Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

RuAF News and Development Thread part 11

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
Collapse
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Tu 160
    Rank 5 Registered User
    • Jan 2013
    • 157

    How is it known for years if most information on T50 is classified. First serial Pakfa should have each engine rated at 34,000lb+ vs 27,600lb each for Su 27 and Pakfa has higher wing sweep,smaller vertical stabilizers and even better aerodynamics than the Su 27, this means almost certainly that Pakfa maximum speed will be faster than that of Su 27. But Pakfa speed will almost certainly be auto limited to not exceed Su 27 max speed to aviod excesive heat damage.

    Also is Su 35 capable of supercruising, I have heard some conflicting info on this?
    Originally posted by Berkut View Post
    T-50 doesn't have higher top speed than Su-27. It has been known for years.
    Last edited by Tu 160; 18th January 2013, 23:32.
    TU 160 STATISTICALLY IS THE LARGEST,HEAVIEST AND MOST POWERFUL COMBAT AIRCRAFT AND BOMBER EVER BUILT

    Comment

    • MSphere
      Senior Member
      • Feb 2010
      • 8983

      Originally posted by Tu 160 View Post
      How is it known for years if most information on T50 is classified. First serial Pakfa should have each engine rated at 34,000lb+ vs 27,600lb each for Su 27 and Pakfa has higher wing sweep,smaller vertical stabilizers and even better aerodynamics than the Su 27, this means almost certainly that Pakfa maximum speed will be faster than that of Su 27. But Pakfa speed will almost certainly be auto limited to not exceed Su 27 max speed to aviod excesive heat damage.

      Also is Su 35 capable of supercruising, I have heard some conflicting info on this?
      Top speed has little to do with engine thrust or T/W. It's the variable intake design that has the largest influence.
      Last edited by MSphere; 18th January 2013, 23:38.

      Comment

      • Tu 160
        Rank 5 Registered User
        • Jan 2013
        • 157

        Yes I knew that also thats why for instance early Su 24 with variable intakes could go Mach 2+ but later versions with fixed intakes could not. And B1B with its fixed intakes can barelly exceed Mach 1 but Tu 160 with variable intakes can go Mach 2.3+
        Pakfa has variable intake design that is designed to supercruise at Mach 1.8 and designed for quite high speed in general. With the Pakfa intake deign should it be able to attain Mach 2.5 or at least the maximum speed eaqul to an Su 27?
        Also need to know about Su 35 supercruise capabilities?
        Originally posted by MSphere View Post
        Top speed has little to do with engine thrust or T/W. It's the variable intake design that has the largest influence.
        TU 160 STATISTICALLY IS THE LARGEST,HEAVIEST AND MOST POWERFUL COMBAT AIRCRAFT AND BOMBER EVER BUILT

        Comment

        • haavarla
          Rank 5 Registered User
          • Dec 2008
          • 6703

          Top speed is of no great important. But Accelleration and the ability to regain energy quicly is. That also mean climb rate as well.

          I think top speed will be the same as Su-35S, more or less.

          Latest on Su-35S performance.

          http://www.ruaviation.com/news/2013/1/16/1459/

          The Supercruise speed on Su-35S remains unknown.
          Last edited by haavarla; 19th January 2013, 04:56.
          Thanks

          Comment

          • Berkut
            Senior Member
            • Nov 2011
            • 2216

            Originally posted by Tu 160 View Post
            How is it known for years if most information on T50 is classified.
            2004.

            Одновременно с исчезновением призрачной надежды на индийские деньги понижались требования к новому самолету. Так, главком ВВС Владимир Михайлов снизил на 0,15 М крейсерскую скорость: К примеру, задана характеристика 2,15 М, чтобы самолет летал с такой скоростью, однако это число 0,15 влечет за собой необходимость усиления киля и увеличение веса самолета. По его словам, анализ эксплуатации самолетов типа Су-27 и МиГ-31 показывает, что хотя они и способны ходить примерно на таких скоростях, но редко на них выходят..."
            From 2.15 to mach 2.

            Comment

            • Tu 160
              Rank 5 Registered User
              • Jan 2013
              • 157

              This analyssis for 2004 when T50 didn't even exist and the design and specification were not even close to being finalized does not prove that Pakfa is incapable of exceeping Mach 2.15
              It was also said in 2009 or so that Pakfa was the size slightly bigger than Mig 29 when in reality Pakfa ended up being a fighter in the heavy class and sightly bigger and heavier than an Su 27, which is a good thing.
              Originally posted by Berkut View Post
              2004.



              From 2.15 to mach 2.
              TU 160 STATISTICALLY IS THE LARGEST,HEAVIEST AND MOST POWERFUL COMBAT AIRCRAFT AND BOMBER EVER BUILT

              Comment

              • MadRat
                Rank 5 Registered User
                • Aug 2006
                • 5033

                T-50 is in between the sizes of MiG-29 and Su-27. It enjoys much larger engines than an Su-27, internalized weapons, integrated ECCM, is visually tougher to spot, integrates electro optical sensors all around it, and is stealth. Not bad for a smaller package.
                Go Huskers!

                Comment

                • MSphere
                  Senior Member
                  • Feb 2010
                  • 8983

                  Originally posted by Tu 160 View Post
                  This analyssis for 2004 when T50 didn't even exist and the design and specification were not even close to being finalized does not prove that Pakfa is incapable of exceeping Mach 2.15
                  The point isn't whether the creators of PAK-FA were or weren't able to design it for more than M 2.15 - but I have serious doubts they were that much keen on doing so.

                  Originally posted by Tu 160 View Post
                  It was also said in 2009 or so that Pakfa was the size slightly bigger than Mig 29 when in reality Pakfa ended up being a fighter in the heavy class and sightly bigger and heavier than an Su 27, which is a good thing.
                  Larger than Flanker?

                  Last edited by MSphere; 19th January 2013, 01:41.

                  Comment

                  • Tu 160
                    Rank 5 Registered User
                    • Jan 2013
                    • 157

                    Did you even look up T50 size specs once? T50 is not smaller than an Su 27,its slightly shorter than an Su 27 but T50 has a significantly larger wing area than the Su 27,T50 has a wider fuselage than the Su 27 and T50 is larger by surface area. Pakfa is also heavier, it empty weight is 40,785lb vs Su 27 empty weight of 36,100lb,T50 max takeoff weight is also larger. T50 also has larger internal fuel capacity,also like you said T50 has larger engines also.
                    T50 is a heavy fighter and is a huge beast much bigger and heavier than an F15 or a Mig 29 which is a medium fighter,Mig 29 has empty weight of 24,250 lb.
                    That photo is very deseptive as its comparing to the Su 30 from the front with its tall canopy and vert stabilizers, try to compare the size of the T50 to Su 27 from the top or bottom,T50 has a larger surface area than the Su 27.
                    Originally posted by MadRat View Post
                    T-50 is in between the sizes of MiG-29 and Su-27. It enjoys much larger engines than an Su-27, internalized weapons, integrated ECCM, is visually tougher to spot, integrates electro optical sensors all around it, and is stealth. Not bad for a smaller package.
                    Last edited by Tu 160; 19th January 2013, 09:20.
                    TU 160 STATISTICALLY IS THE LARGEST,HEAVIEST AND MOST POWERFUL COMBAT AIRCRAFT AND BOMBER EVER BUILT

                    Comment

                    • haavarla
                      Rank 5 Registered User
                      • Dec 2008
                      • 6703

                      If it is a fact, that Pak-Fa is heavier and larger than the Flanker, then you care to post any source of this?

                      I'm not claiming anything, regarding weight. But to say the Pak-Fa is even heavier than the F-22 is a shot in the dark..
                      Thanks

                      Comment

                      • blackwood
                        Rank 5 Registered User
                        • Dec 2011
                        • 314

                        Originally posted by MSphere View Post
                        The point isn't whether the creators of PAK-FA were or weren't able to design it for more than M 2.15 - but I have serious doubts they were that much keen on doing so.


                        Larger than Flanker?

                        Exactly MSphere. When this discussion came up that photo came to mind. Its surface area may be greater. Side and head on the Pak-fa is far sleeker. Just the nose cone size is different. Su-30 is slimmer down the middle, pak-fa has more of flat profile, great for avoiding side and head on radar.

                        Comment

                        • paralay
                          Rank 5 Registered User
                          • Aug 2005
                          • 1415

                          A comparison of the Su-27 / T-50:

                          area of a side view 38 / 27.8 square meters
                          area of the top view 110 / 115.6 square meters
                          area of ​​the front view 10 / 9.47 square meters

                          volume 69.41 / 62.45 cubic meters

                          empty weight of the T-50: 17500 kg * (62.45: 69.41) = 15745 kg
                          Attached Files

                          Comment

                          • Tu 160
                            Rank 5 Registered User
                            • Jan 2013
                            • 157

                            I never said T50 was heavier than F22,I said heavier than Su 27,Mig 29 and F15. F22 is a good deal smaller than Pakfa though but fatter and heavier.
                            wikipedia states that T50 has empty weight of 18,500 kg (40,785 lb)
                            Su 27 empty weight is stated at 16,380 kg (36,100 lb)
                            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_T-50
                            Paralays data still shows Pakfa empty weight is 1755kg heavier than a Su 27 and the scetch shows that Pakfa is pretty much the same size as an Su 27,a little shorter but wider.
                            Originally posted by haavarla View Post
                            If it is a fact, that Pak-Fa is heavier and larger than the Flanker, then you care to post any source of this?

                            I'm not claiming anything, regarding weight. But to say the Pak-Fa is even heavier than the F-22 is a shot in the dark..
                            Last edited by Tu 160; 19th January 2013, 09:33.
                            TU 160 STATISTICALLY IS THE LARGEST,HEAVIEST AND MOST POWERFUL COMBAT AIRCRAFT AND BOMBER EVER BUILT

                            Comment

                            • haavarla
                              Rank 5 Registered User
                              • Dec 2008
                              • 6703

                              Look.. the Su-35S has an empty weight in the range of 18.000 kg.
                              Forget about the legacy Vanila Flanker. They are soon removed from VVS service.

                              The Weight increase comes on all jet due to more avionics and sensor systems and due to strenghting of airframe, the Su-35S has much longer life hour remember.
                              Thanks

                              Comment

                              • Belethor
                                Rank 1 Registered User
                                • Dec 2012
                                • 175

                                Originally posted by Tu 160 View Post
                                wikipedia states that T50 has empty weight of 18,500 kg (40,785 lb)
                                When did Wikipedia become a reliable source???

                                Comment

                                • Tu 160
                                  Rank 5 Registered User
                                  • Jan 2013
                                  • 157

                                  I know Su 35 is heavier than an Su 27 but the comparison was being made between a standard Su 27 and T50. Su 35 Irbis radar is also a good deal heavier than a N00 1 Su 27 radar. Standard Su 27 are not going to be removed from VVS service anytime soon but modernized.
                                  Originally posted by haavarla View Post
                                  Look.. the Su-35S has an empty weight in the range of 18.000 kg.
                                  Forget about the legacy Vanila Flanker. They are soon removed from VVS service.

                                  The Weight increase comes on all jet due to more avionics and sensor systems and due to strenghting of airframe, the Su-35S has much longer life hour remember.
                                  Last edited by Tu 160; 19th January 2013, 09:42.
                                  TU 160 STATISTICALLY IS THE LARGEST,HEAVIEST AND MOST POWERFUL COMBAT AIRCRAFT AND BOMBER EVER BUILT

                                  Comment

                                  • haavarla
                                    Rank 5 Registered User
                                    • Dec 2008
                                    • 6703

                                    The remaining Su-27P/S is going to be upgraded?
                                    This is news to me.. Sources pls.

                                    The 4-5 regiments, some 54 Su-27SM is the last of the upgraded Flankers as far as i'm concerned.
                                    I have not read anything else on the matter.

                                    As you are aware, there are Su-30SM and Su-35S on the floor. Su-35S has started LIRP with 12 units a year.
                                    My point is there will not be any more upgrade on the older Flanker fleet.
                                    Thanks

                                    Comment

                                    • paralay
                                      Rank 5 Registered User
                                      • Aug 2005
                                      • 1415

                                      Originally posted by Tu 160 View Post
                                      wikipedia states that T50 has empty weight of 18,500 kg (40,785 lb)
                                      Su 27 empty weight is stated at 16,380 kg (36,100 lb)
                                      Wikipedia has long been visited paralay.сom
                                      Su-27 had the empty weight 16,380 kg during the test, then the distance of the flight reached 3,900 km. Su-27 standing in the arsenal is empty weight of 17,500 kg and 3,680 km range.
                                      Weight of the T-50 can not be greater than that of the Su-27. But the weight will be comparable if the operating load a fighter T-50 reaches 10g.

                                      Comment

                                      • Berkut
                                        Senior Member
                                        • Nov 2011
                                        • 2216

                                        Originally posted by haavarla View Post
                                        Look.. the Su-35S has an empty weight in the range of 18.000 kg.
                                        No it does not.

                                        Originally posted by Tu 160 View Post
                                        This analyssis for 2004 when T50 didn't even exist and the design and specification were not even close to being finalized does not prove that Pakfa is incapable of exceeping Mach 2.15
                                        FFS dude. I used like an hour to find the damn quote, so if you want to discredit C-in-C of AF and someone that played instrumental part in "TTZ" for PAK-FA, you are going into my ignore list.

                                        Comment

                                        • haavarla
                                          Rank 5 Registered User
                                          • Dec 2008
                                          • 6703

                                          Yes it does, around 18.000kg empty weight.
                                          Thanks

                                          Comment

                                          Unconfigured Ad Widget

                                          Collapse

                                           

                                          Working...
                                          X