Russian 5th Generation Stealth Fighter PAK-FA has flown.

page: 3
6
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 31 2010 @ 08:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by orangetom1999
Hmmm......??? How stealthy is the IR signature of this aircraft.


For the moment, not very because of the older type of engine and outlet being used. The final version is slated to have new engine + Radar and IR stealthy outlet.


Some of you do know that stealth is more than being concealed from radar.....right???


We know. And so do the engineers at KNAAPO working for Sukhoi... Have faith in the engineers their abillity's. They are anything but dumb.


See the photo of the ladder coming down the side of the fusalege from the canopy?? Are those rivets?? How about all those protrusions coming from the fusalege??


Yes, those are rivets but they dont protrude and are embedded in the skin of the aircraft. If you look closer, the F-35 has rivets too. Those rivets will be covered and being painted over with RAM coatings.

Other protrusions? The one at the front? That is data gathering stuff which is always there in prototype planes.


What is that bulb or protrusion extending from the front of the canopy on the right side looking foreward?? some kind of gunsight sensor?? Is that stealthy??


That bulb is the IRST module. And for the moment, just a placeholder. Remember dear Orangetom, this plane is just a prototype.




Stealth is the whole package..not just hidden from radar. It is electronic emissions. Infared signature...also radar cross section. All of these factors put together.

Thanks,
Orangetom


Thanks for your post Orangetom but please dont patronise the Sukhoi design team and engineers at KNAAPO. They know what they are doing so please have some faith in their abillity's to design figther aircraft.

REMEMBER: The original T-10 is vastly different then the SU-27. So the same will apply to this AC.




posted on Jan, 31 2010 @ 10:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by orangetom1999
See the photo of the ladder coming down the side of the fusalege from the canopy?? Are those rivets?? How about all those protrusions coming from the fusalege??


One would presume that the first flight prototype would have such an unfinished set of traits (rivets, misaligned plates) that would be taken care of in production variants. First flight is to verify the basics of flight fundamentals in line with the new airframe.



What is that bulb or protrusion extending from the front of the canopy on the right side looking foreward?? some kind of gunsight sensor?? Is that stealthy??


That is an IRST . Yes, I think it will contribute to an increased signature but its function (passive detection) would balance that compromise more than it takes away (maybe?)




Stealth is the whole package..not just hidden from radar. It is electronic emissions. Infared signature...also radar cross section. All of these factors put together.

Thanks,
Orangetom


Indeed. And the PAK-FA/T-50/FGFA does take all of that into consideration as it is intended to be a LO platform. However, as stated by its maker, there has been an intentional compromise on stealth for cost effectiveness thus allowing for greater production numbers and more interest for the international market.
This aircraft is aimed at being drastically cheaper than the F-22 and even perhaps the F-35.

[edit on 31-1-2010 by Daedalus3]



posted on Jan, 31 2010 @ 01:43 PM
link   
Congratulations to Sukhoi.Now the real work begins, I guess.
Things I see in this beauty:movable LERX, whole movable v-stabs, Su-47 style h-stabs," double" bays for large missiles... what seems to be two small "fast" bays for R-73M on the wings...

Its a beauty, alright.
With the roll-out, successful trials and flight, even the most hardheaded critics can be told that

1. Sukhoi obviously knows what they are doing.
2. If Sukhoi took care of weapon bays, S-shaped air ducts and other stealth features, they know about the nozzles no worse than critics do.
3. With all the photos and videos exploding just 2 hours after the first flight - its obvious that Sukhoi has nothing to hide. Sukhoi said - "first photo after first flight" FSB kept its word.

About the rivets I would say 98% of them will disappear in the finish.Also if you think the raptor has no exposed rivets you are mistaken.



posted on Jan, 31 2010 @ 01:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 

Some are speculating the tail/"stinger" is large enough to accommodate rear looking radar.With the 'rear' hidden weapons bay that could fire missiles in the opposite direction, in other words backwards! You know, considering that fighter aircraft have been around firing missiles since the 60's, one would have thought that they would have come up with 'lock on' backwards firing missiles a long time ago!
Speculation,but I like the idea.



posted on Jan, 31 2010 @ 02:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Raider of Truth
reply to post by Russian soldier
 


Looks like it as based on the F22 Raptor pretty damn sweet.. i hope higher ups in Russia aren't planning something...


I immediately thought the same. Eiter it has taken the russians this long to try and copy the F-22, or maybe the obama administration just gave them the plans.

At any rate, the russians - like the chinese and everyone else - are trying to hit a moving target when trying to constantly play catch-up with the U.S.

How many years ago was the F-22 designed and how many years ago did it make its first flight?

Is the next generation U.S. fighter about to take its first flight? Or maybe it's already happened - leaving the russians to try and catch up to that one, too.



posted on Jan, 31 2010 @ 06:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211
I immediately thought the same. Eiter it has taken the russians this long to try and copy the F-22


You are totally right, this is clearly a damn dirty rip-off - just like the F-22, the PAK-FA has wings, engines, and it flies. Everyone knows that these break-through concepts were pioneered by the Americans with the F-22. In fact anybody who manufactures any jet with stealth capabilities from now on are just making a copy of the F-22.

Scratch that actually - anybody who makes anything remotely high-tech, is just copying the Americans. There is no innovation or top engineering capabilities in the world outside of the US.



As many people already pointed out, the PAK-FA has some very critical differences compared with F-22, and much of the design and technology was developed internally by Sukhoi, and utilized experience from previous aircraft.



Originally posted by centurion1211
or maybe the obama administration just gave them the plans.


Yes, Obama gave them the plans back in 2002 when the project was started.




Originally posted by centurion1211
How many years ago was the F-22 designed and how many years ago did it make its first flight?


What does that have to do with the PAK-FA? The PAK-FA development was tailored to the needs of the Russian Armed Forces, and fits in with their timeline projections for retirement of current fighters. Sure it was meant to counter the F-22, but Russia has budget constraints and priorities different from the US.

Either way both of these aircraft will serve for at least 30 years. Their development costs would otherwise not be justified. Even the US Armed Forces had major issues trying to squeeze the necessary funds out of Congress to fund the F-22 program. So an 8-10 year difference in development won't be too big of a factor, especially since there is no longer a Cold War.



Originally posted by centurion1211
Is the next generation U.S. fighter about to take its first flight? Or maybe it's already happened - leaving the russians to try and catch up to that one, too.


And where is funding going to come from for that next generation fighter? Do you realize what a financial burden projects like B-2 bomber and F-22 were, especially since the end of the Cold War negated much of their purpose?

Last I looked the US government lately isn't exactly awash in money to spend on random black projects most of which are destined to become white elephants. The ongoing wars in Afghanistan and Iraq require more prudent budgeting, with most funds going towards salaries, logistics, and contractors. And it is not like F-22's or a 6th generation fighter will make fighting the wars like Afghanistan or Iraq any easier, or make foreign policy decisions any less difficult.



posted on Jan, 31 2010 @ 07:15 PM
link   
One has to wonder how long stealth in the radio magnetic spectrum will continue to be an exploitable advantage. If the answer is not long, the F22's primary advantage is going to be negated long before it's service life is through.

Wish I knew what the folks at Lockheed and Sukhoi know about this stuff. In my own imagination I can see a sophisticated telescopic visual/IR search system negating stealth at least in part and in good weather. The IRST already does this to a point.

I sure would hate to see all those taxpayers dollars spent on stealth R and D go down the tubes. Even so, the F22 is quite the plane even without the stealth component.

I guess I just can't see how any plane can even contemplate competing with the F22 unless they had some insights to a vulnerability in some area. Otherwise, planes like this new Sukhoi are merely targets.



posted on Jan, 31 2010 @ 07:43 PM
link   
What does the F22 have? Stealth and supercruise. Thats about it really supercruise has been around since the the british lightning and stealth is something that will not get better with age.

Im sure that we will see these very planes turn unmanned before being replaced. The problem is however detection tech. How can you make a plane see around itself. Detection tech needs to evolve to a point where a ucav can see in every direction and only then will they replace manned fighters and especially cas planes.



posted on Jan, 31 2010 @ 08:09 PM
link   
reply to post by flyingfish
 

I've heard about rear firing missiles but I don't really get it.

When launched it's moving "backwards" until it gets some airspeed so it would just be flopping around for a while. It would have to be radar guided since the front aspect heat signature of a target would be minimal (assuming it's being fired at a pursuer) so it would also be a medium range missile. I guess it could used as a "scare shot" to try to get the pursuer off your tail since he would have a pretty good idea he's being fired on but it just seems a kind of pointless and extreme complication.

But that's not even really what I meant. It was purely a statement about the aesthetics. The whole "empennage" just looks odd to me.



posted on Jan, 31 2010 @ 08:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 

The idea has been tested on Su-27 with live fire exercise. Nobody knows how far the tests went and what they turned into. The "stinger" between the engines on PAK FA is huge. If they can put 2 R-73 in it facing backwards, combined with rear facing radar that could obviously be there.
The missile itself doesn't have to be facing backwords, it will simply be fired at the rearward hemisphere, just like today. AIM-9X, ASRAAM, Iris-T, all can be fired to the rear hemisphere, and still are not hangeg backwards on their pylons.
Of course this is just proof I'm not considering this being useful in the real world.If you have a bogey on your six, your chances of survival are very low ANYWAYS. So firing backwords a missile could only serve two or three purposes:

1) Maybey, just maybe, self defence against incoming missiles. With head on direction, any of your missiles' range would nearly double.

2) The so called "revenge fire". You are being fired upon, so you want to at least secure that the other side will at also loose a plane.

3) Unlikely IMO: perhaps distress the other pilot's attention that just might force him to loose his firing solution.
Again just speculating...



posted on Jan, 31 2010 @ 08:39 PM
link   
reply to post by flyingfish
 

It's a Crazy Ivan! Sort of.

1) You're saying target an incoming missile? Is that feasible? Is that done?
2) I guess a F-22 would be more than a fair trade (I doubt the two will ever see each other in combat though).
3) I'm not too familiar with modern avionics. Couldn't forcing an evasive maneuver cause the attacker to break lock.

Like I said though, it really doesn't seem worth the trouble.



posted on Jan, 31 2010 @ 08:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


I see what your saying not "worth" the trouble.
Put yourself in the hot seat with the enemy on your six would it not be nice if you had some option, besides death?I'm not making this stuff up, there are plenty of blogs out there with the same speculations.
I myself enjoy the conversation.



posted on Jan, 31 2010 @ 09:00 PM
link   
reply to post by flyingfish
 

I agree with the sentiment entirely. I know speaking about the practical aspects takes on a whole different meaning if it's you who's running away but still, how often would this situation present itself? It just seems that it's only use is as a last ditch effort. Of course, they said that phantoms didn't need guns, but that is a little different.

Anyhow, I've been a big fan of Russian aircraft and particularly Sukhoi for a while. Even with their idiosyncrasies.



posted on Jan, 31 2010 @ 09:57 PM
link   
For anybody that still hasn't got the message:

This Pak-Fa prototype is using TEMPORARY engines. The aircraft is in prototype stage and changes will most definitely be made.

Regarding why it took us so long to develop such an aircraft:

The 1990s. We basically started from scratch from there. The idea of a front-line fighter to replace both the Mig-29 and Su-27 started all the way in the 80s (which was around the same time the USA developed a need for such an aircraft, too). Considering the bad state of economy we emerged from, we're actually doing pretty damn good, in my opinion.

Priority may also be the second reason.



posted on Jan, 31 2010 @ 10:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Russian soldier
 

So Sue will get a prettier rear end?
That's good news!



posted on Jan, 31 2010 @ 10:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by maloy

Yes, Obama gave them the plans back in 2002 when the project was started.



You help make my point beautifully.

The F-22 project was started back in 1981 - 21 years before russia started their project.



Only fools would think that in the 21 intervening years the U.S. has just sat back and done nothing.

No, count on them racing ahead (again) of what was state of the art in 1981 and old news in 2002, or now when the russian plane finally gets off the ground.



the future?

Perhaps a fleet of unmanned (therefore cheaper) F-47's making maneuvers that will make russian, etc. pilots black out before blowing them out of the sky.

In your heart of hearts you know I'm right about this ...



[edit on 1/31/2010 by centurion1211]



posted on Jan, 31 2010 @ 10:30 PM
link   
And I also found this article about UAV's to help show that the PAK will become basically operational and obsolete at about the same time. Got to hand it to those clever russians.

article

Check out these comments from the article confirming the speed of U.S. UAV development.


When I spoke with him, Gersten said that UAV technology is moving so fast that retrofitting current UAVs is futile. "We are going to replace these before they fail," he said. So get ready to learn about more secret UAVs in the future. Early next year the Air Force will probably select candidates for the next-generation UAV program, which will replace the Reaper in armed reconnaissance missions (the government documents of this can be found here). The UAV in that program is expected to be operational in 2015.


"next generation UAV program". Do the russians even have a 1st generation UAV program yet?



[edit on 1/31/2010 by centurion1211]



posted on Feb, 1 2010 @ 12:20 AM
link   
Do the russians even have a 1st generation UAV program yet?
Yes they have,enter the Mig Skat.
I imagine this stealth is a whole lot cheaper than the B-2, why would they spend billions on a new bomber when they could have hundreds of these.
Can you see any lineage?
Keep in mind the Pak-Fa may become obsolete for the dominant powers,but it's also meant for Internationale sale.




[edit on 1-2-2010 by flyingfish]



posted on Feb, 1 2010 @ 12:36 AM
link   
reply to post by centurion1211
 


so if everyone is gonna go with F-47 UCAVs why did boeing submit something like this?



F/A-XX

[edit on 2.1.10 by toreishi]



posted on Feb, 1 2010 @ 12:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


I think Sue has pretty sweet rear as is..






top topics
 
6
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join