The PAK-FA saga Episode 12.0

**Vympel** · 18th February 2010, 10:27

Originally Posted by HAWX ace

How about Su-22, Su-24, Su-30, Su-34, Yak-38 and Tu-28?? Are they not russian fighters?

Su-22 is the export version for the Su-17. Su-24 and Su-34 are bombers, so that's appropriate. Su-30, Yak-38 and Tu-28 are some of the exceptions to the rule though, its true. However, its a rule thats followed a lot more than its broken.

**rsetiawan** · 18th February 2010, 10:40

Originally Posted by Vympel

Su-22 is the export version for the Su-17. Su-24 and Su-34 are bombers, so that's appropriate. Su-30, Yak-38 and Tu-28 are some of the exceptions to the rule though, its true. However, its a rule thats followed a lot more than its broken.

Su-30 are fighter bomber intended for export hence the '30', 28 are exception, as for Yaks, it seem yak use even number for fighter (before there are yak-28 firebar iirc)

**Otaku** · 18th February 2010, 11:33

Here's some recent 'shots in the dark' from the authority that is F-16.net, enjoy:

Goon, an adviser to the Australian military?

The so is my old grandpa. He still bemoans the loss of the .303 Lee Enfield rifle from the order of battle...

Kopp has zero credibility. Don't get me wrong: the Russians have made fine aircraft in the past. But it's not time to push the panic button just yet

Maybe its just me, but looking at the PAK-FA, it sorta looks like an SU-27 put through an upgrade kinda like what was done to the F/A-18 to get the Super Hornet. Its bigger, stealthier, etc, but basically still the same platform. Not that I am saying that the PAK-FA is in any way like a Super Hornet, it just seems to be a development of the Flanker family, just prettied up for RCS mitigation

If I am not mistaken, western analysts were scared to death of anothert Russian aircraft called the Foxbat, and if I recall correctly, Victor Belenko showed us the truth behind that paper tiger...

...and my favourite:

The T50 has no capability. It's a shell that's made a flight around a basic test circuit. It will never come close to matching either of the American 5th generation fighters.

**swerve** · 18th February 2010, 11:49

Originally Posted by rsetiawan

... as for Yaks, it seem yak use even number for fighter (before there are yak-28 firebar iirc)

The Yak-28P Firebar was an interceptor (not fighter: for shooting down bombers) derivative of the Yak-28 'Brewer' light bomber.

The Tu-28P was also an interceptor derived from a bomber, although the bomber was just a prototype, never put into service.

**Rodolfo** · 18th February 2010, 12:29

Shkval torpedo that likely sunk the Kursk

Sure? It was a conventional Torpedo

and the Beluva submarine

Beluva?

Just more Neocon big talkers launching empty words. As usual. :diablo:

**flex297** · 18th February 2010, 12:35

Originally Posted by Otaku

Here's some recent 'shots in the dark' from the authority that is F-16.net, enjoy:

...and my favourite:
The T50 has no capability. It's a shell that's made a flight around a basic test circuit. It will never come close to matching either of the American 5th generation fighters

That's correct for the moment. But where does he come to the conclusion that it will never come close to matching 5th generation designs, from is beyond me..

**Rodolfo** · 18th February 2010, 12:49

Here's some recent 'shots in the dark' from the authority that is F-16.net, enjoy:

They seems upseted and rabid because of the PAK FA. Trolling always with the same phrases doesn't delete the PAK FA from reality.

Anyway, the thing is already in Moscow?

**Deino** · 18th February 2010, 13:01

... via "Matej" (Secret Projects Forum !!)

Deino

**Sens** · 18th February 2010, 13:15

Originally Posted by swerve

The Yak-28P Firebar was an interceptor (not fighter: for shooting down bombers) derivative of the Yak-28 'Brewer' light bomber.

The Tu-28P was also an interceptor derived from a bomber, although the bomber was just a prototype, never put into service.

