The T-50 (PAK-FA) Thread

[NOLA]

Ahh, so that helps explain it.

 

Thanks for the info NOLA. :)

 

Also, i completely forgot about it :doh:, but patent itself is saying exactly what i was talking about:

 

Технический результат, на достижение которого направлено изобретение, заключается в снижении величины РЛ-заметности самолета до средней величины порядка 0,1-1 м2.

Technical result, The aim of the invention is to reduce the magnitude of radar visibility of the aircraft to an average of about 0.1-1 m 2

http://www.fips.ru/cdfi/fips.dll/ru?ty=29&docid=2502643

 

Some recent pics:

 

 

 

[karambiatos]

is it just me or has the HUD been changed?

[SAM77]

Sigh...

 

All this time has passed and it seems there is no updated engine or vectored exhaust outlets????

 

Is this it????

[ФрогФут]

Sigh...

 

All this time has passed and it seems there is no updated engine or vectored exhaust outlets????

 

Is this it????

Vectored thrust is there right from the beginning. It can be clearly seen on startup videos.

 

Stage 2 engine will be fitted after 2020.

[SAM77]

2020!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

What are they fitting scramjets as well :P

[NOLA]

is it just me or has the HUD been changed?

 

It is just you.

 

Sigh...

 

All this time has passed and it seems there is no updated engine or vectored exhaust outlets????

 

Is this it????

 

What? It has been with TVC all the time, since first prototype.

[ФрогФут]

2020!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

What are they fitting scramjets as well :P

Why don't you like the stage 1 engines?

[Weta43]

I had wondered when they would get to them as well - Not out of any performance concerns - I have no idea how they perform relative to the desired final state, but the current engines 'look' like they're placeholders.

It may be that the thought is no-one will get to point a radar at the tail of a T-50, and that if they do, at that point manoeuvrability trumps stealth, still... All the area around the tail looks like it's been designed with stealth in mind - chines on the rear extension of the body etc.,

 

 

then there's two unreformed engines grafted on. It's almost like someone's drawn a line on the design around them and said "we'll do that later".

Compare the treatment of the valley between the final engines on the F-35 and that on the current T-50 :

 

 

 

 

At that angle, half the aircraft's return must be coming from the section of the body that looks like it was borrowed from an Su-35

 

Edited January 25, 2014 by Weta43

[SAM77]

=4c= Hajduk Veljko No, it is not a "scramjets", it is an engine that nation of Australia can not produce.

 

 

Dont really care about losing reps but you got so upset over my joke I had to pass it around:thumbup:

 

Dude to be honest you're spot on

I am the last person to argue that Australia can produce anything.

 

My comment in relation to the engines was merely to show my amazement at the length of time thats all.

 

I could return the favour but........ are you really worth it :P

[SAM77]

Why don't you like the stage 1 engines?

 

I was expecting them to look a bit sexier not old school as they are now.

 

Dont get me wrong function over form anyday. Just looks a bit daggy :)

 

My bad in regards to thrust vectoring being there since the beginning was getting confused with the Raptor and expecting to see the Russian equivalent by now.

 

"Function over form"

[ФрогФут]

I'd suggest to wait for the final look of the aircraft. They are said to look much different from what they looke like now (from 50-7 or something like that).

[SAM77]

Cant wait to see

 

Its been like a big tease to see what the final exhaust layout will look like

[NOLA]

I'd suggest to wait for the final look of the aircraft. They are said to look much different from what they looke like now (from 50-7 or something like that).

 

-7 will be static frame.

 

Cant wait to see

 

Its been like a big tease to see what the final exhaust layout will look like

 

I wouldn't hold the breath. It is very possible stage two will use same round exhaust, possibly with tooths at best.

[Pilotasso]

They changed the aircrafts manufacturing jig. Its going to be a considerable change, at least structurally.

[ФрогФут]

-7 will be static frame.

 

 

-6-1 or -6-2 will be for static, as far as i know.

http://www.armstass.su/?page=article&aid=124862&cid=24

Сборка шестого самолета T-50-6-1 находится в стадии завершения, еще три самолета (T-50-6-2, T-50-7 and T-50-8) строятся. Один из самолетов T-50-6 предназначен для проведения статических испытаний, а другой - для летных испытаний.

Manufacturing of the T-50-6-1 aircraft is at the final stage, three more aircraft (T-50-6-2, T-50-7 and T-50-8) are in production. On of the T-50-6 aircraft is assigned for static tests, the other one - flight tests.

[NOLA]

No, that info is completely wrong.

 

Т-50-7 статика, почему идет через ЛИС непонятно. 6-2 судя по тем документам, что приходят к нам будет близка к базовой комплектации.

7- статика, остальные все летные.

http://www.aviaport.ru/conferences/users/21479/posts/8.html

 

What you posted is translation of recent Butowski article, who is very accurate and knowledgeable 99% of the time. In that article he had several mistakes tho, including the part you quoted. I have a feeling to certain degree he based that part on this:

 

http://vif2ne.ru/nvk/forum/archive/2524/2524609.htm

 

Which was fishy and with mistakes when it came out, and shortly afterwards proved to be utterly and completely wrong.

[Vekkinho]

It's a common practice in russian or ex Soviet design bueraus.

 

During design of the 3rd and 4th gen fighters majority of focus was given to streamlining the frontal surfaces in order of achieving best possible aerodynamics with least drag. Trailing parts of the fuselage and empennage was least concern with jets like MiG-21, MiG-25, MiG-23, -29 and Sukhoi Flanker derivatives.

 

I have the same "fear" that it seems to be the case here as well.

 

T-50-1 kinda appeared out of nowhere, now the fuselage and general shape of PAK FA is here but looks to me that engine development lags a lot...

I have no doubts on performance of current engines, rememeber supercruise was possible with most of the engines we see on 4th gen fighters but wasn't granted cause of the serious reduction in TBO figures.

 

However, installing a newer engine (we're talking 2020) which is probably more powerful that current one on to by then a decade old airframes/techology is a funny call. I guess there are more reasons behind it-the most likely one is funding the research.

Edited January 26, 2014 by Vekkinho

[sobek]

However, installing a newer engine (we're talking 2020) which is probably more powerful that current one on to by then a decade old airframes/techology is a funny call.

 

LOLWUT? Ten year old airframe? So by your logic, the Raptor is now 20 years old?

[Pilotasso]

Its a question of engine and duct design rather than pure maximum thrust.

 

Some western planes can cruise supersonically, like the Gripen NG and the F-16 Block 60 (allegedly), but that's more of a consequence of engine designs improvements rather than deliberate attempt to make them supercruise (the story behind Eurofighter is slightly different though).

 

This is where Russia stands now. At this time they are just trying to design an engine to cope with supersonic cruise, something they never tried before. None of their previous AL-31 made their planes cruise supersonically. Its something new entirely and its understandable that they will take some time. I never considered the engine development to be late. Its just that 2016 entry to service date was overly optimistic assumption to take at first. im not surprised.

Edited January 26, 2014 by Pilotasso

[ФрогФут]

This is where Russia stands now. At this time they are just trying to design an engine to cope with supersonic cruise, something they never tried before. None of their previous AL-31 made their planes cruise supersonically. Its something new entirely and its understandable that they will take some time. I never considered the engine development to be late. Its just that 2016 entry to service date was overly optimistic assumption to take at first. im not surprised.

Cruise supersonically without afterburner.;) As MiG-31 cruises M = 2.35, but this mode requires AB, but it's still his cruise mode.

And Su-35 already made at least M = 1.1 without AB.

[Vekkinho]

And Su-35 already made at least M = 1.1 without AB.

 

As I said, many 4th Gen fighter engines are capable of supercruise without AB, however these are table test figures and are only slightly > M1.0.

 

Supercruise of a F-22 is in the neighbourhood of M1.4 at 35.000ft.

 

Since there's no similar engine in rest of the world one has to develop it and that's the main 2020 reason.

[Vekkinho]

LOLWUT? Ten year old airframe? So by your logic, the Raptor is now 20 years old?

 

Even older if you consider TES Block 1 airframes from 1991.

 

First Blk10 airframe produced for use with USAF dates from 1999 but delivered in Oct 2002. So it's a 12/15 YO airframe, depends on what you take into account.

[sobek]

First Blk10 airframe produced for use with USAF dates from 1999 but delivered in Oct 2002. So it's a 12/15 YO airframe, depends on what you take into account.

 

But then by your own admission, the T-50 will be a max of 4 years old in 2020.

[GGTharos]

Flying hours.

 

First Blk10 airframe produced for use with USAF dates from 1999 but delivered in Oct 2002. So it's a 12/15 YO airframe, depends on what you take into account.

[GGTharos]

More like in the neighborhood of >M1.7 :)

 

Supercruise of a F-22 is in the neighbourhood of M1.4 at 35.000ft.