combatace Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 Damn! thats programmed to make the streamlined flow over the wings. To support my models please donate to paypal ID: hp.2084@gmail.com https://www.turbosquid.com/Search/Artists/hero2084?referral=hero2084 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Namenlos Ein Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 (edited) T-50-5 http://interfax.az/view/590281 Edited October 28, 2013 by Namenlos Ein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flаnker Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 (edited) Edited October 28, 2013 by Flаnker Мои авиафото Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Namenlos Ein Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 T-50-5. http://www.knaapo.ru/eng/gallery/aircrafts/combat/t-50/t-50-5.wbp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Namenlos Ein Posted November 7, 2013 Share Posted November 7, 2013 http://lusika33.livejournal.com/42990.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Namenlos Ein Posted November 20, 2013 Share Posted November 20, 2013 (edited) T-50-5 in livery. Today at Zhukovsky. Edited November 20, 2013 by Namenlos Ein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FoxHoundELite Posted November 20, 2013 Share Posted November 20, 2013 Wow...just speechless Feel the Rush of Superior Air Power [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Namenlos Ein Posted November 20, 2013 Share Posted November 20, 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sobek Posted November 20, 2013 Share Posted November 20, 2013 That is a strange livery. The white seam at the edge makes it stand out quite a bit. Good, fast, cheap. Choose any two. Come let's eat grandpa! Use punctuation, save lives! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaktus29 Posted November 20, 2013 Share Posted November 20, 2013 @sobek, well its not like they are using this as approved livery for the series.. just playing with colors .. to me it looks awesome, very slick, nice, smooth color .. but in fight, 5gen fight i think the color of this fighters will matter the least .. unless one paints it in bright fluorescent orange i think they are fine.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Namenlos Ein Posted November 20, 2013 Share Posted November 20, 2013 (edited) Edited November 20, 2013 by Namenlos Ein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NRG-Vampire Posted November 20, 2013 Share Posted November 20, 2013 That is a strange livery. The white seam at the edge makes it stand out quite a bit. nothing strange, looks they are testing mixed false shape visualization and winter camouflage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NRG-Vampire Posted November 20, 2013 Share Posted November 20, 2013 false shape paint: seems similar to Tu-144 silhouette or to KAI KF-X (without canards) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilotasso Posted November 20, 2013 Share Posted November 20, 2013 They painted the J-20 on the PAK FA heh, how ironic. :D [sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic] My PC specs below:Case: Corsair 400C PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T) RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4 GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NRG-Vampire Posted November 21, 2013 Share Posted November 21, 2013 no, they painted the early concept shape of PAK-FA :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Namenlos Ein Posted November 21, 2013 Share Posted November 21, 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Namenlos Ein Posted December 11, 2013 Share Posted December 11, 2013 T-50-5. http://vonsolovey.livejournal.com/22917.html http://michaeldec.livejournal.com/22140.html T-50-3, December 2013. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Kurr Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 PAK FA stealth features patent published Details of the Sukhoi Design Bureau's work on the stealthy aspects of the T-50 PAK FA fighter aircraft emerged in late December 2013, when the company's patents were published. According to the patent paperwork, taken together, all of the stealthy measures offer significant improvements over legacy fighter designs. The papers claim that the radar cross-section (RCS) of an Su-27 was in the order of 10-15 m 2 , with the intention being to reduce the size of the RCS in the T-50 to an "average figure of 0.1-1 m 2 ". Entire article at Jane's Dutch Flanker Display Team | LLTM 2010 Tiger Spirit Award Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Invader ZIM Posted January 18, 2014 Share Posted January 18, 2014 (edited) Interesting read, so the radar cross section is significantly reduced vs. legacy aircraft, yet no where near what Western powers consider full Stealth. Essentially, going by the report the RCS can be as high as 1 meter squared, with is actually on par with the estimation of a U.S. B-1 bomber RCS. http://www.thehowlandcompany.com/radar_stealth/Bluefire.htm http://ericpalmer.wordpress.com/2007/11/12/stealth-basics/ Edited January 18, 2014 by Invader ZIM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOLA Posted January 18, 2014 Share Posted January 18, 2014 That is some pretty bad graphics. How the F is MiG-29 supposedly 3 square meters while Tu-160 is 15? And Russians measure RCS differently from US/EU method. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Invader ZIM Posted January 18, 2014 Share Posted January 18, 2014 (edited) LOL, yea, I was just trying to get a few examples that show the B-1 was around the 1 meter squared discussed. As you can see, theres quite a bit of speculation on various RCS's aircraft. The article mentions the estimate of 10 to 15 square meters for the standard Su-27, which falls within that chart above for the Blackjack. To be honest, I'm not sure how you can measure the RCS differently, it's a mathematical equation that's dependent on aspect to the target, in the examples above, it seems the 1 meter squared for the B-1 is for a top-down return, while the other graphic appears to be a nose-on estimation. The article mentions the goal of the T-50 team was to get an average RCS reduction within that zone, and if they achieved their goal, then it seems to fall within the B-1B's estimation for RCS. If you have info on how RCS is calculated differently in Russia, I'd like to read more about that criteria. Another chart which measures the RCS in X-band, so it's also dependent on the frequency used. Edited January 18, 2014 by Invader ZIM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agiel7 Posted January 18, 2014 Share Posted January 18, 2014 (edited) Apparently, the B-2 is actually supposed to have a fraction of the F-117s RCS despite being three times as large due to advances in aircraft design technology and materials science. Also, the designer of Sim Simulator has gone on record saying that the cited values for the F-117 are actually quite optimistic... ...according to Serbian war-time experience. Their SAM operators reported the RCS was at least an order of magnitude smaller than that. Edited January 18, 2014 by Agiel7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOLA Posted January 19, 2014 Share Posted January 19, 2014 To be honest, I'm not sure how you can measure the RCS differently, it's a mathematical equation that's dependent on aspect to the target, in the examples above, it seems the 1 meter squared for the B-1 is for a top-down return, while the other graphic appears to be a nose-on estimation. Yes, mathematics stay the same indeed, but American's and Europeans like to cite the lowest figure; which is of course head on at an optimal frequency. I believe Russians tend to use an average number for the plane instead of frontal. And yup, RCS wary wildly depending on frequency. It did with F-117 for example, and it was designed with a particular radar in mind. Northrop's design had overall lower average* RCS. *average as in vs frequencies, not vs frame position against radar waves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Invader ZIM Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 Ahh, so that helps explain it. Thanks for the info NOLA. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Namenlos Ein Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 T-50-3 T-50-1, 01/2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts