New combat aircraft will be presented at MAKS-2021

LMFS wrote:KRET clarified recently what we have been saying, that ROFAR is at the level of basic research, that means, decade(s) away from implementation.

So basically as real as super duper antiship railguns which the US promised or lasers on the F-35.

Arrow wrote:Currently, Russia has working prototypes of ROFAR radars.  And so we are ahead in this area in relation to the rest of the world.

And the US has working prototypes of railguns. Where are those railguns now, outside of sci fi novels?

Arrow wrote:

medo wrote:. After all, they bring to MAKS real plane, not a model.
.

It is not so sure whether it is a prototype or a mock-up.

Yes, we do not know yet. But there is a question, why would they tow mock-up around? Wooden mock-up is usually driven by trucks to exhibition place and put together there. They are not very mobile as they are just models. Towing around show, that it have fully operational undercarriage. We could see under cover, that it could have real engine as well. This is not something wooden mock-up have.

This week will be very long, before we will see it uncovered and find out more about it. Like its designation as Su-?? or other...

limb wrote:

And the US has working prototypes of railguns. Where are those railguns now, outside of sci fi novels?

Rail guns will stay as a wet dream of Muricans as long as they will not get a technology of fast production of big energy amounts - that is the main issue there.
And as they know shit about constructing modern nuclear reactors, yet small ones, all they can do is apply more Marvel heroes to the rescue.
Captain Murica will have a rail gun stuck up his ass. Or will stick it to WonderFatty, or something more progressive

limb wrote:However, if sukhoi is like the people on this forum, they will deem all chinese engineering decisions as retarded and worthless because ofcourse, chinese are supposedly backward commie copying subhumans not capable of innovation...just like the west claims.

You're casting a wide net there...  Best not stick everyone in the same bucket eh?

More evidence about the intake:

Gomig-21 wrote:
That seems to be the main question about this aircraft.  It does appear to be rather large when you look at that one pic with the bald man walking next to it.  The girth is there even though the sagging tarp could have some effect on that, but the length is undeniable and it is pretty long, almost appears to be as long as the venerable Su-57.

It seems very big, in part because it rests very high on the landing gear. When we get good pictures I will try to analyse the exit angle of the nozzle, I believe it will be higher than most planes. As explained I theorize this may be related to loading the weapons in the bays from below, but we will see. As to the length, the calculations until now show between 16 and 17 m, that is the size of the Saab FS2020. That study had 10 t empty weight, bays for A2G attack and required an engine close in thrust to that of the izd. 30. So even when it may seem close to a heavy fighter, we have to remind that:

> We talk about 5G, that means a "light" fighter is rather what we would call medium in 4G. This is not self serving analysis after having seen the plane, I have been saying this for a while, because I saw it myself when trying to put everything inside of the 3D model. A "stealth F-16" is at least 1.5 - 2 m longer than the original one, that is almost unavoidable.
> F-22 and Su-57 have two engines of the size of the izd. 30 and are close to 20 t empty. That is, twice as much propulsion and almost twice as much empty weight.

Accordingly, the fuel load will increase notably compared to fighters like F-16 and MiG-29 in their original versions, probably it will almost double. It already was studied in the FS2020, I saw that in my model too and I believe it will be the case with the LTS as well.

So the engine is a huge question mark.  Will it be a single Al-41 or is the Izdeliye 30 ready and is already in there and would either of those give this thing a thrust to weight ratio of greater than 1 and a top speed of around Mach 2?  Or is there a new engine that has been built especially for this thing?  

What is the empty weight of this thing? That is the question. It is long, but not so wide, and it may not be that heavy.  From the engine that propelled a F-16 originally to izd. 30 there has been a growth of 50% in thrust, and those are considered the real "hot rod" versions before they started stuffing the plane with equipment. That means a LTS with 12 t empty weight would still keep that TWR. Excess power is not only related to weight, but to cross section and drag though, that is another factor we cannot assess as of now, the tarp does not allow to make a good calculation of that parameter.

There was also a report that it would have TVC which I thought was interesting considering we've never seen a single Russian aircraft with a single engine that was also 360 degree TV.  Some neat things to look forward to.

Let us see, that has not been typically the development line of Lyulka.

Oh, and also it's designation will be neat to find out.  And let's hope NATO behaves itself this time and not come up with a stupid and insulting name like "Felon" those bastards.

I couldn't care less about those stupid NATO denominations, please let us not start one of those insufferable discussions about them?

limb wrote:Maybe russian TVC technology is so advanced that they decided they dont need stabilizers, thus reducing drag. This raises the question if the TVC is 3D or 2D, and what benefits does 3D TVC add to a single engine fighter. My theiry is that 3D tvc adds diminishing returns for a light single engined fighter in terms of lower controllability compared to 2 engined fighters but more weight and cost. Therefore 2D system might be enough.

