Posted on 09/06/2010 7:37:35 PM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
PICTURES: Indian officials get up close to new-look PAK FA fighter
By
Russia has conducted a flight demonstration with its prototype PAK FA fighter for a delegation of Indian defence ministry and industry officials.
Held at Ramenskoye aerodrome near Moscow on 31 August, the 10min display was made in support of talks over the bilateral development by Moscow and New Delhi of a new fifth-generation fighter.
Indian officials inspected Sukhoi's lone PAK FA following the demonstration, which included low-speed passes and high angle-of-attack manoeuvres. The aircraft, which will be followed by two more prototypes before the end of the year, is pictured with new-look camouflage markings.
The new fighter programme is a topic of discussion by an Indo-Russian commission for military industrial co-operation, along with another to produce a multi-role transport aircraft with a 20t payload capacity.
New Delhi is insisting on executing both programmes as joint ventures, with equal sharing of investment and workshare.
Russia's air force has a requirement for 250-300 next-generation T-50 fighters to enter use from 2015-16, while India plans to buy between 200 and 250 of the joint design. This should use a common airframe and engines, but have its on-board systems and weapons tailored for their individual needs.
First flown in January, the PAK FA prototype is intended to de-risk features such as the use of low-observable materials and thrust-vectoring engines with supercruise performance, plus internally carried weapons.
Russian sources suggest a pre-production batch of between six and 10 aircraft will be built to support future testing of the type, with the nation's air force expected to launch operational trials in Lipetsk around 2012-13.
It looks like Cold War II is a go.
This is China’s headache more than America’s.
Obastard is ready to capitulate.
It looks like an F-22ski
“Reboot it”...tricky, in mid-air...
This is China’s headache more than America’s.
And Pakistan’s.
Personally, I think we came out on the wrong end of siding with Pakistan instead of India during the Cold War. I hope we never side with muslim country again.
obama just gave pakistan another $7.5 billion. BP spent about $8 billion along the Gulf coast and our government spent nothing. Yes, send $7.5 billion to a bunch of folks that hate us but nothing to the folks that are impacted by the oil spill.
Will that beast be able to turn in the air? It is longer than any other fighter, even the “big” F-14, F-15, and F-22s. I thought it was supposed to replace the MIG-29, a top-shelf dogfighter. Sure, the new bird has thrust vector engines but that’s still a lot of airframe to twist into a turn... The longer it is, the more airframe you’ve got to drag through a turn, bleeding off energy (speed).
If more countries start fielding effective stealth fighters that missiles have a hard time locking onto, will the future of air-combat be a return to dogfights with cannon?
Nobody needs guns until they - oops!
Really, really, need guns.
Wasn’t that one of the main issues with the early-generation F-4 Phantoms in Vietnam? They couldn’t tangle with the North Vietnamese MiG’s because they didn’t have a cannon.
Looks like its built more for speed than maneuvering, even with vectored thrust.
F-100 and F-8 still relied on guns & F-8 (Crusader) proved that you do best with a mix of both - if for no other reason, they design gunfighters for agility and up close, not as a stable missile platform at distance.
Also, speed is nice but it can't guarantee a safe get away and pure speed isn't a factor in a gun fight.
(Interestingly, both the Phantom (B) and Crusader were Navy birds, the century series AF fighters were obsolete by the time Vietnam came along - although they and the WW2 Spad saw lots of action over Indochina.)
Phantoms (C) got pods strapped on and later (E) got guns
Compare the engine exhaust profiles for this one and the F22. BIG IR signature for this guy!
SKEETER: 'This is China’s headache more than America’s.'
Absolutely correct. The Pak Fa (and the production version, whether it will be called the SU-50 or the SU-41 or SU-51 ...it will most probably end with an odd number since it is primarily air-to-air, and the fact the prototype is called T-50 doesn't necessarily mean it will be SU-50) was geared by Russia and India to face off against their main potential foe-country ....China. Not the US, but China. China has been increasing its military strength both in terms of quality and quantity, and Russia and India both needed something that would maintain a significant qualitative edge against anything Sino. The Pak Fa would not defeat a Raptor (the F-22 is truly a superlative machine) ...but it will knock out any J-11, J-10 or (future Low observable concept) JXX. With ease.
THUNDERSLEEPS: 'Will that beast be able to turn in the air? It is longer than any other fighter, even the “big” F-14, F-15, and F-22s. I thought it was supposed to replace the MIG-29, a top-shelf dogfighter. Sure, the new bird has thrust vector engines but that’s still a lot of airframe to twist into a turn... The longer it is, the more airframe you’ve got to drag through a turn, bleeding off energy (speed).'
That is not accurate. The PakFa will be FAR more maneuverable than the F-14, F-15, and MiG-29. It's aerodynamic capability may even be better in some regimes than the Raptor even. It has LERXs, 3-Dimensional thrust vectoring, and all-moving canted tails (the Raptor has no LERXs, 2-D rather than 3-D TVC, and doesn't have all moving tails). Whether or not it will be more agile than the Raptor remains to be seen ....what is fact though is that it will be more agile than any other current or proposed manned fighter. (See graphics below).
Furthermore, in terms of size I do not understand why people always make it seem like a gigantic fighter! It is smaller than the SU-30 (actually noticeably smaller), and the SU-30 is one of the most maneuverable fighters around (far more than the F-15, and FAR MORE than the F-14). Again, see picture below:
It is more or less the same size as a Raptor, and slightly shorter in length than the proposed YF-23 Blackwidow. Thus, I do not know why people always claim it is 'too long' and 'not maneuverable,' when the fact is that it is smaller and more compact than the SU-30 (and the same size as the Raptor), and is one of the most maneuverable airframes out there.
BILL M: 'Compare the engine exhaust profiles for this one and the F22. BIG IR signature for this guy!'
True, in terms of IR signature the Raptor is MILES ahead of the PakFa prototype. Note four things however:
1) This is still the prototype version. There is definitely room for growth between now and the final version. For instance, look below at the differences between the YF-22 prototype and the final F-22.
2) The F-22 was created from the start to be the best darn fighter the world has ever seen. It had all-aspect stealth, among other goodies. This was because it was meant to be a 'deep-IADS penetrator,' able to penetrate the most advanced IADS (integrated air defence networks armed with the latest SAM systems) unscathed. To kick down the door in enemy territory. the only other manned deep-IADS penetrator is the B-2 bomber (the F-35 does not EVEN begin to get close to that). The PakFa however is meant to defend over HOME territory. Different purposes, thus different solutions.
3) Look at the F-35 JSF. It has the hottest burning most powerful single jet engine on the planet, with a nozzle that has to be one of the most unstealthy this side of a Vougth F-8 Crusader! One of the worst IR signatures flying ....yet ...silence.
4) The Russians have worked on stealthy nozzles before, thus the final version may have something. Again ...as usual ...here is the pudding to act as proof (a SU-30 with a nozzle concept that looks quite ...familiar ...)
Is the PakFa a Raptor killer? Nope, it is MOST definitely NOT. However, it is not the dog some try to make it seem, and will be better than 99% of the stuff flying out there that do not have 'Raptor' in their name brackets.
Another interesting post, thanks.
At first glance it looks stealthy, but built more for speed than the F-22 was, maybe something more along the lines of the F-23.
Your answer
to all that is it the Fr bias, there I said it. They want to ban me? so what.
The only problem with finding other commentary is you have to sign up at each site if you want to post.
Sorry sir ..didn’t quite get your last post. Thanks.
Fascinating!
Thanks for all that information, Spetznaz!
I will get back to you on that in awhile.
Big control surfaces imply strong structure to transmit all that force, which means more weight... Similarly thrust vectoring systems, more weight. More weight means you've got to work harder to turn it... A vicious cycle. Also, using all that command authority and honking it around in a turn tends to scrub speed (energy) quickly. In fighter parlance, speed is life. You can add thrust to regain energy, or to vector your way through a turn, but that increases your IR signature just when you may be trying to break away from an inbound IR missile...
I believe when it comes to air to air combat, small and light has it's own rewards (within reason), and that speed is life. The opposing view is that bigger fighters, with more capable systems and weapons, can engage BVR and never need to dogfight. Yet dogfighting, or simple SAM evasion etc. still occurs... Oddly enough, the US Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps still teach air to air dogfighting tactics...
Got the mail. Understood ...and totally agree.
this has got nothing to do with the US — for all the rhethoric, both India and Russia realise that they have a common foe in resurgent China
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.