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

[RadicalDisconnect]

Well, based on the information so far, it's built to fight legacy, similar, and unmanned* aircraft.

*see previous post quoting Himalayas

As far as weight and size goes, there really isn't any official figures and the best ones you'll arrive at are wild guesses so it's impossible to know whether it would be lighter or heavier than the F-22. The airframe will only get a bit heavier as the rear end becomes reinforced, and more module and sensor combinations are added.

When it comes to "hypothetical" weight reduction compared to other 5th generation designs, aside from use of composites, it would probably because they didn't overdo the faceting of the nacelle portion, they went for a framed canopy, and they went for a "partial" serpentine instead of a full serpentine duct which would eat up some space and add some bulk/complexity.

I agree with this, especially the fact that we don't really know the official weight of the aircraft. Having said that, the T-50 has better span loading than the F-22 does as well. If you look at the vehicle from the front, you can see the weight of the fuselage, weapons, and the nacelles/engines are spread across the span. That generally helps structurally. However, there can be draw backs because you can end up with more structural stress due to there being more longitudinal corners. Once again, it's all about the tradeoffs. However, I doubt a fully mission capable T-50 will weigh less than an F-22.

I'm going by Piotr Butowski's figures from Air International October 2013, which gives 18,000 kg empty and 35,000 kg MTOW. Of course, this could possibly be the T-50 prototypes without avionics or mission systems. This is compared to the F-22's 19,700 kg empty weight and 38,000 kg MTOW.

 

[saintkatanalegacy]

Yes, it must also be noted that the future planes *must* be stronger so that they can handle the 2nd phase engines even though they are lighter.

Much like the T-10 design, I expect constant growth and development throughout its service so I doubt we will have a definite weight on the aircraft.

 

[RadicalDisconnect]

I recall flateric saying that production model PAK FA would use a one-piece canopy. Is this still the plan?

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Well, based on the information so far, it's built to fight legacy, similar, and unmanned* aircraft.

*see previous post quoting Himalayas

As far as weight and size goes, there really isn't any official figures and the best ones you'll arrive at are wild guesses so it's impossible to know whether it would be lighter or heavier than the F-22. The airframe will only get a bit heavier as the rear end becomes reinforced, and more module and sensor combinations are added.

When it comes to "hypothetical" weight reduction compared to other 5th generation designs, aside from use of composites, it would probably because they didn't overdo the faceting of the nacelle portion, they went for a framed canopy, and they went for a "partial" serpentine instead of a full serpentine duct which would eat up some space and add some bulk/complexity.

I agree with this, especially the fact that we don't really know the official weight of the aircraft. Having said that, the T-50 has better span loading than the F-22 does as well. If you look at the vehicle from the front, you can see the weight of the fuselage, weapons, and the nacelles/engines are spread across the span. That generally helps structurally. However, there can be draw backs because you can end up with more structural stress due to there being more longitudinal corners. Once again, it's all about the tradeoffs. However, I doubt a fully mission capable T-50 will weigh less than an F-22.

I'm going by Piotr Butowski's figures from Air International October 2013, which gives 18,000 kg empty and 35,000 kg MTOW. Of course, this could possibly be the T-50 prototypes without avionics or mission systems. This is compared to the F-22's 19,700 kg empty weight and 38,000 kg MTOW.

PiBu qualifies as an expert on Russian aviation, but he won't have definitive figures. Estimates only.

 

[flateric]

I recall flateric saying that production model PAK FA would use a one-piece canopy. Is this still the plan?

Not true. I never said this. T-50 will stay with two piece canopy and silica-glass transparencies

 

[saintkatanalegacy]

What I did recall flateric saying was one piece canopy adds weight

 

[RadicalDisconnect]

Hmm, I thought I remember flateric saying something about a one piece canopy way back in 2010 or 2011, though that may just be my botched memory. Interesting choice of silica glass. I suppose that is to make it thinner and lighter compared to polycarbonate? Side note, why are the edges of the LEVCON and strakes not as sharp at the edge as those on the F-22 and F-35?

Not a whole lot of news about this aircraft since it got transferred to the state test center.

EDIT: Going through some older posts, noticed this.

Normally, a designer will avoid overly large strakes because of the poor pitch-up tendencies they can produce. With the T-50, it actually looks as though they are taking advantage of that same fact to generate the quick nose-up motion we see. The ability of the LEVCONs to move downward allows the aircraft to control pitch-up so that it doesn't get out of hand. That's actually rather clever...

By poor pitch-up tendencies, do you mean that large strakes have excessive pitch-up tendencies, or the other way around?

 

[Kryptid]

By poor pitch-up tendencies, do you mean that large strakes have excessive pitch-up tendencies, or the other way around?

Excessive.

 

[SOC]

there were many things that did happen on maiden flight, but time yet to come to tell about them

...except that should be footage from the second test flight, as the gear is retracted.

 

[Deino]

At 5:21 of the first video the Mig 1.44 seems to have a nozzle malfunction of the Left nozzle (it is open), has anybody noticed this? was there an engine malfunction on that test flight?

Looks exactly (or just the other way around) like the latest J-20 images wgere also one engine is open while the other one is closed.

 

[flateric]

...except that should be footage from the second test flight, as the gear is retracted.

and even more things did happen at the second flight, namely, with FCS (they almost have lost the a/c)

 

[RadicalDisconnect]

Has it been revealed whether the 101KS-V uses mid-wave or long-wave IR bands?

 

[Deino]

PAK-FA T50-3 and -4 began with weapon tests on external pylons:

http://vk.com/wall-14964099_11704

 

[sferrin]

PAK-FA T50-3 and -4 began with weapon tests on external pylons:

http://vk.com/wall-14964099_11704

403 error.

 

[Avimimus]

Try copying/retyping the link rather than clicking on it.

Nothing surprising - four external hardpoints with a mixture of R-73/R-77 or R-77/Kh-31.

 

[RadicalDisconnect]

Grabbed these from ED forums. From certain angles it almost seems like the weapons are canted inwards.

It seems like the Izdeliye 180 / K-77M can use the same launcher interface as the R-77.

 

[stealthflanker]

The latest images above are nice. Especially, hmm finally a good reference point for measurement, the R-73, R-77 and Kh-31 dummy.

they give me figure of 20.44 m length and 14.66m of wingspan. Will try to figure reference wing area.

 

[flanker]

they give me figure of 20.44 m length and 14.66m of wingspan.

Try again...

 

[RadicalDisconnect]

they give me figure of 20.44 m length and 14.66m of wingspan.

Try again...

19.7 m length, 13.95 m wingspan?

(I looked in the back of the book, so does that still count? ;D)

T-50-5 pics from ED forums.

 

[stealthflanker]

they give me figure of 20.44 m length and 14.66m of wingspan.

Try again...

I did bro.. and yes it's rather inconsistent.. i tested using another image taken from side and got 19.6 m

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

they give me figure of 20.44 m length and 14.66m of wingspan.

Try again...

19.7 m length, 13.95 m wingspan?

(I looked in the back of the book, so does that still count? ;D )

T-50-5 pics from ED forums.

19.7 m indeed, wingspan calculates to 13.7m but there is a slight bank which, if I correct for, would indicate 13.95m is likely correct.

 

[stealthflanker]

19.7 m indeed, wingspan calculates to 13.7m but there is a slight bank which, if I correct for, would indicate 13.95m is likely correct.

Ah i stand corrected then. Thanks

 

[RadicalDisconnect]

One of the best images so far. Seems like the weapons are indeed slightly toed in, though nowhere near the degree of SHornet.

http://aviationspotters.net/user_photo.php?ph_id=7779&user_name=Alexey+Mityaev

 

[shivering]

Another T-50 weapons pic from russianplanes.net:

http://russianplanes.net/id136790

 

[RadicalDisconnect]

I remember Pogosyan saying that the T-50's supersonic range is 1500+ km. Did he specify whether this is with 117 engines or izdeliye 30 engines?

 

[flateric]

Source?

 

[RadicalDisconnect]

Source?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ix4VmMaTNCA

And Piotr Butowski's article from Air International October 2013.

 

[flanker]

I have always assumed he meant with 117 engines.

 

[RadicalDisconnect]

I was browsing through ruaviation.com for range info and came across this.

http://www.ruaviation.com/news/2012/2/14/787/

February 14, 2012

Russian advanced Т-50 (PAK FA) fighter leaves American F-22 and Chinese J-20 behind by several important characteristics, Lenta.ru reports. It has been stated by the Commander-in-Chief of the Russian air forces Colonel-General Alexander Zelin.

"After the benchmarks of Russian T-50 fifth-generation fighter’s performance compared to American F-22 and Chinese J-20, we may draw a conclusion that PAK FA outgoes them by maximum flight speed (afterburned and dry), maximum range, thrustweight ratio and maximum overload", - Zelin explained.

According to the Commander-in-Chief, the Russian prototype is comparable to the foreign analogs by dimensions and weight, but it has “significantly lesser run and roll-on operation distance” and it “looks better” than the foreign rivals by characteristics of its aircraft equipment.

According to the plan of Russian Ministry of Defense, PAK FA should have more advanced avionics, than its rivals, “electronic pilot” function and state-of-the-art radar with phased antenna array. F-22 fighter has been put into operation by USAF in 2005, while Chinese J-20 is still under development; its first flight has been performed in early 2011.

The new Russian jet, developed by Sukhoi, combines functions of fighter and strike aircraft. At present three PAK FA prototypes are taking part in the flight test program; they have performed more than 120 flights as of February 8th. The fourth one will join flight testing this year.

After the completion of flight testing, the Ministry of Defense intends to acquire 60 T-50 fighters. The demand for T-50 jets in the Russian air forces is estimated at 150 ones.

I am expecting the greater range, given the PAK FA's likely enormous fuel capacity. But as for the other parameters, any validity to General Alexander Zelin's assertions? I thought PAK FA is designed for 9 g like the F-22, and has Mach 2.0 top speed.

That said I do understand Zelin credibility is questionable and sometimes is not reflected by reality, and PAK FA is still in early testing. Maybe Zelin believes F-22 max speed is only Mach 1.8 like commonly reported in older articles?

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Well, he's unlikely to say "Its worse than the F-22 in all respects oops sorry guys". It may have a higher design G limit, and he may be projecting production engine performance from interim engine performance. Its a bit too vague, but he was notably talking up kinematic performance, not stealth or avionics for instance.

 

[Triton]

It will also be interesting to see the differences between the production Sukhoi T-50 and the production Sukhoi/HAL Perspective Multi-Role Fighter (PMF), formerly FGFA.

 

[RadicalDisconnect]

It will also be interesting to see the differences between the production Sukhoi T-50 and the production Sukhoi/HAL Perspective Multi-Role Fighter (PMF), formerly FGFA.

Recent reports suggest very little differences. In fact, the two-seater may not even be happening at this point.

Two really good images found on ED forums.

 

[FighterJock]

Now that PAK-FA carriage tests have begun, when will we see actual inert or live missile test launches?

 

[saintkatanalegacy]

To be honest, seeing it carrying missiles makes it sound like 2016 isn't overoptimistic for a year. ;D

 

[Avimimus]

To be honest, seeing it carrying missiles makes it sound like 2016 isn't overoptimistic for a year. ;D

Regardless of any other claims about performance - the ability to remain on schedule, rapidly go through flight testing (and possibly stay close to the budget) is pretty impressive compared to a number of other programs.

 

[sferrin]

To be honest, seeing it carrying missiles makes it sound like 2016 isn't overoptimistic for a year. ;D

Regardless of any other claims about performance - the ability to remain on schedule, rapidly go through flight testing (and possibly stay close to the budget) is pretty impressive compared to a number of other programs.

Of course considering the relatively small step they're taking that's not much of a surprise.

 

[donnage99]

This is probably one of the worst thing I've read even as a kindergarden pop-up picture book.
http://www.businessinsider.com/sukhoi-t-50-cant-compete-with-the-f-35-2014-6#military-jets-are-divided-into-generations-were-now-on-the-5th-generation-of-fighter-planes-1

 

[RadicalDisconnect]

This is probably one of the worst thing I've read even as a kindergarden pop-up picture book.
http://www.businessinsider.com/sukhoi-t-50-cant-compete-with-the-f-35-2014-6#military-jets-are-divided-into-generations-were-now-on-the-5th-generation-of-fighter-planes-1

Yup, their T-50 pieces are just as garbage as their F-35 articles.

More pictures from ED forums.

 

[T-50]

This is probably one of the worst thing I've read even as a kindergarden pop-up picture book.
http://www.businessinsider.com/sukhoi-t-50-cant-compete-with-the-f-35-2014-6#military-jets-are-divided-into-generations-were-now-on-the-5th-generation-of-fighter-planes-1

Yup, their T-50 pieces are just as garbage as their F-35 articles.

More pictures from ED forums.

youre completly right!!!

 

[Deino]

:-[ :-[ :-[

IMO it looks at least more dramatic than it sounds in the text !!

http://fotografersha.livejournal.com/539678.html

Moscow, June 10. Today after the regular test flight of the T-50 aircraft at the airfield of the M.M.Gromov Flight Research Institute in Zhukovsky near Moscow, while the plane was landing, a smoke above the right air intake was observed, then a local fire broke out. The fire was quickly extinguished. The plane is to be repaired. There were no injuries. The Sukhoi Design Bureau set up a commission that will investigate the causes of the accident. This incident will not affect the timing of the T-50 test program.

http://www.sukhoi.org/eng/news/company/?id=5451