Sukhoi Su-57 / T-50 / PAK FA - flight testing and development Part I [2010-2012]

Status
Not open for further replies.
Matej

Matej

Multiuniversal creator
Joined
13 February 2006
Messages
2,607
Reaction score
515
Website
www.hitechweb.genezis.eu
I think that the 60 pages of the first flight analysis are really enough, so lets start the new topic about the ongoing flight testing and further development of the latest Sukhoi fighter.

Previous topic: http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,9186.0.html
 
Is there any new information on the T-50? Is the flight testing ongoing? Flateric, what's up? ;)
 
waiting for appearing at LII
 
Flateric ,do you have by any chance info about when T-50 should appear at LII , is it next few days , or a week , or mid-month ...Thanks !
 
from what I know, they're supposed to test "other" systems and "other" configurations
 
Tests of the PAK FA are successful

April 6, 2010

AVIA.RU - Tests of a promising aviation complex tactical aircraft (PAK FA) are successful, reports NEWSru.com citing a source in the military-industrial complex.To date, the fighter T-50 has successfully completed six test flights.
The program of flight tests PAK FA is in accordance with the schedule, the spokesman stressed the military-industrial complex.Fighter fully confirms the claimed characteristics, and this means that some serious modifications aircraft structure will not be required
He noted that the front of an extensive program of flight tests, the results of which will be judged on the actual flight-technical and combat capabilities of the fifth generation fighter.
Click to expand...
B)
 
lancer21 said:
Flateric ,do you have by any chance info about when T-50 should appear at LII , is it next few days , or a week , or mid-month ...Thanks !
Click to expand...
first. even earler;)
 
I'm still wondering if the intake duct etc. ins't part of the "unnecessary serious modifications" ???
 
flateric said:
lancer21 said:
Flateric ,do you have by any chance info about when T-50 should appear at LII , is it next few days , or a week , or mid-month ...Thanks !
Click to expand...
first. even earler;)
Click to expand...

Okies thanks, please keep us posted, bet the fence around Zhukovsky is overpopulated with spotters ... :p
 
Obninsk scientists have created a new type of aircraft glazing
Authors' CVTS "Technology" from Obninsk (Kaluga region) for his work on "Synthesis of multifunctional coating composition for making a fundamentally new quality glazing cockpit, the development of technologies and special equipment, the establishment of mass production of glass" award for the RF Government.

As reported on April 2 REGNUM correspondent news, according to local newspaper "NG-region, Obninsk, scientists have begun work in 2000 as a result of comprehensive research and development of a new type of aircraft glazing. Its multi-functional coating protects the crew from the effects of external factors and increase the performance characteristics of modern combat air vehicles.

"REGNUM" "REGNUM"
April 2, 2010
Click to expand...

glass cockpit apparently
 
transparency apparently
 
today at night An-124 has delivered both T-50-1 and KNS to Zhukovsky
 
saintkatanalegacy said:
Obninsk scientists have created a new type of aircraft glazing
Authors' CVTS "Technology" from Obninsk (Kaluga region) for his work on "Synthesis of multifunctional coating composition for making a fundamentally new quality glazing cockpit, the development of technologies and special equipment, the establishment of mass production of glass" award for the RF Government.

As reported on April 2 REGNUM correspondent news, according to local newspaper "NG-region, Obninsk, scientists have begun work in 2000 as a result of comprehensive research and development of a new type of aircraft glazing. Its multi-functional coating protects the crew from the effects of external factors and increase the performance characteristics of modern combat air vehicles.

"REGNUM" "REGNUM"
April 2, 2010
Click to expand...

glass cockpit apparently
Click to expand...

Someone explain. ???

T-50 is in Zhukovsky now, and there has been 6 flights in total so far. Flights will resume in end of april or beginning of may.

PS: Sorry, i must have been blind or something but when i posted this i didn't see Flateric already said the news. :)

Also, what is the flight dates so far? have i got this correct?

1 - 29'th January.
2 - 6'th February
3 - 12'th February
4 - 25'th March
5 - 26'th March
6 - ???
 
Thanks to Vladimir Galkin for photos
 

Attachments

  • 93b830237cbf.jpg
    93b830237cbf.jpg
    111 KB · Views: 1,640
  • 018990.jpg
    018990.jpg
    206.7 KB · Views: 1,471
Hi Guys!

A new comparison, this time between the Su-27 and PAK FA. I think the PAK FA can still reach "easily" a wingspan of 14.70 m... :eek:



;)
 

Attachments

  • Su27_pakfa_comp.jpg
    Su27_pakfa_comp.jpg
    90.5 KB · Views: 298
Here is a good study on this fighter:
http://steeljawscribe.com/2010/04/11/de-constructing-sukhois-pak-fa#more-5056
Looks like they lifted some of the data from here.
 
img5094.jpg


looks like the plane indeed has sidebays
 
Hola Amigos!

Please, does anyone have the high resolution version of this awesome image?:

http://paralay.com/pakfasu/520.jpg

I ask because this image has appeared in several graphic publications.

Thanks!

;)
 
I don't think the high res version has been publicly posted - and only certain publications got it.
 
Hello!

The qualified opinion of Carlo Kopp on the Sukhoi PAK FA:

"The emergence of the Russian Sukhoi T-50 / PAK-FA (Перспективный Авиационный Комплекс Фронтовой Авиации), the intended replacement for the T-10 Flanker series, marks the end of the United States' quarter century long monopoly on the design of Very Low Observable (VLO) or stealth aircraft. Designed to compete against the F-22 in traditional Beyond Visual Range (BVR) and Within Visual Range (WVR) air combat, the PAK-FA shares all of the key fifth generation attributes until now unique to the F-22 - stealth, supersonic cruise, thrust vectoring, highly integrated avionics and a powerful suite of active and passive sensors. While the PAK-FA firmly qualifies as a fifth generation design, it has two further attributes absent in the extant F-22 design. The first is extreme agility, resulting from advanced aerodynamic design, exceptional thrust/weight ratio performance and three dimensional thrust vectoring integrated with an advanced digital flight control system. The second attribute is exceptional combat persistence, the result of a 25,000 lb internal fuel load. The internal and external weapon payload are likely to be somewhat larger, though comparable to those of the F-22A."

Original note:

http://www.ausairpower.net/flanker.html

Good Weekend!
 
Wil said:
...it has two further attributes absent in the extant F-22 design. The first is extreme agility, resulting from advanced aerodynamic design, exceptional thrust/weight ratio performance and three dimensional thrust vectoring integrated with an advanced digital flight control system. The second attribute is exceptional combat persistence, the result of a 25,000 lb internal fuel load. The internal and external weapon payload are likely to be somewhat larger, though comparable to those of the F-22A.
Click to expand...

Note - CK already doesn't love F-22 per se, now he loves 'improved F-22', invented by himself
 
anyone quoting the apa should be banned from the forum
 
Wil said:
Hello!

The qualified opinion of Carlo Kopp on the Sukhoi PAK FA:
Click to expand...

I've been hesitant to bring this up but I think this is probably appropriate here. I've been a member of a yahoo group for several years and somewhat recently APA's analysis came up on that forum during the F-22 line closer debate. One of the members happens to have been on the LO team for the F-22 and had some fairly interesting things to say about the F-22 and APA in general. Surprisingly even though the F-22 "was his baby" he found it hard to argue against Gates' decision to close the F-22 line. A position I'm not sure I personally agree with but considering his background and personal connection to the F-22 it’s an interesting opinion nonetheless.

Regarding APA he gives high remarks about their open source info on Russian and PLA air defense systems but stated that their (Kopp's et al.) understanding of signature management wasn't very good. Obviously because APA ties in their analysis of Russian air defense systems with their understanding of signature management and F-22/F-35 CONOPS he says to disregard their analysis of the AD systems. Its not that APA is always wrong but they're certainly wrong on a salient part of their argument.

Another point that'd I'd make is that they don't even address the F-22's IR management technologies. Granted little is actually known about the specific technologies other than TOPCOAT, but they don’t even address them on any level.
 
Jetguru said:
anyone quoting the apa should be banned from the forum
Click to expand...

LOL, I was gonna type something to that effect but thought it might not go over well. ;)
 
Carlo Kopp and the APA crowd have ascended to godhood with the recent accessment of PAK-FA. Just by looking at public image of the first prototype, he already knew about its thrust to weight ratio, avionic package, stealth, supercruise speed and accurately compared it to the f-22 ::).

I love how when he mentioned pak-fa's short coming in term of stealth shaping, he never forgot to stretch it back to the f-35 that it "suffer from the same characteristics."

All hail Carlo Kopp! He's our savior against the satanic JSF team.

However, one thing bugs me about APA's godly perception and observation is the statement that the public unvealing of T-50 reveals its accomplishment in advanced stealth shaping that even APA had failed to predict, making the T-50 much more scarily capable than previous "analysis" from APA.

Wouldn't APA failure to see that any aircraft aimed at stealth gonna have at least some flat surfaces and facets and acted all surprised when the thing showed up kinda contradicts with their godly ability to predict precisely RCS of an aircraft based on jpeg images?

I guess it's one of those mysterious thing in life, like the unicorn, which we may never be able to explain!
 
http://ozzyblizzard.blogspot.com/2008/12/air-power-australia-flanker-analysis.html

I think this is a more appropriate read for anyone believing whatever those retards at the apa put out...
The pakfa literally has rivets!
 
flateric said:
Note - CK already doesn't love F-22 per se, now he loves 'improved F-22', invented by himself
Click to expand...
The most recent accessment of the PAK-FA from APA has abandoned an 'improved f-22' (f-22C) already. They now moved on to an f-22E, an kinematically improved f-22 with aggressive electronic attacks.
 
I lost Ozzyblizzard on his description of the wonders of the AIM-120D.

I am not entirely sure that a 100 nm+ range, two-pulse motor &c have been developed in the time and budget disclosed for that weapon.

Whatever one thinks of APA, one should deal with them on factual grounds.

By the way, anyone who was around in the early days of ATF/F-22 can gain an interesting perspective on where PAK-FA is coming from, in terms of signatures and performance.
 
I think had PAKFA been developed to be a bit lighter .... well quite a bit lighter, it might have been a good entry for the 1986 ATF submission contest deadline.
 
50,000 pounds normal TOW was very optimistic for ATF. What occurs to me is that if you look at the next-to-final ATF requirement, before stealth requirements were upgraded, you get something that looks like PAK-FA.
 
I agree 100%. I had the same though as soon as I saw the first picture. One thing I cannot understand is how PAK-FA can have lower combat take of weight than the Raptor when obviously its a much larger design
 
I like Dan Raymer's summary of the change from "Living in the Future".

"the Air Force suddenly changed the requirement for stealth from "pretty good, especially from the front" to "incredible, from almost all directions".
 
lantinian said:
I agree 100%. I had the same though as soon as I saw the first picture. One thing I cannot understand is how PAK-FA can have lower combat take of weight than the Raptor when obviously its a much larger design
Click to expand...

Based on best current info:
T-50
l=66.9'
b=48.2'
h=17.4'
W=?

F-22
l=62'1"
b=44'6"
h=16'5"
W=60,000 lbs.

The only way I could see the T-50 weighing less is if it carries much less internal fuel, but that would greatly impact it's supercruise ability. My guess is it's definitely in the same weight class.
 
I just looked at Wikipedia. I do not know whether the facts there are 100% correct but they are there nonetheless.

PAK-FA T-50
  • Length: 19.8 m (65.9 ft)
  • Wingspan: 14 m (46.6 ft)
  • Height: 6.05 m (19.8 ft)
  • Wing area: 78.8 m2 (848.1 ft2)
  • Empty weight: 18,500 kg (40,785 lb)
  • Loaded weight: 26,000 kg (57,320 lb)
  • Internal Fuel Capacity: 10,300 kg (22,711 lb)
  • Max takeoff weight: 37,000 kg (81,570 lb)

F-22 Raptor
  • Length: 18.90 m (62 ft 1 in)
  • Wingspan: 13.56 m (44 ft 6 in)
  • Height: 5.08 m (16 ft 8 in)
  • Wing area: 78.04 m² (840 ft²)
  • Empty weight: 19,700 kg (43,430 lb)
  • Loaded weight: 29,300 kg (64,460 lb)
  • Internal Fuel capacity: 8,200 kg (18,000 lb) internally
  • Max takeoff weight: 38,000 kg (83,500 lb)

While I can understand that the F-22 end up caring less fuel because so it had to meet meet maneuver requirements, why does it weight so much? Did LM need to reinforce the structure so much as to maneuver at 9Gs? All throughout the 90' its empty weight was quoted as: 31,998lbs (14,514kg). What happened?

An explanation could come from the fact that the F-22 can carry 2,000 kg (4,500 lb) more stores given it carries that much less fuel with all other weights comparable. Its internal bays are overall smaller than T-50s, it wings would then have to be able to carry substantially more weight than its Russian counterpart, who's smaller payload is spread between its wings, body pylons and larger weapons bays.

The conclusion being that the F-22 wings are apparently very structure heavy and it T-50 will be no match for the Raptor in supersonic maneuvering.
 
A bit simpler answer: think about the whole shape, not only dimensions. Something like bread vs. pancake. And connections from it - one that you already mentioned is structural integrity.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom