly as it leaves the weapon bay.
Or a rear slot might open and they get chucked out the back or even thrown upwards and outwards away from the plane.
kvs and BenVaserlan like this post
BenVaserlan- Posts : 58
Points : 64
Join date : 2018-06-20
Given agility is not a priority (meaning it could be an aerodynamically stable design), perhaps a swing-wing layout for better short field take off and high speed efficiency. What do you think?
GunshipDemocracy likes this post
Mir- Posts : 3834
Points : 3832
Join date : 2021-06-10
The design philosophy should be the same as the Mig-31. A pure high speed interceptor with electronics and weapons that can track and engage the enemy from vast distances. No need for any fancy manouvres like the Su-57.
A swing wing is a great concept but it will just add unnecessary weight and increased costs to design. Adequate lift should be provided through a blended wing design.
A swing wing is a great concept but it will just add unnecessary weight and increased costs to design. Adequate lift should be provided through a blended wing design.
GarryB, GunshipDemocracy, BenVaserlan and Broski like this post
Arrow- Posts : 3492
Points : 3482
Join date : 2012-02-12
A swing wing is a great concept but it will just add unnecessary weight and increased costs to design. Adequate lift should be provided through a blended wing design. wrote:
The most important and interesting thing will be the engine. If they want to actually reach 4M? Will this be a breakthrough plane? Unless they stay at a speed of around 2.8-3M.
GarryB, GunshipDemocracy, BenVaserlan and Broski like this post
Mir- Posts : 3834
Points : 3832
Join date : 2021-06-10
If were to design this plane I would stick with Mach 3 max and let the weapons do the hard running. No need to send a plane into space running after a bus when a cheap missile can do the job even better.
GarryB, GunshipDemocracy, The-thing-next-door, BenVaserlan and Broski like this post
GunshipDemocracy- Posts : 6171
Points : 6191
Join date : 2015-05-17
Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada
Mir wrote:If were to design this plane I would stick with Mach 3 max and let the weapons do the hard running. No need to send a plane into space running after a bus when a cheap missile can do the job even better.
well, you cannot design anything that the ordering party refuses to accept or did not request in the first place. They said 4,5-5000km/h then it has to be delivered. There must be a reason behind this.
BTW enemies I mean partners are already working on this solution, I bet Russians do as well.
https://newatlas.com/aircraft/hermeus-chimera-hypersonic-test/
GarryB, kvs, BenVaserlan and Broski like this post
Big_Gazza- Posts : 4901
Points : 4891
Join date : 2014-08-25
Location : Melbourne, Australia
My money is on the PAK-DP having a variable cycle turbojet/ramjet engine. Otherwise I can't see how it can achieve the alleged requirement of M4.5. Turbojets can't cut it, and hybrid engines like the SR-71s J58 (with its compressor bleed directed to the afterburner above M2.5) are temperamental and IIRC are subject to flameouts.
I've noticed some articles around claiming that the 1st flight of the PAK-DP is imminent, maybe even by years end. Nothing authoritive as far I'm concerned, but maybe where there is smoke there is a certain amount of hydrocarbons combusting in an oxygen-rich environment...
source
I've noticed some articles around claiming that the 1st flight of the PAK-DP is imminent, maybe even by years end. Nothing authoritive as far I'm concerned, but maybe where there is smoke there is a certain amount of hydrocarbons combusting in an oxygen-rich environment...
Russian 6th-gen MiG-41 interceptor will fly this year, Russia says
Anticipation builds as the MiG-41, a groundbreaking aircraft possessing truly space capabilities, is set to make its maiden flight this year. The Russian media outlet OverCloser recently reported that this superior machine is on the brink of being commissioned and is expected to join the ranks of the Russian Air Force within the next 2-3 years
As per the insights from Russian journalists, the MiG-41 stands unparalleled in its class. OverCloser suggests that the time is ripe for the MiG-41 to step into the limelight and replace the venerable yet still potent MiG-31.
MiG-41 is poised to take over from the MiG-31
The MiG-31, despite its age, has an impressive track record. It can target objects even in near space, intercept ballistic and cruise missiles, and the MiG-31K variant houses the first hypersonic air-launched missile. Despite the exceptional performance of the MiG-31, the need for a new long-range interceptor was recognized long ago.
The first attempt at extensive modernization was the MiG-31M, which surfaced in 1993. However, it never made it into production due to “financial difficulties”, but in reality, it was the pressure from American “partners” who were hesitant about Russia gaining more strength.
The current MiG-31s are undergoing an upgrade to the MiG-31BM. The upgrade featuring new radar and electronic enhancements, new missiles, and weapons control systems. However, the Foxhounds will face mass decommissioning. The reason – the exhaustion of their production resource in the coming decade.
This circumstance led to the inception of the PAK DP program, which has been developed under the most stringent secrecy. In 2019, the research phase was completed, and by 2021, a prototype was developed, initially slated to fly in 2025 and enter mass production in 2028. Surprisingly, the designers are two years ahead of schedule, an indication of their relentless commitment.
The emergence of the MiG-41 in its generation
While the technical specifications of this new development remain undisclosed, it is speculated that the MiG-41 will be capable of matching the speed of supersonic high-altitude reconnaissance aircraft. This distinctive feature is also being incorporated into the American and Chinese counterparts of this aircraft type.
Russian reports suggest that the MiG-41 will operate in near-space conditions, achieving speeds exceeding Mach 3. The aircraft is said to be capable of launching satellites into low orbits, intercepting hypersonic missiles, and performing various other feats. These bold assertions have led the US to dub the MiG-41 a “fantasy”. While it’s premature to definitively categorize the MiG-41 as either a figment of imagination or a bluff, there seems to be significant progress within the Russian PAK DP project.
The aircraft’s developers assert that the MiG-41 will achieve speeds ranging from Mach 4 to 4.5, nearing hypersonic speeds. The notion of launching satellites is not particularly groundbreaking, however, the designers have begun to openly discuss the aircraft’s capability to house anti-satellite missiles.
The MiG-41 is classified as belonging to the 5++ and potentially even the 6th generation of aircraft. Its avionics are not solely designed for manned flights. Given the lack of necessity for a human to endure overloads of up to 9g, provision has been made for unmanned operation.
What will the MiG-41 “may have”?
By the 6th generation, aircraft will have to have:
ultimate stealth thanks to improved stealth technology;
networking capabilities with high integration with other aircraft and ground forces;
flight efficiency at any speed;
the possibility of unmanned mode;
increased range of detection and tracking of multiple targets;
laser weapons.
While the specifics around the onboard capabilities of the MiG-41 remain somewhat obscured, reassurances from the Russian design team indicate that other key performance characteristics are in place. Notably, they were also given the significant challenge of ensuring the aircraft’s super maneuverability.
The apparent paradox of achieving near-hypersonic speeds while maintaining effective stealth technology remains an intriguing enigma. It is well-documented that upon reaching speeds of 3000 km/h, conventional stealth coatings tend to deteriorate rapidly, making the aircraft highly visible on radar. The subsequent repairs to restore stealth capabilities are predictably costly. This leaves one wondering how the design team was able to address this seemingly intractable issue.
source
GarryB, Arrow, kvs, thegopnik, BenVaserlan, Mir and Broski like this post
GunshipDemocracy- Posts : 6171
Points : 6191
Join date : 2015-05-17
Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada
Big_Gazza wrote:My money is on the PAK-DP having a variable cycle turbojet/ramjet engine. Otherwise I can't see how it can achieve the alleged requirement of M4.5. Turbojets can't cut it, and hybrid engines like the SR-71s J58 (with its compressor bleed directed to the afterburner above M2.5) are temperamental and IIRC are subject to flameouts.
I've noticed some articles around claiming that the 1st flight of the PAK-DP is imminent, maybe even by years end. Nothing authoritive as far I'm concerned, but maybe where there is smoke there is a certain amount of hydrocarbons combusting in an oxygen-rich environment...
as for engine i agree with you it has to be hybrid. Interestingly in case of SR-72 Americans said that it will be turbojet/scramjet not sure how in low hypersonic speeds scramjet is better than ramjet tho.
As for link from Bulgarinamilitary its source is Russian blog on Yandex/dzen without other sources so I presume this 2 year is actually stated 2025 info based on 2017's announcement:lol1:
GarryB, BenVaserlan and Broski like this post
GarryB- Posts : 40551
Points : 41053
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
Given agility is not a priority (meaning it could be an aerodynamically stable design), perhaps a swing-wing layout for better short field take off and high speed efficiency. What do you think?
I suspect they will do what they have done with current aircraft like the Su-35 and Su-57 where the wing is relatively thin but control surfaces on the front and rear allow it to change shape to create a curve for extra lift at takeoff and landing, and then once airborne it will flatten out to be very low drag for high speed flight.
Being an interceptor it will be operating from rather huge airbases in the north and the far east which are rather long and give plenty of space to get airborne so reducing the need for swing wings, I would expect the lift issues will be solved by wing shaping to create a curve and also a super thin flat wing shape for very high speed flight.
The most important and interesting thing will be the engine. If they want to actually reach 4M? Will this be a breakthrough plane? Unless they stay at a speed of around 2.8-3M.
Very much agree, and the MiG-31 showed they could safely get to mach 2.83 with a conventional turbojet which is pretty damn amazing considering the rotational force on the blades and shafts of the engine.
To get to cruising at mach 3 to mach 4.5 perhaps then ramjet propulsion would easily solve their problems without being too daring and too drastic or exotic.
If were to design this plane I would stick with Mach 3 max and let the weapons do the hard running. No need to send a plane into space running after a bus when a cheap missile can do the job even better.
I suspect they are talking about mach 4.2 for a specific reason and I suspect that is the thermal limit for some of the body and structure materials they have at the moment to make the fuselage.
There is no huge value in making a plane mach 10 plus if that creates problems releasing weapon or changing course, so let the plane fly Mach 4.2 or about 5,000km/h and let its missiles use scramjets and move much much faster.
My money is on the PAK-DP having a variable cycle turbojet/ramjet engine.
That should be achievable and reasonable...
Otherwise I can't see how it can achieve the alleged requirement of M4.5. Turbojets can't cut it, and hybrid engines like the SR-71s J58 (with its compressor bleed directed to the afterburner above M2.5) are temperamental and IIRC are subject to flameouts.
Up to about mach 5 is fine for ramjets... above that speed and you need more exotic and complex scramjets, but the question is what is the limitation... is it engine speed or airframe speed, because at the moment with the MiG-31 the limit is engine speed.
An engine designed from the outset to operate as a turbofan but also as a ramjet is not that difficult and should provide the necessary thrust at the different flight speeds, but the fuselage surface will really heat up from such a flight.
It is not friction that generates the heat, it is the air in front of the aircraft being compressed that creates the heat and it generates a lot of heat.
SR-71s used to circle the airfield quite a few times to cool down before landing...
I am interested in seeing whether it is a tactical fighter sized aircraft like the MiG-31 or if it is a big aircraft like a Tu-22M or Tu-128 type sized aircraft.
as for engine i agree with you it has to be hybrid. Interestingly in case of SR-72 Americans said that it will be turbojet/scramjet not sure how in low hypersonic speeds scramjet is better than ramjet tho.
A scramjet would have higher airflow through the engine... for a turbojet or ramjet the airflow through the combustion section must be subsonic so the air intake on the SR-71 is ramped forward to be a small slit that blocks airflow into the turbojet and leaks air into the bypass area of the turbofan to act as a ramjet while the turbojet just idled.
Big_Gazza, kvs, GunshipDemocracy and BenVaserlan like this post
Arrow- Posts : 3492
Points : 3482
Join date : 2012-02-12
If the PAK DP prototype flew this year, it would be absolutely amazing. The number of programs conducted for Russian aviation is impressive. They are already building 5th gen Su 57 planes and a 5th gen light plane is being developed. They are building a new Tu 160M and PAK DA is under development. A new interceptor plane and the S 70 Drone are being developed.
GarryB, Big_Gazza, BenVaserlan and Broski like this post
Mir- Posts : 3834
Points : 3832
Join date : 2021-06-10
GunshipDemocracy wrote:
well, you cannot design anything that the ordering party refuses to accept or did not request in the first place. They said 4,5-5000km/h then it has to be delivered. There must be a reason behind this.
That may be so and the Soviet/Russian designers have indeed created some innovative and surprising aircraft over the decades. Me - I'm just thinking that this will be a hugely expensive undertaking and might just get cancelled on those grounds considering that it would be very easy to eliminate spacecraft with cheap missiles/jamming and even lasers.
Just because the brief says so doesn't guarantee that it will get into production. There is a very long list of cancelled projects that only managed to get to the prototype stage. The list for paper ware is endless.
GarryB, GunshipDemocracy and BenVaserlan like this post
mnztr- Posts : 2898
Points : 2936
Join date : 2018-01-21
There has not been that much detail written about the R-15 engine in the MIG-25 Foxbat. At high speed it operated somewhat like a ramjet. Perhaps they will make a new verision of this concept. It will not be that hard to take the AL-41 and modify it to this purpose.They can even use the engines of the MIG-35 as a base which would mean the takeoff performance might suffer like the SR-71. I wonder if they will make this one from stainless steel as well. I think the SS makes a lot of sense. Even the Elon Musk starship is made of SS.
GunshipDemocracy and BenVaserlan like this post
lancelot- Posts : 3175
Points : 3171
Join date : 2020-10-18
It is well known that the PAK-DP is supposed to use an Izdeliye 30 engine derivative of some sort. With the same gas generator.
Mir likes this post
Arrow- Posts : 3492
Points : 3482
Join date : 2012-02-12
lancelot wrote:It is well known that the PAK-DP is supposed to use an Izdeliye 30 engine derivative of some sort. With the same gas generator.
So it probably won't reach a speed of 4M, probably somewhere around 3M.
BenVaserlan and owais.usmani like this post
Mir- Posts : 3834
Points : 3832
Join date : 2021-06-10
I mentioned some paper ware.
One of the most amazing research projects was the DSB-LK long-range cruise missile strategic bomber dating back to 1957!
The design requirements included a high Mach 4+ (with ramjet) with an altitude of up to 35000m. As one of the options the aircraft was to be powered by a combined power unit made up of turbojet and ramjet engines. Defensive armament also included air-to-air missiles.
Even back then the research done on this project indicated that, using the technology available, the development of such an aircraft was feasible. However work on the project ended in 1960.
I can easily see that this now ancient project could form the basis of the PakDa as well as the PakDp. We might even be looking at the roots of the A-12/SR-71 if you ask me!
One of the most amazing research projects was the DSB-LK long-range cruise missile strategic bomber dating back to 1957!
The design requirements included a high Mach 4+ (with ramjet) with an altitude of up to 35000m. As one of the options the aircraft was to be powered by a combined power unit made up of turbojet and ramjet engines. Defensive armament also included air-to-air missiles.
Even back then the research done on this project indicated that, using the technology available, the development of such an aircraft was feasible. However work on the project ended in 1960.
I can easily see that this now ancient project could form the basis of the PakDa as well as the PakDp. We might even be looking at the roots of the A-12/SR-71 if you ask me!
GarryB, Big_Gazza, kvs, GunshipDemocracy and jon_deluxe like this post
Arrow- Posts : 3492
Points : 3482
Join date : 2012-02-12
One of the most amazing research projects was the DSB-LK long-range cruise missile strategic bomber dating back to 1957! wrote:
The 1950s and 1960s were crazy in terms of development. Lots of amazing projects. The incredible development in space science was already planning nuclear-powered spaceships. The famous Orion, etc. Development of nuclear technologies, work on ultra-pure nuclear charges, which later the USSR used even for civilian purposes, such as crushing minerals in underground explosions, etc.
Now we have stagnation in both space and aviation, etc. Although Russia has recently pushed development forward a bit. Scramjet engines, miniature nuclear reactors, lasers, new materials, maybe PAK DP etc
GarryB, kvs, GunshipDemocracy and Mir like this post
Isos- Posts : 11602
Points : 11570
Join date : 2015-11-06
Bunch of overestimated shit projects.
Just load a an-124 with a ramp and storage area to launch 30 cruise missiles that are long 8m.
Take the kalibr that is 4.5m and make 8m long by adding just fuel and get a missile with 5000km range.
Buy 20 planes and 500 8m long kalibr with nuks.
You get your strategic bomber that will be able destroy a country with a single attack.
Just load a an-124 with a ramp and storage area to launch 30 cruise missiles that are long 8m.
Take the kalibr that is 4.5m and make 8m long by adding just fuel and get a missile with 5000km range.
Buy 20 planes and 500 8m long kalibr with nuks.
You get your strategic bomber that will be able destroy a country with a single attack.
GunshipDemocracy likes this post
Arrow- Posts : 3492
Points : 3482
Join date : 2012-02-12
Buy 20 planes and 500 8m long kalibr with nuks. You get your strategic bomber that will be able destroy a country with a single attack. wrote:
t's not about destroying any country. Just an impulse for the development of civilization. Crazy projects develop many interesting technologies that can then serve our civilization and push its development forward.
GunshipDemocracy, Hole, Mir and bitch_killer like this post
George1- Posts : 18523
Points : 19028
Join date : 2011-12-22
Location : Greece
Mir wrote:I mentioned some paper ware.
One of the most amazing research projects was the DSB-LK long-range cruise missile strategic bomber dating back to 1957!
The design requirements included a high Mach 4+ (with ramjet) with an altitude of up to 35000m. As one of the options the aircraft was to be powered by a combined power unit made up of turbojet and ramjet engines. Defensive armament also included air-to-air missiles.
Even back then the research done on this project indicated that, using the technology available, the development of such an aircraft was feasible. However work on the project ended in 1960.
I can easily see that this now ancient project could form the basis of the PakDa as well as the PakDp. We might even be looking at the roots of the A-12/SR-71 if you ask me!
GarryB, GunshipDemocracy, Hole and BenVaserlan like this post