It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

T-50 PAK-FA configuration.

page: 3
1
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 12 2005 @ 09:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by matej
There is also shown difference between RAM [radar absorbent material] and composite material. Simply: RAM is used to reduce the RCS [radar cross section] when much reflection material is also used [for example it is RAM painting on metal skin]. When you will use ONLY composite materials, you can reduce RCS to 0.


So you are saying radar cannot detect composite object? LOL.
Most todays planes use composites on surface also F-22 uses titanium only internally so far I know.
And higlhy special Radar absorbent materials are much better against radar waves than "normal" composites (besides many RAM are spacial composites).




posted on Apr, 12 2005 @ 09:53 PM
link   
Yeah, the Raptor uses composite metals that don't reflect as much radar waves back. But just using composite metals will not get your RCS to 0.



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 01:58 PM
link   
nice article >> english.mn.ru...



posted on Apr, 18 2005 @ 07:30 AM
link   
external image


external image

[edit on 11/9/2005 by Mirthful Me]



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 12:31 PM
link   
Matej, do you have any info on why the Mig PAK-FA was rejected and the Sukhoi one selected ??



posted on Apr, 25 2005 @ 09:57 AM
link   
Simply because MiG 1.27 was higher technology risk and T-50 "better answered to VVS specifications".

WestPoint23: I agree. When you built the cube with size of Airbus A380 of composite materials, It will not be very stealthy :-)

[edit on 25-4-2005 by matej]



posted on Apr, 25 2005 @ 07:15 PM
link   
that pakfa with f22s shape tale started with some pics of chineses aerodynamics models (but that doesnt mean that china also is in an f22 shape plane).

Is very intresting the design evolution between russians and americans, there are cases in which the design selected looks more like the americans "loser" designs ,please dont missinterpret that as "russian copies", but sometimes the ruskies take an different aerodynamic configuration (mig29/su27-f17 -that is if you compare with the f16-, su25-a9)

i hope that the new design wouldnt use unstable concepts, for an cheaper plane, but if they want unstable, well its more likely that the pakfa use the tipical delta-cannard

is more likely that the design selected will be something between the su27 and the yf23, but we must see...

no matter what could say some members -or USAF-Boeing claims- the f22 doesnt have an stealth design, its an supercruiser shape

i think that the market demands more small-cheaper planes like the ja39, why not to resurrect the mig 21???

by the way the mig pakfa 1.27 is an real design or is another speculation??, that stuff only could work with an backwarded CG, funny it looks like an Typhoon-su27-f23 fusion




[edit on 25-4-2005 by grunt2]



posted on May, 13 2005 @ 12:36 AM
link   
external image


external image



[edit on 11/9/2005 by Mirthful Me]

[edit on 11/9/2005 by Mirthful Me]



posted on May, 14 2005 @ 12:46 PM
link   
external image

[edit on 11/9/2005 by Mirthful Me]



posted on Sep, 11 2005 @ 01:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by matej
www.hitechweb.szm.sk/luke/T50-3view.jpg[/url]


Hi ! I have search this picture you given by google but no matter your link or the pic google links all can't open it to show! although this pictuer is perfect I have never seen.
Who can help post this pictuer on here? I will be grateful for him!



posted on Sep, 11 2005 @ 01:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by matej
www.hitechweb.szm.sk...

I don't hope picture like this cartoo which is unvalvable and not exactly.
The picture should be like this which showed in left side without color and just a line-drawing.

[edit on 11-9-2005 by emile]



posted on Sep, 12 2005 @ 12:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Because no design is perfect and R&D into the next generation design is better than copying someone's else.


Nobody ever expects anything else from you.

Out,
Russian



posted on Sep, 12 2005 @ 12:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Yeah, the Raptor uses composite metals that don't reflect as much radar waves back. But just using composite metals will not get your RCS to 0.


Yes, true, but the shape with the composite metal will get you damn close to it.

Out,
Russian



posted on Sep, 12 2005 @ 12:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Russian

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Because no design is perfect and R&D into the next generation design is better than copying someone's else.


Nobody ever expects anything else from you.

Out,
Russian


This forum is for discussing Aircraft Projects, not the perceived qualities of individual members... Personal attacks, insults or demeaning posts will not be tolerated.



posted on Sep, 14 2005 @ 06:31 PM
link   
what kind of a name is pakfa



posted on Sep, 16 2005 @ 07:55 AM
link   
emile: my black and white drawing was removed from web. There is only color version. But if you want, send me by U2U your mail and I will post it. Second drawing is from Sasha and can be downloaded from paralay.narod.ru

Both drawings are only GENERAL ARRANGEMENTS because real detailed shape of Sukhoi T-50 is of course still secret. And by the way not finished yet. The final configuration will be ready in early 2006. I computed the dimensions from Su-47 (do not know, how Sasha did it).

Danie: It means Perspektivnyj Aviacionnyj Kompleks Frontovoj Aviacii. It is difficult to translate, but it should be Perspective Aviation Complex of Tactical Aviation.



posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 09:01 PM
link   



Danie: It means Perspektivnyj Aviacionnyj Kompleks Frontovoj Aviacii. It is difficult to translate, but it should be Perspective Aviation Complex of Tactical Aviation.



um thank you



posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 12:15 PM
link   
PAK FA news:

Source: 18.01.06, Interfax-AVN

Fifth Generation Fighter Getting Better

The fifth generation heavy combat airplane developed by the Sukhoy Aviation Holding Company will be lifted into the air in 2007. Financing of work on its creation will be sharply increased this year. In the opinion of specialists, the possible participation of foreign partners guarantees the airplane good marketing prospects.

In 2007, and perhaps, even at the end of 2006, the fifth generation airplane is supposed to be lifted into the air, Russias air force commander-in-chief, General of the Army Vladimir Mikhaylov, announced.- The airplane™s airframe has been defined and that characteristics trued up According to him, work on the airplane is progressing in accordance with the timetable. Mention by the CinC of the possibility of the creation of a light-weight fifth generation airplane also is news.

We will be making a lighter airplane, perhaps with one engine, in parallel, Mikhaylov said.

True, the aircraft builders called this announcement of the general a bewilderment. Only one fifth generation airplane is indicated in the state arms program, the heavy one, a source close to the Sukhoy Aviation Holding Company reported to Biznes.- A separate order is needed for a light one. And this is a lot of money.


More about new light fighter I wrote in thread Encyclopedia of non american stealth planes

Also the PAK FA has now bigger maximal take-off weight than originaly planned, so it is close to Su-47 demonstrator. I made a new drawing, but this is the last one [because my sources told me, that official drawings will be released soon].

Bigger here: www.hitechweb.szm.sk...




posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 04:58 PM
link   
Excellent artwork Matej.

I would expect the T-50 to have more outwardly canted tail fins to reduce the side angle RCS (as on the F-22, F-23, F-117, F-35 etc).



posted on Feb, 5 2006 @ 12:07 AM
link   
I will put some money on that configration of T.50 has no future if it would still be designed as Raptorski. I think that Sukhoi bur. has already realized this so the configration of T.50 might chang already.

Except lower detectable, almost all of professor of aerodynamics would say that Canard layout is more superior than formal layout as F-22. THat is what I always presisted that MiG I.44 was more advanced and better than S-37 and F-22, if we just talking about the aerodynamical configeration.

[edit on 5-2-2006 by emile]




top topics



 
1
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join