If they have the 3D nozzle, it would be good for some maneuvers (yaw control). If not, it is not the end of the world. The plane is already controllable in stall events with the 2D TVC.

I think people are hyping to much, a working prototype, a new engine, maybe not the first prototype...I can't believe this is a prototype, I will eat my arm if I'm wrong.
I expect you guys don't get disappointed
It will be interesting to see if the name has an E for export at the end.

dino00 wrote:I think people are hyping to much, a working prototype, a new engine, maybe not the first prototype...I can't believe this is a prototype, I will eat my arm if I'm wrong.
I expect you guys don't get disappointed
It will be interesting to see if the name has an E for export at the end.

I think it will be more than just a model. Probably with mostly the basics in it. But I too wouldn't get too excited just yet.

Sukhoi is realy fast. A month and a half ago Sukhoi only start developing new light fighter, according to western claims and now they already have a prototype...

Well it is obviously because they copied something American... same with scramjets etc.

True. But there is a difference. In that time Russian industry was not as developed as today and Su-57 was the first fifth gen fighter jet and whole new technology have to be developed, tested and matured to get into production. This new one will simply take already developed and matured technology from Su-57, so it will not take that long to go in production. Many things were tested in Su-57 and in S-70 Ohotnik...

Its aerodynamics is totally different, and so no doubt will be its roles and expected capabilities.

A bit like saying Sukhoi should be developing the PAK DA because it is really only a really big Su-34 but with stealth.

That.
And what more, checked the oil prices lately ;-)?
It functionally doubled this year.
The same applies to gas, coal, and all the other energy sources.
Imagine the condition of the Russian budget, they are swimming in cash.

It is a fair point but some things just take time and throwing money at it does not speed it up much.

Ironic really considering the whole purpose of this light fighter is to reduce costs not to soak up extra income...

Mig will now have to really pull up their socks, but having competition usually spurs the best from somebody. I'm pretty sure we'll see the Mig-41 and a new light fighter from Mig in the very near future.

If this is a Sukhoi bird then of course they are getting lots of attention... looking at history in the late 1980s it was the Mi-28A that was shown at western and Russian airshows so that it could find foreign investors to pay for its development because they had already chosen the Ka-50 for the job of replacing the Mi-24.

Obviously then Desert Storm happened, which the Russians examined carefully and realised attack helos are much safer if they operate at night and flying in a helicopter at low altitude at night is a full time job so they went back on their selection of the Ka-50 because it was a single seater and ran the competitions again with the Mi-28N winning the role of Mi-24 replacement while the Ka-52 which was more expensive but also had more capabilities, was adopted as a sort of recon helicopter... a non stealthy Commanche really... except it made it to service.

Su-57 technology and s-70 technology allows to create a smaller aircraft pretty fast.

Not really... this aircraft is different and has different operational requirements... it is not just a case of pull the horizontal tails off and change the shape of the main wing and the air intake...

Single engine version of the Su 57 it seems.

Clearly visibly not.

You guys are too harsh on Mig. I'm pretty confident we'll at the very least see the Mig-41 very soon. Things are going to get very interesting from now on!

They are, but haters are going to hate...

If Sukhoi could manage to get their Su-35s to be as cheap to operate as MiG-29s then Egypt and Algeria and Russia would not be buying MiGs...

Hopefully it can accommodate a Kh-32 in its internal bays intended for Elizabethan CVN fired from Argentinian one near the Malvinas Islands.

These new small fighters will carry a range of new ordinance, but the Kh-32 is rather huge for such a small aircraft.

Perhaps when the PAK DA starts to enter service and some Tu-22M3Ms are freed up they could sell some to Argentina...

Th e advantage of no horizontal stabilizer is in rcs?

With a TVC engine a horizontal tail is just extra weight and drag...

If you fall for the "experts" view on the MiG and Kilmov, you are bound to believe that its all the fault of the MiG. Which it is not! I guess all those experts are either ignoring or not aware of the dirty work Sukhoi management have been doing all these decades to undermine almost all others OKBs to create a monopoly.

The F-5 was a cheap to buy and cheap to operate aircraft because the engines were cheap and simple and it had two.

The upgrade was a larger more powerful engine that was more expensive to buy and more expensive to maintain, so the F-20 was a dud.

The F-16 is not cheaper to buy nor cheaper to operate than a MiG-29.

Klimov is going nowhere. Allmost all the engines for rotary winged are designed by Klimov and so does the 3D TVC that we see on the RD and AL series. They are the pioneers in those and way back in 2004 those were rated for 500hours.

Klimov has been busting its ass to not just make engines for all of Russias service helicopters, but to actually put into production a new version with more power that is more efficient and more modern than the version previously supplied by Motor Sich, so that existing aircraft can keep flying and new aircraft can be built.

It is also in the process of developing new engines for a wide range of new aircraft the Russians have designed and are on the verge of production but are waiting for new engines...

I can't imagine this to be a VTOL at all. Not saying that it could later be developed into one, but...no VTOL right there.

I'll eat two chocolate cakes if it is!

Well that would explain the recessed engine location... normally the engine sticks out on Sukhoi designs... and why the engine intakes are so far forward...

So if it is a VTOL design then I will have sex with a stunningly beautiful woman... and relax because that will destroy this design as an effective aircraft.

On the same subject an old design known as project 33 that was sold to China in the 90s.

That is a model and I doubt it ever flew.

The original twin engine design gained a lot of performance with the gap between the engines effectively making the body of the aircraft a lifting body, which actually increases effective wing surface area.

That design has a centreline vertical fin which would miss the energised vortexes coming off the LERX... meaning it would probably have to be much bigger than as shown in that model...

There is absolutely no way in hell that Sukhoi would even think about starting something like this without a go ahead from VKS, AKA their main, largest and primary customer

Rubbish. Sukhoi has lots of export customers that are probably asking for something like this and Sukhoi think if they can get enough international interest they can make it and then interest the Russian military in buying it... but its size suggests it wont be any better than the MiG-35.

MiG's light fighter market segment just flew away and will not be coming back, ever

There is no evidence the Russian military is even interested in that segment of the market.

Maybe this is not even the first prototype.

It is advertising to create interest.... a bit like talking about an Mi-28A from airshows in the late 1980s, compared with the Mi-28NM now.

I said months ago that MiG should take existing parts, a single engine and wrap them in new stealth airframe in order to develop new fighter jet

At the time I was ridiculed by several individuals here

But now Sukhoi did exactly that and took MiG's entire market segment

Sukhoi might just be fishing for export customers, while MiG has the actual contract to supply the eventual replacement for the MiG-35.

Russian 5th-gen light single-engine fighter
Chinese FC-31,
American F-35
South Korean KF-21 Boramae

Yeah... pretty boring...

If this plane finds success on the export market and the VVS adopts a domestic version for its airforce, where would that leave the MiG LMFS? Would they even have a need for it anymore?

If is the biggest word in the English language.

Maybe we don't hear from MiG because they are making the new light fighter for the Russian military?

I think it's safe to say that MiG LMFS has already been left behind, current day VKS has no patience for redundant products

Always impressed by your confidence.

No horizontal stabiliser, it's already substantially different

Not at all... run the AB on the F-35 and apparently after 90 seconds of burn the tail falls off...

So this is a supersonic F-35.

That seems to be the main question about this aircraft. It does appear to be rather large when you look at that one pic with the bald man walking next to it. The girth is there even though the sagging tarp could have some effect on that, but the length is undeniable and it is pretty long, almost appears to be as long as the venerable Su-57.

But there will be no complaints like there are with the MiG-35 because a single engined aircraft the same size as a twin is just more efficient isn't it?

So the engine is a huge question mark. Will it be a single Al-41 or is the Izdeliye 30 ready and is already in there and would either of those give this thing a thrust to weight ratio of greater than 1 and a top speed of around Mach 2? Or is there a new engine that has been built especially for this thing?

If it was for export it would be an AL-41 ideally... unless they are buying Su-57s together as a package and they go for the deluxe package with the better engines.

There was also a report that it would have TVC which I thought was interesting considering we've never seen a single Russian aircraft with a single engine that was also 360 degree TV. Some neat things to look forward to.

Single engine means it wont be as agile in terms of super stall manouvering where only engine power its keeping it airborne, and no ability to roll in a super stall.

They'll definitely give it a more flattering codename this time because they'll consider the single fighter plane as a hat-tip to the F-35

They have no interest in giving Russian equipment flattering names.

How are we so sure this thing has no horizontal stabilizers? Maybe it wasn't added yet when the pictures were taken?

We can't be, but why tow around a plane with bits missing?

Maybe russian TVC technology is so advanced that they decided they dont need stabilizers, thus reducing drag. This raises the question if the TVC is 3D or 2D, and what benefits does 3D TVC add to a single engine fighter. My theiry is that 3D tvc adds diminishing returns for a light single engined fighter in terms of lower controllability compared to 2 engined fighters but more weight and cost. Therefore 2D system might be enough.

2D would be useless as there would be no ability to yaw the nose at a target. You couldn't roll with only one engine but with 2D engine thrust you could only raise or lower your nose in a superstall.

Currently the only air force operating a single engined fighter with TVC is the PLAAF with the J-10C. It would be interesting if sukhoi snalyzed the J-10Cs performance to see if TVC for one engine is worth it.

Or they could look at their notes and experience with Yak-141s that they ended up selling to the Americans so they could make the F-35B.

However, if sukhoi is like the people on this forum, they will deem all chinese engineering decisions as retarded and worthless because ofcourse, chinese are supposedly backward commie copying subhumans not capable of innovation...just like the west claims.

Yeah, I don't think China would openly and freely give Sukhoi access to their development and testing records any more than the Russians would offer up the same information to China for free.

Yak have plenty of experience with single engined fighters with thrust vectoring engine nozzles... the Americans bought the details of their main jet engine nozzle for the Yak-141 because no western VSTOL fighter could operate with a 90 degree thrust vector angle with a fully afterburning jet engine... like the Yak-141 did.

The plane is already controllable in stall events with the 2D TVC.

It would stop being a fighter and would just be avoiding the ground in such cases.

dino00 wrote:I think people are hyping to much, a working prototype, a new engine, maybe not the first prototype...I can't believe this is a prototype, I will eat my arm if I'm wrong.
I expect you guys don't get disappointed
It will be interesting to see if the name has an E for export at the end.

You need to prepare yourself to only use one arm in future!
There is a very slight chance it may not fly at MAKS but everything points to a prototype, and not even a demonstrator as someone mentioned. Expect some serious marketing!
I will also be surprised if there is an "E" added in the name. Sukhoi likes to use a "7" in the eventual name (Su-67) but for export it might be Su-62?

Does this outline make sense to you? This is what I am figuring out from what we have seen until now:

It appears that the intake goes right up towards the front of the cockpit.

The "intakes" underneath the lifting body/wings may actually be for weapons/sensors and the undercarriage??

Mir wrote:It appears that the intake goes right up towards the front of the cockpit.

The "intakes" underneath the lifting body/wings may actually be for weapons and the undercarriage??

I see the intake ventral as in Borisov's model. The F-35-like feature is a pointy LERX to me, as in MiG izd. 33.

What appears outboard of the intake is simply bodywork (this is what you refer by "intakes underneath of the lifting body" I guess), thicker than the wing and thinner than the fuselage (engine tub or whatever we call it). If you look from the sides you notice that there is a certain thickness along the sides of the fuselage all the way to the tail. The position of the main landing gear doors and some pictures from behind evidence that the struts are anchored below the height of the wing. Of course, some thickness is needed to store the wheels and struts. I notice that strange position of the doors is not coincidence and may serve the purpose of clearing the opening of other bay doors above, like quick bays for instance, which would be restricted on ground if the landing gear doors open the conventional way.

LMFS wrote:If you look from the sides you notice that there is a certain thickness along the sides of the fuselage all the way to the tail.

This is naturally all guesswork atm but I expect a lot of space for weapons etc inside the areas along the sides of the fuselage to the tail.

Mir wrote:This is naturally all guesswork atm but I expect a lot of space for weapons etc inside the areas along the sides of of the fuselage to the tail.

Yes, and the fact that the doors of the landing gear open the way they do instead of doing it like in the Su-57 is a strong hint to that area you mention having some function. The obvious one is to have quick bays for short range missiles, but we will see...

They could really be messing with us using coat hangar wire to create false shapes and bumps and lumps...

GarryB wrote:They could really be messing with us using coat hangar wire to create false shapes and bumps and lumps...

Absolutely! A lot of people can end up with pie in the face - including me

Isos wrote:Mig last chance is mig-41. If the program is late or not respecting the specs then it will be eaten by sukhoi.


I guess this one will be named su-21 in ref to the year but also to the wonderful single engine mig-21.

СУ-59

This stuff is so exciting

Source: new single-engine fighter will be able to destroy land and sea targets

Its premiere will take place on the first day of the MAKS-2021 air show

https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/11926935

The marketing is very agressive

UK should feel concerned. Argentina too

dino00 wrote:


The marketing is very agressive

Pointing a middle finger at the Brits!

The Rostec logo worries me a little bit - might be just a mock-up - but I'll keep on believing!

dino00 wrote:Source: new single-engine fighter will be able to destroy land and sea targets

Its premiere will take place on the first day of the MAKS-2021 air show

https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/11926935

Very relevant! That was the biggest challenge in the design, and the most likely reason for the size of the plane. A strong hint of Su-57 sized bays (just one of them) or, at least, a way of carrying ordnance bigger than AAM, me thinks...

As to the EOTS... the idea was to put it at the side of the forward landing gear, using the depth and width of the space available there... let us see whether that matches the real design too

Mir wrote:

dino00 wrote:


The marketing is very agressive

Pointing a middle finger at the Brits!

The Rostec logo worries me a little bit - might be just a mock-up - but I'll keep on believing!

I would say computer graphic.



I don't see this down looking EO complex on this plane, unless it is very small. Could be an option, to be installed later.