Sukhoi Su-57 / T-50 / PAK FA first flight - pictures, videos and analysis [2010]

[donnage99]

What always intrigues me is the persistent "no-talk" with China. I understand China has been workin' on the J-xx, but surely participation in the PAK FA will only benefit their program. Is it because Russia doesn't want China's participation? Or between China and India, for which they are rivals, Russia can only pick one?

 

[nn903]

China has a long tradition of copying Russian designs and maybe that's what it's all about. I think Russians would want to sell the end product to China rather than giving them access to the technology so early.

 

[saintkatanalegacy]

Me thinks it's because of the strained relationship when the J-11 was serialized without license.

 

[Deino]

Me thinks it's because of the strained relationship when the J-11 was serialized without license.

What's IMO for sure one of the main reasons ... but also not 100% since the Chinese were allowed to produce the Flanker by licence after a certain number of aircarft built from kits ... and as far as I understand the situation China decided to proceed alone without taking all kits (but that will bring us to far off topic).

Deino

 

[Dreamfighter]

Flateric,

The model on Pogosyan's working table, is that a kind of concept model (pre-prototype) or rather - on the contrary - what a production-representative T-50 will/could look like?
I see some obvious differences, like a different canopy and longer (non-moveable?) lerx'es... It's much more like on one of the pics that showed Pak-Fa before it's official unveiling.
Thx.

 

[NikolasTz]

Hi it is my first post
Art picture

From http://nellenmellen.deviantart.com/art/Sukhoi-T-50-PAK-FA-156028252

Mod edit: fixed link

 

[flateric]

is that a kind of concept model (pre-prototype)

it's one of iterations that lead to current design

 

[Wil]

Hi it is my first post
Art picture

Hola Amigos!

This is my first message, too...

Beautiful 3D graphics NikolasTz, a great work, but I believe the PAK FA of the figure is rather wider than the real.

The PAK FA wingspan is 14.80 - 15.00 m, please look at this picture (courtesy of Espacial.org):

The PAK FA wingspan is not 14.20 m!!!!

Best wishes!

 

[rousseau]

Also please notice that leading-edge flap on PAKFA is full-span to wing root, but still is great work.

 

[NikolasTz]

Hi it is my first post
Art picture

Beautiful 3D graphics NikolasTz, a great work, but I believe the PAK FA of the figure is rather wider than the real.

Yes, it's nice, I did not myself this 3D art.

 

[flateric]

T-50 MLG tires are 1050 mm in diameter, Su-27/Su-35s are 1030

 

[Just call me Ray]

Hi it is my first post
Art picture

http://fc04.deviantart.net/fs71/i/2010/061/4/5/Sukhoi_T_50_PAK_FA_by_nellenmellen.jpg

Damn, it looks like it's ready for Ace Combat!

 

[lancer21]

As most of you would know by now , Combat Aircaft has a nice article about PAK FA, including in this number the high-res camouflage pic of bort "51" that everyone was banging their heads about few weeks ago... ;D( altho the quality is not exactly 100%...AFM has it too , but on only one page ,at the bottom of their small 1 page article , tho its better quality...)

Also Combat Aircraft at least tried to fix the photoshop right landing leg mismatch of the unpainted prototype...but with all their efforts , it still can go a bit better ...now the shape of the gear door doesnt exactly match!

More here ...

http://www.combataircraft.net/issues/latestissue.php

 

[Ian33]

http://picasaweb.google.ru/106125363254545602859/T50#

very nice looking aircraft.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Well......

[removed low res pics - Admin]

 

[lantinian]

Wow! It does indeed look quite a bit more compact than the SU-35. The second picture is so telling. It almost feels non Russian in design ;D

Great photos Overscan!

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

They are from the link Ian33 posted, so he deserves any credit for the find. Found this one in higher res via Paralay's forum though :

 

[Deino]

.... and the 2. one too !

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

These pics emphasise how much smaller it is than many people expected. Unfortunately its hard to measure exactly due to the angles.

 

[Austin]

The second picture looks PSed , its definitely not small but yes compared to Flanker its ~ 25 % smaller

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Can't see any signs of Photoshop. The angle makes it looks even smaller than it is - it is much less high than the Su-35, and the length seems small due to the angle the T-50 is at.

 

[Sundog]

These pics emphasise how much smaller it is than many people expected. Unfortunately its hard to measure exactly due to the angles.

Very True. I thought it was about the same size as the Flanker originally, but now seeing it in these pics, it looks to be about 80% to 85% the size of the Flanker. I'm going by looking at that pic of them from behind and above and approximately how much planform area each one takes up. Partly, because as Overscan noted, the T-50 is much lower to the ground than the Flanker and not nearly as tall, due to the much smaller verticals, it looks much smaller than it is from the side aspect.

 

[Fox_One]

Found this one in higher res via Paralay's forum though :

All 3 pics are already hi-res in Ian33's link, you just need to use the magnify button.

 

[Deino]

Here's it !

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

For some reason the magnifying glass didn't work for me the first time - it just enlarged the low res pic which looked bad.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Photos were taken on 22nd and 23rd of January, with a Canon EOS 20D.

 

[lancer21]

WOW beautiful finds, thanks alot for posting them!

Would you think based on these pics and its relative size compared to Su-30 that the estimates concering the empty weight , normal TOW and max TOW needs revisiting ? IMO , i think its lighter than thought( not just becasue of the aparent size , but also little details like smaller fins , smaller stabilators etc than usual which translates in reduced weight)... even if it uses basically same engines as Su-35 , it would give it a better T/W ratio by default!

Just my 2 cents.

 

[Matej]

Considering the perspective and the fact, that all wheels are on the ground - not bad. Really not bad

 

[slamode40]

Nice airplane

 

[saintkatanalegacy]

judging by the inlet, the duct is indeed offset vertically and horizontally allowing F-22 like compressor shielding.

I guess the pressure swirling will be relieved by the fact that it is partially fuselage shielded much like how the F-22 is partially fuselage shielded

 

[lantinian]

judging by the inlet, the duct is indeed offset vertically and horizontally allowing F-22 like compressor shielding.

I very much doubt that the taxi profile if the same as the flight profile. The nose will be lifted as shown on Matej's drawing and part of the engine fans will be directly visible. If is not like the F-22, where the engines are close to one another, while the inlets start much further forward allowing for much more pronounced inlet duck curve.

 

[saintkatanalegacy]

the engine location doesn't need to closer to each other per se to provide full compressor shielding.
Even half vertical and half horizontal offset is just enough to shield the thing as long as it has an S-duct

kinda like this http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,9186.msg84009.html#msg84009

only difference is that horizontal and vertical are switched

 

[mrdetonator]

Can't see any signs of Photoshop. The angle makes it looks even smaller than it is - it is much less high than the Su-35, and the length seems small due to the angle the T-50 is at.

Perhaps, it is bcs the Su-35 staying there without engines(about 3 tons lighter) appears to be very tall now. Also those pictures are probably leaks, someone will be punished for this.... ;D

 

[Sundog]

Regarding the inlets, it's safe to assume the compressor face will not be visible, since it's a key element of reducing RCS. The simple fact is, we just don't know how it's being accomplished atm for the production standard. If the face isn't blocked by the inlet ducting it's safe to assume they will use some sort of fan blocker just as the Super Hornet does to hide it's fan faces.

 

[flanker]

Considering the perspective and the fact, that all wheels are on the ground - not bad. Really not bad

Are you going to update the drawings now that a good front view is available?

PS: Did you see Kens work so far?

 

[saintkatanalegacy]

tbh, I don't think they would want to use radar blockers as that would compromise intake performance since the size of the duct is supersonic compression optimized. Adding one would be very unfavorable for supercruising. but that's just my 2 cents

 

[Wil]

These pics emphasise how much smaller it is than many people expected. Unfortunately its hard to measure exactly due to the angles.

Hi!

The PAK FA has an "intermediate" size, between the F-22 and Su-27. The target was the Raptor! One of the last pictures confirmed, for example, the wingspan: ~ 14.70 m, as stated for quite some time Paralay.

The dimensions of PAK FA:

Wingspan: ~14.70 m
Length: 20.40 - 20.80 m
Height: ~5.00 m

The new russian figther is a big bird! Please look this:

http://paralay.com/pakfasu/shema.png


Or this other:

Best wishes!

 

[Matej]

Are you going to update the drawings now that a good front view is available?

PS: Did you see Kens work so far?

Answers are no, no. I am going to make the complex revision of it when some good quality official 3 view will appear. It means source grade at least 4. Where I can see Kens progress?

Oh, and... 8. March is already here http://www.hitechweb.genezis.eu/fightersSF04.htm

 

[Deino]

That's so brilliant !!!!

Will it also be used in the Combat-Aircraft feature ?

Deino

 

[saintkatanalegacy]

wow. I think I'm the happiest person on earth seeing that ;D

spasibo matej!!!