PAK-FA, T-50: News #4

Pierre Sprey wrote:

Rmf wrote:

KomissarBojanchev wrote:What's the reason hat sukhoi chose less stealthy podded engines instead of going for a flat belly like the F-22 or MiG-1.44?

well theres the reason, podded engine gives you flexibility and upgrade potential, stealth aircraft has tight tolerances and in f-22 engines are integraqted into airframe thus fixed and intakes are fixed , so no way to upgrade untill end of service life, with podded engine you can change engine size or intakes somewhat and thus you can upgrade engines and swap them faster , russians knew they wouldnt have definitive engine ready so they used that method , so in 2017 117s engines , then 2020 izd30 engines ,then in 2030 some new engines , so all in all pak-fa will inch further away from f-22 over time etc...

He's wrong. The podded engines are better for stealth. They are part of the reason why the YF 23 was more stealthy than the Raptor

that is not true, its a propagated myth on internet , and quite successfully thanks to cia desinfomation campaign and its lobby intenet groups, and parroted now around....
yf-23 was less stealth !!!! , but it had better sustained speed , then yf-22 edged slightly in maneuverability and it won the competition.

new pic http://russianplanes.net/id207031

busting myths about the PAK FA : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=scJnps0RErg

How about the dielectric tail stinger, any idea what it is housing? Is it a rear warning radar or simply part of the ECM suite?

all of above it houses radar that after fighter launches missiles and turns around sends midcourse updates to AA missiles ,also close range detection , jams, and helps in ecm.

very informative, detailed summary on the PAK-FA

http://fullafterburner.weebly.com/aerospace/sukhoi-pak-fa-the-anti-stealth-gamechanger

Multi-core T-50: on the new Russian fighter IMA BK has replaced the "Baguette".


On the photo: Multifunctional indicators for the PAK FA.

The company "Sukhoi" started flight testing of a fundamentally new computing systems of the aircraft T-50. The new system is significantly more reliable and more powerful than the previous, and for the first time all design and development in the modern history of Russian military aviation did it airplane firm.The first fighter T-50 with new on-Board electronics and the microprocessor were up in the air this winter. According to Dmitry Gribov, chief designer of the company "Sukhoi" and the Director of the Directorate integration of the BWC, the latest platform replaces designed in 2004 by the computing system on the basis of OBC "Baguette". Work on the creation of a new system of "Integrated modular avionics weapons systems" (IMA BK) was conducted during the last four years. One of our customers — the Ministry of industry and trade of the Russian Federation. Computer system created on the basis of domestic multi-core microprocessors and new, domestic operating system real-time.

4 million lines of code


On the photo: In the scientific and technical center management information systems of the company "Sukhoi" is the testing of IMA BK.

In the integrated structure of the onboard equipment of the aircraft T-50 to the Central computer shall perform the functions of control systems of the aircraft, use of weapons, defense and a multi-mode smart support of the pilot. Central computer which simultaneously plays the role of pilot and electronic and electronic electronic Navigator and a flight engineer, in real time solves the problem of automatic detection and identification of the most dangerous purposes, to build the most optimal route, the optimal solution of problems of the use of weapons and defense aircraft, as well as reconfiguration of the system in case of failure. The new control system takes control of almost all key devices of the aircraft radar, navigation and communication in the previous version of the aircraft to calculate functions of each system used its calculator.The amount of its onboard software has already exceeded 4 million lines of code, and still further to implement a number of complex functional control modes LA and complex information processing."The new system is indeed innovative and has no analogues in the world, — says Dmitry Mushrooms. — We first went along the path of reproduction is already implemented by other decision makers, and provided a promising architecture, which will continue to develop in the direction of "network side", consistently upgrading onboard systems and complexes. Multi-core gives us almost unlimited possibilities for designing fault-tolerant hardware configurations, while saving on weight, power consumption and cost of equipment."The data is exchanged via fibre-optic channels. The transition from copper to fiber optics has allowed us to increase the speed and volume of data transmission, in order to reduce the weight of the cable network and to improve its noise immunity. If data transmission over traditional copper cable gives the speed of the order of 10-100 Mbps, then the fiber is almost 1,000 times more — 8 Gbit/sec Network structure of the complex increases the reliability of all devices when failure of any computer there is an automatic switching system at the other unit, and the use of a centralized processor has allowed almost twice to reduce the weight of the device. The performance of OBC increased by more than ten times, accutanecost increased more than four times. For the first time in Russian history the head role in the implementation of the common platform design and development played an aircraft firm.For the first time in Russian history the head role in the implementation of the common platform design and development was assigned to aircraft company — OKB Sukhoi. When you create a new system sukhivtsi worked together with the leading domestic enterprises of concern "radio-Electronic technology" (KRET): Ryazan State instrument-making enterprise (rsie) and Ramensky instrument design Bureau (RPKB). In turn, the State research Institute of aviation systems" (GosNIIAS) performed modeling of functional applications of the T-50 new computing platform. Conclusion GosNIIAS was positive: IMA BC gave a significant increase in computing resources and speed of information processing.

Taganrog IQ

One of the problems that faced the leadership of the Sukhoi design Bureau, training and retention of highly qualified software testers. Worldwide the major aircraft manufacturers and instrument engineers often turn to outsourcing is to attract programmers from India and Eastern Europe. To prepare a good specialist takes about two years. In Moscow because of the higher salaries of experienced testers take IT commercial structure. But because of the defense of the specifics to attract outsourcers from other countries was, of course, impossible.Sukhivtsi found an original solution by opening a branch in the city of Taganrog, where there are good professionals and Universities. In Taganrog have created a few dozen new jobs, and in recent years sukhivtsi from his native city of Anton Chekhov remains one of the most successful and loyal employees.

The unlimited possibilities of multi-core

New computing platform has already attracted significant interest not only from the related airline and helicopter companies in Russia, but also the developers of computing systems for space and Navy. Indian experts have chosen the operating system of the development of the company "Sukhoi" for the joint project of a fifth generation fighter, rejecting the use of the famous American RV OS VxWorks and Integrity.Little-known fact that for the first time the popular concept of integrated modular avionics was implemented for French fighter Dassault Rafale, and after that was adapted for a wide range of civil and military transport aircraft — A380, A400, A350, SSJ100, and others. Military aircraft are not so strictly regulate the dealings with the regulatory documents and the certified requirements, as a civilian, where every change is possible only after a thorough verification and validation process. That's why the system on multi-core microprocessors began flight tests on military aircraft."Our objective is to maintain leadership in this field, speaking on the ideological locomotive of the solution of questions of integration of avionics equipment into the network architecture of the future", — says Dmitry Mushrooms.

https://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/92456/

A lot of hard work gone into that development.

Love the workbench in that photo, all the new gear surrounding the old school wood handled screwdriver. The hammer must have been out of shot.

Even though the panels are digital.. Still show to be inferior in quality graphics
to western counterparts. The Sukhoi panels looks low resolution display ,
this is consequences of the lack of a graphics accelerator chip . It will not
make the plane less effective in anyway for sure.. but shows that Russia still
needs to work harder to get western level avionics. in term of panel displays.

Vann7 wrote:Even though the panels are digital.. Still show to be inferior in quality graphics
to western counterparts. The Sukhoi panels looks low resolution display ,
this is consequences of the lack of a graphics accelerator chip . It will not
make the plane less effective in anyway for sure.. but shows that Russia still
needs to work harder to get western level avionics. in term of panel displays.

Vann, seriously, how old are you?

PapaDragon wrote:

Vann7 wrote:Even though the panels are digital.. Still show to be inferior in quality graphics
to western counterparts. The Sukhoi panels looks low resolution display ,
this is consequences of the lack of a graphics accelerator chip . It will not
make the plane less effective in anyway for sure.. but shows that Russia still
needs to work harder to get western level avionics. in term of panel displays.

Vann, seriously, how old are you?

he is a troglodyte so ignore him. Little he knows of Russia's input in graphics. And he cannot even say GPU properly (graphics processing unit). And he doesn't even know the difference between a GPU and resolution on a display. There is a lot he said wrong that most in my field of expertise would call him a retard but that is just being nice to him.

Vann7 wrote:Even though the panels are digital.. Still show to be inferior in quality graphics
to western counterparts. The Sukhoi panels looks low resolution display ,
this is consequences of the lack of a graphics accelerator chip . It will not
make the plane less effective in anyway for sure.. but shows that Russia still
needs to work harder to get western level avionics. in term of panel displays.

Yes, it is quite bad, on the F-35 the pilots will be able to entertain themself during missions with most recent video games on the HUD, on the sukhoi the crew will have to fly the aircraft, and the computer on the airplane won't be capable to do anything else just help this.

: D


The interesting is they using an old, gameport stick.

Presume because it is cheap,commodity, and easy to map like the production stick.

I presume they have to run thousands of hours on test bench.

JohninMK wrote:A lot of hard work gone into that development.

Love the workbench in that photo, all the new gear surrounding the old school wood handled screwdriver. The hammer must have been out of shot.

YES, the mix make very Russia.

marcellogo wrote:

JohninMK wrote:A lot of hard work gone into that development.

Love the workbench in that photo, all the new gear surrounding the old school wood handled screwdriver. The hammer must have been out of shot.

YES, the mix make very Russia.

It is the same everzwhere, the diference is in the US they feels like anything that is not modern a shame.

coolieno99 wrote:very informative, detailed summary on the PAK-FA

http://fullafterburner.weebly.com/aerospace/sukhoi-pak-fa-the-anti-stealth-gamechanger

Well, the article makes some fair points but remains plagued by outlandish claims, such as the PAKFA being jointly designed by HAL :

...It is expected to enter service with designation Sukhoi Su 50 in Russian Airforce. The aircraft is being co-developed  in collaboration with HAL with 50% sharing of fundings. The HAL would develop an Indian specific variant named Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA).

They seem to confuse the PAK FA and FGFA programs. The former is entirely developed by Sukhoi and its contractors and poised to become the mainstay of the russian air force. Whilst it is the latter which will be "co-developed", i.e. tailored by sukhoi to indian MoD requirements. As to the 50% funding allegation, it is simply not true, which is why indians have no say in the design and engineering choices made for the pakfa.

The Indians spent loads of money on development of Su 30 MKI whose later variants Su 30 MKM of Malaysia and Su 30 SM of Russia were sold, but India did not receive any royalties for that. It was because such a clause wasn't written in the contract.

Here again, they only paid for integration of western avionics of their choosing into a pre-existing aircraft (since HAL couldn't do it on their own), not the "development" of the aircraft, and as such the very idea of them claiming royalties for the MKM and SM is hilarious.

PM Modi’s Russia visit in september will follow signing of the final contract.
“Under the new offer, India will have to pay $3.7 billion, instead of $6 billion, for the technological know-how and three prototypes of PAK FA fighters. The proposal awaits a decision from Prime Minister Narendra Modi, when he meets Russian President Vladimir Putin for the annual India-Russia summit this week.

I think India already got favorable terms and a better deal than anything the west has to offer, but they mustn't push their luck far though. Indians have been consistently unwilling to devote serious funding to the project, and yet remain obsessed with claiming full ownership of the technology developed by Sukhoi.
I mean, it would be self-defeating for the russians to spend much time and money developing 5th gen tech to counter the American threat, and then sell everything for a few lousy toilet paper dollars.

yep, full technology transfer any day now

miketheterrible wrote:

he is a troglodyte so ignore him. Little he knows of Russia's input in graphics. And he cannot even say GPU properly (graphics processing unit).  And he doesn't even know the difference between a GPU and resolution on a display.  There is a lot he said wrong that most in my field of expertise would call him a retard but that is just being nice to him.

What?

Gpus accelerate graphics , CPU alone can do graphics but very slow.
Russia it seems is using Brute force to display graphics. because of the low resolutions and limited colors. Because im not aware of they designing any GPU at all for Pak-fa. The higher the capabilities and memory of your GPU the higher the resolution of your display and the better the graphics the panels can display in real time.. Graphics accelerator can be very useful for displaying terrain in 3d virtual reality. So pilots can have full panoramic view without leaving the plane.

Again this will not be a problem for plane performance , the entire panels
can be analog and will still do well ,but for sales point of view ,is better when your panels display are very advanced. India in particular always buys western or European panels ,instead of the Russian ones in many planes.

Advanced graphics allows larger panels displays and simply things..
take a look at Boeing digital panels designed for the Super Hornet.



All this things helps ,simplify operation of the combat jet and also helps
with the sales. India again is one nation ,that usually use western avionics instead of the Russian ones.  Better graphics displays can help in situational awareness and easier take on decisions.

all this comes from an Indian pilot interview , he flew many combat jets ,
europeans ,americans and Russians. including F-35 he had a chance to see.
and apparently he was ordered to compare and give his advice which one India should buy. He tested helmets and avionics and flying performance.
but it was interesting how the Panels display was important for him too.
he spoke of some panels display that are hard to read when sun light hit them. forgot which plane was ,but for real pilots , panels was important too.
he told he liked a lot Super hornet digital panels . Pak-fa panels can do the job too ,but not as advanced as others.

[ F l a n k e d ] wrote:

coolieno99 wrote:very informative, detailed summary on the PAK-FA

http://fullafterburner.weebly.com/aerospace/sukhoi-pak-fa-the-anti-stealth-gamechanger

Well, the article makes some fair points but remains plagued by outlandish claims, such as the PAKFA being jointly designed by HAL :

...It is expected to enter service with designation Sukhoi Su 50 in Russian Airforce. The aircraft is being co-developed  in collaboration with HAL with 50% sharing of fundings. The HAL would develop an Indian specific variant named Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA).

They seem to confuse the PAK FA and FGFA programs. The former is entirely developed by Sukhoi and its contractors and poised to become the mainstay of the russian air force. Whilst it is the latter which will be "co-developed", i.e. tailored by sukhoi to indian MoD requirements. As to the 50% funding allegation, it is simply not true, which is why indians have no say in the design and engineering choices made for the pakfa.

The Indians spent loads of money on development of Su 30 MKI whose later variants Su 30 MKM of Malaysia and Su 30 SM of Russia were sold, but India did not receive any royalties for that. It was because such a clause wasn't written in the contract.

Here again, they only paid for integration of western avionics of their choosing into a pre-existing aircraft (since HAL couldn't do it on their own), not the "development" of the aircraft, and as such the very idea of them claiming royalties for the MKM and SM is hilarious.

PM Modi’s Russia visit in september will follow signing of the final contract.
“Under the new offer, India will have to pay $3.7 billion, instead of $6 billion, for the technological know-how and three prototypes of PAK FA fighters. The proposal awaits a decision from Prime Minister Narendra Modi, when he meets Russian President Vladimir Putin for the annual India-Russia summit this week.

I think India already got favorable terms and a better deal than anything the west has to offer, but they mustn't push their luck far though. Indians have been consistently unwilling to devote serious funding to the project, and yet remain obsessed with claiming full ownership of the technology developed by Sukhoi.
I mean, it would be self-defeating for the russians to spend much time and money developing 5th gen tech to counter the American threat, and then sell everything for a few lousy toilet paper dollars.

yep, full technology transfer any day now

The Indians are trying to get the best bang for their buck. It's up to the Russians to tell them how much their deck is worth.

They're going to get an "F-22 like" fighter (superior in practically most aspects - ala F-15/Su-27) without bleeding 10s of billions into R&D. If Sukkoi and the MoD had more cash on hand they would negotiate from a much stronger position. No one, absolutely no one is getting this type of deal in the world. The Chinese will come begging for some borts as well. Don't you doubt that for a second. Hopefully the bort price is doubled for export. Meaning those who invest in R&D get preferential pricing. Those that do not pay more and get less - an exception to the Iranians just to fuck with Israel (but this is just my childish opinion).

Vann7 wrote:

miketheterrible wrote:

he is a troglodyte so ignore him. Little he knows of Russia's input in graphics. And he cannot even say GPU properly (graphics processing unit).  And he doesn't even know the difference between a GPU and resolution on a display.  There is a lot he said wrong that most in my field of expertise would call him a retard but that is just being nice to him.

What?

Gpus accelerate graphics , CPU alone can do graphics but very slow.
Russia it seems is using Brute force to display graphics. because of the low resolutions and limited colors. Because im not aware of they designing any GPU at all for Pak-fa. The higher the capabilities and memory of your GPU the higher the resolution of your display and the better the graphics the panels can display in real time.. Graphics accelerator can be very useful for displaying terrain in 3d virtual reality. So pilots can have full panoramic view without leaving the plane.

Again this will not be a problem for plane performance , the entire panels
can be analog and will still do well ,but for sales point of view ,is better when your panels display are very advanced. India in particular always buys western or European panels ,instead of the Russian ones in many planes.

Advanced graphics allows larger panels displays and simply things..
take a look at Boeing digital panels designed for the Super Hornet.



All this things helps ,simplify operation of the combat jet and also helps
with the sales. India again is one nation ,that usually use western avionics instead of the Russian ones.  Better graphics displays can help in situational awareness and easier take on decisions.

all this comes from an Indian pilot interview , he flew many combat jets ,
europeans ,americans and Russians. including F-35 he had a chance to see.
and apparently he was ordered to compare and give his advice which one India should buy. He tested helmets and avionics and flying performance.
but it was interesting how the Panels display was important for him too.
he spoke of some panels display that are hard to read when sun light hit them. forgot which plane was ,but for real pilots , panels was important too.
he told he liked a lot Super hornet digital panels . Pak-fa panels can do the job too ,but not as advanced as others.

sigh....

Go do some homework on integrated circuitry as well look up Elbrus 1C and then come back. What you are thinking of is called a Graphics Processing Unit (GPU) what I think you are trying to imply is APU which is Accelerated Processing Unit which intigrates a GPU onto the same die as the CPU like AMD's and now Intel with their latest processors. This is something present in Elbrus 1C which currently exists. Low and behold, you need to do some homework. If you think this is how it ends up, take a look at the displays in Su-35 and then come back.

Thanks.

Oh, and BTW, this is going through R&D so don't expect it to be end product. But you never seem to catch on. Which had been obvious.

Vann7 wrote:

miketheterrible wrote:

he is a troglodyte so ignore him. Little he knows of Russia's input in graphics. And he cannot even say GPU properly (graphics processing unit).  And he doesn't even know the difference between a GPU and resolution on a display.  There is a lot he said wrong that most in my field of expertise would call him a retard but that is just being nice to him.

What?

Gpus accelerate graphics , CPU alone can do graphics but very slow.
Russia it seems is using Brute force to display graphics. because of the low resolutions and limited colors. Because im not aware of they designing any GPU at all for Pak-fa. The higher the capabilities and memory of your GPU the higher the resolution of your display and the better the graphics the panels can display in real time.. Graphics accelerator can be very useful for displaying terrain in 3d virtual reality. So pilots can have full panoramic view without leaving the plane.

Again this will not be a problem for plane performance , the entire panels
can be analog and will still do well ,but for sales point of view ,is better when your panels display are very advanced. India in particular always buys western or European panels ,instead of the Russian ones in many planes.

Advanced graphics allows larger panels displays and simply things..
take a look at Boeing digital panels designed for the Super Hornet.



All this things helps ,simplify operation of the combat jet and also helps
with the sales. India again is one nation ,that usually use western avionics instead of the Russian ones.  Better graphics displays can help in situational awareness and easier take on decisions.

all this comes from an Indian pilot interview , he flew many combat jets ,
europeans ,americans and Russians. including F-35 he had a chance to see.
and apparently he was ordered to compare and give his advice which one India should buy. He tested helmets and avionics and flying performance.
but it was interesting how the Panels display was important for him too.
he spoke of some panels display that are hard to read when sun light hit them. forgot which plane was ,but for real pilots , panels was important too.
he told he liked a lot Super hornet digital panels . Pak-fa panels can do the job too ,but not as advanced as others.

So, few things.

That is not an aircraft control panel, but a cheap simulator panel.
They tried to save money, so all individual screen shown on one cheap PC screen.
Here is the monitor that has been explicated into the sim:


Usually on an aircraft there are multiple screens, and each of them representing an independent system, not connected to the others.

The most importance are the basic aircraft instruments, these have to validated to stringent standards.

The least important the tactical / communication screen, if say the com gone for 2 sec the effect minor, if the basic instruments gone for two sec during landing then the aircraft is toast.



The two sukhoi guy on the pic playing with a basic aircraft instrument test rig. It has basic functions, and thses two will be part of the five-six screens in the front of the pilot.

These two screen is the least confidental, every aircraft has these instruments .

Just to go further about semi technology.

The aircraft display shown on the hornet simulator can be driven by simply a geforce 256 , manufactured 18 years ago.

That has enough processing power to drive any tactical screen that you need.

Typically a tactical screen doesn't need texturing, bumbp maping or complex lighting algorithms.
That is required only for movie quality real time video games : )

Russia has semi fab that can make more complicated stuff than a 18years old semi, and the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PowerVR selling design patterns for anyone who has money.

But to design something that can display 3D graphic is not that complicated, a few dozen person company can deliver that kind of stuff in short period of time if a brand new design required for aerospace purposes.


I can't emphasize how old and dated technology required even for the most complicated tactical display.

Talking of cockpits and displays..... I've been trying to find pics of the F-22 cockpit for ages and have found nothing. Anyone else had luck?

Thanks for the photo of the cockpit of the Super Hornet.

At Suckoy Team a single screen is not safety in case of malfunction, much better to have two singles pushed together in the event of default of any of them, fighting performance would not be affected. In Russia (and earlier in the Soviet Union there have been numerous studies (some still stumbled) on ergonomics combat workstation (advanced tech apart)

Regarding the discussion I agree that the data represented on the display are not a video game created by corporate Perception (example), beautiful, modern and effect, but do not correspond to actual use in flight and in combat.
But though: is there a point where for obvious reasons, russia must catch up: the Visual information of its pilots.

I think the basic point is unique: no one likes to be represented on the display old-analog dials instead of three-dimensional maps.

The basic point is purile.

Vann is a fanboi and wants the best and anything not the best is the worst... and it is all Putins fault.

Cockpit displays present information to the pilot.

Whether they do that in a 3D profile map of the terrain ahead or in some other way is a very dumb point... WTF is the pilot flying the plane looking at his MFDs all the time for... why bother with a cockpit canopy at all if he is just going to stare at MFDs.

Go to a flight sim website and see them whine about graphics performance there... I have never read about a pilot complaining that his MFDs are not high enough resolution...

Way to focus on BS instead of real issues...

Isos wrote:

HM1199 wrote:busting myths about the PAK FA : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=scJnps0RErg

NICE !!

You can put the video directly on the forum

Great video! It's good to know that the Pak fa will be very stealthy, so I don't see how the F-35 could stand a chance against it.