The Jak-25 FLASHLIGHT-A was an all weather fighter!

Jak-25/26/27 variants

The Jak-28 BREWER was a light bomber and recce aircraft.

The Jak-28P FIREBAR was an all weather fighter.

In that case the FIREBAR was much more important and just revealed to the public in 1967, when its successor the Su-15 was at hand. Just the BREWER was presented in 1961 as first superonic Frontal Aviation bomber.

The Jak-25 and Jak-28P did serve in the PVO and by that in the interceptor role like all fighters in the PVO.

The Su-7/9/11/15/17 got all fighter designations, when serving as interceptors with the PVO or were strikers with the FA.

**over G** · 18th February 2010, 13:15

Originally Posted by Deino

... via "flateric" (Secret Projects Forum !!)

Deino

Now i'm confused

It shows the radiation sign, why?

Is the radar already installed on the plane? (maybe not

)

Also i'm intrigued for that metal nose (heck even the painting is showing it), no prototype have flown with metal nose, although some of you could inform me better....

(although the segmented nose only shows a structure inside..not necessary a metal cone)

And i have a little suspect that the aesa radar does not go in the nosecone, but in the nose's flanks, but then, this is just a very improbable thing (to leave the nosecone w/o radar)

And the name for this plane will be Su-51?

**secondparttohel** · 18th February 2010, 13:52

Originally Posted by Deino

... via "flateric" (Secret Projects Forum !!)

Deino

Can you get us the link of the fullsize one? I can't find one

**Deino** · 18th February 2010, 13:53

Me too .. Matej only posted this part !

PS: Just noteced ... This part is via Matej onad not flateric !" SORRY !!!!

Deino

**ZIL** · 18th February 2010, 15:06

Originally Posted by over G

And the name for this plane will be Su-51?

It may be Su-50 (i.e. Su-50, flying prototype 1), or maybe T-50-1 (T-50, flying prototype 1). 1 probably denotes the serial number of the flying prototype, like 710 for T-10M-10, 902 for T-10BM-2 etc.

**over G** · 18th February 2010, 16:15

sferrin,flex and martinez,can you please continue the 9-11 topic in the general board?

The T-50 does have more interesting secrets....

********
Anyways, one can see that the rhomboid 'hatch' from the sides of the T50's nose doesn't have the same color of the rest of the airframe

This is a different material, most likely fiberglass

for the radar arrays,but the nosecone is just painted as the rest of the airframe

I'm clueless

**Otaku** · 18th February 2010, 18:23

Originally Posted by over G

The T-50 does have more interesting secrets....

********
Anyways, one can see that the rhomboid 'hatch' from the sides of the T50's nose doesn't have the same color of the rest of the airframe

This is a different material, most likely fiberglass

for the radar arrays,but the nosecone is just painted as the rest of the airframe

You mean a side-array (in Blue)? I would have thought location (in Red) would have been more suitable, for the X-band.

Name: HR3c copy.jpg
Views: 4376
Size: 257.3 KB

Imho, the location behind the LEVCON (in Green) will house the L-band, it was sort of alluded to in that 'Vesti' news animation.

C/o QuadroFX:

"Практически, это самолет-невидимка", - сказал Н.Макаров на пресс- конференции в Москве, рассказывая о характеристиках перспективного авиационного комплекса фронтовой авиации.
По его словам, для уменьшения заметности все вооружение находится внутри самолета, в фюзеляже и внутри крыльев.

"This aircraft is practically invisible [to radar]"- said N. Makarov (some Air Force big-wig), at a news conference in Moscow, talking about the characteristics of the PAK-FA.
According to his words, in order to reduce it's radar signature, all weapons are carried inside the aircraft, in the fuselage and inside the wings...

Official confirmation of those underwing 'stealth pods' (?)

**Matej** · 18th February 2010, 18:41

Originally Posted by Otaku

You mean a side-array (in Blue)? I would have thought location (in Red) would have been more suitable, for the X-band.

The problem is, that there is not the same hatch on the opposite side - there is the cannon.

**Otaku** · 18th February 2010, 18:51

Originally Posted by Matej

The problem is, that there is not the same hatch on the opposite side - there is the cannon.

D'Oh!! You're right!! How stupid of me

Matej, could we have the rest of that 'Blue 51' blow-up please? (not that the numbers' not interesting or anything...but...)

**Deino** · 18th February 2010, 19:43

Originally Posted by Otaku

Here's some recent 'shots in the dark' from the authority that is F-16.net, enjoy:

...and my favourite:

And this is my most favourite regarding Carlo Kopp's credibility:

"...the only viable strategic survival strategy now remaining for the United States is to terminate the Joint Strike Fighter program immediately, redirect freed funding to further develop the F-22 Raptor, and employ variants of the F-22 aircraft as the primary fighter aircraft for all United States and Allied TACAIR needs."

Besides that there's an ongoing discussion at the German FlugzeugForum about possibly three already flying prototypes. I thought, that the second flyable one is only in final construction yet ... ??!!!

Any idea on that !?

Deino

**haavarla** · 18th February 2010, 19:46

Originally Posted by UAZ

The Su-34 is available for export (decontented export version of course).
The amount of decontenting will depend on which country will be buying it.

Could you pls show me a source to that statement?

First of all the NAPO are in no condition to manufact an export version Su-34 and at the same time forfilling the RuAF procurment..

Second, i have never come across any reports that suggest that the Su-34 are open for export.

III.
The Su-30 will do just fine as a STRIKER for anyone out there interesting, and its considerble cheaper

..

Thanks

**Matej** · 18th February 2010, 22:50

Originally Posted by Otaku

Matej, could we have the rest of that 'Blue 51' blow-up please? (not that the numbers' not interesting or anything...but...)

No, sorry. I dont want to violate the copyright issues. Wait a few days and I am sure that there will be official high-res photos in camo free to use.

**rsetiawan** · 18th February 2010, 23:22

Originally Posted by haavarla

Could you pls show me a source to that statement?

First of all the NAPO are in no condition to manufact an export version Su-34 and at the same time forfilling the RuAF procurment..

Second, i have never come across any reports that suggest that the Su-34 are open for export.

Thanks

RIA Novosti,

NOVOSIBIRSK: The introduction of Russia's latest fighter-bomber into active service with the country's air force will make the plane more attractive on global export markets, the head of the corporation producing the aircraft said Thursday.

"Widespread use of the Su-34 following its purchase by the Russian Air Force will boost sales on external arms markets," Sukhoi holding Director General Mikhail Pogosyan said.

It is designed to replace the Su-24 Fencer frontline bombers in the Air Force.

**UAZ** · 19th February 2010, 07:25

Originally Posted by haavarla

Could you pls show me a source to that statement?
First of all the NAPO are in no condition to manufact an export version Su-34 and at the same time forfilling the RuAF procurment..

Second, i have never come across any reports that suggest that the Su-34 are open for export.

III.
The Su-30 will do just fine as a STRIKER for anyone out there interesting, and its considerble cheaper

..

Thanks

Check ROSOBORONOEXPORT's catalogue of export products:

http://www.roe.ru/cataloque/airf0rces_cataloque.html

They call it Su-32 in that catalogue.

**Scorpion82** · 19th February 2010, 07:50

The latest issue of the German aviation magazine FlugRevue features an article about the PAK FA.
It states that the Al-41F1 engine powering the prototype generates a reheat thrust of 147 kN. Any other source which confirms that?

It furthermore states that there will be 6 prototypes:
T-50KNS = not flyable prototype to be used for taxi and ground trials
T-50-0 = Static airframe for structural load testing
T-50-1/2/4 = Flying prototypes
T-50-3 = Static airframe for fatigue testing

It is stated that T-50-2 is scheduled to conduct its first flight at the end of 2010.

**Snow Monkey** · 19th February 2010, 08:43

Originally Posted by Scorpion82

The latest issue of the German aviation magazine FlugRevue features an article about the PAK FA.

It furthermore states that there will be 6 prototypes:
T-50KNS = not flyable prototype to be used for taxi and ground trials
T-50-0 = Static airframe for structural load testing
T-50-1/2/4 = Flying prototypes
T-50-3 = Static airframe for fatigue testing

It is stated that T-50-2 is scheduled to conduct its first flight at the end of 2010.

Yet aren't two prototypes already supposed to have flown? I guess Sukhoi is already ahead of schedule...

**Sens** · 19th February 2010, 10:44

Originally Posted by Snow Monkey

Yet aren't two prototypes already supposed to have flown? I guess Sukhoi is already ahead of schedule...

The FR has excellent connections to Russia and by that the infos published are correct. The internet related guessing aside.

**sferrin** · 20th February 2010, 04:10

Originally Posted by Vympel

Wow, you mean back in the Cold War when the West had no idea what a dedicated PVO interceptor was for, they just assumed based on fuzzy intelligence that it was something completely different? Of course, that's exactly the same as what is happening with the T-50, right? Right? Guys?

The Mig-23 designation was initially associated with the Mig-25 aircraft in the West. When getting reports of planned Mig-23 production and deployment combined with the apparent performance of the airframe (the Mig-25's that is) it's easy to see how wrong conclusions could occur.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXX

**over G** · 20th February 2010, 05:14

If I am not mistaken, western analysts were scared to death of anothert Russian aircraft called the Foxbat, and if I recall correctly, Victor Belenko showed us the truth behind that paper tiger..

Because the most feared fighter in the Gulf War was the Mig-29

People get exited by airshows, and turn rate comparisons, there are more important things for air combat, no, i'm not talking about radar or sensor fusion..or electronic magic

The 25/31 was/is a threat for any 'teen' fighter, actually it was/is a 'teen' killer.

Neither the mig-29, su-27,or the T-50 will finish the 25/31 legacy

That aircraft is way too important

**haavarla** · 20th February 2010, 06:27

sferrin;1537391]The Mig-23 designation was initially associated with the Mig-25 aircraft in the West. When getting reports of planned Mig-23 production and deployment combined with the apparent performance of the airframe (the Mig-25's that is) it's easy to see how wrong conclusions could occur.

Ummh.. Try the T-10 = Su-27 analogy..

http://www.nytimes.com/1989/06/17/bu...l?pagewanted=1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_T-10

Back then the west didn't know squat before PARIS 1989 .. pretty much as to day.. but wait!
To day we happens to know squat!
Namly the release of the T-50 fotages/Vids.

#################Keep the clever comments to yourself, thanks!#################

Thanks

**rsetiawan** · 20th February 2010, 09:31

Originally Posted by over G

Because the most feared fighter in the Gulf War was the Mig-29

People get exited by airshows, and turn rate comparisons, there are more important things for air combat, no, i'm not talking about radar or sensor fusion..or electronic magic

The 25/31 was/is a threat for any 'teen' fighter, actually it was/is a 'teen' killer.

Neither the mig-29, su-27,or the T-50 will finish the 25/31 legacy

That aircraft is way too important

iirc in Gulf War MiG-25 found to be superior compared to MiG-29, shooting an F-18 and escaping the pursuing F-15....

**HAWX ace** · 20th February 2010, 09:50

Originally Posted by rsetiawan

iirc in Gulf War MiG-25 found to be superior compared to MiG-29, shooting an F-18 and escaping the pursuing F-15....

More info here, from this post onwards: http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/sho...59#post1214559

Let's not derail too much.

Thread: The PAK-FA saga Episode 12.0

Thread Tools

Display

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

Posting Permissions