New combat aircraft will be presented at MAKS-2021

limb wrote:Anyone wonder what the engine might be? I doubt a single AL-41 is suitable since it has a low T/W ratio. Perhaps klimov or tumanskii have a new engine?

It is known to be the izd. 30. But the 117 may do as well, compared to the F-35 it would not be bad.

ALAMO wrote:This plane was - probably - shown to the public as far as 3 years back, again as a model on a Borisov desk.

I have been following this issue VERY carefully for a while. I did my model in late 2017 and early 2018 mainly, and looked for every possible reference by then and at any time afterwards. There was no news about this other than the regular claims by MiG that we have been hearing since beginning of this century. Then in 2019 a study by TSAGI for a twin engine fighter for MiG and a bit earlier, a MoU with the UAE also by MiG. The model at Borisov's desk appeared this year only. Earliest mention to the single engine jet I recall is Chemezov Dec 2020. But I agree they are trolling us like champions with this presentation

PapaDragon wrote:

limb wrote:Anyone wonder what the engine might be? I doubt a single AL-41 is suitable since it has a low T/W ratio. Perhaps klimov or tumanskii have a new engine?

I-30 from Su-57 definitely

So the RD series is in the dustbin of history? Its sad that klimov is going extinct, it was a truly great engine design bureau.

Russian_Patriot_ wrote:The first photos of the new fighter

Looks awesome.  Loving the fact that it seems to have done away with any horizontal stabilizers and is just utilizing all-moving canted stabilators.  That front landing gear is pretty interesting also and doesn't have the usual "mud-guard" that's even on the Su-57 most likely because of the intake being forward of the landing gear.  It's also showing a clear stealth edge on the forward fuselage but the cover is hiding the belly intake pretty well.  Although I think we can suspect it to be there like all the previous CGI interpretations.  To me, so far, the closest it seems to resemble is the LMFS CGI.  

limb wrote:So the RD series is in the dustbin of history? Its sad that klimov is going extinct, it was a truly great engine design bureau.

They are still further developing and selling RDs for many customers, and they are the ones designing the turboprops and turboshafts for Russia. Plus probably they can work subcontracted for anything UEC needs. They are alive and well.

Gomig-21 wrote:That front landing gear is pretty interesting also and doesn't have the usual "mud-guard" that's even on the Su-57 most likely because of the intake being forward of the landing gear.

Right, it is not needed with the intake in that position, it always gets clean air.

Although I think we can suspect it to be there like all the previous CGI interpretations.  To me, so far, the closest it seems to resemble is the LMFS CGI.  

Thank you Sir. To be fair, CGIs with this layout and design solutions grew like mushrooms AFTER the model at Borisov's desk appeared... It is easy to know the numbers of the lottery the day after, but the funny part is to know them BEFORE, you know... When I presented this model back in 2018 this was the kindest feedback I got  

PapaDragon wrote:I-30 is planned successor of RD series so it's all going as planned

Not really, the izd. 30 is the follower of the AL-31 family. The RD is notably smaller.

Hopefully it means that Russia finally decided to bring it's runways into current century

If you look attentively the nose landing gear has two wheels and is very robust, so this plane should not have any restriction in terms of operational conditions compared to say Su-57. In fact, it seems it uses almost the same landing gear and even doors of Su-57, don't know if they are scaled or not but I hope they are!

The difference is that there is no forward placed wheel throwing debris to the intake, the runways can remain as they are

George1 wrote:

LMFS wrote:

Russian_Patriot_ wrote:I wouldn't think about the size yet. At the moment, there is no way to compare the size with anything

Not so sure of that

from existing aircrafts resembles the Shenyang FC-31

The tail and whole aft section is nothing like J-31

Is there some canards under there ?

LMFS wrote:
Thank you Sir. To be fair, CGIs with this layout and design solutions grew like mushrooms AFTER the model at Borisov's desk appeared... It is easy to know the numbers of the lottery the day after, but the funny part is to know them BEFORE, you know... When I presented this model back in 2018 this was the kindest feedback I got  

Yeah people suck, what are you gonna do!? If they paid any attention to the developments of the past, they would know that not only the Pelican had that ventral intake, but so didn't the MiG 1.44, the Eurofighter Typhoon, F-16 etc., etc. lol. Crazy bastards. But it would be interesting to know where you came up with the ventral intake, or more precisely, what convinced you that it would have that layout?

But this appearance under the sheets, so to speak, is killing us here! The anticipation -- even if it's just for 5 more days -- is brutal! Let's go!

Gomig-21 wrote:Yeah people suck, what are you gonna do!?  If they paid any attention to the developments of the past, they would know that not only the Pelican had that ventral intake, but so didn't the MiG 1.44, the Eurofighter Typhoon, F-16 etc., etc. lol.  Crazy bastards.  But it would be interesting to know where you came up with the ventral intake, or more precisely, what convinced you that it would have that layout?  

But this appearance under the sheets, so to speak, is killing us here!  The anticipation -- even if it's just for 5 more days -- is brutal!  Let's go!

Hahaha, we people are full of paradoxes indeed. But it is ok, when the reference is the JSF it is easier to think along those lines I guess. The reason for the ventral intake can be long, but to make it short you can say that it is a lighter, less draggy and more straightforward solution for a single engine plane. In particular when there is one engine to be fed, the two air ducts need to join before of the engine and that divides the internal volume in a way that does not allow to place a substantial bay in front of the engine. The only solution is to place it at the sides of the engine, but that creates a lot of drag and develops the plane exactly in the opposite direction (transversal) that you need (longitudinal). An important part is to analyse the failures of the F-35 and the reasons behind them. Without the STOVL requirement, nothing prevents UAC from devising a low drag, high performance fighter with a smaller engine that is a better representation of that hypothetical "stealth F-16" than the JSF could ever be. I am really eager to see the rest of the design decisions and solutions indeed, this is IMHO one of the most important events in military aviation of the last years without a doubt

Backman wrote:Is there some canards under there ?

I would not be on canards with those pictures (and in general, canard is a pretty radical design decision today), but you never know. What I see is a bit difficult to identify, like some kind of wide LERX or strake... it already puzzled me in the "Borisov model" (see the dark shadow below the fuselage chine in the picture below) but I thought it may be an effect of the picture, now it seems that there is definitely something like a border that starts (in x axis) a bit after the glazing of the cockpit... would be great to see that with better detail in the next days

LMFS wrote:
Hahaha, we people are full of paradoxes indeed. But it is ok, when the reference is the JSF it is easier to think along those lines I guess. The reason for the ventral intake can be long, but to make it short you can say that it is a lighter, less draggy and more straightforward solution for a single engine plane. In particular when there is one engine to be fed, the two air ducts need to join before of the engine and that divides the internal volume in a way that does not allow to place a substantial bay in front of the engine. The only solution is to place it at the sides of the engine, but that creates a lot of drag and develops the plane exactly in the opposite direction (transversal) that you need (longitudinal). An important part is to analyse the failures of the F-35 and the reasons behind them. Without the STOVL requirement, nothing prevents UAC from devising a low drag, high performance fighter with a smaller engine that is a better representation of that hypothetical "stealth F-16" than the JSF could ever be. I am really eager to see the rest of the design decisions and solutions indeed, this is IMHO one of the most important events in military aviation of the last years without a doubt

Very cool and totally agree about the importance of this event. It will certainly boost Russian military aviation IMO.

LMFS wrote:I would not be on canards with those pictures (and in general, canard is a pretty radical design decision today), but you never know. What I see is a bit difficult to identify, like some kind of wide LERX or strake... it already puzzled me in the "Borisov model" (see the dark shadow below the fuselage chine in the picture below) but I thought it may be an effect of the picture, now it seems that there is definitely something like a border that starts (in x axis) a bit after the glazing of the cockpit... would be great to see that with better detail in the next days

It also seems to be Russia's first attempt at a DSI intake if I'm not mistaken. Something we haven't seen yet on any Russian aircraft, if it is indeed exactly like the model on Borisov's FAMOUS desk! lol.

The Drives first shit piece on Russia's new fighter is here. https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/41566/russias-new-light-fighter-jet-breaks-cover-ahead-of-huge-russian-air-show

Photos have appeared on social media showing what appears to be Russia’s much-hyped new light-to-medium-weight fighter, or at least a mock-up of it,

Much hyped eh. Nobody has heard of its actual existence until days ago. And we still don't even know what it is.

The big question is whether this is a mock-up, or a real aircraft, and to what degree the aircraft’s development program has progressed.

Denial stage

A Divergent Supersonic Inlet (DSI) is highly likely as well, which would simplify the inlet design while maintaining performance and help with reducing radar cross-section from the forward hemisphere.

Some DSI shilling like usual. If it doesn't have DSI, they will act all shocked again.  And I don't believe DSI is chosen for RCS considerations at all. If the engineers chose to put DSI on it, I'll respect their judgement. And if not, I'll respect that judgement too.

The big factor here is money. Russia would have to make some very hard choices to execute the full development and fielding of this aircraft themselves. Hence the heavy marketing push for major export partners to help offset some or even all of the cost.

Oh not this f*cking bullshit again you dipshits. All of the cost ? What the hell do you know about Russia's finances ? Evidently nothing. We haven't heard a peep about pre orders or MFG partners at all.

Hmmm so when years ago Borisov told about works ona new fighter (stol or vstol) and I quoted that it was barrage of denial . What can I say you're welcome lads


When you look that the engine is Iz. 30 (thrust up to 18,000KG ) and MTOW accidentally to 18 tons means it can be STVOL still

I know you all love me right?

Backman wrote:The Drives first shit piece on Russia's new fighter is here. https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/41566/russias-new-light-fighter-jet-breaks-cover-ahead-of-huge-russian-air-show

Photos have appeared on social media showing what appears to be Russia’s much-hyped new light-to-medium-weight fighter, or at least a mock-up of it,

no worries I heard that before " Soviet Union cannot manufacture T-34 in decent quality and quantity" . Before 41.

LMFS wrote:

Thank you Sir. To be fair, CGIs with this layout and design solutions grew like mushrooms AFTER the model at Borisov's desk appeared... It is easy to know the numbers of the lottery the day after, but the funny part is to know them BEFORE, you know... When I presented this model back in 2018 this was the kindest feedback I got  

no way with those eyes


Im glad to see you back. I only look forward to check if the new fighter is STVOL o STOL

Rear view

The guys from Russian social networks also remembered these 3D models. It looks VERY similar

Russian_Patriot_ wrote:Rear view

Where did you get this scoop ? just curious

Backman wrote:

Russian_Patriot_ wrote:Rear view

Where did you get this scoop ? just curious

From the Russian social network "VKontakte"

Before we declare that it has no horizontal tail which would be cool, this does look like a place where a tail section would be bolted on.

Better quality photo

Front view

Before we declare that it has no horizontal tail which would be cool, this does look like a place where a tail section would be bolted on.

Not if both are free to turn...

Also it just occurred to me that in case this turns out to be single engine VTOL we will probably hear on the news that some guy in New Zealand committed mass shooting

As Mindstorm pointed out a few pages before the MiG design will likely be a twin engined aircraft, this is a Sukhoi... I rather doubt this programme will lead to anything being in production for the next 5-10 years and in the mean time the MiG-35 and MiG-41 will be in production.

This is just a light export plane... and there would be no value in making it VSTOL, the Russian Navy are a very conservative bunch and likely would not even consider a single engined carrier aircraft.

This just looks boring... an F-35 with no horizontal tail but also no shaping for a lift fan so odds are it is essentially a fifth gen stealthy F-16... everything the F-35 was supposed to be likely for a fraction of the price and operational costs.

Pretty exciting stuff and the best part is she's a flier!