Vekkinho Posted December 26, 2012 Posted December 26, 2012 ^^ Not wrong but very disappointing, for a low RCS fighter I expected better... [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
Sov13t Posted December 26, 2012 Posted December 26, 2012 I <3 picture based sigma calculators you guys should put it on your resumes. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] 51st PVO Regiment | Forum | Statistics DCS: MiG-21Bis
NOLA Posted December 26, 2012 Posted December 26, 2012 (edited) ^^ Not wrong but very disappointing, for a low RCS fighter I expected better... Sweet Jesus on a pongo stick. A - It is a freaking prototype. RCS measures are not installed. Suggest to take a look or two to see difference between X-35 and F-35. B - There will be a lot of things going on in the intakes instead of the "perfect" solution that Russians are too stupid to do, that is S-intake. They did it on MiG-23 for shit and giggles, while it was pure luck Su-47 had it. PS: Marcos, a lot of mistakes in that electronics sum up... Edited December 26, 2012 by NOLA
Vekkinho Posted December 26, 2012 Posted December 26, 2012 Sweet Jesus on a pongo stick. A - It is a freaking prototype. RCS measures are not installed. Suggest to take a look or two to see difference between X-35 and F-35. There's 4 T-50 prototypes so far and I saw no major structural or functional changes. All I see so far are changes of peripheral equipment that may or may not work in practice or combat. Sukhoi is jumping all over the place with "gadgets" and whatever they get funds for to install on prototype but still fail to produce a more important "basic" parts in order to enter 5th gen fighter club. It's really useless comparing differences of PAK-FA and "hopefully" final Su-50 product with differences of X-35 and F-35 cause X-35 had all the basics of F-35 ironed out in year 2000 when it made it's first flight... B - There will be a lot of things going on in the intakes instead of the "perfect" solution that Russians are too stupid to do, that is S-intake. They did it on MiG-23 for shit and giggles, while it was pure luck Su-47 had it. That's correct. I agree. For a single engined aircraft with dual intakes "S-Intake" as You call it was the only option. In fact XP-80A had it too! When we talk intake ducts Su-47 wasn't anything revolutionary, if You take a closer look You'll notice it's a '60s theory in practice here. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
NOLA Posted December 26, 2012 Posted December 26, 2012 There's 4 T-50 prototypes so far and I saw no major structural or functional changes. All I see so far are changes of peripheral equipment that may or may not work in practice or combat. Sukhoi is jumping all over the place with "gadgets" and whatever they get funds for to install on prototype but still fail to produce a more important "basic" parts in order to enter 5th gen fighter club. It's really useless comparing differences of PAK-FA and "hopefully" final Su-50 product with differences of X-35 and F-35 cause X-35 had all the basics of F-35 ironed out in year 2000 when it made it's first flight... That's correct. I agree. For a single engined aircraft with dual intakes "S-Intake" as You call it was the only option. In fact XP-80A had it too! When we talk intake ducts Su-47 wasn't anything revolutionary, if You take a closer look You'll notice it's a '60s theory in practice here. Ok, now we have established Sukhoi are just a bunch of stupid people. Good. :book: Have you read patent for T-50 layout closely? Basics of F-35 has been ironed out in 2000 you say? Ok, lets just simply agree to disagree there. Su-47 duct or S-duct on F-22 is not anything revolutionary as you say, that is exactly my point. You don't think that if Sukhoi *wanted* to do an S-duct they would? It is not a matter of that they couldn't do it, obviously they didnt like its drawbacks and decided to think fresh (again, hint, T-50 layout patent). Obviously the drawbacks were just too big and they felt they could get same RCS lowering by doing it in a different way. It is funny. If LM did what PAK-FA does in terms of intakes people would call it revolutionary. But if Sukhoi does it, obviously they are too dumb to do such a "basic" part of 5'th gen design that enters it to 5'th gen design club. :) 1
wilky510 Posted December 27, 2012 Posted December 27, 2012 Ok, now we have established Sukhoi are just a bunch of stupid people. Good. :book: Have you read patent for T-50 layout closely? Basics of F-35 has been ironed out in 2000 you say? Ok, lets just simply agree to disagree there. Su-47 duct or S-duct on F-22 is not anything revolutionary as you say, that is exactly my point. You don't think that if Sukhoi *wanted* to do an S-duct they would? It is not a matter of that they couldn't do it, obviously they didnt like its drawbacks and decided to think fresh (again, hint, T-50 layout patent). Obviously the drawbacks were just too big and they felt they could get same RCS lowering by doing it in a different way. It is funny. If LM did what PAK-FA does in terms of intakes people would call it revolutionary. But if Sukhoi does it, obviously they are too dumb to do such a "basic" part of 5'th gen design that enters it to 5'th gen design club. :) I've just seen people calling LM a bunch of money huggers with the current F-35 situation and the past F-22 situation... Not sure where you've got this idea someone said they're revolutionary... Usually alot of hate on LM as of late. But on a serious note noone is calling Sukhoi "dumb".. They're good at making aircraft. People say LM is just as dumb, but they aren't either.
karambiatos Posted December 27, 2012 Posted December 27, 2012 But on a serious note noone is calling Sukhoi "dumb".. They're good at making aircraft. People say LM is just as dumb, but they aren't either. one things for sure, LMs marketing team is 50 times better A 1000 flights, a 1000 crashes, perfect record. =&arrFilter_pf[gameversion]=&arrFilter_pf[filelang]=&arrFilter_pf[aircraft]=&arrFilter_DATE_CREATE_1_DAYS_TO_BACK=&sort_by_order=TIMESTAMP_X_DESC"] Check out my random mods and things
xilol Posted December 27, 2012 Posted December 27, 2012 Let's see in the future who sells more aircrafts in the international market "IN ALTIS VIS ET VIRTUS" [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
marcos Posted December 27, 2012 Posted December 27, 2012 It'll be interesting to see but the US only really have one fighter aircraft manufacturer now. Russia still have two.
NOLA Posted December 27, 2012 Posted December 27, 2012 It'll be interesting to see but the US only really have one fighter aircraft manufacturer now. Russia still have two. To be frank, MiG is in reality Sukhoi's b!tch, for a lack of a better word. :) Somewhat sad, but that is how the things are.
marcos Posted December 27, 2012 Posted December 27, 2012 Well the bitch is still producing new fighter planes like the MiG-35 and has had other projects like the 1.44. Boeing bitch on the other hand....
Vekkinho Posted December 27, 2012 Posted December 27, 2012 (edited) Ok, now we have established Sukhoi are just a bunch of stupid people. Good. :book: Have you read patent for T-50 layout closely? I've never said that nor I thought that. The problem is not with OKB Sukhoi. Now take this for granted...you'll see no significant engine nacelle / intake changes until you see a new engine. And that's what's kinda disappointing. Current engines used with T-50 prototypes are uncapable of supercruise with "S-intake duct". It is funny. If LM did what PAK-FA does in terms of intakes people would call it revolutionary. But if Sukhoi does it, obviously they are too dumb to do such a "basic" part of 5'th gen design that enters it to 5'th gen design club. Probably, 'cause if LM did it it would be in year 1997... Edited December 27, 2012 by Vekkinho [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
Weta43 Posted December 28, 2012 Posted December 28, 2012 you cant provide guidance with L band radars, not even when triangulating from multiple arrays (since no radar gets targetting data to beggin with, none of the other will either) . To provide "targetting" data, all you need is a point in space and a conventional m-link to provide the missiles ins with a new steerpoint. Any 3-d radar will allow that and a triangulation of 3-d radar will do it with more accuracy. L-band can provide 3-D information, and so can perform this task. See http://www.thalesgroup.com/Countries/Netherlands/Documents/Datasheet_SMART-L/ D being IEE L Detection of a "Patrol" aircraft at 400km, a "Stealth" missile at 65km. Getting the effective antenna size larger than that on a cruiser through techniques simillar to that used in the square kilometer array - for example - would be a challenge, but the Russians have met those before... Cheers.
aaron886 Posted December 28, 2012 Posted December 28, 2012 Sorry, I don't mean to further detract from the discussion, but... Well the bitch is still producing new fighter planes like the MiG-35 and has had other projects like the 1.44. Boeing bitch on the other hand.... This is a poorly planned statement. :D How is the MiG35 any more a "new fighter plane" than the F/A18E?
marcos Posted December 28, 2012 Posted December 28, 2012 (edited) Sorry, I don't mean to further detract from the discussion, but... This is a poorly planned statement. :D How is the MiG35 any more a "new fighter plane" than the F/A18E? 2-way thrust vectoring. Greater thrust-to-weight ratio. Better climb rate. Up to 10g load. Optical tracking of stealth targets at 45km. What about the 1.44 too? MiG Skat? Boeing basically just gets its ass kicked by Lockheed everytime. Edited December 28, 2012 by marcos
tflash Posted December 28, 2012 Posted December 28, 2012 (edited) Lets continue discussion in SH thread: http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1638127&postcount=51 Edited December 28, 2012 by tflash [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
mikoyan Posted December 30, 2012 Posted December 30, 2012 I've never said that nor I thought that. The problem is not with OKB Sukhoi. Now take this for granted...you'll see no significant engine nacelle / intake changes until you see a new engine. And that's what's kinda disappointing. Current engines used with T-50 prototypes are uncapable of supercruise with "S-intake duct". Probably, 'cause if LM did it it would be in year 1997... And.. I guess you got the data from the t-50 and su-35 to back up your statement :music_whistling:
Namenlos Ein Posted January 17, 2013 Posted January 17, 2013 01/17/2013, T-50-4 in Zhukovsky after 7000km-long flight from Komsomol'sk-na-Amure. http://tvzvezda.ru/news/forces/content/201301171613-it4s.htm — video.
marcos Posted January 17, 2013 Posted January 17, 2013 (edited) That's further than an F-22 can manage. All in one flight? How many mid-air refuels? Clearest view of internal bay lines for MRAAMs and SRAAMs. Edited January 17, 2013 by marcos
Sov13t Posted January 17, 2013 Posted January 17, 2013 2 pit stops along the way. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] 51st PVO Regiment | Forum | Statistics DCS: MiG-21Bis
Recommended Posts