Read the forum code of contact
By: - 15th December 2003 at 11:06 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
"LO features and RAM" doesn't necessarily mean "quite stealthy", unless you're comparing it to the original Yak-141.
Here's a MiG-33 image.
By: - 15th December 2003 at 13:05 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Well Yakovlev were the only OKB to seriously investigate shaping as RCS reduction.
Look at this model of their MFI submission:
By: - 15th December 2003 at 13:06 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Even clearer is this later submission to the LFS program:
By: - 15th December 2003 at 17:46 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Thank you very much for the images aerospacetech!
So the picture I posted really is the Yak-43 and the one you posted the LFS proposal? I've sometimes seen the latter, more 'stealthy' shape attributed to the Yak-43. Also I thought this was not right, but I wasn't sure.
Originally posted by SOC
"LO features and RAM" doesn't necessarily mean "quite stealthy", unless you're comparing it to the original Yak-141.
I'm not comparing the Yak-43 to anything or saying its stealthy. That's what some others have implied in certain forums. But it now really seems that they have confused the Yak-43 and the Yak LFS proposal.
Doesn't anyone have any clue about the weights and dimensions of the Mikoyan 33?
By: - 15th December 2003 at 19:21 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
A question for Aerospacetech
Aerospacetech,
I registered for this forum just so I could ask you about Yak's MFI proposal, so I hope you will respond.
That is the first picture I have seen of Yak's project. Do you have any more photos or information? It looks very similar to the MiG-1.42/.44, but I cannot see the configuration of the air intake.
Any additional info would be appreciated ... for a long time I have been fascinated by Russia's MFI program.
Thanks.
--Gavin.
By: - 15th December 2003 at 19:40 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Here you go gavin ;)
By: - 15th December 2003 at 19:41 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
another one here- you can see the inlets clearly
By: - 15th December 2003 at 19:42 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Rear view:
By: - 15th December 2003 at 19:43 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Last one:
By: - 15th December 2003 at 19:49 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Aerospacetech, I sincerely want to thank you.
--Gavin.
By: - 15th December 2003 at 19:54 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I think that people are confusing different designs.
I think the first design was initially labelled as an advanced Yak-41M development, and later on called Yak-43. It is powered by an R-79M turbofan. It clearly isn't stealthy (but might be reduced RCS)
The Yakovlev MFI proposal was as "stealthy" as possible and powered by an NK-32 turbofan.
There were several advanced designs of V/STOL fighters, possibly designated "Yak-43", which may have combined features of each.
By: - 15th December 2003 at 19:57 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The tell-tale sign of a stealthy design is its use of planform alignment.
The Yakovlev MFI clearly uses this.
In fact, I think it was a fine design hampered by the fact that they chose 1 engine, which was distinctly out of favour.
By: - 15th December 2003 at 19:58 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
BTW I also post as "Overscan" on www.acig.org
By: - 15th December 2003 at 20:29 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Originally posted by aerospacetech
BTW I also post as "Overscan" on www.acig.org
And I post as "Meteorit" there too.
Thank you for the Yakovlev MFI images. Unless they are the same as the ones missing from the acig thread, could you repost the lost images I requested there (and the Sukhoi T-60S and T-12 anyway)? :)
By: - 15th December 2003 at 20:39 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Indeed, at first glance, the Yak design seemed to have a lot of potential. Not only does it look stealthier than MiG's MFI, the bifurcated intake presumably would have allowed an interal weapons bay.
I wonder if it was intended to have v/stol capability. That might explain the choice of using only one engine.
Are you sure it was an MFI contender? The scale and configuration looks very similar to an early Lockheed mockup for the JSF. The Russian equivalent would have been the LFI, not MFI.
Either, it's shame this plane will never fly.
--Gavin.
P.S. -- I registered at ACIG a while ago, but I got frustrated that nobody ever seemed to respond to my posts ... oh well.
By: - 15th December 2003 at 20:44 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Yefim Gordon is certain its the MFI concept.
Heres that possible Kh-101:
By: - 15th December 2003 at 20:46 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
T-4MS final version:
By: - 15th December 2003 at 20:47 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
One T-60 artists impression:
By: - 15th December 2003 at 20:48 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Another one: both are by Piotr Butowski
By: - 15th December 2003 at 20:49 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
This is a generic "bomber" concept from the "stealth institute".
Posts: 93
By: Meteorit - 15th December 2003 at 11:04
Does anyone have more information about these (unrelated) Russian fighter projects of the 1980s? This is all I've found so far:
Mikoyan Product 33
Crew: One
Engine: One RD-33 turbofan of 81 kN
1980-1986. Planned as a MiG-29 class fighter mainly for the export market to replace MiG-21.
Yakovlev Yak-43
Crew: One
Empty weight: 18,000 kg
Engine: One Kuznetsov NK-32 turbofan of 245 kN
Planned as a next-generation STOVL fighter to succeed Yak-41. Improved aerodynamic configuration with LO features and RAM. The engine would have combined the functions of lift and cruise. Front- and rear-looking radars. Weapons were to be carried in an internal bay.
The following is said to be a three-view of the Yak-43. However, the Yak-43 is sometimes said to be quite stealthy, but in the drawing it doesn't look like that. :confused: