The T-50 (PAK-FA) Thread

[joey45]

"OMG!!! it's a TMPTRBWATJSFPTPFR lets get out of here......."

[Krippz]

What`s with the "F" mania? If US aircraft can have various nicks (Raptor, Spirit, Black Widow, Lancer, etc), russian can too. Forget the Nato designations, I lost all hope in them since Mig-15 Fagot...

 

Edit: Oh I`ve just found the MiG-15UTI name - Midget :doh:

 

Based on the NATO reporting name nomenclature all Russian Fighters are designated with a name that begins with an F.

[Airway]

I know !

 

If it must begin with an F, it clearly is a

 

[joey45]

Flanker G

[topol-m]

Based on the NATO reporting name nomenclature all Russian Fighters are designated with a name that begins with an F.

 

I know that. Most of NATO`s designations sound dumb.

[Bucic]

Falafel

It sure sounds to me like something flat :D

[Lucas_From_Hell]

Flanker, Fulcrum, Frogfoot, Fencer, Fullback, Fitter, Flogger, Fishbed (?!) and now, to start with F, let's probably name it "F***ed-your-day".

 

Will probably describe NATO experiences with it, anyway :music_whistling:

[Kusch]

Fanboy :D

[Griffin]

Flop :)

 

(I do really like the plane.)

[Lucas_From_Hell]

Flip-flop? :D

[EvilBivol-1]

One of a number of guess-projections from the RU forums:

 

Edited January 30, 2010 by EvilBivol-1

[Kusch]

And:

 

 

[Frazer]

Don't worry, it will fly :joystick:

 

[monotwix]

It’s hard to say what’s inside the fuselage space, it could be 1s class seats, I see the fuel could also be there or just above the fans.

[GaryIKILLYOU]

:megalol: How about the name..... Fighter? ;) :joystick:

[concrete]

F.Kilroy

 

[Pilotasso]

And:

 

 

 

Where did you get that idea?

[topol-m]

From the russian forum:

 

 

Where did you get that idea?

 

probably from here:

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=827365&postcount=1260

It is logical to assume there is a slight curve.

Edited January 31, 2010 by topol-m

[Pilotasso]

I meant the internal duct strangulation. Its incompatible with supersonic flow. Thats why I asked.

Edited January 31, 2010 by Pilotasso

[Bucic]

I think a better guess is this (green)

 

 

Maybe a little more curvature on the lndg gear side but that would be it. The red contour is a heavy exaggeration IMO.

[Pilotasso]

I think a better guess is this (green)

 

 

Maybe a little more curvature on the lndg gear side but that would be it. The red contour is a heavy exaggeration IMO.

 

 

I believe EB's post (#511) has nailed it right, the ducts are diverted upwards so, the constriction for the gear is not needed.

 

BTW, Anatoly kvochur on T-50. Time has gonne by fast since the 80's, hardly recognized him...

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24MhO94g_xI&feature=related

Edited January 31, 2010 by Pilotasso

[Kusch]

Another sugestions:

 

[RvETito]

What we can see on that picture are the two weapon bays between the engines. Rumors say that there are two more, much smaller, probably enough to house a single short range missile though their location is not clear.

[topol-m]

What we can see on that picture are the two weapon bays between the engines. Rumors say that there are two more, much smaller, probably enough to house a single short range missile though their location is not clear.

 

Their location is perfectly clear, between the wings and the intakes - http://lenta.ru/news/2010/01/29/pakfa/pak.jpg

Edited January 31, 2010 by topol-m

[Bucic]

Another sugestions:

 

http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l319/roadwarriormfp/PAK-FA-1copy.jpg

 

Another wrong estimation IMO. This one is almost funny :) To properly present the duct silhouette one should choose contours going through side points in the middle of height of any current duct cross section. This guy clearly has a thing for edges. Once he sees one, theres no way to drag him of it :P

 

Edited January 31, 2010 by Bucic