Sukhoi PAK FA (Russian Fifth-generation fighter)

page: 10
3
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 22 2007 @ 08:00 AM
link   
Waynos:

There must be misunderstanding. What I mean is never concerning to the quality of picture Jozef Gatial drawn. I just want to say, if Su-50 copy F-22 exactly ressemble to the picture showed, its specification won't come close to F-22 as well.

BTW, I will so glade to see whats the Tornado by J.G. looks like?




posted on Oct, 22 2007 @ 08:05 AM
link   
reply to post by emile
 


Yes, I see what you are saying. I just wanted to point out (generally in fact) that it is purely a fantasy picture and not meant to be a true representation of the T-50.

I don't know if has drawn a Tornado, as it is really in service, I merely meant that the BAC Eagle (TSR 2) looks so good as a Gulf War bomber that it can make me resent the fact that the Tornado was ever needed.



posted on Oct, 28 2007 @ 12:43 AM
link   
reply to post by waynos
 


How about MiG-15 and F-86!!!


MiG-15 produced first! It means the sabre design taken from the MiG?

fool idea! you guys answers are not so experts. based on single side knowledge. much more like assumption!



posted on Oct, 28 2007 @ 07:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Eastpolar Commander
 






How about MiG-15 and F-86!!!


How about them? They both flew in 1947 and they are both part German





MiG-15 produced first! It means the sabre design taken from the MiG?


No, they are completely unrelated and entirely different, isn't that obvious?.




fool idea! you guys answers are not so experts. based on single side knowledge. much more like assumption!


Yes you are right, I know absolutely nothing about planes


Er, why are you addressing this argument to me completely out of the blue? Have you gone mad?



posted on Oct, 29 2007 @ 04:13 AM
link   
Me thinks the good commander read some insinuating bits on this thread and in the frenzy to respond he just clicked 'post reply' somewhere on the thread and that happened to be your post Sir..


Seems benign enough to me!



posted on Nov, 1 2007 @ 06:27 AM
link   
Now this damned PAK_FA was delayed again? who has more newest information.
In China, reporter said this fighter won't flight earlier than 2012 by a Russia lieutenant general.



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 03:31 AM
link   
PAK FA updates:

1)Indian scientists feel India introduced into the program too late to provide any real technical input for the prototype that flies in 2009. Hence the accusation that 'India's inclusion is just as a source of fianance and an assured market.'

2)Technology demonstrator to fly in 09. It will use engines, systems and avionics from prev gen Su-30 a/c (Su-35 based AL-41F and Irbis-E?)

3)09 prototype to have 'swept-forward' wings to increase agility, yet reduce radar c/s


4)Once prototype flight is successful, 6 more will be developed, all in 2 seater config, thus requiring modified RCS designs for frontal fuselage; apparently Indian technical expertise can only begin contribute from here onward, if at all.

5) The a/c will be 2/3rds the weight of the current Su-30 versions, and be able to fly 'longer'. Note Su-30 MKI max takeoff weight is ~39tons and un-refueled range is 3000km.

6)Weapons will be carried within the fuselage.

Source

Don't know what to make of the substance behind these points/claims, but they sure are new updates IMO.
Any similar chatter on other news networks/online?



posted on Jun, 25 2008 @ 03:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Daedalus3
PAK FA updates:
1)Indian scientists feel India introduced into the program too late to provide any real technical input for the prototype that flies in 2009. Hence the accusation that 'India's inclusion is just as a source of fianance and an assured market.'


Good move from India: Learning off how to build a 5th gen AC and by financing, assure that Russia will sell them to India and set the stage for Russia to market the plane to other nations making Russia pleased with India.



2)Technology demonstrator to fly in 09. It will use engines, systems and avionics from prev gen Su-30 a/c (Su-35 based AL-41F and Irbis-E?)


That tech demo will have alllllll the stuff found on the SU-35BM and that will also be the stuff wich PAK FA stage 1 will be:

A total new airframe wich is superior to the 35BM and later Stage 2 PAK FA will be introduced as final design with 5th gen stuff.



3)09 prototype to have 'swept-forward' wings to increase agility, yet reduce radar c/s



Interesting indeed. Seems like a Berkut like thing but then using the PAK FA airframe.



5) The a/c will be 2/3rds the weight of the current Su-30 versions, and be able to fly 'longer'. Note Su-30 MKI max takeoff weight is ~39tons and un-refueled range is 3000km.


Nice stats but is the 30 realy that heavy at max takeoff? That is fat!!



6)Weapons will be carried within the fuselage.


Crucial for stealth planes so a fairly obvious choise.



Any similar chatter on other news networks/online?


Well, just buy some good fighter magazines like AFM (AirForces Monthly)
or CA (Combat Aircraft) then you will get some fairly decent info.

or just using good ol Google!!



posted on Jun, 25 2008 @ 06:49 PM
link   
I'm not going to be too picky with the information, but one point that's up for grabs is the claim of Forward-Swept Wings.

I thought that they said that FSW was not going to be included in PAK-FA?

That aside, I do hope that it will be in the two-seater versions as is stated. There' s just something more attractive about Russian 2-seaters than single-seaters.



posted on Jun, 26 2008 @ 06:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Darkpr0
I'm not going to be too picky with the information, but one point that's up for grabs is the claim of Forward-Swept Wings.

I thought that they said that FSW was not going to be included in PAK-FA?

That aside, I do hope that it will be in the two-seater versions as is stated. There' s just something more attractive about Russian 2-seaters than single-seaters.


yeap yeap.. the Su-27 looks like a real mutt, but the Su30 series have a sense of finesse and beauty.



posted on Jun, 26 2008 @ 07:05 AM
link   

That aside, I do hope that it will be in the two-seater versions as is stated. There' s just something more attractive about Russian 2-seaters than single-seaters.


O'rly?

K, I'll shuttup now.,


[edit on 26/6/2008 by C0bzz]



posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 02:18 AM
link   
reply to post by C0bzz
 


Yeap, the UB was quite beastly, and didnt have a radar upfront either :|

but since you're shutting down, I'll start up


You seen the new MiG-35 /Mig-29K two seaters? Look better than the single seaters they do.

MiG-29K

Beeeeauutiiiful


Can't wait to see these stacked up on the Vikramaditya's carrier deck



posted on Jul, 4 2008 @ 09:54 PM
link   
Brought to our attention by RedBaron in another thread.

A possible picture of the PAK-FA in construction here?
So a couple of questions here:

1)This article being dated in mid 2007, was that picture discussed on ATS? Could be a valid photo as the construction of PAK-FA pre-prod model/prototype started in the last third of 2007?

2) Looks like in has MiG29-esque LERX and tilted vertical tail fins (the only indication that it could be a 5th gen fighter that is NOT the F-22 or F-35) . But if thats the vertical tail fin, where's the wing?!

3)Is this what the PAK-FA is finally going to look like? Article dated for Apr 08.





[edit on 4-7-2008 by Daedalus3]



posted on Jul, 5 2008 @ 02:22 AM
link   
According to newest information, the Su-50 will be an a/c much resemble to YF-23.



posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 02:32 AM
link   
reply to post by emile
 


any details around that?



posted on Jul, 19 2008 @ 12:14 AM
link   
Sorry for be late.

According to three informations recently,
first, the PAKFA will be a X-wing jet.
second, the PAKFA will be a FSW jet
third, the PAKFA will more resemble to Russia-era jet than F-22 style.

now let's make logic:

it won't resemble F-22, it could be anything else. we can say it like YF-23.
FSW was a sort of outdated tech which US and Russia has already tested and was likely abandoned.
Now what does X-wing mean?
The BAe 1214 also could be called X-Wing, although it was a FSW. A forward swept wing without fore-plan, should be called X-wing for identified to normal FSW.
But conversely, it was outdated, so I just wondering does that wing like YF-23 also could be called X-Wing? after all that back-edge of main wing and frontal edge of V-tail on YF-23 formed like a "X". If such X wing was forced to categorise as US style, then the PAKFA must be FSW I mean 1214 project.

Is that a Russia-era? or rightly say British-era.....



posted on Aug, 11 2008 @ 08:09 AM
link   
more updates..
PAK-FA/T-50/FGFA to have single seater and twin seater operational versions?



The bone of contention is that Russia has already frozen the design parameters of its FGFA, the single-seater Sukhoi T-50 PAK-FA, the first prototype of which is likely to take to the skies by 2009.

India, however, wants a twin-seater FGFA built to its requirements, which will obviously require several design changes. With the FGFA project expected to cost $8-10 billion, a cash-starved Russia is agreeable to the idea of having both single and twin-seater versions.

source



posted on Aug, 11 2008 @ 02:06 PM
link   
It makes a lot of sense that PAK-FA would have single-seater and double-seater configurations.

The single-seater variant is an obvious choice as it's standard. A double-seater variant is handy for two reasons:

1) A completely new airframe is going to need new pilots, pilots which are going to need a fair amount of training. Having aircraft to train them in seems like a good plan.
2) Given that the aircraft is supposed to have radar/electronic capabilities on par with the F-22, and that the F-22 has a huge amount of power in that respect, it may be a great idea to have someone on hand to take advantage of these resources while the pilot is free to keep an eye on what he's doing.

There's also the "sexy factor", which we've already discussed.
All in all, I'm not surprised about the addition of a two-seater variant, I think it's a logical step.



posted on Aug, 12 2008 @ 06:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Darkpr0
The single-seater variant is an obvious choice as it's standard. A double-seater variant is handy for two reasons:


Standard?For?



1) A completely new airframe is going to need new pilots, pilots which are going to need a fair amount of training. Having aircraft to train them in seems like a good plan.


But a trainer is not all of it right? It got me thinking.. does the F-22 have a two seater trainer? Interesting question for me since I never bothered to think about it.
Apparently it doesn't..

then I thought.. maybe the Raptor being a high value asset, will only have experienced veterans converting to it with at least say 1000-1500 hours on other jets like the F-16 or F-15.
But then that doesn't make too much sense either since every aircraft will come to an operational stage in its lifetime when it will be the first op a/c a pilot flies after getting his/her wings..
So what gives then?
Does the Raptor (and the F-35 for that matter) only have simulation and non-Raptor based training before the Raptor rookies get to solo their own?

Raptor Flight Training for rookies:
www.air-attack.com...



2) Given that the aircraft is supposed to have radar/electronic capabilities on par with the F-22, and that the F-22 has a huge amount of power in that respect, it may be a great idea to have someone on hand to take advantage of these resources while the pilot is free to keep an eye on what he's doing.


And so why doesn't the F-22 have a 2 seat version? Or better yet.. why isn't the F-22 2 seat? Is it purely to reduce the lifted payload that is replaced by computing power?

Came across this in my siftings:
www.defensetech.org...

Seems I raised more questions in my head than I answered.







There's also the "sexy factor", which we've already discussed.
All in all, I'm not surprised about the addition of a two-seater variant, I think it's a logical step.


and so why wasn't it a part of the original program with or w/o the Indians?

[edit on 12-8-2008 by Daedalus3]



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 01:49 AM
link   
helllooo?
anybody?
Answers/thoughts to the above?





top topics
 
3
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join