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

here is a article that cuts through the speculations...

FEARTHIS! SUKHOI PAK FA T-50

on X-47, just think thats a white project, black projects never go public. so really there are more sinister things lurking in the air force budgets...

X-47 is designed to work with F-22, F-35, B-1, B-2, Making 4 Airframes in a fleet to be Stealth, Designed to Destroy S-300, S-400, S-500 Air Defense Systems, so the other manned aircraft can do their job safely. its size and advanced design, which is the most advanced stealth design on the earth, it probably doesn't show up at all on a radar. it is small and has the most modern design.

it really makes any air defense system obsolete, it also puts anyone 30 years behind acquiring a stealth fleet.

First thing that came in my thoughts was.........somebody in the US is selling secrets. Not because of the shape of the plane but because of the stealth tec.

I am all for balance in the world so I do not mind if somebody thinks the same way.

Here is one of the High res pics Russian soldier found.The domes in the back ground really make this one smack of Russia.Very nice...
I will post pics of my model when finished..

Originally posted by werk71
here is a article that cuts through the speculations...

FEARTHIS! SUKHOI PAK FA T-50

Was a good read. Thanks for that information.

on X-47, just think thats a white project, black projects never go public. so really there are more sinister things lurking in the air force budgets...

That is for sure.

X-47 is designed to work with F-22, F-35, B-1, B-2, Making 4 Airframes in a fleet to be Stealth, Designed to Destroy S-300, S-400, S-500 Air Defense Systems, so the other manned aircraft can do their job safely. its size and advanced design, which is the most advanced stealth design on the earth, it probably doesn't show up at all on a radar. it is small and has the most modern design.

it really makes any air defense system obsolete, it also puts anyone 30 years behind acquiring a stealth fleet.

I doubt that the X-47 is capable of destroying the S-400 AA systems due to its incredible powerfull radars that alledgedly can detect F-22's. Not to mind the future S-500 system that doesnt even exist yet.

but the X-47 is definitly capable of killing early versions of S-300. Doubtfull for the later versions.

And setting back 30 years? You should know that Russia is capable of producing Stealth UAV's/UCAV's. Take the MIG SKAT for example.

And untill previous week, some people thought that the PAK FA was vaporware

Originally posted by zatara
First thing that came in my thoughts was.........somebody in the US is selling secrets. Not because of the shape of the plane but because of the stealth tec.

Dude. Are you serious? Do you realy think that the designers and engineers at Sukhoi and KNAAPO arent capable of learning stealth tech themselves?

Sukhoi made the SU-47 all by themselves and without doubt, all the tech onboard the SU T-50.

I am all for balance in the world so I do not mind if somebody thinks the same way.

Just sickening.

Just the thought that some US person suposedly feels sad for the Russians and sell them tech that they themselves arent supposely be able to invent themselves is bloodboiling!!

You should be ashamed! Not only you insult the hard workers at Sukhoi and KNAAPO, but you think that only the US is able to invent something new...

Bastard.

reply to post by James R. Hawkwood


the thing that i like About X47b, even if it can't deal with S-500 is, if it tries and fails a Pilot will not Lose his life, to me that a win situation. Russia has a a unmanned project lurking also. on my blog look at Japans TACOM drone, its link is on the side.

i really like your conclusions, thanks for liking my article. i just updated it with statistics that a mechanical engineer has done, he did some math to get a analysis for size,thrust,weight,, basically over all statistics.

reply to post by James R. Hawkwood


I could not agree with you more.The more you understand about how these systems evolve.You begin to see it in the SU-50s design.
Without getting to technical,it is clear to me the SU-50 is designed to counter the F-22 in a game of "hide and seek". With it's advanced on board radar systems,coupled with it's long range missile package.While the F-22 is trying to be stealthy to get a lock on"hide and seek".The Sukhoi is going for the first lock on then be stealthy "seek and hide".
This is obviously a very high stakes game and which plane would come out on top is yet to be determined.But I really admire Sukhoi's approach to counter the expensive F-22 with this cost effective design.

Originally posted by Aircow
Beautiful aircraft.
The range of 5500 km or 3400 nm is the same as the F-15. I wonder if it has thrust vectoring and if it is fly by wire. Ostensibly the Mig 29 was not because the Russian pilots preferred not being over ruled by the flight computer.

I thought you meant F-15E with CFT definitely.
The model of F-15 without additional fuel tanks will never gets 4500 km range.

Originally posted by Tifozi
reply to post by muzzleflash

 

Although they made some steps thowards stealth (like lowering the radar signature, with hidden missiles and whatnot) they didn't take too many efforts in making it completely stealth, like the exhaust system.
I think their approach is to make a BETTER fighter/bomber, but also keep the price the lowest possible.

This is not worth to be agreed.
How do you define the nozzle which is stealthy nozzle?

A week past when the PAK·FA flew, it is the time to summarize some information we collected before till the some of huge pix showing PAK·FA released nowadays.

While the PAK·FA unveiled, it still surprised most of aircraft fans, although seemed they saw it somewhere or somewhen. Why, because the PAK·FA does have some advantages hidden behind the attractions from its appearance.

The first impressive character is its CARET inlet.
CARET inlet was not innovatively used by PAK·FA but S.H.E/F, nevertheless, the basic principle of CARET inlet is wave-ride, Russian used it better than American on PAK·FA, that's why we saw they transversely set the rectangular section of CARET inlet. Review: the longer the horizontal wedged edge, the more lift will be.

Second, movable LERX upon the CARET inlet.
This is the first time we saw a movable LERX was used on a true jetfighter, we remember Indian HAL LCA Tejas was planned it but that was merely a plan.
Is this only a movable LERX? I think it also is a vortex aileron, not a flap, it is capable to up-deflect, so it contains canard function too. We say it is a movable LERX because the angle of swept is really large enough to be a LERX. A large angle of swept edge cause vortex roll from down site to the up surface, however, when being slight AoA, this swept angle is too large to keep the pressure under the LERX so give a movable leading edge down deflect for works.
Then if you watch carefully, the LERX was up deflecting when PAK·FA tends to take-off, so the effect of this period factually is a canard alike.
Moreover, the movable LERX is a easy way to regulate the swept angle of shock wave produced by edge of CARET inlet whereas F-22 made it bypass door which was a hard method.

Thirdly, all-moving dorsal fins.
The earliest all-moving vertical tail we can remember was A-5 Vigilant used. The most strongest memory the A-5 gave me was wide-side setting engine nacelle, which also brought a commodious weapon bay to the A-5 Vigilant. Following the A-5 was F-14，the favorable jetfighter to the most military fans. The Tomcat set duel-fin. Now it is PAK·FA turn, that duel-fin is not enough to control such wide airframe, plus, too many tough maneuver are waiting for it to do, then we saw a couple of all-moving vertical tail with considerably small area for reducing weight.
Compare to the ATF from YF-22 to F-22's junk-like tail fin, this all-moving vertical-wing gives PAK·FA amount of advantages: reducing weigh; reducing RCS, more stability in High-maneuver, more controllability for yaw and spin.

Fourthly, omnidirectionanl vectoring thrust.
The nozzle F-22 like is worked for doable TVC at that time because airtight of movable workpiece in high temp pressure was hard to be circular shape, not like somebody dreamed for IR stealth。The rectangle nozzle was farfetched as stealth nozzle because of the exhaust gap appeared on F-117。 Yes, if L/W ratio approach the exhaust gap like F-117, you do gained IR reduced, but we say the nozzle on F-22 is a rectangle nozzle rather than a gap on F-117。But now, F-22 lost its capability of horizontal vectoring thrust.
Obviously, the OVT bring an ability of omni-maneuverability to do "helicopter" maneuver without loop previously.

Fifthly, YF-23 like back
The acr-shaped slope at up-surface will be a lift coming according the principle of Bernoulli. YF-23's design used it well but overrun. PAK·FA inherited it with slight humpback not only got drag reduced also obtained an additioanl lift from fuselage.

Last but not least
A relatively big angle for swept wing.
We know area ratio used for capability of transonic and supersonic good, but nobody noticed waspish design works for transonic good whereas there is another way design airframe like arrow same as Eurofighter Typhoon did, also is an excellent way for supersonic fly. The principle here is, the more time or position of shockwave occur you delay, the more drag could be decreased. For the PAK·FA, a high-swept wing will works for a real supercruise not like F-22 doing supersonic although without afterburner but still with range reduced compare to none-supersonic fly.

reply to post by Russian soldier




quite impressive in all counts..... but I wonder with russias economy nearly as bad as ours... how long they can afford to keep making or flying them...

reply to post by centurion1211

Pak fa a copy of f-22
where is the proof for the BS you post ,

reply to post by lilwolf


Two ways to mitigate that:

1)They got the Indians to share the development costs.
2)Its considerably cheaper per unit as compared to the F-22. With capability compromises of course.

reply to post by flyingfish


this is stupid , I was questioning centurion1211 moronic post that the PAk fa is a copy of f-22

NEXT TIME READ THE POST CAREFULLY

reply to post by sadchild01

Centurion..was called out by maloy on the whole copy comment.Read the whole thread..
You come out of a hole and throw a flame.
If you have nothing constructive to add to the discussion your going to be labeled a troll.
My first impression of your post was that "you "where saying the SU was a copy.
So, I will give you that.

Whatever.

I doubt the new fighter will be able to outrun one of these:

article

Airborne Laser Testbed Successful in Lethal Intercept Experiment
The Missile Defense Agency demonstrated the potential use of directed energy to defend against ballistic missiles when the Airborne Laser Testbed (ALTB) successfully destroyed a boosting ballistic missile. The experiment, conducted at Point Mugu Naval Air Warfare Center-Weapons Division Sea Range off the central California coast, serves as a proof-of-concept demonstration for directed energy technology.

So, anyone have pictures of the latest russian or chinese copy of this technology, or is this one still way too far ahead of them?

Originally posted by centurion1211
Whatever.

I doubt the new fighter will be able to outrun one of these:

article

Wow, you realy dislike the SU-50 eh? Well, i cant blame you. I perfectly understand it.

But the ABL system sure is a nice toy. Thanks for the article

So, anyone have pictures of the latest russian or chinese copy of this technology, or is this one still way too far ahead of them?

well, this ABL tech is already done by the Soviets/Russians. It was tested on a converted Il-76 by Beriev. The plane on which the ABL was attached was called the Beriev A-60.

Click here for more information.

I dont know if it had succes against ICBM's or fighter planes though.

Originally posted by centurion1211
Whatever.

I doubt the new fighter will be able to outrun one of these:

article

Airborne Laser Testbed Successful in Lethal Intercept Experiment
The Missile Defense Agency demonstrated the potential use of directed energy to defend against ballistic missiles when the Airborne Laser Testbed (ALTB) successfully destroyed a boosting ballistic missile. The experiment, conducted at Point Mugu Naval Air Warfare Center-Weapons Division Sea Range off the central California coast, serves as a proof-of-concept demonstration for directed energy technology.

So, anyone have pictures of the latest russian or chinese copy of this technology, or is this one still way too far ahead of them?

I wonder if the US has thousands of those to fly around the air constantly protecting us against missiles, and stealth fighters? Not saying it isn't good. just questioning its practicality.

I like all the new software and hardware coming out as much as any geek, but to say that the future of warfare is in UAVs is, well, naive. Nothing will ever replace good old cheap human lives. And that is the ugly truth.

Russian Soldier, I have a question for you or anyone else willing to answer... I have always wondered why Russian fighter pilot helmets have holes in the top, do you know what they're for?? Maybe Russian aircraft plug right into the pilots brain?

Anyway the T-50 is one cool looking bird, cant wait to see it in its final stages.

Originally posted by 3vilscriptI wonder if the US has thousands of those to fly around the air constantly protecting us against missiles, and stealth fighters? Not saying it isn't good. just questioning its practicality.

Thousands of Boeing 747's flying with this stuff? Impossible. I doubt even God itself can afford all that kinda hardware.

For praticality: Go the way like S-400/THAAD. That is the practical way to deal with ballistic missiles.

I like all the new software and hardware coming out as much as any geek, but to say that the future of warfare is in UAVs is, well, naive. Nothing will ever replace good old cheap human lives. And that is the ugly truth.

The human body has limits that disallows designers to maximise combat performance on a given airframe.

UCAV's when propperly designed and constructed can even handle G-loads that are just as great as short ranged-all maneuverable missiles like the AIM-9 or the R-73. Not to mention a standard size advantage and standard weight carrying capacity.

Russian Soldier, I have a question for you or anyone else willing to answer... I have always wondered why Russian fighter pilot helmets have holes in the top, do you know what they're for?? Maybe Russian aircraft plug right into the pilots brain?

Plugging into the brain

No, those holes are for the Helm-cueing systems or in later helmets, the helm-mounted HUD.

Anyway the T-50 is one cool looking bird, cant wait to see it in its final stages.

In its final stages its gonna be the enemy's worst nightmare. Its like a god just gave this plane to Russia, that is how good it is. And that is a massive compliment to Sukhoi and KNAAPO.

The human body has limits that disallows designers to maximise combat performance on a given airframe. UCAV's when propperly designed and constructed can even handle G-loads that are just as great as short ranged-all maneuverable missiles like the AIM-9 or the R-73. Not to mention a standard size advantage and standard weight carrying capacity.

Yes but is it practical and cheap to fight a war in this manner? I mean, it would be great if wars were fought only by robots and the sort minimizing human loss, but in the end governments will consider the machines more valuable than a pilot in a cheaper... F-15 or Su-27. One could argue that the technology will get cheaper and accessible as time goes on, and its true, but it sort of defeats the purpose for "the latest in tech."

Plugging into the brain No, those holes are for the Helm-cueing systems or in later helmets, the helm-mounted HUD.

Thanks for that I always wondered what they were for. I used to joke with my dad and tell him that the Russian planes were so advanced that the plane plugged straight into the pilots head. I have always been fascinated by Russian tech. There is something so incredibly practical about how they go about things.