Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
LMFS wrote:Manov wrote:That was a CGI showed long ago. No idea why they put it there. I think just an oportunistic reason.
New in the forum, greetings to all!
Could you explain why it is a CGI? Looks perfectly real to me...
Here is why
+80
Isos
LMFS
kvs
KomissarBojanchev
eridan
Pierre Sprey
d_taddei2
RTN
[ F l a n k e d ]
AlfaT8
zg18
JohninMK
Swede55
onwiththewar
Hole
marcellogo
havok
Mindstorm
magnumcromagnon
dino00
archangelski
Manov
tomazy
rambo54
JackRed
The-thing-next-door
Tsavo Lion
Peŕrier
YG_AJ
GRIM 44
BKP
SeigSoloyvov
Dr.Snufflebug
TheArmenian
Neutrality
medo
Azi
MC-21
wilhelm
KiloGolf
Stealthflanker
Luq man
Cyberspec
Tingsay
thegopnik
Nasr Hosein
flamming_python
AMCXXL
ZoA
iwanz
par far
T-47
GarryB
Cheetah
miketheterrible
OminousSpudd
Singular_Transform
chicken
ATLASCUB
berhoum
Vann7
Big_Gazza
hoom
Viktor
HM1199
Cyrus the great
tanino
coolieno99
franco
jaguar_br
Svyatoslavich
mack8
yavar
Benya
George1
Austin
higurashihougi
Rmf
Kimppis
Project Canada
84 posters
PAK-FA, T-50: News #4
Guest- Guest
Here is why
LMFS- Posts : 5169
Points : 5165
Join date : 2018-03-03
Militarov wrote:LMFS wrote:Manov wrote:That was a CGI showed long ago. No idea why they put it there. I think just an oportunistic reason.
New in the forum, greetings to all!
Could you explain why it is a CGI? Looks perfectly real to me...
Here is why
Thanks!
Well, I don't dispute that whole clip may be CGI, the second scene looks suspicious, but the one where the missile is launched, if CGI, is really well accomplished.
It strikes me nevertheless me that there is this ongoing discussion about whether the weapons bays have been actually tested or not. As far as I understand (but I stand to be corrected by anyone in the know), this belongs to the basic aerodynamic validation of the aircraft, I cannot imagine the plane has come to the pre-series after 8 years of flight testing without getting that crucial part checked, that would mean either the guys at Sukhoi are idiots (which they are definitively NOT) or that the program is a complete farce, which is getting increasingly difficult to justify.
KomissarBojanchev- Posts : 1429
Points : 1584
Join date : 2012-08-05
Age : 27
Location : Varna, Bulgaria
Why is it that the most interesting pictures of the Su-57(open weapons bays, the photo of it carrying 6 R77s) always end up being CGI?
Svyatoslavich- Posts : 399
Points : 400
Join date : 2015-04-22
Location : Buenos Aires
Don't forget the basic fact that, even though Russia is much more open about new weapon developments than the USSR, the T-50 program is Russia's most advanced plane and there are many secrets about it. So don't expect to see photos about each and every accomplishment, or details about all the solutions. There are many in forums like keypublishing who state that the lack of photos of missile launches from the weapon bays are evidence that these never happened.
GarryB- Posts : 40557
Points : 41059
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
Normally testing involves examining the airflow around the bay doors when they are open and closed to ensure a weapon released doesn't get blown up into the aircraft after release... it can happen a lot.
Even if the aircraft is not damaged in such a case the damage to the weapon often renders it fairly useless... especially if it loses a control fin or stabilising part...
With the PAK FA however the main AAM is the R-77, whose standard launch pylon includes a pneumatic arm that throws the missile downwards into the slipstream and away from the aircraft before the rockets motor is started.
The worst thing that could happen is the motor fails to start and the missile just falls to the ground.
Most of the time it ensures a nice clean safe separation of the weapon from the weapon bay.
The R-37 and R-37M has the same arm launch thing as both were designed to be used from internal weapons bays originally.
(Ie when both missiles were designs it was expected that the next gen of fighters would be stealthy with internal weapon bays.)
The large mesh control surfaces of the R-77 were designed to be folded forward when stowed and to flip out and back upon launch.
Ask them for photos of their birth... if they don't have any then it never happened so they are not allowed to breathe.
Even if the aircraft is not damaged in such a case the damage to the weapon often renders it fairly useless... especially if it loses a control fin or stabilising part...
With the PAK FA however the main AAM is the R-77, whose standard launch pylon includes a pneumatic arm that throws the missile downwards into the slipstream and away from the aircraft before the rockets motor is started.
The worst thing that could happen is the motor fails to start and the missile just falls to the ground.
Most of the time it ensures a nice clean safe separation of the weapon from the weapon bay.
The R-37 and R-37M has the same arm launch thing as both were designed to be used from internal weapons bays originally.
(Ie when both missiles were designs it was expected that the next gen of fighters would be stealthy with internal weapon bays.)
The large mesh control surfaces of the R-77 were designed to be folded forward when stowed and to flip out and back upon launch.
There are many in forums like keypublishing who state that the lack of photos of missile launches from the weapon bays are evidence that these never happened.
Ask them for photos of their birth... if they don't have any then it never happened so they are not allowed to breathe.
LMFS- Posts : 5169
Points : 5165
Join date : 2018-03-03
GarryB wrote:Normally testing involves examining the airflow around the bay doors when they are open and closed to ensure a weapon released doesn't get blown up into the aircraft after release... it can happen a lot.
Even if the aircraft is not damaged in such a case the damage to the weapon often renders it fairly useless... especially if it loses a control fin or stabilising part...
With the PAK FA however the main AAM is the R-77, whose standard launch pylon includes a pneumatic arm that throws the missile downwards into the slipstream and away from the aircraft before the rockets motor is started.
Exactly, and those tests need to be carried out throughout the flight envelope of the plane, in order to establish the launch constraints for each weapon and to validate the mechanical and aerodynamic design of the launching system. Since the R-77 is a AAM, it may need to be launched under vigorous manoeuvring, which further complicates the issue, even with the presence of a launch ejector. IMO it is simply absurd to suggest that this has not been tested already.
LMFS- Posts : 5169
Points : 5165
Join date : 2018-03-03
I am reading these days that the new weapons intended for the PAK-FA are getting ready and should be tested shortly.
Does anybody have a reasonably complete list of what (internal) weapons have been planned and what is their status of development? Has this information been disclosed? As far as I know this list would include:
> R-77 / R-77M / R-77PD
> R-37M (Izd. 810?)
> R-74M2
> Kh-59MK2
> Kh-58UShKE
> Kh-38M
> Kh-35UE
> FAB-500 / FAB-250
> PKB-500U
Is anybody aware of the development of an equivalent to the Small Diameter Bomb? This would greatly increase the effectiveness of the aircraft to attack high value targets while in LO configuration (8 to 12 of those could probably be carried in the weapons bays).
Thanks,
Does anybody have a reasonably complete list of what (internal) weapons have been planned and what is their status of development? Has this information been disclosed? As far as I know this list would include:
> R-77 / R-77M / R-77PD
> R-37M (Izd. 810?)
> R-74M2
> Kh-59MK2
> Kh-58UShKE
> Kh-38M
> Kh-35UE
> FAB-500 / FAB-250
> PKB-500U
Is anybody aware of the development of an equivalent to the Small Diameter Bomb? This would greatly increase the effectiveness of the aircraft to attack high value targets while in LO configuration (8 to 12 of those could probably be carried in the weapons bays).
Thanks,
Isos- Posts : 11603
Points : 11571
Join date : 2015-11-06
LMFS wrote:I am reading these days that the new weapons intended for the PAK-FA are getting ready and should be tested shortly.
Does anybody have a reasonably complete list of what (internal) weapons have been planned and what is their status of development? Has this information been disclosed? As far as I know this list would include:
> R-77 / R-77M / R-77PD
> R-37M (Izd. 810?)
> R-74M2
> Kh-59MK2
> Kh-58UShKE
> Kh-38M
> Kh-35UE
> FAB-500 / FAB-250
> PKB-500U
Is anybody aware of the development of an equivalent to the Small Diameter Bomb? This would greatly increase the effectiveness of the aircraft to attack high value targets while in LO configuration (8 to 12 of those could probably be carried in the weapons bays).
Thanks,
I already posted on the thread about precision guided munition that they have grom 2 guided munition derived from kh 38. There is also the grom 1 which is a small cruise missile.
GarryB- Posts : 40557
Points : 41059
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
The Kh-38 is basically a rocket powered 250kg bomb with various guidance options and 40km export range and reportedly 80km domestic model range.
There are the glide cluster bombs too.
There are the glide cluster bombs too.
Isos- Posts : 11603
Points : 11571
Join date : 2015-11-06
GarryB wrote:The Kh-38 is basically a rocket powered 250kg bomb with various guidance options and 40km export range and reportedly 80km domestic model range.
There are the glide cluster bombs too.
Wiki says :
Kh-36 Grom-1 AS-23 tactical cruise missile / AGM Air to Surface with 130–260 km range and
Kh-36P Grom-2 AS-23B / KAB- guided bomb gliding LGB version, 250 and 500 kg, various aim guidance, both created on the base of Kh-38M short-range tactical missile and also have a modular structure, warheads and seekers, can be propelled modified, shown at MAKS 2015
LMFS- Posts : 5169
Points : 5165
Join date : 2018-03-03
Thanks for the info,
it is a little confusing, at the Sputnik link in your post in the precision munitions thread they say Grom-2 is a 250 kg bomb, with 130 kg warhead, without engine and 280 km range... really weird.
Maybe it is a weapon proposal, or in early development and there is not much info available on it.
it is a little confusing, at the Sputnik link in your post in the precision munitions thread they say Grom-2 is a 250 kg bomb, with 130 kg warhead, without engine and 280 km range... really weird.
Maybe it is a weapon proposal, or in early development and there is not much info available on it.
Isos- Posts : 11603
Points : 11571
Join date : 2015-11-06
LMFS wrote:Thanks for the info,
it is a little confusing, at the Sputnik link in your post in the precision munitions thread they say Grom-2 is a 250 kg bomb, with 130 kg warhead, without engine and 280 km range... really weird.
Maybe it is a weapon proposal, or in early development and there is not much info available on it.
Thr range is for the grom 1 which is a small cruise missile. Grom 2 is the guided bomb with a range far much shorter as it is not powered by any engine. Sputnik is not reliable for military stuff. There isn't lot of info in English but I saw lot of russian articles about it but I don't speak russian so ...
But grom 2 bomb should have a longer range than KAB series because it has wings to go further.
GarryB- Posts : 40557
Points : 41059
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
they say Grom-2 is a 250 kg bomb, with 130 kg warhead
A 250kg bomb might have a warhead of 130kgs of HE... the rest of the mass will be the shell of the bomb and of course fragment material designed to be blown out by the explosion to cause damage to the target.
Just in comparison the OFAB-500U HE fragmentation bomb is nominally a 500kg bomb, though its actual weight is about 515kgs and includes a parachute retard system so it can be dropped from low altitude. It has a HE payload of about 230kgs.
Armour piercing bombs have less HE and more metal/structure weight...
LMFS- Posts : 5169
Points : 5165
Join date : 2018-03-03
GarryB wrote:they say Grom-2 is a 250 kg bomb, with 130 kg warhead
A 250kg bomb might have a warhead of 130kgs of HE... the rest of the mass will be the shell of the bomb and of course fragment material designed to be blown out by the explosion to cause damage to the target.
Just in comparison the OFAB-500U HE fragmentation bomb is nominally a 500kg bomb, though its actual weight is about 515kgs and includes a parachute retard system so it can be dropped from low altitude. It has a HE payload of about 230kgs.
Armour piercing bombs have less HE and more metal/structure weight...
Interesting, now that you mention it. I thought the concept "warhead" would include the fragmentation materials intended to damage the target and not only the explosive, but never looked into it in detail.
Nevertheless, these new "Grom" weapons and KAB bombs as well look not very well optimized for the PAK-FA to me: they would occupy the whole useful length of the bay (only 4 in total could be carried in LO mode) and pack (especially the KAB-250 and the new Groms) relatively little punch. In contrast, a SDB is 1800 x 190 mm with a weight of 129 kg and warhead of 93 kg (apart from up to some impressive 110 km reported range). Something like that would be one of the first weapons I would develop for the Su-57, together with the plane's LO, kinetic performance, payload and persistence I can imagine they would make it extremely capable in SEAD/BAI roles.
Pierre Sprey- Posts : 129
Points : 137
Join date : 2017-02-01
KomissarBojanchev wrote:Why is it that the most interesting pictures of the Su-57(open weapons bays, the photo of it carrying 6 R77s) always end up being CGI?
Because the weapons bays have not been filmed yet. Do you think there is a camera crew everytime the jet is testing ?
Peŕrier- Posts : 275
Points : 273
Join date : 2017-10-15
GarryB wrote:they say Grom-2 is a 250 kg bomb, with 130 kg warhead
A 250kg bomb might have a warhead of 130kgs of HE... the rest of the mass will be the shell of the bomb and of course fragment material designed to be blown out by the explosion to cause damage to the target.
Just in comparison the OFAB-500U HE fragmentation bomb is nominally a 500kg bomb, though its actual weight is about 515kgs and includes a parachute retard system so it can be dropped from low altitude. It has a HE payload of about 230kgs.
Armour piercing bombs have less HE and more metal/structure weight...
Actually, armor piercing bombs have most of their weight made of casing, up to around 80% if not even more.
An armor piercing bomb is mainly a block of hard steel as thick as possible, and the actual warhead is just a small fraction of the weight.
Compared to a standard HE bomb, there is little to nothing in common, last but not least even the fusing devices are totally different.
Pierre Sprey- Posts : 129
Points : 137
Join date : 2017-02-01
Svyatoslavich wrote:Don't forget the basic fact that, even though Russia is much more open about new weapon developments than the USSR, the T-50 program is Russia's most advanced plane and there are many secrets about it. So don't expect to see photos about each and every accomplishment, or details about all the solutions. There are many in forums like keypublishing who state that the lack of photos of missile launches from the weapon bays are evidence that these never happened.
Some of the retard cases at Keypub think that because there hasn't been pic or video of the weapons bay, that the weapons bay might be fake and that the su 57 will only carry external weapons.
Because as you know, the su 57 isn't stealth, 5th gen or anything.
miketheterrible- Posts : 7383
Points : 7341
Join date : 2016-11-06
Pierre Sprey wrote:Svyatoslavich wrote:Don't forget the basic fact that, even though Russia is much more open about new weapon developments than the USSR, the T-50 program is Russia's most advanced plane and there are many secrets about it. So don't expect to see photos about each and every accomplishment, or details about all the solutions. There are many in forums like keypublishing who state that the lack of photos of missile launches from the weapon bays are evidence that these never happened.
Some of the retard cases at Keypub think that because there hasn't been pic or video of the weapons bay, that the weapons bay might be fake and that the su 57 will only carry external weapons.
Because as you know, the su 57 isn't stealth, 5th gen or anything.
Funny too since it's similar in internal structure as Su-47 for the bay, and sukhoi themselves stated they tested it.
But keypub is a joke. Too many American retards who are now trashing Kinzhal saying US has such weapons for decades. But didn't care to provide which weapon.
kvs- Posts : 15861
Points : 15996
Join date : 2014-09-11
Location : Turdope's Kanada
miketheterrible wrote:Pierre Sprey wrote:Svyatoslavich wrote:Don't forget the basic fact that, even though Russia is much more open about new weapon developments than the USSR, the T-50 program is Russia's most advanced plane and there are many secrets about it. So don't expect to see photos about each and every accomplishment, or details about all the solutions. There are many in forums like keypublishing who state that the lack of photos of missile launches from the weapon bays are evidence that these never happened.
Some of the retard cases at Keypub think that because there hasn't been pic or video of the weapons bay, that the weapons bay might be fake and that the su 57 will only carry external weapons.
Because as you know, the su 57 isn't stealth, 5th gen or anything.
Funny too since it's similar in internal structure as Su-47 for the bay, and sukhoi themselves stated they tested it.
But keypub is a joke. Too many American retards who are now trashing Kinzhal saying US has such weapons for decades. But didn't care to provide which weapon.
NATO-tards always claim that whatever innovation Russia produces is "old news". For example Scientific American claimed that
the USA was testing a Shkval type of torpedo back during the 1950s. To the average sap this may sound credible, to anyone
with a relevant education this is a brainless joke. There was not enough understanding of boundary layer dynamics back in the
1950s to even start such a project. Not all science and mathematics was discovered in the 1700s. A lot is very recent.
The USSR had Kolmogorov, the world leader on boundary layers and turbulence. Mach 10 missiles require materials that can
withstand the heat and power plants that have enough energy density to overcome air drag (which generates the heat). America
does not have Mach 10 missiles. It has Mach 8 THAAD:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminal_High_Altitude_Area_Defense
These are ABM missiles and not anti-ship missiles. The USA does not even have supersonic anti-ship missiles. But NATO-tard
fanbois will claim that the USA has a fleet of UFOs with high power beam weapons. Because...
Isos- Posts : 11603
Points : 11571
Join date : 2015-11-06
American scientifics in the 50 were german. Today many of them are foreigners in their universities. A lot of their students are from Asia ... Most of what they discover is send on the net so russian and chinese have access to their latest discovery while the opposite is not true.
Guest- Guest
Pierre Sprey wrote:KomissarBojanchev wrote:Why is it that the most interesting pictures of the Su-57(open weapons bays, the photo of it carrying 6 R77s) always end up being CGI?
Because the weapons bays have not been filmed yet. Do you think there is a camera crew everytime the jet is testing ?
Actually there is, or at least there should be in most cases. Chase or laboratory aircraft is almost always flying together with prototypes of various kinds especially when we are talking about weapon and sensor tests.
Svyatoslavich- Posts : 399
Points : 400
Join date : 2015-04-22
Location : Buenos Aires
Surely missile launches were filmed with very high-definition and high-speed cameras, as is usually the case with such tests, but this is very classified information and won't be release to the public, at least not anytime soon.Militarov wrote:Actually there is, or at least there should be in most cases. Chase or laboratory aircraft is almost always flying together with prototypes of various kinds especially when we are talking about weapon and sensor tests.
franco- Posts : 7057
Points : 7083
Join date : 2010-08-18
T-50-10 on its way to Zhukovsky.
https://bmpd.livejournal.com/3114928.html
https://bmpd.livejournal.com/3114928.html
Isos- Posts : 11603
Points : 11571
Join date : 2015-11-06
franco wrote:T-50-10 on its way to Zhukovsky.
https://bmpd.livejournal.com/3114928.html
New nose cone, new paint and new glass cockpit !!!! Awsome pics !
GarryB- Posts : 40557
Points : 41059
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
Nevertheless, these new "Grom" weapons and KAB bombs as well look not very well optimized for the PAK-FA to me: they would occupy the whole useful length of the bay (only 4 in total could be carried in LO mode) and pack (especially the KAB-250 and the new Groms) relatively little punch. In contrast, a SDB is 1800 x 190 mm with a weight of 129 kg and warhead of 93 kg (apart from up to some impressive 110 km reported range). Something like that would be one of the first weapons I would develop for the Su-57, together with the plane's LO, kinetic performance, payload and persistence I can imagine they would make it extremely capable in SEAD/BAI roles.
The primary role of the Su-57 will be air superiority, so most of the first part of the conflict it will be air to air mainly.
Only later in the war would it be used against enemy air defence and ground targets... and in those missions it will be less stealthy with external pods for target detection.
A standard weapon it would carry is the internal model of the AS-11 in an updated form which has a range in excess of 200km for dealing with enemy radar and major SAMs.
For use against other target they have a range of guided bombs and glide bombs and missiles and a range of aircraft to deliver them.
Because the weapons bays have not been filmed yet. Do you think there is a camera crew everytime the jet is testing ?
Actually there are probably a dozen cameras filming everything they do, but the film will be classified and only high ranking officials would be able to release such footage... and to be honest... why would they? The aircraft is not for sale to anyone soon...
Actually, armor piercing bombs have most of their weight made of casing, up to around 80% if not even more.
An armor piercing bomb is mainly a block of hard steel as thick as possible, and the actual warhead is just a small fraction of the weight.
Compared to a standard HE bomb, there is little to nothing in common, last but not least even the fusing devices are totally different.
Quite right, but Armour piercing bombs are designed to penetrate into a target before exploding... but because they explode inside the target the explosive charge only needs to be a small fraction of the weight of the charge.
What I was talking about was the difference between HE blast bombs with light shells and large HE payloads that do large damage with blast... some are even made of paper to reduce collateral damage... blast waves are lethal at short range but much less dangerous with distance. Fragmentation bombs use the HE charge to accelerate bits of metal called fragments that retain velocity much better than a shockwave of air so a fragmentation bomb is dangerous to much greater distances, but those fragments reduce the HE payload weight to bomb mass ratio.
A thermobaric bomb might be mostly HE material, whereas a fragmentation bomb might only be 40% HE material by weight.
Some of the retard cases at Keypub think that because there hasn't been pic or video of the weapons bay, that the weapons bay might be fake and that the su 57 will only carry external weapons.
A friend of mine calls such people "ass niggers"... of course he can get away with it because he is not white... he is part Maori.
(Note an ass nigger is someone who appears to be brown skinned but when you get close to them your nose tells you they are actually covered in their own shit because they have their heads up their own asses most of the time...)
NATO-tards always claim that whatever innovation Russia produces is "old news". For example Scientific American claimed that
the USA was testing a Shkval type of torpedo back during the 1950s. To the average sap this may sound credible, to anyone
with a relevant education this is a brainless joke. There was not enough understanding of boundary layer dynamics back in the
1950s to even start such a project. Not all science and mathematics was discovered in the 1700s. A lot is very recent.
That is actually amusing because the current Shkval torpedo is developed from a Soviet torpedo that was in service in 1952.
In fact its designation was RAT52. During early testing they had problems with them flying... ie breaching the surface and getting airborne for several kms... but the primary use was to carry them in aircraft and drop them into the water 2km or so from the target ship... the weapon is dropped and lands in the water slowed by a parachute... the weapon dives down a hundred metres or so and then stabilises and comes up near the surface and activates its rocket motor to travel at 60-70 knots at the target in a straight run.