Sukhoi PAK FA news and speculation (T-50, I-21) Part II [2008-2009]

[donnage99]

I wonder if Russian Plasma stealth will have the same problems as U.S. plasma stealth; arcing near the ground. Of course, I believe in that U.S. case, it was a whole vehicle being shielded with it when that occurred.

US tested plasma stealth? ???

 

[Sundog]

I wonder if Russian Plasma stealth will have the same problems as U.S. plasma stealth; arcing near the ground. Of course, I believe in that U.S. case, it was a whole vehicle being shielded with it when that occurred.

US tested plasma stealth? ???

I believe there was a report on it in Aviation Week, and their source(s) said the main problem with it was arcing between the aircraft and the ground. It's hard to be stealthy when you're generating lightning strikes between your aircraft and the ground, lol.

 

[quellish]

I believe there was a report on it in Aviation Week, and their source(s) said the main problem with it was arcing between the aircraft and the ground. It's hard to be stealthy when you're generating lightning strikes between your aircraft and the ground, lol.

Northrop tested using ionizing fields on aircraft in the wind tunnel in the 1960s and 1970s with some promising results for drag reduction. After that not a lot was heard until the 1990s when supposedly the same effect was rumored to reduce an aircraft's RCS.

 

[saintkatanalegacy]

i heard rumors of it being used on the intruder before. no idea if it's true

 

[SOC]

I wonder if Russian Plasma stealth will have the same problems as U.S. plasma stealth; arcing near the ground. Of course, I believe in that U.S. case, it was a whole vehicle being shielded with it when that occurred.

US tested plasma stealth? ???

Possibly as early as 1964. KEMPSTER was tested on at least one A-12, and it is described as generating an electron cloud to absorb RF energy.

On a related note, I also remember a Jane's report in JDW from around the time the MiG MFI was first unveiled. The Keldysh device had been mentioned, and the Brits got a bunch of BAe engineers to try and build one. They said the science was sound but they couldn't quite make it work for undisclosed reasons.

 

[saintkatanalegacy]

well, one thing's for sure. plasma has great significance in aerothermodynamics

 

[tacitblue]

I wonder if Russian Plasma stealth will have the same problems as U.S. plasma stealth; arcing near the ground. Of course, I believe in that U.S. case, it was a whole vehicle being shielded with it when that occurred.

US tested plasma stealth? ???

I believe there was a report on it in Aviation Week, and their source(s) said the main problem with it was arcing between the aircraft and the ground. It's hard to be stealthy when you're generating lightning strikes between your aircraft and the ground, lol.

^I am not familiar with the details of 'plasma stealth' but if indeed there is/was an issue with arcing to the ground, then I know enough about physics and aircraft to know that there are ways around that. If 'plamsa stealth' is as good as the hype on these forums then I'd be willing to bet that there are a few silver bullets gathering dust in hangars on both sides of the ocean.

 

[saintkatanalegacy]

i'm not sure if the plane itself has enough energy to cause an electric arc. if it were possible, might as well use it as a weapon like a lightningstormwaffe

 

[flanker]

Lets just hope it is true.

http://babelfish.yahoo.com/translate_url?doit=done&tt=url&intl=1&fr=bf-home&trurl=http%3A%2F%2Frian.ru%2Fdefense_safety%2F20090811%2F180469230.html&lp=ru_en&btnTrUrl=Translate

Orginal:

http://rian.ru/defense_safety/20090811/180469230.html

 

[flateric]

Zelin did know of no flight till the end of the year already in May, reporting to Putin - read resent Ares blog posts

 

[saintkatanalegacy]

http://www.russiatoday.com/Sci_Tech/2009-08-13/deter-space-strikes-russia.html

bottom part says we will expect the maiden flight on november or december

 

[flanker]

http://vif2ne.ru/nvk/forum/files/Mes/(090819190944)_IMG_0127.JPG

I guess it is something...

 

[Matej]

Just WOW!

 

[frank]

Looks kinda like a head-on view of the YF-23.............

http://vif2ne.ru/nvk/forum/files/Mes/(090819190944)_IMG_0127.JPG

I guess it is something...

 

[donnage99]

OVAL intakes?? :-\

 

[Sundog]

OVAL intakes?? :-\

Is that a front view or rear view? Perhaps the circles just represent the location of the engines? If they are circular from the front view, perhaps it's using a form of inward turning fixed inlet?

As for the tails, it doesn't look very YF-23-ish to me at all. They are too vertical to be like the YF-23's. They're very similar to any aircraft with twin tails and low observable characteristics. They are simply canted outward like on the Hornet/Super Hornet/Raptor. Based on what I'm seeing, I'm guessing it's a flanker meets the F-22 or Super Hornet. The only thing remaining to be answered in terms of configuration is if the wing is a modified delta or trapezoidal. I'm thinking it will be a modified delta similar to the F-22's, but we'll see. Oh, I'll also be interested to see if it has 2d or 3d thrust vectoring. I'm betting the latter, just based on where they've gone with the Flanker series. In which case perhaps it's just using the thrust vectoring for pitch control? I doubt it, but it would look cool.

 

[Dragon029]

They're confirmed to be 3D.

They are 3D.

 

[flateric]

According to Zelin:
Air Force is preparing second T-50 for flight tests this November
first airframe is currently at TzAGI for static tests

 

[flateric]

thanks to Yurist who just have send me these from MAKS directly - pretty NIIP girls just took canvas off the stuff

 

[Woody]

Perhaps they'll (Russia) will keep up this cat and mouse game until the F-22 production line is finally broken up. It would seem the tactically sensible thing to do - both military and marketing wise.

Cheers, Woody

 

[Matej]

Is this Zhuk-MSF or alternatively some its derivate?

 

[flateric]

it's PAK-FA AESA radar antenna

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Yes, a NIIP design not Phazotron like Zhuk.

 

[frank]

IMHO, the tails look like the YF-23's because they are so far outboard as well as canted outward. They're certainly not inboard. Isn't it 'supposed' to have quite large verts? If so, having large verts performing double duty as V-tailed 'ruddervators' could make sense. As for the perspective, to me it looks like a nose section & maybe they have round intakes to throw off the real shape of them, just as all of the early drawings of the YF-22, YF-23 & I think B-2, were drawn from the perspective to hide the intakes &/or the exhausts. The round intakes seem to be so obviously roundly pronounced as to be unrealistic looking, again, just MHO.

 

[saintkatanalegacy]

basing on the badge, the tail configuration is similar to the 1.44. it is obviously a wide body with jamming pods on the tail. given the placing of the engine and the "protrusions" on at the side of the cockpit, it might suggest that the plane has top-mounted intakes while below it may be utilized as weapon storage. the wings may be diamond delta or a modification of it as swept wing because as far as if see how the stabilators are placed, it would somehow be similar to the 1.44.

or

i could just be drinking too much vodka

 

[flateric]

saintkatanalegacy, second one

 

[saintkatanalegacy]

i reckon the "round" parts are the engine nozzles. well the intake configuration itself, i imagine, would be like an inverted intake of the YF-23.

so what i'm expecting is a stealthy 1.44(wider space between the engines, minus the canards and plus the nose of the Su-34) with top mounted intakes, lots of internal storage(perhaps for those really long missiles), probably a diamond delta wing and inboard elevators.

but really though, it makes sense placing the intakes on top if the engines are placed low if they're planning to avoid direct radar returns from the turbine face.

 

[flateric]

saintkatanalegacy, you must start reading some aerodynamics books to learn why it doesn't make sense to use top mounted inlets on PAK FA

please stop making let's say amateur conclusions from just one view

 

[saintkatanalegacy]

ok, so my thoughts on a more practical PAK FA would be this

 

[Woody]

Here's a trace of the badge outline complete with casting irregularities for what it's worth.

Cheers, Woody

 

[frank]

I suppose, even with this info, it's still all speculation!

 

[Demon Lord Razgriz]

I posted that badge on a site I go to and one of the members said they saw it yesterday with some Saturn concept art, and he mentioned that the outline shown on the badge looks like it'd fit the concept art.

 

[Gavin]

How seriously can we take this badge? It certainly bears a resemblance to the so-called "Saturn" image, and to the CAD images previously seen on this forum. But does that lend credibility or raise doubts? Either the evidence is building that this really is the PAK FA configuration, or Internet fakes are inspiring each other . . . which is it?

 

[saintkatanalegacy]

the problem is we have no idea of what it really looks like so we can't tell which is true or not. all we have are some clues

 

[avatar]

So this baby will have over 1500 t/r modules ?

 

[vajt]

Well the latest rumor date now is November so we'll see...

-----JT-----

 

[sanjeev.k]

All this PAK-FA talk makes me really wish our stupid country would buy some more F-22s. Update the F-22A with the electronics of the F-35 series, give it the designation F-22C, and build 400 more of them. I currently don't have much faith in the F-35.

If we aren't stuck with 2 wars and money isn't the problem.

On the subject, I do agree that it looks like a 1.44 tail layout. I do think the badge shows the front view, as the bulges above the 2 circles are obviously of the engines that come out on top like that of the yf-23 for lower signature purpose. Still don't answer why the intake depiction is round though.

The rounded intakes on that PAK-FA impression on that badge may possibly validate what rsm55 said on keypubs forums around 2 year's back - url of this post is (http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?p=1105204&highlight=fedorov)
############# extract of post begins
"
The other thing about layouts and engine intakes it that Saturn's
new AL is rumoured to be a kind of... let's say "Advent engine-like" design.
People familiar with the concept (which typically features
non-variable air intakes) will remember that it does not marry
well with classic rectangular intake designs.
"
##### extract ends
What rsm55 says may be plausible because the AL-41 series was (IIRC) a variable cycle engine much like the GE-F120 powering the YF-23 (and the final iterations of the YF-23/FB-23 did feature rounded intakes).
Perhaps Lyulka Saturn's lofty attempts to incorporate ADVENT engine technology into the AL-41F series may reportedly be the source of the engine 'troubles' which Zelin admitted recently (see: http://en.rian.ru/russia/20090820/155864971.html).
Hope history wont repeat itself - the original MFI program suffered setbacks/credibility because Saturn struggled for many years before finally mastering the high inlet temperature turbine technology of the AL-41

 

[flateric]

So this baby will have over 1500 t/r modules ?

1526

 

[flanker]

I personaly dont think the round holes represent intakes. My first thought wasnt that it was intakes, but to show "here lies the engines". Nothing more than that.

 

[Matej]

I tend to agree with that.