The T-50 (PAK-FA) Thread

[NOLA]

The fact that some forum members can believe they're more intelligent than the best minds in the Sukhoi Design Bureau is extraordinary.

 

If you think i do that, clearly you are understanding it opposite of what i am saying.

 

Su-47 had S-intakes. As i said, it is not extremely complex task really, even MiG-23 had them... Clearly they moved away from them in PAK-FA. Read the quote i posted, it is from PAK-FA patent, and it is speaking out *against* S-intakes. As i said, they have selected a different approach, a more complex one. So Sukhoi folks are not stupid, i never said they were. Anyone who think straight intake equals to "Zomg, clearly Sukhoi is teh stupid to not make S-intakes!", are stupid. :D

 

Straight intakes like they have opted are saving them weight AND volume. Not to mention S-intakes dictate things like engine placement, weaponbay placement and so on. It is not stupid decision, but a clever one. Clearly they think they can shield compressor as much as S-intakes do, through atleast three separate solutions.

[marcos]

What you've posted is a load of rubbish. Protecting the compressor face from radar reflection along the flight line is all well and good, if that's the direction the radar is coming from but that may well not be the case. As shown on your bog-roll schematic, the compressors will provide plenty of radar reflection for a plane coming from just underneath the flight line.

 

Seriously? How is this hidden? Doh! Where are you even getting this trash from?

 

[ФрогФут]

marcos, don't get mad, but they also seem to have inlet ramp.:)

[NOLA]

What you've posted is a load of rubbish. Protecting the compressor face from radar reflection along the flight line is all well and good, if that's the direction the radar is coming from but that may well not be the case. As shown on your bog-roll schematic, the compressors will provide plenty of radar reflection for a plane coming from just underneath the flight line.

 

Seriously? How is this hidden? Doh! Where are you even getting this trash from?

 

 

Wow. I thought you were just ignorant and slow, but now i see you are in fact much worse. I will just leave it at this, no point, this is like talking to a wall. YOU haven't provided ANYTHING, all you have done is to try to discredit me on every step, and failed each time.

 

Picture is from a patent, and one of the patent holders is MAIN DESIGNER OF PAK-FA. So this trash is from him. If my memory doesn't fail me, Pogosyan is also one of the patent holders, another idiot that made this trash. It doesn't show the three solutions i mentioned (duh!) it is just a simple sketch with one purpose, to show the inlet is straight.

 

Yes, the intakes are variable, hence they have ramps.

[marcos]

Wow. I thought you were just ignorant and slow,

Don't confuse me with you. Seriously, you provide cigarette packet drawings and say they're from Sukhoi.

 

marcos, don't get mad, but they also seem to have inlet ramp.:)

They're not so much of a problem, depending on the angle. But there's a lot of crap going round the internet, so who knows.

Edited February 24, 2013 by marcos

[Kaktus29]

its true, i don't think US scientist are stupid, actually no scientist is stupid.. they are just people that go through a college, graduate in certain subject and that is that.. german, russian, chinese, american it makes no difference.. the difference part comes in how much resources are available to him..

 

for instance, do you think brazilian engineer does no know how radar works? how its deflected, this science is beyond the brazilian brain?.. no, of course not, but if there is no billion of dollars waiting to be used by him and his compatriots than yes, there will be no such products in Brazil..

 

Which brings me to another point.. US has a problem not in not having resources,money to spend on military projects, but in actually having them.. you see, when you have pretty much unlimited supply of money you are more or less forced to go into extreme not yet tested products because you can afford it..even if it doesn't work-hei we have money we will make it work-mentality is dangerous as it makes progress harder.. its jumping the gun mentality.. doing something before its time.. JSF was being developed already in 1990... when F-15 was going strong and there was no need whatsoever to do this.. so all this money spent on it even though the technology of 1990 was faaar behind what it should be to implement the project.. if they waited until 2005 and do the work.. by today we might be witnessing a no-problem JSF that is better in all aspects than this what we have now..another TOO big to Jail, FAIL, CUT, etc.. project..

 

This phenomena was recorded in human studies.. if you give a man unlimited resources to do the simplies task he will cock it up.. if you give the same man very limited resources he will be very efficient..

 

same is with food that you eat..eating only what is needed up to a calorie accurate will make your metabolism work much more efficiently and your muscles will be much stronger pound-per-pound than over-eating and thus adding fat with the muscle that comes from working out..

 

US has a curse..its called -MIC- .. and they are not in efficiency business ..

[sobek]

Enough with the namecalling. Please discuss like adults or take the high road.

[Teknetinium]

[marcos]

 

[Namenlos Ein]

Sukhoi Holding Company will develop a two-seat export version of PAK FA

Sukhoi Holding Company will export both single-seat and two-seat versions of fifth-generation T-50 (PAK FA) fighter, Lenta.ru reports.

 

“The details will be unveiled after the signing of corresponding contracts. After that we will provide the number of exported single-seat and two-seat aircraft,” — president of United Aircraft Corporation (UAC), Mikhail Pogosyan, said at Aero India 2013 airshow held in Bangalore.

 

According to the president of UAC, at present only single-seat versions of PAK FA are being tested, “but we will start testing of two-seat fighters in the nearest future”. Pogosyan also noted that “even one pilot will be able to perform multi-role missions thanks to the jet’s airborne equipment and its level of automation”.

[wilky510]

I must say even though I'm not a very big fan of Russian aircraft, the PAK-Fa does look nice.

 

 

Both the Su-30MKI and PAK-Fa are the better looking aircraft out there.

[Flаnker]

[Weta43]

Wonder what they're going to hang first on the external pylons...

[Pilotasso]

Probably freefall iron bombs :D

[Weta43]

Probably :)

 

Or a mock up of an AWAC killer that won't see service for 25 years - just to freak the internet watchers out...

[topol-m]

Probably :)

 

Or a mock up of an AWAC killer that won't see service for 25 years - just to freak the internet watchers out...

 

:clown: you saw that in that crystal ball of yours? Wasn't there also a vision of PAK-FA carrying R-60 and R-27? Maybe that's how you see its AA armament?

Edited March 15, 2013 by topol-m

[Weta43]

My crystal ball sees fairly conventional R-77 & R-73 derivatives carried internally in the medium term, but my guess really is AWAC killers & long range weapons with passive seekers that won't see full active service for 25 years hanging off the externals in the long term.

I guess we might see a few interesting things on the externals over the next couple of years during WCS testing, but the above is my guess for the first few years of regular service.

[RIPTIDE]

Probably freefall iron bombs :D

No, even better: S-8KOM rocket pods. :D

[pepin1234]

Probably :) - just to freak the internet watchers out...

 

 

Wow you are a good military specialist... probably they choose you too to " Test " the AWACS killer. I am sure with you, the missile become ready sooner than 25 year :megalol:

[GGTharos]

F-22's sneak right to AWACS' and 'kill' them ... Assuming that the PAK-FA will be capable of the same feat, I don't believe there is a particularly big need for any of those big, draggy, heavy 'awacs killer' missiles any more.

 

My crystal ball sees fairly conventional R-77 & R-73 derivatives carried internally in the medium term, but my guess really is AWAC killers & long range weapons with passive seekers that won't see full active service for 25 years hanging off the externals in the long term.

[Weta43]

F-22's sneak right to AWACS' and 'kill' them ... Assuming that the PAK-FA will be capable of the same feat, I don't believe there is a particularly big need for any of those big, draggy, heavy 'awacs killer' missiles any more.

 

Except that if you you carry very long range passive homing weapons (AWAC killers :-), you can engage those AWAC from outside the engagement zone of the fighters at the 'front line' (before you get to their 'normal' BVR range), and don't have to count on flying past / through the AWAC's escort to do so...

Then your fighters are free to engage the (now less well informed) fighters close at hand.

 

Either way - it's got to be a better use of all that technology than hanging S-8KOM rockets of the pylons, but I bet we get to see that over the next few years :)

[NOLA]

My crystal ball sees fairly conventional R-77 & R-73 derivatives carried internally in the medium term...

 

As conventional as AMRAAM's and Sidewinders in F-22? ;)

[Weta43]

Conventional as in single seeker type and not ramjet powered

[NOLA]

Conventional as in single seeker type and not ramjet powered

Okei, in that sense.

[Agiel7]

Is the effectiveness of AWACS-killer missiles not contingent on whether the AWACS' radar is emitting or not? Unless it has either the Alamo D's heat-seeker or the AA-12's onboard radar to switch on in the endgame phase, can't the AWACS simply turn off its radar until the missile is no longer a threat (surely one of its HAVCAP aircraft can see that big ol' missile coming if the AWACS' radar cannot).