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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hello Boys!

A new picture, a Su-27, PAK FA and F-22 comparison. The PAK FA dimensions (estimated):

19.4 m x 13.95 m x ~5 m

http://img191.imageshack.us/img191/25/su27t50f22comp.jpg

Best wishes!
 

Attachments

  • su27t50f22comp.jpg
    su27t50f22comp.jpg
    126.5 KB · Views: 212
groomi said:
flanker said:
Before the end of the year. Matter of weeks. When is Medvedev planning to visit?

Germans friends say me that "three best Russian expressions are "Tomorrow", "Maybe" and "Maybe tomorrow"
Maybe in first quarter of the next year

(I'm sorry. Very bad English) :)

Hello Groomi, nice to see you here.

I have two questions:

Could you please say what color scheme will first production Su-35S and T-50-2 carry? (if you know) :p

Will PAK-FA have a new scheme, or same colors as on Su-35S 902 and T-50-1?
 
I can say for sure that grOOmi won't comment on that on certain reasons.
 
Wil said:
Hello Boys!

A new picture, a Su-27, PAK FA and F-22 comparison. The PAK FA dimensions (estimated):

19.4 m x 13.95 m x ~5 m

http://img191.imageshack.us/img191/25/su27t50f22comp.jpg

Best wishes!

This scale map in which PAKFA contained was drawn out of China so that is not accurate.
The length is estimated a little bit short than real size.
 
flateric said:
I can say for sure that grOOmi won't comment on that on certain reasons.

Dinosavri blin. (Not grOOmi, but "they".)

Oh well, i guess i have to be simply patient. :-\
 
Development of aircraft armament PAK FA will run parallel with the development of the fighter - CEO of a corporation Tactical Missiles

Moscow. December 14.
Interfax-AVN - Corporation Tactical Missiles, "Aviation has been developing weapons of destruction for the fifth-generation fighter, and successfully carries out the state defense order, and develop military-technical cooperation with foreign countries.

"Long-Term Complex Frontal Aviation (PAK FA), the first phase will appear in the 2012-2013 year, this time to be ready and arms under him. Then with the development of the PAK FA will develop weapons", - told Interfax-AVN CEO Corporation, Tactical Missiles, Boris Obnossov. He noted that with all due respect to the aircraft that just a platform to accommodate different types of armament. Further increasing the combat efficiency of the fighter will be achieved mainly through the arms. "This roughly 20-30 percent increase in building aircraft," - said Boris Obnossov. Responding to a question, how is the implementation of a prisoner at MAKS-2009 contract for the supply of various Air Force aircraft missile, B. Obnosov said that the contract is fully executed. "We have an annual capacity of one company covers it," - he said.

B. Obnosov reported that the volume of the parent company corporation, located at the Queen, is 8 billion rubles. The volume of production of enterprises of all corporations $ 38 billion. According to B. Obnossov successfully implemented export contracts. He reported that the production corporation Tactical Missiles today delivered to China, Algeria, Venezuela, India, Vietnam, Malaysia and other countries.

Previously reported that at MAKS-2009 was signed a major contract for the purchase of advanced aviation ordnance acquired for the Russian Defense Ministry family fighters Su. "The cost of the contract - about 6 billion rubles," - said the Air Force Commander Col. Gen. Alexander Zelin said. He clarified that the matter concerns more than 14 names of the new weapon, which is able to meet the challenges imposed on the new equipment purchased or upgraded aircraft for Russian Air Force. At the MAKS-2009 was also announced three contracts under which the company "Dry" to 2015 for the Russian Air Force to supply 48 advanced Su-35s, 12 Su-27SM, and 4 - Su-30M2.

The first flight of the fifth generation fighter was held on 29 January this year. According to experts, the PAK FA has several unique features, combining the functions of attack aircraft and fighter. Fifth-generation aircraft is equipped with a fundamentally new avionics, the integrating function of the e-pilot, "and promising radar with a phased array. This greatly reduces the load on the pilot and allows you to concentrate on the implementation of tactical tasks.

In the inner compartment of the fighter can be placed as missiles, air-to-air and air-to-surface missiles. In air-to-air missile is a large and short-range and medium-range missile development Design Bureau "Vympel". Originally planned to equip aircraft missiles, air-to-air long-range development of the design bureau "Novator", but on the results of the contests were decided in favor of product development Corporation "Tactical Missiles".

In air-to-surface missiles in an internal compartment can be placed antiship missiles, rockets modular general-purpose bombs and guided the caliber of 250 kg. Besides aircraft can carry guided missiles and bombs for various purposes caliber to 1500 kg on external pylons.

All managed air attack, planned to equip the aircraft, designed Corporation Tactical Missiles.

http://vpk.name/news/47636_razvitie_aviacionnogo_vooruzheniya_pak_fa_budet_idti_parallelno_s_razvitiem_samogo_istrebitelya__gendirektor_korporacii_takticheskoe_raketnoe_vooruzhenie.html
 
Fifth-gen jets in IAF arsenal in a decade

20 DEC, 2010, 09.30AM IST, RAJAT PANDIT,TNN

NEW DELHI: It will take a decade for India to begin inducting the first lot of the 250-300 advanced stealth fifth-generation fighter aircraft (FGFA) it is going to jointly develop and manufacture with Russia.

As per the detailed roadmap finalised between India and Russia, the "series production" of FGFA will be launched in 2019, with the actual deliveries to begin in 2020, sources said.

The stage for the entire FGFA programme, which will see India spending upwards of $35 billion over the next two decades in its biggest-ever defence project, will finally be set this week.

With Russian President Dmitry Medvedev in town, New Delhi and Moscow will ink the $295 million preliminary design contract (PDC) for FGFA on Tuesday. Then, over the next 18 months, the two sides will work out the detailed design and other agreements to kickstart the actual building of FGFA.

"Forty Indian designers and scientists will be stationed in Russia, with a similar number of Russians here. A secure data link will also be set up to ensure both sides are fully in the picture all the time," said a source.

The total cost of designing, infrastructure build-up, prototype development, flight testing and the like has been pegged at around $11 billion, with both sides chipping in with $5.50 billion each in the "50-50% partnership".

India, for instance, will spend $2.50 billion of its $5.50 billion share in setting up infrastructure for manufacturing plants, tooling facilities and hangars.

Each "swing role" FGFA, with a deadly mix of super-manoeuvrability and supersonic cruising ability, long-range strike and high-endurance air defence capabilities, will cost an additional $100 million or so.

Cash-strapped Russia is already flying the prototype of its single-seater FGFA called Sukhoi T-50. While the Indian FGFA will basically be based on this fighter, it will "be tweaked to meet IAF requirements".

For one, IAF wants a twin-seater FGFA, with one pilot actually flying the jet and the other handling sensors and weapon systems. Russia, however, feels adding a second cockpit will "adversely impact" the stealth.

For another, IAF is keen on a new engine with "a greater thrust" than the one Russia is currently using for its FGFA. "All these things will take time and money... Six to seven prototypes should be flying by 2017. It will take about 2,500 hours of flying to get the final flight certification," he said.

With IPR (intellectual property rights) being "equally and jointly vested", India and Russia may also decide to sell the FGFA to "third countries" by mutual consent.

Till FGFA becomes a reality, India's combat fleet will mainly revolve around the 270 Sukhoi-30MKIs contracted from Russia for around $12 billion, the 126 medium multi-role combat aircraft to be acquired in the $10.4 billion project and 120 indigenous Tejas Light Combat Aircraft, apart from upgraded MiG-29s and Mirage-2000s.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/fifth-gen-jets-in-iaf-arsenal-in-a-decade/articleshow/7131337.cms
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Russian-Indian second prototype T-50 fighter to fly in 2011

12:23 20/12/2010

The Russian-Indian second prototype T-50 fighter aircraft will take to the skies in early 2011, United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) President Alexei Fyodorov said on Monday.
"We have put the deadline forward to the start of 2011," he said.
"It is important for us that the second prototype is a development of the first, not simply a repeat," he added.
Work is underway on the third prototype, incorporating even more advanced systems, he said.
Russia's Sukhoi holding and India's Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) agreed in early 2010 to jointly develop a fifth-generation fighter jet based on the T-50 design.
They later put the estimated project design cost at $295 million.
The contract is to be signed by HAL and UAC officials during Russian President Dmitry Medvedev's visit to India on December 20-22.
The two sides agreed to develop both a single-seat and a two-seat version of the aircraft by 2016, initially focusing on the single-seat version. The costs will be shared equally between Russia and India.
The first Russian prototype T-50 made its maiden flight in January 2010.
The new fighter aircraft is expected to enter service with the Indian Air Force by 2020.

NEW DELHI, December 20 (RIA Novosti)

http://en.rian.ru/russia/20101220/161853847.html
 
and finally...

Russia, India sign design contract for prototype multirole fighter

11:26 21/12/2010

Russia and India signed a contract on Tuesday to jointly develop a design for a new fifth-generation multirole fighter.
The document was signed between Russia's state arms exporter Rosoboronexport and India's Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) during Russian President Dmitry Medvedev's current visit to India.
Russia's Sukhoi holding and India's Hindustan Aeronautics Limited agreed in early 2010 to jointly develop a fifth-generation fighter jet based on the T-50 design.
The project design cost is estimated at $295 million, shared equally between Russia and India.
The two sides agreed to develop both a single-seat and a two-seat version of the aircraft by 2016, initially focusing on the single-seat version.
Russia has been developing its own fifth-generation fighter since the 1990s. The current prototype, known as the T-50, was designed by the Sukhoi design bureau and built at a plant in Komsomolsk-on-Amur in Russia's Far East.
Russian officials have already hailed the fighter as "a unique warplane" that combines the capabilities of an air superiority fighter and attack aircraft.
Russia is planning to use the jointly-developed 5G fighter as an export version of T-50, while India is expecting the new fighter aircraft to enter service with its air force by 2020.

NEW DELHI, December 21 (RIA Novosti)
 
India, Russia Formalise 5th Gen Fighter Effort ( via livefist )

Official statement:
A contract for Preliminary Design of the Indo-Russian Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft was signed between Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL), Rosoboronexport and Sukhoi here today. The Project involves design and development of a Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft that will have advanced features such as stealth, supercruise, ultra-maneuvrability, highly integrated avionics suite, enhanced situational awareness, internal carriage of weapons and Network Centric Warfare capabilities.

The aircraft to be jointly developed is termed Perspective Multi-role Fighter (PMF). PMF draws upon the basic structural and system design of the Russian FGFA Technology Demonstrator with modifications to meet IAF specifications which are much more stringent. The broad scope of bilateral cooperation during the joint project covers the design & development of the PMF, its productionization and joint marketing to third countries. Programme options include the design & development of a twin seater variant and the integration of an advanced engine with higher thrust at a later stage.

Today's contract is only the first in a series of such contracts which will cover different stages of this complex programme. The total cost including options and the value of production aircraft will make this the biggest Defence programme ever in the history of India involving production of over 200-250 aircraft.

The Contract was signed by Mr. A Isaykin, General Director, Rosoboronexport and Mr. M Pogosyan, General Director RAC MiG & Sukhoi from the Russian side and Mr. Ashok Nayak, Chairman, HAL and Mr. NC Agarwal, Director (D&D), HAL from the Indian side at Delhi.
 

Attachments

  • PAK-FA.jpg
    PAK-FA.jpg
    170.7 KB · Views: 48
Austin said:
sferrin said:
Makes one glad we cancelled the F-22. :(

I believe they can restart the production line if required.

That's the theory. $$$$$ might make it unlikely though given that they've already killed what program efficiency they've achieved by interrupting the supply chain.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cjc
[quote author=sferrin]That's the theory. $$$$$ might make it unlikely though given that they've already killed what program efficiency they've achieved by interrupting the supply chain.
[/quote]

My thought on F-22 was they should have allowed export of F-22 in "Export Model" variant to their selected allies which would have subsidized the program and would have kept the production line viable not sure why they didnt do it but would rather prefer closing the F-22 product line.

F-22 may not be fundamental to US air dominance but would hurt its aerospace industry , Did they achieve break even on F-22 program ?
 
I don't know of any allies that could afford the F-22. Britain looked at it, which is probably the only country we would export it to anyway, and they couldn't afford it. Building an export version was too cost prohibitive; IIRC, LM considered this with Japan, if Japan picked up the tab to make the export version changes and Japan said no thanks.

Seriously, I'm supposed to be worried about a plane that won't possibly be operational until 2020, if they even meet the schedule, and then how many years until they have enough numbers to make a difference, if ever? We'll be able to build something much better than the F-22 by the time the T-50 gets anywhere near operational service. Hell, even the USAF isn't worried about it.
 
Aha, so the magic number "2015" suddenly vanished from the radar screen to be never seen again... :)

Amazing how silent that happened compared to F-35 deadline pushing.
 
Sundog said:
Seriously, I'm supposed to be worried about a plane that won't possibly be operational until 2020, if they even meet the schedule, and then how many years until they have enough numbers to make a difference, if ever? We'll be able to build something much better than the F-22 by the time the T-50 gets anywhere near operational service. Hell, even the USAF isn't worried about it.

I know - the Russians (and now Indians) have handed an entire generation of American engineers a multi-billion dollar justification. Undoubtedly the new U.S. platform will be superior as well (considering that it will significantly post-date the T-50). After all, the obvious advantage of the PAK-FA over the ATF is that it is entering service a full quarter century later.
 
Russians are not that far behind. There already was enormous investment in the 5th generation fighters and it was in the second half of the 80s. In fact this was one of a number of factors that led to the collapse of the Soviet Union. PAK FA seems to be (because there is not really official data available) more than a 5th generation fighter. Its something like the JSF, it means 5th generation merged with the latest trends, especially the affordability.

In my opinion F-22 failed at all as the weapon system, because even the richest air force in the whole world cant afford it. It was designed under the cold war doctrine which means that it has many good, but in the current environment unnecessary capabilities. Its not the point being able to design and build the best fighter ever, the point is making it being used in the real opperational service in the sufficient nubmers. PAK FA and JSF still have that chance, so we will see (how the politicans will decide).
 
I don't think the F-22A failed as a weapon system. We could certainly afford more but the F-35 was cheaper and appealed more to current military/political leadership. There are some good reason to that but terminating production certainly seemed premature. Ideally F-22 production and development would be ongoing so technologies common with the F-35 could be incorporated. To me this seems the equivalent of terminating F-15 production after 187 airframes in favor of more F-16s.
 
Colonial-Marine said:
I don't think the F-22A failed as a weapon system. We could certainly afford more but the F-35 was cheaper and appealed more to current military/political leadership. There are some good reason to that but terminating production certainly seemed premature. Ideally F-22 production and development would be ongoing so technologies common with the F-35 could be incorporated. To me this seems the equivalent of terminating F-15 production after 187 airframes in favor of more F-16s.

I have always been of the opinion that making such a rapid shift from the F-22 to the F-35 was a serious error. The former, in its latter batches, were very affordable and very capable. The aircraft has considerable development potential left with space reserved for flank arrays and EO systems and relatively large bomb bays (though not as large / well shaped as the F-35). Lockheed has now even offered to bring some avionics commonality to the two aircraft. It seems that the USAF is paying an incredibly large sum of money to develop an aircraft with less LO capability but fractionally larger bomb bays than the Raptor. Perhaps it may have been better to have stuck with the F-22 and continued to work to lower its unit and operating costs whilst increasing its utility.
 
Some very nice high-rez pics of "51" ,thanks to QuadroFX for pointing to them :)

http://paralay.iboards.ru/viewtopic.php?style=12&f=5&t=1104&start=2970
 
lancer21 said:
Some very nice high-rez pics of "51" ,thanks to QuadroFX for pointing to them :)
we have these nice pics for a half of a year already
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,9717.msg96714.html#msg96714
 
I really don’t want to open a can of worms regarding the sometimes „strange” discussions about the T-50, but since there’s an interesting one ongoing at the ACIG-Forum, I simply wanted to ask for Your opinion … seems as if there are not too many Russian-speaking members online …

http://www.s188567700.online.de/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6518&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=30

To start with, the discussion circles around an article / interview recently published - and then rapidly withdrawn - by Komsomolskaya Pravda:

С блога военного обозревателя газеты "Комсомольская правда".

Цитата:
Я сразу прошу читателей "кушать" этот текст, тщательно пережевывая. Ибо в данном случае говорят конкуренты ПАК ФА. И безусловно, что только и только специалисты смогут оценить состоятельность их доводов. Но в любом случае они интересны. Интересны хотя бы потому, что попали на стол президенту России (любопытно, что он с ними сделал?).

Мои собеседники: сотрудник научного института авиапрома, к.т.н. – NM; ведущий конструктор одного из предприятий авиапрома – NN; старший научный сотрудник аналитического центра – NO. Причина обращения в газету – провальная ситуация с ПАК ФА.

КП: – Новый истребитель называют машиной пятого поколения. Насколько это соответствует требованиям, предъявляемым к машинам такого класса?
NM: – В первую очередь пятое поколение отличается от четвертого крейсерским сверхзвуком без форсажа, когда самолет может лететь на сверхзвуковой скорости без включения форсажного режима работы двигателей. Однако для нового истребителя крейсерский сверхзвук возможен только на режиме частичного форсажа – аэродинамика не позволяет, сопротивление самолета превышает безфорсажную тягу двигателей.
КП: – Что такое крейсерский сверхзвук в режиме частичного форсажа?
NN: – Да любой сверхзвуковой самолет, если только он не летит на полном (максимальном) форсаже на максимальной для себя скорости, может лететь с некоторой промежуточной установившейся сверхзвуковой скоростью, используя режим частичного форсирования двигателей. Например, МиГ-31 может летать со скоростью 3000 км/ч, но в мирное время с целью экономии ресурса двигателей на учебных режимах он летает со скоростью 2550 км/ч. Любопытно, что режим частичного форсажа преподносится фирмой даже как достоинство ПАК ФА.
КП: – А разве это не так?
NO: - Вы просто не можете себе представить, как этому будут удивлены читатели. А уж как будет потешаться над "достоинством" зарубежная публика…
КП: – В чем Т-50 превосходит, а в чем уступает своему главному сопернику – американскому "Раптору"? В чем самая сильная и самая слабая сторона Т-50?
NO: – Уступает почти во всем. Сейчас мы превосходим американцев, скажем, лишь по некоторым характеристикам РЛС. Наша РЛС "Ирбис" с пассивной ФАР (фазированной антенной решеткой) "видит" в 2 раза дальше РЛС "Раптора" с активной ФАР. Это очень сильно пугает американцев. На что будет способна наша станция с активной ФАР – покажет время. Ведь новые технологии еще надо довести и освоить на практике. И, наверное, дальность РЛС все же более важна, чем большее количество режимов РЛС с активной ФАР.
NN: – Предложенная для ПАК ФА идеология была такова, что он и не должен был превосходить "Раптор".
КП: – А на какие же параметры тогда нацеливался Т-50?
NN: – Его место было определено между американскими "Раптором" и единым ударным истребителем JSF F-35. Имела место концепция промежуточного истребителя в классе где-то между нашими МиГ-29 и Су-27. Это уже потом задача изменилась до обеспечения полного превосходства в воздухе.
КП: – Почему задача изменилась и кто ее ставил?
NN: – "Тучные" годы позволили размечтаться, и Сергей Иванов поставил новую задачу. Но поезд-то ушел.
NM: – Однако, это все мелочи. У ПАК ФА выявилась такая слабая сторона, что все меркнет перед ней. Машина получилась крайне "хлипкой".
КП: – Какой смысл вы вкладываете в слово "хлипкой"?
NM: – Компоновщики не смогли учесть последствий своих решений при завязке конструктивно-компоновочной схемы самолета, а безоглядное поклонение современным расчетным методам при неверно заданной расчетной модели, в которой не были учтены физические особенности конструкции, привело к недостоверной оценке жесткости конструкции.
КП: – Почему, на Ваш взгляд, была неверно задана расчетная модель"?
NM: – Сказался недостаточный уровень квалификации. И только когда специалисты ЦАГИ (Центральный аэро-гидродинамический институт) "протрясли" машину вдруг стало ясно, что на самом деле жесткость на порядок ниже требуемой.
КП: – Что такое жесткость?
NM: – Если, например, взять в руку обычную линейку и приложить к ее концу силу, то линейка прогнется. Если сила будет приложена перпендикулярно плоскости линейки, то прогиб будет большим, линейка на глазах изогнется. Но если такая же сила будет приложена вдоль плоскости линейки, то прогиб мы и не заметим. Таким образом, жесткость линейки (конструкции) определяется высотой сечения. Самолет воспринимает основные аэродинамические нагрузки консолями крыла (Fк) и оперением (Fо). Силы, возникающие с одной и другой стороны самолета, уравновешиваются – силовые потоки замыкаются друг на друга. При этом сила устремляется по кратчайшему пути, и идеальным вариантом является работа прочной и жесткой конструкции на изгиб. Однако встречаются компоновки, когда силовые потоки могут замкнуться только в обход – путь длинный, да еще и конструкции приходится работать на кручение.
NN: – Проблема ПАК ФА в его компоновке – в расположении основных отсеков вооружения друг за другом между мотогондолами. А так как к хвосту высота фюзеляжа уменьшается до высоты отсека, то задний отсек практически "режет" самолет пополам. Над отсеком последний силовой шпангоут лишь по названию силовой. Силовые потоки от цельноповоротных килей и стабилизаторов не могут замкнуться друг на друга напрямую, и они устремляется навстречу друг другу по весьма тонким балкам вперед.
NM: – Частотные испытания показали, что самолет просто развалится от флаттера (быстро развивающихся вибраций) при превышении приборной скорости 500 км/ч. Нагрузки на конструкцию летательного аппарата определяются скоростным напором, который пропорционален квадрату скорости воздушного потока. Оказалось, что допустимый скоростной напор для этой компоновки в 8 раз ниже расчетного – (500 км/ч : 1400 км/ч)2 = 25 : 196 ≈ 1 : 8. Иначе говоря, жесткость конструкции необходимо увеличивать в те же 8 раз. Исправить это уже никак нельзя, так как данная проблема определяется неустранимым органическим пороком компоновки. Для ПАК ФА это приговор, который обжалованию не подлежит.
NO: – Единственное, что может сделать в данной ситуации разработчик, так это покаяться. По крайней мере, это будет честно. А вот и дальше вводить в заблуждение руководство страны и налогоплательщиков – "мошенничество", УК РФ.
NM: – ПАК ФА летает, но из-за крайне малой жесткости он никогда не станет истребителем.
КП: – Почему Вы так считаете?
NN: – Да потому, что истребитель должен летать у земли с приборной скоростью 1400 км/ч, а тут ограничение – 500 км/ч. И это все, что может себе позволить себе ПАК ФА. Любой реактивный учебно-тренировочный самолет летает быстрее… Совмещение областей летных режимов (без использования форсажа) F-22A "Раптора" и JSF F-35 с ограниченной областью летных режимов Т-50 наглядно показывает, что, как такового, истребителя нет. Приговором ему является красная линия – линия равного по высотам полета скоростного напора, который на уровне моря соответствует скорости 500 км/ч (приборная скорость).
КП: – Во что уже обошлась России разработка Т-50? Во сколько миллиардов?
NO: – Порядка трех миллиардов. А общая стоимость должна составить 10 миллиардов – по пять миллиардов индусы и мы.
КП: – Ваши заявления многие читатели могут расценить как следствие внутренней борьбы на фирме. Вы готовы к тому, что Ваши оппоненты в нашей же газете отвергнут Ваши заявления?
NN: – Вы отстали от жизни. Всякая внутренняя борьба на фирмах закончилась еще в прошлом веке. Пусть авторы Т-50 попробуют представить информацию, что для ПАК ФА, например, обеспечена нормированная критическая скорость флаттера 1400 км/ч.
КП: – Как Вы думаете, когда Т-50 полностью доведут до ума, и он начнет поступать в войска? 2013 год – это реально?
NM: – Довести до ума Т-50 невозможно в принципе, и любая дата нереальна.
КП: – Сколько будет стоить для наших ВВС один Т-50 и сколько могла бы стоить одна альтернативная машина?
NO: – Точно сказать не сможет никто. Вот "Суперджет" продали "Аэрофлоту" по 20,3 миллиона долларов, а сейчас по требованию В. Христенко организован процесс по снижению российской доли издержек в 3,5 раза. Каталожная цена уже превысила 30 миллионов – авиакомпания "Малев" собиралась приобрести 30 лайнеров за 1 миллиард. А себестоимость оценивалась в 50 миллионов.
NN: – Если не заниматься заумью при проектировании и максимально использовать отработанные технические решения и технологии, то нужно не так уж много денег. Стоимость одной машины пятого поколения могла бы не намного превышать стоимость своего предшественника из четвертого поколения. Практика "Раптора" и особенно JSF показывает, что возникавшие по "перспективным" технологиям проблемы тут же оборачивались ростом стоимости.
КП: – И все же мы знаем, что один "Раптор" обошелся Минбороны США где-то в 150 млн долларов. Хотя неофициально говорилось и 180 и даже о 300 млн долларов... Наш Т-50 может получиться дешевле или дороже?
NO: – Наш Ил-96М стоит в 2–2,5 раза меньше своих западных аналогов. В идеале Т-50 мог бы быть в 2 раза дешевле "Раптора".
КП: – "Небезгрешный" Т-50 появился из-за того, что нет конкуренции между российскими авиационными школами?
NN: – Конкуренция по пятому поколению была, только уровень ее был невысокий. Школы ушли вместе с патриархами. Пик мировой авиации был до 80-х. Плохо еще другое – нет механизма выявления и продвижения интересных предложений как по проектам в целом, так и отдельных технических решений. И это касается не только авиации – нет площадок для профессионалов, форумов, конференций, открытых форматов для обсуждения проблем.
КП: – Когда было принято решение запускать в дело Т-50, была ли у разработчика альтернативной машины возможность показать свой вариант нового истребителя и доказать, что он лучше?
NN: – Тендер по ПАК ФА завершился в 2002 году. Если бы ПАК ФА был верхом совершенства, то он был бы безальтернативен. И хотя совершенства разглядеть невозможно, альтернатива авторам ПАК ФА не нужна – показывай, не показывай, доказать им ничего невозможно. Как сказал перед телекамерами неизменно оригинальный Жириновский, "свое дитя ближе к телу".
КП: – А нельзя ли ради "интересов Отечества" объединить проекты Т-50 и альтернативный?
NM: – Чужие идеи никому не нужны, особенно когда своих нет.
КП: – К чему, на Ваш взгляд, может привести запуск Т-50 в серию? Не получится ли так, что индийская сторона откажется от машины?
NO: – Чтобы машина пошла в серию, она должна успешно пройти летные испытания. Индийской стороне нужен истребитель, а не самолет для демонстрации лишь взлета и посадки.
КП: – Что Вы имеете ввиду?
NO: – А то, что программа ПАК ФА провалена. Однозначно. Как бы кто не пытался это скрывать.

Tom put then together the following problems cited:

- The structure of the aircraft is limited to 500km/h at low levels. It's simply not built for low-level combat operations and would likely fall apart due to the massive gust response (well, no wonder considering the size of the wing).

- Originally, C-in-C RuAF, Gen Mikhailov wanted to have the PAK-FA with a max speed of 2,600km/h. Subsequently, on request from the manufacturer, this had to get lowered down "two" times (actually three times), "from 2,500km/h" to "2,300km/h", then to "2,130km/h"

- "There was a concept for an interim fighter...[i.e. the "FGFA"]...years of daydreams...the train was out..."

- The Indian involvement "should be 50%" but "there is nothing Indian" in the T.50. It's now called "Russian-Indian" project, because of this intergovernmental agreement.

- Even funnier is when the person providing all this commentary explains that the radar is going to be "two times more powerful" than that of the Raptor. By side that the Russian radar is still between 5 and 8 years away from becoming operational.... but, one should expect that 20-30 years after the first flight of the YF-22, the Russians might become capable of fielding something that's at least a match for the AN/APG-77. On the other, we've heard so many such explanations already 40 years ago - and still, it was only in the early years of this century, that the Russians came out with something closely matching the APG-65 from the mid-1970s in multi-role capability, function and performance (not to talk about man-machine interface)... Hell, this navalized Indian MIG-29s is to become the first ever true multi-role variant of that fighter at all (more than 30 years AFTER the type originally entered service!).

Any idea about its reliability, credibility …
Thanks in advance,
Deino 
 
It was never withdrawn and since August at the same place where it was - a blog of Victor Baranets, retired colonel and so called military observer of yellowish Komsomolskaya Pravda newspaper. His moral level can be judged from fact that he felt free to discuss possibility of Col. Levchenko betrayal and escape to China when SAR teams were still searching crash site and remains of pilot of Su-27SM from Dzemgi last year.
We see here attempt of those who lost the competition - from context it's clear that it's not MiG staff with their E-721 butcompetitors from inside Sukhoi with alternative, so called 'heavy PAK FA' entry. When someone says that his fighter can carry two Kh-55 and fly twice of T-50 range, 'easily calculating this performance data on calculator', performing role of PAK DA and uses such political clown as Zhirinovsky to promote an aircraft project to President Medvedev - 'our letter at the table of President' - you are starting to worry about his mental health. As 'letter to President was on his table in August' then it seems that this paper was used according with a level of its significance - went in the watercloset or either other appropriate place.
 
Thanks a lot for Your comments.

Deino
 
500km/h at low level argument itselfs makes the article not credible...hell a spitfire can fly faster!

But for max speed i recall somewhere circa 2006 that news indeed talked about reduction to mach 2.

I'd be interested to hear more about the heavy pak fa entre and mig E-721; configuration? planned performance etc?


As for the debate on ACIG; Tom's knowledge aside, the arguemnt that T-50 is just a developped SU-27 just because it has round engines is not very serious.
 
Ogami musashi said:
As for the debate on ACIG; Tom's knowledge aside, the arguemnt that T-50 is just a developped SU-27 just because it has round engines is not very serious.

True. It's a developed Su-27 because it's got a good portion of the Su-27's entire back end, not just the nozzles.
 
There is not a single identical structural assembly other than the nozzles as far as I can see. Not even the unpainted area is exactly the same, neither the outer mold line of the fairing which sits higher in the airframe with respect to the wing/tail plane than it does in the Su-27 family, nor the access panels (far fewer and serrated on the lower side). The stinger is completely different, the engines are further apart and have a weapons bay in between them - at which point DOES it become a new design according to you if this is not enough?
 
I don't think sferrin meant it was a Su-27 gone stealthy, but the design of the Su-27 lead to the T-50's design. I think the closest western analog was Northrup's designs stemming from the F-5/F-20 leading to the YF-17.
 
Demon Lord Razgriz said:
I don't think sferrin meant it was a Su-27 gone stealthy, but the design of the Su-27 lead to the T-50's design. I think the closest western analog was Northrup's designs stemming from the F-5/F-20 leading to the YF-17.

The lower aft fuselage looks like it was built on Flanker tooling is what I meant.
 
sferrin said:
The lower aft fuselage looks like it was built on Flanker tooling is what I meant.

Fair enough, that could actually be true (although the significant differences mentioned above would likely require some alterations to the tools). IMHO that's a very far cry from it having "a good portion of the Su-27's entire backend" or the whole aircraft being essentially a Silent Flanker though.
 
Trident said:
sferrin said:
The lower aft fuselage looks like it was built on Flanker tooling is what I meant.

Fair enough, that could actually be true (although the significant differences mentioned above would likely require some alterations to the tools). IMHO that's a very far cry from it having "a good portion of the Su-27's entire backend" or the whole aircraft being essentially a Silent Flanker though.

I never said it was a "Silent Flanker" along the lines of the F-15SE. I said, "a good portion of the Su-27's entire backend", which is an accurate comment IMO. I didn't say the entire backend.
 
Well i'm not quite sure about all of that but my point was that we lack information to assert that.
Because being a rip of SU-27 like tom says suppose:

-The plane was drawn with the SU-27 as a starting point
-The plane was built with a majority of technics that are similar to SU-27
-The plane has similar performance traits I.E it tends to behave like the SU-27 but with ehanced performance


I think we lack all of the 3 points to have a good argumentation and looks are not an accurate argument. It is very subjective in addition; While of course i see some similarities i don't see that plane being more flanker evolution or else then the F-22 is just a stealthy F-15...
 
Well, I've always assumed that any Sukhoi design uses past Sukhoi (or TsAGI) studies and that Russian air doctrines require widely spaced engines, high maneuverability etc. - Similarities don't surprise me.
After all, the F-22 is just a derived F-15 ;)

But let's not start that discussion again!

Ogami musashi said:
But for max speed i recall somewhere circa 2006 that news indeed talked about reduction to mach 2.

This seems supported by the actual design - lots of room around the engines and issuing of contracts for a 2nd generation of considerably more powerful engines (allowing the original requirement to be met).
 
sferrin said:
True. It's a developed Su-27 because it's got a good portion of the Su-27's entire back end, not just the nozzles.
It is definitively an evolution of the Flanker concept but not an evolution of the Su-27 as an aircraft.
It has similarities but as a concept, integral layout, twin fins and wing LERX, as such yes it is an evolution, but it also has a few revolutions, single piece dorsal fins without rudder, a LEVCON that blends the fuction of the previous canards and wing LERX.
Faceted fuselage and inlet.
This makes the T-50 a new aircraft with new aerodynamics and concepts.
It is more a YF-23 concept with F-22 wings and tail and an original LEVCON on a SU-27 basic layout.
Definitively it will be aerodynamically speaking the most advanced stealth fighter of the 4 that are in design or operation including the F-22, F-35 and J-20.

When it gets its new engine and new 2D nozzle type it will be a total match for the F-22 and more more advanced than the J-20, it will be better than these two.
where it might fall short well perhaps avionics or weapons, but it is a very smart design.
 
PAK FA said:

Lot's of guess there; Aerodynamics are not done by the eye;

Let see first what will be the real production version of pak-fa...
 
Ogami musashi said:
Well i'm not quite sure about all of that but my point was that we lack information to assert that.
Because being a rip of SU-27 like tom says suppose:

-The plane was drawn with the SU-27 as a starting point
-The plane was built with a majority of technics that are similar to SU-27
-The plane has similar performance traits I.E it tends to behave like the SU-27 but with ehanced performance


I think we lack all of the 3 points to have a good argumentation and looks are not an accurate argument. It is very subjective in addition; While of course i see some similarities i don't see that plane being more flanker evolution or else then the F-22 is just a stealthy F-15...

I look at the t-50 and see the Russians wanted to take the best from each aircraft...

front end cockpit area very Northrop yf-23 like with a f-22 wing and Flanker style "centroplane" lifting fuselage for the weapons bays...add in the all moving vertical tails, adjustable LERX, and 3-d vectoring and you have a less stealthy, yet more maneuverable airplane than the f-22, but later versions should be more stealthy.

Regarding those who believe that the t-50 and Flanker are related, only in the nacelle layout and centroplane. Think of it as a family stealthy "evolution" of the Flanker rather than a completely new jump into an entirely untested airplane configuration.
 
I'm not sure the Su-27 was used as a starting point, afterall there was the interim S-37 (and even the MiG 1.44) not to mention several other configurations rejected pre-submission in 2003. It appears the F-22 fuselage configuration was rejected out-of-hand (vertical s-duct, w/bay lay-out) as the performance penalties didn't conform with RuAF requirements. If you read the official patent application (c/o flateric) they wanted to keep the side & front profile as low/flat as possible- they 'podded' the engines and hence the T-10 center-plane 'tunnel' came back into play as an aerodynamic device.

I'm confident that the radar-blocker/'banana' duct/canted engine solution is nothing short of revolutionary as far as engine screening is concerned (jubilant J-20 fanboys over at keypubs take note!!). The front & sides of the intakes are faceted, the rear will get 2-D tvc so the question remains what will they do with the rounded bare-metal engine pods (from all aspects)- they must have a plan considering the attention to detail elsewhere.

20100429.jpg


Tellingly, the Russkies aren't keen on the 2 seater 'FGFA', because of the RCS penalty. Now that Indian money is made available, expect the project to move forward as per schedule (barring any nasty surprises).
 
kcran567 said:
I look at the t-50 and see the Russians wanted to take the best from each aircraft...

front end cockpit area very Northrop yf-23 like with a f-22 wing and Flanker style "centroplane" lifting fuselage for the weapons bays...add in the all moving vertical tails, adjustable LERX, and 3-d vectoring and you have a less stealthy, yet more maneuverable airplane than the f-22, but later versions should be more stealthy.

Excuse me but when i read things like that...what do you know about stealth? aerodynamics? How can you judge a plane you've seen on 2 videos only by bits?

Do you seriously think things are that simple?

No, you don't take best part from each plane; it doesn't work like that; a plane is an integral thing it is not because you take the 23 like front end with F-22 wings that it works.

When you design a plane you design it with all dimensions in mind.

World is not black or white and a simply study of performance of F-15 vs SU-27 shows you that lerx and tunnel on SU-27 is not equal to better performance;



Regarding those who believe that the t-50 and Flanker are related, only in the nacelle layout and centroplane. Think of it as a family stealthy "evolution" of the Flanker rather than a completely new jump into an entirely untested airplane configuration.

What is an untested airplane configuration for you? You think that because you have a tunnel it can't bring new flow fields?? That you master it an had only to tweak it??


I wish people would stop believe they can in one glance do the same work than 10 years of windtunnel,CFD and phd+20 years experienced people's work.


Not directed against you in an offensive way but with the release of J-20 i'm overflooded with those kind of people that already know what is good and is not good on a plane that hasn't even left the ground...and the S-duct stupid rants on pak-fa did set me on earlier..
 
I'm pretty certain that Airwolf is just the nickname of the photographer who uploaded the image at strizhi.ru.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom