PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby Singha » 18 May 2011 14:03

looking at the beastly power of this bird, I wonder why people work themselves into a froth about the A2A capabilities of the typhoon - which anyways awaits the full evolution of the captor-E radar, pirate IRST and meteor, plus a successor to the somewhat dated Asraam aim132 (will it be aim9Xv2 ?). this thing with side looking radars etc , internal weapons in considerable number and long loiter time, plus better top speed and low drag is clearly in the f22 class and a tier above the EF. and we are getting 250 to start with.

the indian official quoting 0.5m2 rcs target vs 20m2 for MKI is quite telling comparison. I wonder how EF with external weapons can claim similar figures...seem to recall EF supporters quoting 0.1m2 or some such figure... :((

methinks if we can upg the MKI using elements of the pakfa program, a EPE engine, a better missile and a downscaled pakfa aesa radar + PAKFA itself, the air to air arena will be taken care of.

we need a high quality semi-stealthy DPSA bird to replace and supplement the Mirages and Jags and Rafale is probably it. eventually when AMCA enters service around 2025 it can supplement and replace....

Gaur
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2009
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 23:19

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby Gaur » 18 May 2011 16:02

Austin wrote:Gaur , check the link its out there , I can read the article , you can always use full screen for better viewing.

I don't know what the problem is, but I get a message saying "Sorry! This document is not publicly available." when I try to view either the embedded document. On clicking the link, I get the msg "The document 'De-constructing the Sukhoi PAK-FA (Su-50)' has been deleted ".

Anyway, will try to search for another link afterwards.

arunsrinivasan
BRFite
Posts: 345
Joined: 16 May 2009 15:24

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby arunsrinivasan » 18 May 2011 16:38

^^ Found this link & just downloaded the PDF.

IDA's Unclassified Analysis Download Link

Gaur
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2009
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 23:19

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby Gaur » 18 May 2011 16:53

arunsrinivasan wrote:^^ Found this link & just downloaded the PDF.

IDA's Unclassified Analysis Download Link

Thanks a lot arunsrinivasan. Much appreciated. :)

At first glance, the article doesn't seem to be an "analysis" by any standards. It is a compilation of info and diagrams from various sources. A very interesting and exhaustive compilation, but a compilation nevertheless. So, if someone was paid to do this job, they could have just searched Paralay or keypubs instead. I am willing to bet that even Austin would have seen majority of the diagrams in the pdf. :D

rakall
BRFite
Posts: 798
Joined: 10 May 2005 10:26

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby rakall » 18 May 2011 23:10

Gaur wrote:
arunsrinivasan wrote:^^ Found this link & just downloaded the PDF.

IDA's Unclassified Analysis Download Link

Thanks a lot arunsrinivasan. Much appreciated. :)

At first glance, the article doesn't seem to be an "analysis" by any standards. It is a compilation of info and diagrams from various sources. A very interesting and exhaustive compilation, but a compilation nevertheless. So, if someone was paid to do this job, they could have just searched Paralay or keypubs instead. I am willing to bet that even Austin would have seen majority of the diagrams in the pdf. :D


The compilation is entirely a copy-paste from keypubs (where a lot of info came from Paralay).. Not a single word of independant analysis

Shrinivasan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2196
Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Location: Gateway Arch
Contact:

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby Shrinivasan » 19 May 2011 10:14

I am able to download from this link.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/55728898/Russ ... esentation
User - Luptonga

Njoy...


Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2597
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby Cybaru » 23 May 2011 03:56

Singha wrote:looking at the beastly power of this bird, I wonder why people work themselves into a froth about the A2A capabilities of the typhoon - which anyways awaits the full evolution of the captor-E radar, pirate IRST and meteor, plus a successor to the somewhat dated Asraam aim132 (will it be aim9Xv2 ?). this thing with side looking radars etc , internal weapons in considerable number and long loiter time, plus better top speed and low drag is clearly in the f22 class and a tier above the EF. and we are getting 250 to start with.

the indian official quoting 0.5m2 rcs target vs 20m2 for MKI is quite telling comparison. I wonder how EF with external weapons can claim similar figures...seem to recall EF supporters quoting 0.1m2 or some such figure... :((

methinks if we can upg the MKI using elements of the pakfa program, a EPE engine, a better missile and a downscaled pakfa aesa radar + PAKFA itself, the air to air arena will be taken care of.

we need a high quality semi-stealthy DPSA bird to replace and supplement the Mirages and Jags and Rafale is probably it. eventually when AMCA enters service around 2025 it can supplement and replace....



Where is the like button ?? We need mud movers.. Heavy duty mud movers.. Rafale is probably better than EF in this regard..

Shrinivasan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2196
Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Location: Gateway Arch
Contact:

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby Shrinivasan » 23 May 2011 06:39

Hope they also start working on a Bomber version of the PAK-FA. We need a dedicated bomber for taking out entrenched ground targets and large armoured columns / trains etc.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby shiv » 23 May 2011 07:19

Cybaru wrote:Where is the like button ?? We need mud movers.. Heavy duty mud movers.. Rafale is probably better than EF in this regard..


Sorry :D The words "mud movers" make me see red.

Mud moving is both outdated and ineffective overall. Damage per kilo of explosive is not good enough. We need PGM delivery platforms and earth penetrating and bunker busting precision munitions. Like dogs with Titanium teeth - the business of mud moving has caught the imagination of a lot of people but I have serious reasons to disagree with that.

One 250 kg bomb that can explode after penetrating 10 meters of earth is better than 50 X 250 kg bombs that will merely scratch the surface and move some mud.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby Singha » 23 May 2011 08:26

Cheenum, Rus has started conceptual work on a replacement stealth bomber for tu22/tu160 dubbed the PAKDA. it will certainly borrow from the PAKFA project, but no CG drawings released yet of what its size and shape will be. I suspect it will be much smaller than the blackjack...probablt tu22 size at most but feature new cruise missiles and internal bays.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36405
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby SaiK » 23 May 2011 10:07

http://imageshack.us/m/840/1817/130606999521006225.jpg

fantastic-o!

but, high RCS there, and high Infra.

jai
BRFite
Posts: 366
Joined: 08 Oct 2009 19:14

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby jai » 23 May 2011 12:21

shiv wrote:
Cybaru wrote:
Like dogs with Titanium teeth - the business of mud moving has caught the imagination of a lot of people but I have serious reasons to disagree with that.



Dr. Sahib, the first post on Dogs with metal teeth was made on the military humour forum along with a joke. Looks like you missed the sarcasm of the post !

I am amazed that so many people have taken this one seriously :rotfl: :rotfl:


Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby Austin » 24 May 2011 17:22

Interview with Saturn GD V Chepkin

link

On Military Aircraft Engine

For military aircraft, we have created two engines - one for the aircraft, the Su-35 ", the second - for the Russian aircraft 5 th generation of T-50". The first - "117C" - is mainly intended for export. it is easier in terms of aerodynamics, and most importantly - targeted for aircraft with conventional arms, suspended on pylons outside the fuselage, with no strong constraints on dimensions. Such schemes are used on aircraft 4-th generation, exported to India and Malaysia.

The second engine - "117" - though only differ by one letter in the title, is much more advanced engine - this is a real engine of the 5-th generation. we sometimes hear from competitors the engine of 5-th generation should have such a blade, such and such materials, high-speed rotors, and you do not have this ... None of this is all just ways of achieving the goal. A single goal - increasing specific thrust, ie the ratio of thrust to its weight. For example, the first jet engine Arkhip Mikhailovich Cradles weighed 1350 kg and had the same cravings, that is, its specific thrust is equal to 1. The engine is the 4 th generation, "AL-31F, has already managed to achieve specific thrust of 8.7, and car 5 th generation, the figure is 10.

- What are the new challenges encountered when creating the plane 5 th generation?


Problems have to solve a thousand. Say, for reducing the radar visibility "T-50 has a scheme with an internal arrangement of weapons, so is becoming increasingly important problem of reducing its size. And that means we have to be develop and put into service a new weapon, but since it is low volume, it must be highly accurate. It therefore necessarily needs a fully functional GLONASS.

