The T-50 (PAK-FA) Thread

[BronzeBuddha]

How many Kh-38Ms and Kh-58UShK will be carried internally? 2 per main bay? They seem like roughly the same size as Izd. 810.

[SkateZilla]

http://aviationspotters.net/user_photo.php?ph_id=7779&user_name=Alexey+Mityaev

[BronzeBuddha]

http://www.ruaviation.com/news/2012/2/14/787/

 

Russian advanced Т-50 (PAK FA) fighter leaves American F-22 and Chinese J-20 behind by several important characteristics, Lenta.ru reports. It has been stated by the Commander-in-Chief of the Russian air forces Colonel-General Alexander Zelin.

 

"After the benchmarks of Russian T-50 fifth-generation fighter’s performance compared to American F-22 and Chinese J-20, we may draw a conclusion that PAK FA outgoes them by maximum flight speed (afterburned and dry), maximum range, thrustweight ratio and maximum overload", - Zelin explained.

 

According to the Commander-in-Chief, the Russian prototype is comparable to the foreign analogs by dimensions and weight, but it has “significantly lesser run and roll-on operation distance” and it “looks better” than the foreign rivals by characteristics of its aircraft equipment.

 

According to the plan of Russian Ministry of Defense, PAK FA should have more advanced avionics, than its rivals, “electronic pilot” function and state-of-the-art radar with phased antenna array. F-22 fighter has been put into operation by USAF in 2005, while Chinese J-20 is still under development; its first flight has been performed in early 2011.

 

The new Russian jet, developed by Sukhoi, combines functions of fighter and strike aircraft. At present three PAK FA prototypes are taking part in the flight test program; they have performed more than 120 flights as of February 8th. The fourth one will join flight testing this year.

 

After the completion of flight testing, the Ministry of Defense intends to acquire 60 T-50 fighters. The demand for T-50 jets in the Russian air forces is estimated at 150 ones.

 

What do knowledgeable people make of this statement? Or is Zelin talking out of his anus?

[Flаnker]

[Namenlos Ein]

 

 

 

[OutOnTheOP]

http://www.ruaviation.com/news/2012/2/14/787/

 

 

 

What do knowledgeable people make of this statement? Or is Zelin talking out of his anus?

 

I don't make anything of it; it is a forgone conclusion that they would make such a statement, regardless of how awesome or how crap the aircraft might really be.

 

...would you really expect a government official to say something along the lines of "we're spending billions of dollars to make a new fighter that is pretty good, but it's still not better than some of the other ones out there"?

[Namenlos Ein]

 

 

 

[BronzeBuddha]

I don't make anything of it; it is a forgone conclusion that they would make such a statement, regardless of how awesome or how crap the aircraft might really be.

 

...would you really expect a government official to say something along the lines of "we're spending billions of dollars to make a new fighter that is pretty good, but it's still not better than some of the other ones out there"?

 

True, but saying the PAK FA will be faster implies a speed of greater than Mach 2.25, or 1500 mph, unless the max speed requirement has somehow increased since 2004, when it was specified as Mach 2, or about 2135 km/h. Wasn't the original requirement Mach 2.35?

Edited May 29, 2014 by BronzeBuddha

[NOLA]

Or maybe, just maybe, Zelin is simply a talking head?

[esb77]

The Russian military aircraft builders have a tradition of high speed, high thrust ratio, and short landing strip performance.

 

Given that, it's not all that surprising that the PAK-FA might surpass competitors in those areas.

 

The more interesting question would be, do the design decisions that give performance in those areas come at a cost in terms resources that could have been spent on BVR air combat or multirole capability.

 

It's not a secret that the Russians are good at airframes and engines. It's the information collection and processing and human interface areas where you have to wonder if they're competitive with other countries' defense industries.

 

In short the airframe performance claims might be credible, the avionics claims much less so.

Edited May 30, 2014 by esb77

[BronzeBuddha]

Or maybe, just maybe, Zelin is simply a talking head?

 

Given that Zelin was the head of the VVS, I don't think he would make such claims out of the blue. Even though the official max speed for RFP is Mach 2.0 (2135 km/h) at altitude, I wouldn't be surprised if the PAK FA with stage two Izdeliye 30 engines can achieve its original Mach 2.35 (2500 km/h) which would be faster than the F-22's Mach 2.25.

 

But what I'm more concerned about is the ability of the Russians to create avionics, software, and VLO in the class of the F-22 and F-35. As esb77 noted, the Russians aren't playing up these aspects like they are for kinematics. More troubling, flateric from Secret Projects says there is very little changes in the exterior shape of the production T-50 from what we're seeing now. The panel edges may become serrated and the metallic nacelles won't be exposed, but the shape of rear fuselage is unfortunately making me believe that the PAK FA really can't match the F-22 or F-35 in all-aspect VLO. Especially against the Raptor, I really don't think the T-50's kinematic advantage can fully compensate for its disadvantage in stealth.

 

As much as I like the T-50 (I think it's a beautiful bird), I am really worried about how well it might fare in a fight against the F-35 and especially the F-22.

Edited June 1, 2014 by BronzeBuddha

[NOLA]

Given that Zelin is the head of the VVS, I don't think he would make such claims out of the blue.

 

Because Russian generals are known to never talk out of their arses from time to time.

 

Even though the official max speed for RFP is Mach 2.0 (2135 km/h) at altitude, I wouldn't be surprised if the PAK FA with stage two Izdeliye 30 engines can achieve its original Mach 2.35 (2500 km/h) which would be faster than the F-22's Mach 2.25.

 

It is not official anything. It is limited not because of the engines, that should be perfectly clear all things considered.

[Pilotasso]

I really don't think the T-50's kinematic advantage can fully compensate for its disadvantage in stealth.

 

What kinematic advantage? The alleged 100 mile/h difference would be negligible, the true max speed of the F-22 is still top secret, and the T-50 didn't even get past its test phase with its final hardware.

[BronzeBuddha]

What kinematic advantage? The alleged 100 mile/h difference would be negligible, the true max speed of the F-22 is still top secret, and the T-50 didn't even get past its test phase with its final hardware.

 

Even without a speed advantage, I would expect that the PAK FA will have the kinematic and maneuvering advantage over most of the envelope. Which would be all fine and dandy except that it seems like the aircraft seemed to sacrificed a bit much in VLO to achieve that.

 

As much as I like the looks and aerodynamics of the T-50, I just don't think it will be enough to overcome a stealthier F-22. Against an F-35, the two may be pretty evenly matched, but the F-35 might also have massive sensor and software advantage.

[Namenlos Ein]

 

 

 

 

[BronzeBuddha]

It is not official anything. It is limited not because of the engines, that should be perfectly clear all things considered.

 

As I currently understand it, materials limit the T-50 to Mach 2.35, as stated by flateric over at Secret Projects. The current speed requirement is Mach 2.0, but this may have been with the current 117 engines. Who's to say that the T-50 can't achieve the original Mach 2.35 with second stage engines? That said, this may be frankly a moot point since a dash speed of Mach 2.35 vs. Mach 2 is likely not important.

[NOLA]

You really have to work on your reading comprehension.

 

The current speed requirement is Mach 2.0, but this may have been with the current 117 engines.

 

For the last time. Engines are not the reason why top speed is limited to Mach 2.

[combatace]

You really have to work on your reading comprehension.

 

 

 

For the last time. Engines are not the reason why top speed is limited to Mach 2.

 

If you are talking about aerodynamics or weight then T-50 is surely more aerodynamic then F-22 and is even lighter.

[GGTharos]

He's being a talking head.

 

What's the maximum operational speed for the F-22? No one knows, and no one who knows is talking.

 

Let's be very clear about one thing: The F-22 flies something like a clean, no CFT F-15E with -229's when it comes to acceleration etc. The F-15 is limited to M2.5 for particular reasons relating to engine performance, but the -229, using some -119 technology (same for the -220's), is insanely powerful at supersonic speeds. I figure the -119 might be doing a touch better.

 

NASA's F-15, with some tweaks to the old engines, hit close to M2.7.

 

So, what's the F-22's top speed? It's got more TWR than the F-15, and it flies without stuff hanging off of it, which is a major (more than half a mach number) top speed limiting factor for the F-15.

 

I have no idea how he made his comparisons, and frankly if the T-50 'is lighter with more TWR and more fuel', I'd like to know exactly what it is they sacrificed to get that light weight.

 

What do knowledgeable people make of this statement? Or is Zelin talking out of his anus?

[BronzeBuddha]

You really have to work on your reading comprehension.

 

 

 

For the last time. Engines are not the reason why top speed is limited to Mach 2.

 

Well, I searched up and found the Mikhailov quote, and I stand corrected. The reason for dropping max speed was to avoid the need to strengthen the tail. My bad.

[Namenlos Ein]

http://www.sukhoi.org/eng/news/company/?id=5451

Sukhoi's message over the incident with the T-50 aircraft

 

Moscow, June 10. Today after the regular test flight of the T-50 aircraft at the airfield of the M.M.Gromov Flight Research Institute in Zhukovsky near Moscow, while the plane was landing, a smoke above the right air intake was observed, then a local fire broke out. The fire was quickly extinguished. The plane is to be repaired. There were no injuries. The Sukhoi Design Bureau set up a commission that will investigate the causes of the accident. This incident will not affect the timing of the T-50 test program.

 

 

 

T-50-5, 06/10/2014

[Sashmeister]

[SkateZilla]

http://www.sukhoi.org/eng/news/company/?id=5451

 

 

 

didnt anyone tell them it's not safe to throw cigarettes out the window? :music_whistling:

[Pilotasso]

what could possibly ignite in that area??

 

hot hydraulic plumbing for the movable LERX?

[ViFF]

plasma generators? :suspect: