Russian's next generation of fighter jet

Originally posted by IAF101
I wonder why the Russian even bother these days. They havent made a decent aircraft since the Mig-29 came out during the cold war. They have lost the edge. Their planes are crude, cheap and unreliable as has been attested to in every major conflict.

Completely correct! There hasn't been a single remotely interesting aircraft that has done anything in any way "new" or "interesting" since the Fulcrum! I mean, look at all these conservative, boring designs! One might even say that they copied them from the United States! Consider my "List of Russian Garbage"!

MiG-31 Foxhound: Look at this! Total rip-off of that whole thing that the USAF has to intercept enemy aircraft! I mean, Mach 2.35 cruise is so last generation. And you know? Those new 300 km, Mach 6 AA-X-13 missiles just don't have the range or speed to cut it in today's modern combat.

MiG-35 Fulcrum-F: Oh, come on. Do you really think that nobody else thought of fielding 360 degree Thrust Vectoring on an aircraft that might make it into field use? And that AESA radar, what useless stuff these engineers come up with. Nothing new in that category.

Su-47 Berkut/Firkin: Curse these conservative Russian designs! Never a lick of originality to its name! You would think they'd be slightly more creative than to use such an old design as one that has forward-swept wings! Complete rip-off of every aircraft ever made.

As you can see, the Russians have done nothing in the least interesting with their own hardware. It's all old, old tech. It is to all other, superior aircraft what vacuum tubes are to transistors. Nothing interesting to see here, people.

Move. Along.

When was the last time the Russian aerospace industry actually came up with some idea really revolutionary that gave them any kind of edge ? Not since the cold war.

Oh, right, that Cold War type-thing. The one that, when it ended, left no real need for combat aircraft that could crush anything known? The one that, when it ended, left Russian aircraft doing nothing but airshows, since nothing had to be blown up should a moment's notice come along? Right, that one.

Originally posted by planetfall
any idea if its a vtol like the jsf? i wonder how many patents they've violated?

=o)

Except that JSF *isn't* a VTOL at all, and its STOVL variant uses a Russian concept anyaway.

IAF101

Just take a look at their Z-10 attack helicopter and tell me if it doesnt resemble an Apache.

I will, it doesn't. It does however resemble the AgustaWestland A129 Mangusta quite closely, and much more so that the Tigre even (ie look at the fuselage curviture for one thing).

It resembles the AH-64 and AH-1 only if you close one eye and squint with the other, and then not very much





Even with this closeness, the pictuire does reveal that the WZ-10 is not a direct copy of anything, it only resembles them to varying degrees, which you can say about any aircraft.

[edit on 20-11-2007 by waynos]

The difference between the AH64 and the Mi24 can be explained easily.

The mi24 was designed to carry some infantry aswell as being a attack helicopter.

double post

[edit on 11/20/2007 by warset]

Originally posted by tomcat ha
The difference between the AH64 and the Mi24 can be explained easily.

The mi24 was designed to carry some infantry aswell as being a attack helicopter.

thats because Russia simply doesnt have the same class attack helicopters. (except the few Ka50, which russia did not mass produce)
even their closest to this class, the Mi28, is still much larger than a standard western attack helicopters
Russian's bigger helicopters have more fire power, but is no match in terms of mobility, both Mi24 and Mi28 are much larger than AH64

AH64, Tiger, Mangusta, AH2, WZ10 on the other hand, all share the same principle, and are similar in size and shape


but hey guys, thats off topic

[edit on 11/20/2007 by warset]

Ok..
All the hogwash about 'russian crap' is troll bait and I ain't going to fall for it.

Seriously..

And the notion about a 'limited Russian ability to develop agile attack helis' is tending toward hogwash too..

en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by Daedalus3


We are talking about mass production. Probably strength in 2015 is speculation. I'm just as skepticaly about developments in Falcon etc. Wait until its here or completed production. A nice airframe of which on 10 have been built wont stop anyone.

The first serial Mi-28N was passed to the Army. The aircraft will join the two pre-serial machines which are used for army trials. The aircraft, along with Ka-50/Ka-52 has entered service. Up to 10 helicopters will be purchased in 2006 of total 300 to be purchased to 2015.

Operators: Russia
Russian Air Force - 16 in service

i just checked wiki, and there is a mention of pak-fa's maiden flight is schedualed to be late next year

russia has completed the designing stage; they are currently working on building the first actual plane..

i suppose the final product might turn out to be a F22 Raptorsky


ps. both mi28 and mi24 are huge..

Japan, China, Iran, and Korea have stealth designs too. They all seem to have a similar design to the F-22. It would make sense that the russians are finding that this raptor like design is the best fit for their needs as well.

I think the more important question will be what kind of avionics/weapon systems they will incorporate into their design.

Originally posted by waynos
Except that JSF *isn't* a VTOL at all, and its STOVL variant uses a Russian concept anyaway.

The F-35B will still retain VTOL capability even though it may not be officially classified as a VTOL aircraft. Also, whether such a capability used in real life and or how useless such a feat may make the aircraft is a different story.

reply to post by WestPoint23

The F-35B will still retain VTOL capability even though it may not be officially classified as a VTOL aircraft.

The F-35 cannot take off vertically with a full fuel load. That is without including any weapons at all, or indeed a pilot. So if the only conditions in which the F-35 CAN take off vertically mean it cannot go anywhere or do anything, then it is not really a VTOL aircraft in any meaningful sense. This same limitation faced the first three poster P.1127 designs from Hawker in 1957 and has always been a problem in this field. A lot of effort went (in hindsight wastefully) into overcoming this and the Kestrel and Harrier (or XV-6 and AV-8A in the USA) were truly VTOL warplanes. In fact neither is the Harrier II a true VTOL either, which a lot of people forget, and the AV-8B was the plane that the acronym STOVL was invented for.The last truly VTOL warplane was the Harrier GR.3 of 1977-87 and even in this the VTO aspect was never used as it compromised payload range performance to an unacceptable degree (halving the bombload and range just as it did with the original GR.1/AV-8A) which is the reason that AV-8B and later F-35B development followed the path they did instead of an all out effort to make them VTOL, which would have been a waste of time. Although in theory the Sea Harrier was the best placed of all models to operate in a truly VTOL mode due to its light weapons loading for its standard air defence role, in truth it never did. Instead using the ski jump ramp device to further enhance payload and range in STOVL mode right from the start and throughout its career.

The fact that a half fuelled and unarmed F-35B or AV-8B can lift itself up off the ground , almost exclusively at air shows, is not worth shouting about, this is why both types are classed as STOVL, whereas the proper acronym for the 60's and 70's models was V/STOL where vertical take off with a limited warload was at least an option.

If you are being really, really picky you could say that the F-35 has a VTOL demonstration capability, as outlined above, but it has no operational VTOL capability at all, and as experience shows, doesn't need it. Which is surely the real point my friend?

as you said;

how useless such a feat may make the aircraft is a different story.

[edit on 21-11-2007 by waynos]

[edit on 21-11-2007 by waynos]

Originally posted by planetfall
looks just like the Joint Strike Fighter to me:

I could not agree more. Doesn't China have a similar copy also?
lol

Oh yes, regarding the actual topic

Just because this image has been released of a wind tunnel model and Russia is reported to have entered the manufacturing stage, where is the connection between the two? I thnk a lot of people are jumping the gun with this 'copy' malarky and their will be a few surprised posters around when the finished article is actually revealed.

Just because a shape has been tested in a wind tunnel means nothing, there are thousands of tunnel models around that never went any further. You should see the 1947 one for the HP Victor that had fins on its wing tips like a Rutan design. The Victor never flew in that form though.

I came across this article which has a representation of the new stealth fighter that I have not seen before. It may have missed it if it has been discussed before. It looks like a cross between the Raptor and the Berkut. This again could be speculative since this might reduce external hardpoints due to wing loading.

img85.imageshack.us...

Here's the article...

www.india-defence.com...

That's exactly what it is, it's a morph between the F-22 and Su-47.

Shattered OUT...

reply to post by planetfall


I have got no clue as to how you can connect that to the F-35. Looks like a copy of the F-22 to me.

Their planes are crude, cheap and unreliable as has been attested to in every major conflict.

Name one modern conflict that involved modern Russian aircraft.

The F-15 doesnt look anything like the Mig-29. The same role has nothing to do with design specifications.

Mig-29 and F-15 have diferant roles.