The American GPS, for obvious reasons is not suitable, since in times of crisis they will disable it, and both during the Ossetian-Georgian war, they impose an artificial shift in the coordinates of 300 km. Also need to know exactly, not just to shoot, but how do you shoot, so should be a modern mapping system. The missile itself should be unobtrusive. Such weapons are now manufactured, and all this affects the design of the engine. Work is proceeding according to plan ... In general, in my opinion, the plane turns out good, no worse than the American "F-22".

By the way, if we compare the T-50 "with the" F-22 ", Western sources say that the T-50" loses much of the last parameters such as infrared engine visibility in the rear hemisphere ?

We're working very intensely, and to reduce the infrared and radar visibility, and were twice as better performance in comparison with the "F-22" (at least for those data that are published and which I have).

Today, the Chinese have copied our Su-27 "and are ready to sell it on world markets at dumping prices. ?

We do not lose, because such an aircraft as we do, the Chinese have no time soon will be! They say that the plane made is 5-th generation, but you can say anything ... They are the best engine copied from our "AL-31F. We also do engine 5-th generation, and it is in all of its parameters on traction, in specific fuel consumption corresponds to the 5-th generation.

I open a secret and say that we actually already have two motors 5-th generation. The second, which is now conventionally called the "Type 30", has already been tested in flight on the fighter T-50 "According to its parameters it a 15-25 percent greater than "117 ".

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2734
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby JTull » 24 May 2011 17:43

Austin wrote:Interview with Saturn GD V Chepkin

I open a secret and say that we actually already have two motors 5-th generation. The second, which is now conventionally called the "Type 30", has already been tested in flight on the fighter T-50 "According to its parameters it a 15-25 percent greater than "117 ".


Very positive news!

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby Singha » 24 May 2011 18:21

yah baby yah....the type30 sounds like a meaty beast to me.

Gaur
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2009
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 23:19

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby Gaur » 24 May 2011 19:28

AOA! They were only recently saying that the second 5gen engine was 10 years away! Craftly Russians! :twisted:

Gaur
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2009
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 23:19

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby Gaur » 25 May 2011 06:55

Image
Image
Indian Delegation at PAK-FA demonstration.
From keypubs.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby Austin » 25 May 2011 08:05

Can any body identify the gentleman in the cockpit ?

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby Singha » 25 May 2011 10:15

said to be delegation of indian MOD and industry officials. the gents in the pic look like grizzled old IAF types to me though...

these two pics bring out the size and shape diffs between su30 and pakfa quite well - hugely smaller vertical tails for eg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2781/443 ... f758_z.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2751/443 ... c147_z.jpg

we could perhaps save a few 100kg more in weight for PAKFA-I by changing the wheels and supports to a thinner design as operating from super-cold and gravelly siberian airbases is not on our agenda...the F15 for example has a truly sdre thin legged look vs pakfa/rafale...and it still operates with big payloads hung on every rack down to the tailpipes. F15E is worthy of a case study in how to increase pylons and fuel on a existing platform - side pylons, tail pylons it has them all.

the saved weight could reduce fuel consumption to extend endurance kinda like deleting the 1400kg of MAD on P8A for USN

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby Austin » 25 May 2011 10:40

The higher thrust would be some what offseted by uses of rectangular nozzle , so a 17 to 18 Ton thrust might see a 3 to 5 % reduction if they opt for such nozzle for greater rear stealth.

What would matter too is beyond raw thrust does the new engine has better T/W ratio and better fuel consumption figures compared to 117.

If they can keep the weight similar to 117 and achieve a 2-3 T higher thrust that would improve the T/W ratio

nits
BRFite
Posts: 1003
Joined: 01 May 2006 22:56
Location: Some where near Equator...

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby nits » 25 May 2011 11:29

Slight OT; but at first glance was not able to recognize Indian Air Chief PV Naik as eyes are accustomed to see him in Uniform... though he still has no nonsense look in that formal suit 8)

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4441
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby srai » 25 May 2011 11:32

Gaur wrote:Image
...
Indian Delegation at PAK-FA demonstration.
From keypubs.

Singha wrote:said to be delegation of indian MOD and industry officials. the gents in the pic look like grizzled old IAF types to me though...

...


One looks like the retiring ACM Naik in suit.
Image

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby Singha » 25 May 2011 11:35

ha hah I knew it...the person in the foreground looks like a hard man too. probably a air commodore/AVM type in charge of IAF reqs for the project.

kvraghav
BRFite
Posts: 858
Joined: 17 Apr 2008 11:47
Location: Some where near the equator

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby kvraghav » 25 May 2011 13:04

^^^
The one in the cockpit seems to be test pilot Mr Kothiyal.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby Austin » 25 May 2011 13:13

Yeah he could be Mr Kothiyal , he certainly is a defence breed not the MOD types.

Gaur
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2009
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 23:19

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby Gaur » 25 May 2011 13:15

^^
Wg Cdr Kothiyal has not been attached to any deffence related field for a long time (Tarmak007 had posted an interview with him a few months back). He serves in Civil Aviation sector and there is no reason why he would be part of a MOD delegation. Anyway, I don't see much resemblance in any case.

sarabpal.s
BRFite
Posts: 344
Joined: 13 Sep 2008 22:04

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby sarabpal.s » 25 May 2011 15:44

Slight OT; but at first glance was not able to recognize Indian Air Chief PV Naik as eyes are accustomed to see him in Uniform... though he still has no nonsense look in that formal suit



MIG 21+++ look :evil:

BENNY
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 26
Joined: 22 Aug 2010 11:53

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby BENNY » 25 May 2011 15:47

Besides the common heavier platform, Russia has also agreed to jointly develop a lighter fifth generation fighter tailored to meet the specific requirements of the IAF.


http://www.deccanchronicle.com/channels ... -visit-117

Light 5th Gen???

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby Austin » 25 May 2011 16:01

^^^ Surprising and if this does not get confirmed by many other sources should be taken as journo error

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16518
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby NRao » 25 May 2011 16:06

BENNY wrote:
Besides the common heavier platform, Russia has also agreed to jointly develop a lighter fifth generation fighter tailored to meet the specific requirements of the IAF.


http://www.deccanchronicle.com/channels ... -visit-117

Light 5th Gen???


Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr. :evil:

There goes my AMCA.

Whom does Naik work for?

Gaur
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2009
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 23:19

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby Gaur » 25 May 2011 16:07

SELF DELETED. Wrong information.
Last edited by Gaur on 25 May 2011 16:28, edited 1 time in total.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16518
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby NRao » 25 May 2011 16:09

Gaur wrote:
Austin wrote:^^^ Surprising and if this does not get confirmed by many other sources should be taken as journo error

That may not be an error. I am pretty sure that I have seen another news report that FGFA will be a little lighter than PAK-FA. I know that this is contrary to the popular belief, but I distinctly remember reading such a news report. I will post the link if I manage to find it.


The UAV or twin-seat version?

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16946
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby Rahul M » 25 May 2011 16:12

Austin wrote:Can any body identify the gentleman in the cockpit ?

aviator sunglass == military, in this case IAF, right ? :P

probably someone from air HQ in charge of plans waghera.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby Austin » 25 May 2011 16:17

NRao wrote:The UAV or twin-seat version?


Could be but the ghost of light fighter keeps coming and dies quickly , let us wait for more confirmation from other sources.

Gaur
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2009
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 23:19

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby Gaur » 25 May 2011 16:26

Was just searching for the report of lighter FGFA news I was talking about. It seems that I have totally made a total fool of myself. I had just seen some stupid fanboy posts in some forums on how FGFA would be lighter because it would use even more super duper composites. In short, there is no such news report but only my muddled memory. Next time, will definitely search before posting.
:oops: :oops: :oops:

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby Austin » 25 May 2011 17:03

Rahul M wrote:
Austin wrote:Can any body identify the gentleman in the cockpit ?

aviator sunglass == military, in this case IAF, right ? :P

probably someone from air HQ in charge of plans waghera.


Yes he certainly has the flare and style of a defence officer

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby Singha » 25 May 2011 19:22

the third gent behind the ACM , wearing aviator glasses also is definitely a IAF looking type. which makes sense - ACM would have taken some high level planning officers there...but wonder why all are in civil dress....usually serving officers seem to go on foreign trips in service dress for official occasions.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Postby Austin » 25 May 2011 19:27

Singha wrote:the third gent behind the ACM , wearing aviator glasses also is definitely a IAF looking type.


You mean Mikhail Pogosyan ?


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests