The PAK-FA Saga Episode 11.0

Read the forum code of contact

Member for

14 years 2 months

Posts: 694

The previous posts pointing out it was using a different engine than Su-35? Yes, I read those.
It wasn't clear to me they were talking about an entirely different core, as opposed to digital FADEC and various tweaks. I have posted saying if that was all it is, it seems strange not to bring it into the Su-35 program.

I would say it's because it's meant for export and/or there must be left something to offer as an upgrade option later on... Either way, russian engines' life cycle is traditionally very low, so at the -BM will need an engine replacement, at least once in its operational life.

If the alternative is true, meaning there is no further planned engine for PAK-FA besides what is now flying, then great for them! :)

Don't get me wrong. I was stunned when I read it in the first place too. But the only other option would be to claim that the president of NPO Saturn is... shamelessly lying.

Otherwise I agree: Great for them! Demonstrates russian capabilities in aviation engine development.

Member for

20 years 7 months

Posts: 10,217

Dimwitted question alert:

Is it practical to fit IRST behind the front cockpit glass, or would it have too much of an adverse effect on the optics?

The front cockpit glass would need to be athermalized, then. Thermal sensors won't see through polycarbonate..

Member for

17 years 11 months

Posts: 1,010

Those weapons door bays are about 5m long. Central bays 5,1m long...
(Unconfirmed).

If true, this mean it get to carry some big BVR missile, depending on how the missile ramps inside are configurated..

Those figures don't really mesh with certain other comparisons. That f22 over pakfa image suggests length is around 18.5 to 19 meters. That also coincides with the width of the engines on the pak fa, which are said to be further developed 117s, which in themselves are a version of al31f. If bays are 5 meters long then the engines would be significantly longer and wider than 117s.

In line with 18.5 to 19 meter length i suggest actual weapon bay doors are closer to 4.4 meters long and some 1.15 meters wide.

Interestingly enough, it'd mean pak fa has a huge wingspan for its length, of over 14 meters, perhaps over 14.5 meters. (and if we accept the 21-22 meter lengths which were a product of just assuming the existing su27 length - we'd get a monstrous wingspan of over 16 meters!)

Member for

16 years 11 months

Posts: 402

The T-50? Yes, I'm sure such an airplane would be very useful for them as they are right now... But can they afford it? :dev2:

I would say that he was teasing Kapedani on this one.

@ Kapedani,

in the previous thread djcross opposed you but you are still pushing your own point of view which you are trying to present as an universal truth.

Are you more competent than he is in this field?

Are you an engineer or a scientist working in the aviation industry?

An aviation journo perhaps?

We are all lacking solid info and hard data on this plane and you are trying to judge it after several pics and videos have been released :confused:

From what I could conclude I would say that you don't really like what the Russians have achieved and you are trying to downplay that any way you can. I bet you could do much better than this. Or can you really:confused:

Member for

20 years 4 months

Posts: 6,186

High Res via SecretProject

Attachments

Member for

16 years 10 months

Posts: 265

Not sure if this was posted before, but did anybody noticed a hole below the tail fin? Looks like some kind of air intake too me, what do you guys think?

http://pilot.strizhnapshot11.jpg
http://pilot.strizhads/2010/01/Snapshot12.jpg
http://pilot.str/01/Snapshot5.jpg

Doesn't look like the air comes out at the back, so it must be related to the engine right? Cooling maybe?

Absolute beauty. I still prefer the forward swept wing.

Can anyone tell me why berkut was not selected (technical parameters vis the current model).

Member for

20 years 1 month

Posts: 343

For whatver it is worth, an Indian TV channel CNEB was showing diagrams of PAKFA (artistic or semi official?? don't know) which showed deep horizontal/lateral bends into the fuselage (in the middle roughly where the undercarriage withdraws) for the air intakes. that would give stealth and solve the engine face problem but would make the weapon bays much smaller unlike projected here.

Member for

20 years 8 months

Posts: 177

Can anyone tell me why berkut was not selected (technical parameters vis the current model).

Because it didn't meet the requirements.

The reason it, the PAK-FA, didn't have a forward swept wing is FSW's are quite limited, they're only good to M=1.7, but there is isn't any evidence the Berkut got anywhere near that speed, they're difficult to put weapons on and I seriously doubt it would be a good design for low LO from the forward aspect.

Now, you actually could design a FSW for M>1.7, but it would be so heavy, any advantages you would have gained from the design would be lost. Conventionally swept wings, or in the case of the T-50, a modified delta, is very efficient structurally and, therefore, much lighter.

Member for

17 years 10 months

Posts: 784

I don't know how many time its has to be shown to a certain member on here, but one more try I think.

It was shown how the F-22 externally its intakes and design "appear" to 100% straight and pretty much inline with the engine face. Yet we all know that the compressor face isnt visible from the front.

Seemingly that mere fact only applies to the F-22 and obviously any other aircraft is inferior.... and cant possibly have an "S" type duct.

http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l319/roadwarriormfp/PAK-FA-2acopy.jpg

The top half of the engine isnt visible at the very least if we have a straight intake....

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

Also as can be seen there is the large amount of room taken up within the intake area by the undercarriage.
The engines are also not inline with each other and are possibly toed in at the front so they are inline with the airflow because of the internal bend with the intake caused by the wheel well area.

I would guess that the entire fan isnt hidden, but at the very least 90% of it is.

Member for

18 years 7 months

Posts: 690

There is obviously both a vertical and horizontal bend in the intakes. There are also radar reflecting panels inside the intakes

The horizontal bend/non-allignment can be seen clearly from this angle (click to enlarge)

http://img3067.imagevenue.com/loc591/th_95047_KMO_113131_00007_1_t208_2_122_591lo.jpg

And here's the view from the front

http://img3067.imagevenue.com/loc575/th_14347_pakfainlets_122_575lo.jpg

The problem with some people is that they cannot comprehend a different technical solution.

If they wanted to have a classic S-bend they would've gone with this solution:

http://img3067.imagevenue.com/loc381/th_14576_Berkut_bays5_flat_122_381lo.jpg

Member for

18 years 7 months

Posts: 1,344

:cool:

Member for

20 years 4 months

Posts: 6,186

Paralay congratulation on getting the PAK-FA drawings on the dot :)

Now we want you get PAK-DA drawings on the dot ;)

Can we get the weapons lay out drawings on this new fighter ?

Member for

15 years 11 months

Posts: 138

:cool:

Are there weapon bays outboard of the engines as Aviation Week said?

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 755

Any chance of a Su-47 style rotary launcher?

http://airvoila.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/sukhoi-su-47-berkut-aguila-dorada-esquema.jpg

Member for

15 years 3 months

Posts: 6,441

:cool:

I do think its way closer to 21m in lengt.
18-19m seems far to short, well we will see shortly when we can compair it with the UB Flanker that escorted it during flights.

Thanks

Member for

15 years 3 months

Posts: 6,441

The point of the photos with coloured lines showing the angles of the sharp edges is that the Sukhoi DOES have aligned edges, just like the F-22, except different angles.
Does this mean F-22 RCS is bigger from the front and side direction otherwise T-50 RCS is bigger from the rear...:confused:

Attachments

Member for

17 years

Posts: 4,042

Hope is one thing; reality totally another. :)

The T-50? Yes, I'm sure such an airplane would be very useful for them as they are right now... But can they afford it? :dev2:

It must be the fifth or sixth time at least. Doesn't anyone read previous posts? PAK FA flew with the new engines installed, NOT the 117S++.

http://www.rian.ru/defense_safety/20100129/206858518.html

Correction, it flew with new engines, but...it didn't fly with the engines that ultimately will power it.

Member for

15 years 3 months

Posts: 6,441

Su-27 vs Pak-Fa prototype vs YF-23:

Member for

20 years 5 months

Posts: 4,674

High Res via SecretProject

The second picture shows nicely the similarities in nose-shape and relative inlet position between the T-50 and YF-23. Obviously a lot of work went into the nose - LERX - inlet complex. And I dare to say this thing will achieve an astonishing high supercruise Mach number. (Thanks to the faster wing alone, and I think it has less compromised area-ruling.)

These LERX flaps sure play a role for the inlets in the external compression. The lower lips of the inlets are *very* similar to the F-22A. As I wrote in my previous post, Sukhoi didn't cut as much into aerodynamics for the sake of LO here as LMCO did on the F-22A. And if they get the LERX management right we'll see some very intersting ultrahigh-AoA maneuvers, with the opportunities they offer for active flow control over that broad back.

On that inlet s-duct discussion: Looking at the configuration of the T-50, I'd say that only very few planes will fly high enough to get a nice clean look at the compressor blades, whatever minor portion might be visible. Again, clearly here LO wasn't pushed at the costs of aerodynamics.

Btw, what is everyone's take on the stability of the T-50?

Member for

17 years 6 months

Posts: 25,376

These questions or remarks I wish to make here - I personally am not a specialist in this aspect, but still important to refer to it. After the success of the first flight test of the prototype of the new Russian fighter PAK-FA or T-50 is clear that the first phase had been successfully concluded. That there is a long and difficult to complete the mission, which began to get Russia's air force the an invisible fighter full competition is to rival the U.S. F - 22 and later F-35. Clear what can be seen from the plane is the plane mixed in the design and experience between the previous two models of the aircrafts, I mean both the Russian MiG' 1.42 and S-37 and of course, the guidelines for the design of Sukhoi aircraft in addition to what the Russians could get information on aircraft design from US F-22 and YF-23. but should not be underestimated right designers and engineers and technicians in the design of the Russian aircraft also can not be interpreted by the plane just as the American vision or, more correctly of expertise the U.S., for the Russians to have sufficient experience and vision inevitably different, too. Everything posted on the new Russian plane that it was incomplete in the sense that it flew more accurate without the original -proper-engine and without the original radar, maybe an has other things that may require re-design or in the form of shape of nose, intakes engines and the cockpit. In addition to what can anticipate in terms of aviation equipment flight control and avionics, electronics, and possibly also armament. After all these shortcomings is not something strange at all, but they need to work arduous and of course, funding for completion and that the question of whether Russia is able to bear these expenses or investment ? This in itself is a re-design of the plane again to some extent. The second issue is their status of this aircraft will be present or re-design like a new aircraft totaly after the completion of all deficiencies known and unknown can fully meet the operational requirements of the Russian Air Force to obtain a fifth-generation fighter?.