OT - New Russian Stealth Fighter

[Z-AZ1USN]

I Agree

And we have another copy of a US design

I agree....well..I wonder how much they spent for R@D for this?
Wanna bet Nada, Zip, Zilch...however, they may of had to come up
with a way for it to burn vodka. As always imitation is a sincere
from of flattery. They did it with a captured B29 and copied that down
faithfully to the last rivet. Even their space shuttle look like what we
have been using.

 

[Ken Stallings]

I would need to see higher quality images of the nose area to be totally convinced of this first impression, but the design of the nose doesn't appear too stealthy to me. It appears rounded, and rounded objects are not intrinsically stealthy. This is especially true for the nose radome of this aircraft.

I am certain that the design of the overall fuselage offers enhanced low observability properties. The devil is fully in the details. Not only airframe shape but also materials and coatings.

BTW: The examples of the Flanker shooting down F-22's was in error. It was F-15C's and in head-to-head competition between F-15C's flown by our less experienced pilots against instructor pilots flying Su-27's of the Indian Air Force.

This points to a couple of facts. First and foremost dogfights normally come down to who is better in the cockpit. Second, the Indian Air Force is a first rate organization with excellent training standards. That's why we sent some of our less experienced pilots over there. It was an excellent learning opportunity for them to go against excellent pilots flying dissimilar aircraft, in this case a very potent Su-27.

Cheers,

Ken

 

[deathfromafar]

The examples of the Flanker shooting down F-22's was in error. It was F-15C's and in head-to-head competition between F-15C's flown by our less experienced pilots against instructor pilots flying Su-27's of the Indian Air Force.

Don't forget the F-15 and F-16's in that exercise were flying specific profiles and were "noses cold". The later Red Flag meet when the IAF SU-30MKI's were at Nellis indicated that the radar/fire control systems in the SU-30 isn't what the Russians crack it up to be. The Indian AF pilots committed numerous incidents of fratricide which indicates there are serious deficiencies with TD/IFF modes of those Russian AESA radar sets.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2siH9W5P4E&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfXBoeV86Yo&feature=related

 

[djscoo]

There are several pictures on the wikipedia website...none of them are particularly clear though.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_PAK_FA

 

[Ken Stallings]

There are several pictures on the wikipedia website...none of them are particularly clear though.

Appreciate that link! Those photos helped me conclude a few things. First, I was right, the upper half and lower half of the nose radome is circular. Also, the underside shot seemed to show a seam running down the lateral line which I suspect is an internal weapons bay. If I am wrong, then the weapons would have to be hung on external pylons, which would seriously degrade stealth characteristics.

One final observation is that the cockpit canopy is not coated. If you look at photos of the F-22's canopy, you will notice it has a gold hue to it. That's not a bad photo or your imagination. The F-22 canopy has gold integrated into it in a special way so as not to degrade seeing through the acrylic, but enough so that radar energy is bounced off the surface of the canopy vice getting inside and bouncing off all those lovely angular surfaces inside -- like the pilot, which can bounce back radar energy to the radome it came from.

I'm thinking this aircraft is indeed a very significant reduction of radar cross section from the Su-27. But on first look, I suspect it has a RCS significantly larger than that of the F-22.

Cheers,

Ken

 

[djscoo]

Statistics say 10 internal and 2 external hardpoints...I think you are right about those being doors along the centerline.

 

[Bjoern]

The result was a bloated and inefficient system filled with numerous flaws which could be exploited by an enemy 1/10th the size.

...sometimes in form of a Cessna 172...

Avionics and advanced communications were and still remain a weak point for them.

Actually not really. Datalinks were used since the late 70s in versions of the MiG-21 or -23.

Whether they were badly needed in the russian defense philosophy (ground control all the way) is a different question.

I would even go so far as to say it will be a maintenance nightmare just as their other aircraft are. Just ask the nations that operate Mig-29's, SU-27's/SU-30's. Hangar queens for the most part. More than a few nations who operated these types dumped them because of the high costs and poor reliability. I don't expect any better out of the T-50. In fact, I bet it's cost will be so high that only 2 or 3 nations will buy it in numbers.

From what I know the LSK and Luftwaffe were quite happy with their MiGs.
They only got shipped off to other nations because of the reunification (and subsequent downsizing and reorganization of the united armed forces) and the advent of the Eurofighter (made the Luftwaffe give the Fulcrums to Poland to free training capabilities for EF conversion).

I agree....well..I wonder how much they spent for R@D for this?
Wanna bet Nada, Zip, Zilch...however, they may of had to come up
with a way for it to burn vodka. As always imitation is a sincere
from of flattery. They did it with a captured B29 and copied that down
faithfully to the last rivet. Even their space shuttle look like what we
have been using.

All (internationally speaking) reusable spacecraft designs didn't look that much different from Rockwell's original Space Shuttle.

Why try to make things different at all costs?

Buran was capable of a fully automated mission, by the way. A difference to its american counterpart.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buran_(spacecraft)


I'm curious whether the T-50 retains the famed rough field capabilities of most of its predecessors or not.

 

[Hanimichal]

is this an cars to have beauty designs? or this is for flight dynamic question!

same design with f-22 only in the imagination of the viewer

 

[deathfromafar]

Actually not really. Datalinks were used since the late 70s in versions of the MiG-21 or -23.

Yes, I know as I mentioned they were advanced in some areas while not in others. But those systems and the entire comms network were not very secure from ELINT and EW capability we had. This was put to the test a few times.

As far as the Migs and Sukhois maintenance, Mig-29 engines averaged about a 350 hour TBO which is very poor by current standards and the SU's AL-31's quite a bit better but both have a number of drawbacks compared to Western engine designs and durability. Their centerspools and casings are reported to be fairly good but their blade disks and engine systems are another story. The next generation of engines may overcome many of the old or current shortcomings. Time will tell if the cash is there and actual fruition occurs.

 

[warchild]

I would need to see higher quality images of the nose area to be totally convinced of this first impression, but the design of the nose doesn't appear too stealthy to me. It appears rounded, and rounded objects are not intrinsically stealthy. This is especially true for the nose radome of this aircraft.

I am certain that the design of the overall fuselage offers enhanced low observability properties. The devil is fully in the details. Not only airframe shape but also materials and coatings.

BTW: The examples of the Flanker shooting down F-22's was in error. It was F-15C's and in head-to-head competition between F-15C's flown by our less experienced pilots against instructor pilots flying Su-27's of the Indian Air Force.

This points to a couple of facts. First and foremost dogfights normally come down to who is better in the cockpit. Second, the Indian Air Force is a first rate organization with excellent training standards. That's why we sent some of our less experienced pilots over there. It was an excellent learning opportunity for them to go against excellent pilots flying dissimilar aircraft, in this case a very potent Su-27.

Cheers,

Ken

I hear ya there ken.. Thanks for the correction.. ..

 

[Sundog]

BTW: The examples of the Flanker shooting down F-22's was in error. It was F-15C's and in head-to-head competition between F-15C's flown by our less experienced pilots against instructor pilots flying Su-27's of the Indian Air Force.

This points to a couple of facts. First and foremost dogfights normally come down to who is better in the cockpit. Second, the Indian Air Force is a first rate organization with excellent training standards. That's why we sent some of our less experienced pilots over there. It was an excellent learning opportunity for them to go against excellent pilots flying dissimilar aircraft, in this case a very potent Su-27.

The reason the F-15's lost to the Flankers was due to the rules of engagement the Indian Air Force asked them, the USAF, to use. The IAF had the F-15's not use their long range missiles, which is their strength. As a result, the Flankers were able to get in close enough to kill the F-15's. I'm also quite sure the USAF allowed this, since they were trying to drum up need for F-22's at the time as well.

 

[centuryseries]

As a result, the Flankers were able to get in close enough to kill the F-15's. I'm also quite sure the USAF allowed this, since they were trying to drum up need for F-22's at the time as well.

LOL well it wouldn't be much fun as a BVR engagement! Seriously though, in a dogfight their Sukhois have thrust vectoring if I'm not mistaken?

On the subject of Datalinks, is the F-22 Netcentric yet? I heard or read that it isn't yet.

Russian Mig-31 is argubly the best interceptor in the world right now. Like it or hate it, when the US lost the F-14 they lost a huge capability with those Phoenix missiles too. :mixedsmi:

I see that nose profile as not being round in the second movie on the first page, it looks more like the beak that the side by side seat SU-34 has?

 

[Bjoern]

As far as the Migs and Sukhois maintenance, Mig-29 engines averaged about a 350 hour TBO which is very poor by current standards and the SU's AL-31's quite a bit better but both have a number of drawbacks compared to Western engine designs and durability. Their centerspools and casings are reported to be fairly good but their blade disks and engine systems are another story. The next generation of engines may overcome many of the old or current shortcomings. Time will tell if the cash is there and actual fruition occurs.

Well, what do you need ultradurable engines for if you have a few thousand of them in stock instead?
Back when the 27 and 29 were designed and introduced, most of their user countries still used the "use and throw away" mentality.

Ever since well...maintenance seems to be cheaper than replacement. See our F-4s.

 

[Sundog]

LOL well it wouldn't be much fun as a BVR engagement! Seriously though, in a dogfight their Sukhois have thrust vectoring if I'm not mistaken?

They have newer Flankers with thrust vectoring as well, but I don't think those are the ones they fought. In fact, partly as Ken Stalling was saying about pilot skills, their vectored thrust Su-27MKI's fought some of our F-16 aggressor pilots last year and lost. There was actually a video of the U.S. aggressor pilots talking about it in their debriefing on YouTube for a week or so, before the Pentagon pulled it. Anyway, the F-16's were able to kill them because the Indian pilots used the thrust vectoring in a very high-G, high alpha turn (I think they were trying to due a modified J-turn at around 30000ft) at the beginning of the fight and ended up bleeding off all of their energy and falling tail first (Since the fall off in thrust at altitude results in T/W being less than one) and the F-16's seeing them do that just went vertical and came right back down on top of them and killed them.

Of course, the F-16 pilots said the IAF will actually do quite well, once they learn how to take advantage of their TV and that with proper training they should easily be able to beat the F-16. I only point that as reference to say why I don't think TV had anything to do with the fight between the Flankers and the Eagles. In fact, IIRC, it was the Flankers IR sensors that allowed some of them to sneak up on and kill the Eagles.

With regard to the MiG-31, I have an excellent book on it. It's a very formidable aircraft and they built the structure for a high enough q-limit to do 1000mph on the deck. There isn't an aircraft around that will touch that. Although it's safe to say a bird strike would be completely catastrophic down there. To me, the MiG-31 is the very definition of "Klingon Battle Cruiser," and I mean that in a good way.

 

[Bone]

Drag Chutes?? OMG, what a joke.

 

[Ken Stallings]

I'm also quite sure the USAF allowed this, since they were trying to drum up need for F-22's at the time as well.

I won't deny that was a small goal. But the primary goal was simply to give some of our younger pilots some seriously valuable training. And to do that, it was necessary to turn the fight into a knife fight in a phone booth -- a classic visual dogfight.

You can practice the radar and datalink radar guided engagements in any training range in the states against any opponent. But to have a chance to put your pilots up against actual Su-27's in a dogfight was a wonderful training opportunity.

In terms of training with Su-27's I know the Indian Air Force put more hours on their jets than any other nation flying the Su-27. So, it's not just gaining experience against this type, but also being flown by expert pilots! I don't believe the IAF really forced us into those ROE's. It's pretty much what we wanted also.

Cheers,

Ken

 

[Matt Wynn]

i remember the Indian Su-30MKI's visiting the UK, they were under orders NOT to turn the radar on, still, great looking aircraft, as for a copy remember this has it's origins back before the Berlin wall came down and the Iron Curtain was still closed over the window of the world...

still this makes a great formation image, the Tornado F.3, Eurofighter Typhoon FGR.4 and the Su-30MKI

back on topic, without seeing more images and studying them to me it looks stealthy, but them inlets... they'll be the make or break in stealth capability I believe... could do with some F-117 style inlet screens one thing i like on the T-50... the way the Elevators look to be part of the wing but are a seperate unit... well i love the design even if it is an imitation...

 

[Sundog]

Drag Chutes?? OMG, what a joke.

You obviously haven't operated from runways that are covered with snow and ice. Which is probably the primary reason it has them. In which case, it makes sense to use the chutes and save brake life.

Just for reference, look at Norway's F-16s, they have brake chutes as well, precisely because of the operating conditions they encounter in the far north.

but them inlets... they'll be the make or break in stealth capability I believe

The inlets drop down drastically at the top, and maybe go up behind it. They're obviously using either a "vertical" serpentine duct, where the F-22 uses lateral serpentine ducts, or they could just be going with fan blockers, like the Super Hornet uses.

 

[centuryseries]

Drag Chutes?? OMG, what a joke.

Lets not forget the Russians have a history of building aircraft that can operate out of rough strips, and that anything that helps slow you down on a rough strip somewhere is worth it in wartime. Its the same principle the Swedes use/d with their air force.

While the Russians are still operating, the US (in a mock WW3) would be caught on their pristine runways or have nowhere to land and continue the fight. All hypothetical of course - that is assuming their Nukes would get near their targets without falling apart!

Just to throw a thought out there, the Russians seem to have invested more money in Anti Aircraft SAM defences than the US - to me this is indicated by the sheer variety of SAM designations over the years, perhaps utilising their skills in Anti Aircraft technology the Russians are best placed to pull off a Stealth fighter for less money than any other country?

 

[peter12213]

I agree with Centuryseries, if they make one it'll be a hell of a lot cheaper than anything the UK or US could do it for and I certainly bet it'll have features that we havent thought of or be capable of manouvres that ours arn't, the Russians are excellent aeronautical engineers more than capable of pulling somthing like this off if they have the money, not to blow smoke up the ruskies arses though lol! As for drag chutes though I have no problems with them as Sundog said in cold countries you often find aircraft using them, as brakes just don't work as effectivly in snow and ice especially as most aircraft tyres are slick and so have little or no grip!!

Smoothie that is a great shot the MKI has always been my favourite Flanker variant next to the SU37 Terminator that is!

:salute: Pete!