PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 05 Jan 2011 09:49

The reasonS I am hopeful is:

1) Software,
2) System integration - with so many disparate systems, uncertainties, etc, - to me - it seems that India has got pretty good at this game,
3) Project management within the air craft industry,
4) Funds - no issues here,
5) Recognition by others - leading to partner if need be, and, finally,
6) Chicom. My absolute favorite. There is no one to maintain the symmetry better than India. Even the Oz will have to relent on this point. And, I love that. : )

I am not worried. AMCA - IMVVHO - will be better than the FGFA. Going on a limb perhaps ............................

nash · Post by **nash** » 05 Jan 2011 09:55

If we look at the time line of LCA then the funding started around 93 , first flight 2001 and IOC in 2011 and that too without much expertise in engine,radar,composite,design,etc.

But now we are much capable so the timeline for AMCA fundine in 2009-10 , first flight in 2017-18 and finally induction in 2025 is very much feasible and gettable.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 05 Jan 2011 10:00

AMCA is inevitable and relatively easier compared to starting out with the minimal base and a white sheet of paper for Tejas. we have strong partnerships with russian, french, american and israeli vendors to get any building blocks not available locally, LRDE is completing its AEW and gaining exp on the EL2032 work, kaveri is in tests and Snecma is signed up, FGFA technology blocks and skills can be used....esp in stealth airframe and rcs reduction test points...

we will get there. I do not have any doubt in my mind. it might enter squadron service 5 yrs behind the J-20 but will be a better system (minus the menacing black paint and grainy photos)....it will likely sport a shivering yindu yellow and white primer as usual.

nash · Post by **nash** » 05 Jan 2011 10:16

Kaveri engine already going through test and so far it is successfull and as per GTRE it will be flight test by end of 2011.Even a kaveri engin with 90KN thrust with 1.1T weight will be quite compatible with AMCA at prototype stage.Then AESA for Tejas-MkII can be reused.We have quite good EW technology and IRST and other Tech from FGFA and MMRCA deal.We are very much clear this what we are upto.

And also another important thing is IAF is onboard from the design stage only., so there will be good synergy between consumer and producer.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 05 Jan 2011 10:51

yes - unlike the J20, the AMCA is not designed for size, psyops or intimidation...imho its footprint will be no bigger than the eurofighter. 2 x 90KN **RELIABLE** and **HIGH MTBF** will imho do fine for a stealthy strike plane with a secondary air defence role onlee. (Ej200 specs are 60kN dry and 89kN wet)....but we need to allow for a bulkier airframe than EF due to internal bay creating a bigger fuselage, so it wont be as agile which is fine...also 2D TVC nozzles ported from FGFA could be applied

nrshah · Post by **nrshah** » 05 Jan 2011 11:00

shiv wrote: 2) Going at the same rate India will catch up with America in 40 years time - i.e in 2050. If you are 20 years old today, you will be 60 years when India catches up. I will be dead.

Sorry for OT here, but we want you to live the day sir... You are one the very few who dares to think a dream like this... We want you to see the dream coming true... OT over...

nash · Post by **nash** » 05 Jan 2011 11:06

As far as radar signature or RCS is concern it will be at par with FGFA and may be better if the final version of AMCA will be without horizontal and vertical fins.

nrshah · Post by **nrshah** » 05 Jan 2011 11:40

http://www.thehindu.com/news/states/ker ... 033082.ece

From the link...

.....On the recent deal India signed with Russia for joint development of a Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft, Mr. Antony said the contract was for a preliminary design. “Given the circumstances, we require a fifth generation fighter. Only they [the Russians] were ready to give us the technology......”

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 05 Jan 2011 13:29

**RELIABLE** and **HIGH MTBF**

which is exactly why the Kaveri had come in for praise from the Americans in 2006.

there's thrust and there's other stuff.

Kaveri is now doing well in thrust too. As far as its other design features are concerned they were always contemporary with western standards.

And unlike the LCA what is now going to take up the AMCA program is an * India with a booming economy , an ever more powerful private sector, an aerospace sector no longer under sanctions and most importantly a country which has already done the LCA". * this list could go on. But I am quite certain that we will produce a a good relevant fifth generation fighter by 2023-25.

manish.rastogi · Post by **manish.rastogi** » 05 Jan 2011 15:12

imvho the only fronts on which we wont be par with FGFA are a)maneuverability/agility

b) airframe

c)somewhat on engine

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 05 Jan 2011 15:37

b) airframe

No. AMCA will have superior stealth characteristics much greater use of composites and coatings.

Composites is a place where India is doing quite well.

Sandeep_ghosh · Post by **Sandeep_ghosh** » 05 Jan 2011 15:50

shiv wrote:
Sandeep I mean no offence - but I write the way my mind works.

None taken sir, It's a great pleasure for me to be educated by people who have vast knowledge and greater understanding of science and i am sincerely thankful to you and all the members of BRF for shedding light on the queries.

1) India has reduced a 50 year gap to 20 years and has taken 60 years to do that.
2) Going at the same rate India will catch up with America in 40 years time - i.e in 2050. If you are 20 years old today, you will be 60 years when India catches up. I will be dead.

The second question is whether India has to exactly catch up with the US and do exactly the same things. My answer to that is "No". India does not need to do that and will not do that. ut my thoughts on this are definitely OT.

I hope we dont get in race with US... I dont think its of any use... land of bharat, historically has been a global power throughout the ages of humanity, Its coming back to its natural design. I sincerely believe by the time all aspirations are fruitful ...you'd still be alive and kicking

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 05 Jan 2011 16:00

I'm glad that AKA has put the record straight for those who decry our 5th-gen JV with Russia.As he rightly said,no ne was willing to share with us the tech.I only hope that the decision on the MMRCA is a wise one atking into account whoch nation by sanctions,etc.,delayed the LCA by a decade!

manish.rastogi · Post by **manish.rastogi** » 05 Jan 2011 17:42

D Roy wrote:
b) airframe
No. AMCA will have superior stealth characteristics much greater use of composites and coatings.

Composites is a place where India is doing quite well.

I believe airframe relies more on design factor than composite factor....and its for sure that russians have greater experience in designing than us!!

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 05 Jan 2011 18:33

materials and construction is just as important as aerodynamics to what you put into "airframe development.

Make no mistake coming up with good solid aerodynamics is a much lesser deal than devising appropriate materials and tolerance manufacture in this age of "stealth".

stealth is not just about chining and edge alingnment blah blah. It has a lot a lot to do with materials and coating. And of course you have to keep the weight down while improving maintainability.

In all these areas India has made superb progress due to the LCA project.

And by the way the AMCA wind tunnel models have impressed many people about India's design capabilities. As an aside, India is investing heavily in the entire range of wind tunnel facilities from trisonic to hypersonic.

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 05 Jan 2011 18:45

And by the way all the delays that we saw in indigenous programs can be put down to one thing - lack of money.

yes this may seem deterministic but it is not. As the air chief put it in that NDTV interview the country had no money in 2000 for modernization . And as a corollary it tried "import substitution" via various DRDO projects. But what people must realize is that "indigenization" also requires serious financial backing. you cannot do it on the cheap.

Instead when you look at in terms of lifetime analysis do you realize why it is attractive. but that is not how people saw it then. The air force said "bhenc... mera fighter kahan hain", babu said "chal 2 crores le aur plane banaa".

designers on the other hand were more than happy to take those sums and promise the moon. Now with your economy booming and the private sector letting it rip India can become a serious player.

I don't know if people realize this , but when somebody writes that XXXX industrialist saved YYYYY project it is not just about words.

Also it would be worthwhile to see just how much was spent on the LCA project during the eight and ninth plans and compare that to the tenth and eleventh plan periods.

All this talk of "ye agency banta to baat ban jati" and " internal rivalry ke kaaran nahin hua" and " isko nahin usko dena chaihiye thaa" happens when there is not enough money and people are looking for bakras.
the atomic agency has done well because it has received good support over the years except for 91-93 when new mines had to be cancelled. That is the kind of shit the Indian economy was in at that time.

In the 90s decade we slowly but surely got out of that shit. but that meant that there was hardly any change lying around to make FMS deals.

Now we will have a single "beeeg aeronautics agency" a la the space agency because we can afford it . earlier it was only possible to keep it piecemeal because we had chub change to throw at it. It's simply not possible to have beeeg umbrella government agency with meagre budget. In fact this would describe DRDO's past and past performance rather well.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 07 Jan 2011 15:49

http://www.janes.com/news/defence/idr/i ... _1_n.shtml
pak-fa/mi for chippanda.

pardon if posted earlier

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 08 Jan 2011 09:18

According to some posters in Russian forums, the second flying prototype which is due in early 2011 will not incorporate any major change to its airframe as compared to first prototype. Again, this is all from forums so take it FWIW.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 08 Jan 2011 09:45

DRoy,

Good summary of the situation.

vic · Post by **vic** » 08 Jan 2011 12:37

nrshah wrote:http://www.thehindu.com/news/states/ker ... 033082.ece

From the link...
.....On the recent deal India signed with Russia for joint development of a Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft, Mr. Antony said the contract was for a preliminary design. “Given the circumstances, we require a fifth generation fighter. Only they [the Russians] were ready to give us the technology......”

Who else was invited with similar joint development plans????????????????

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 08 Jan 2011 13:11

vic wrote: From the link...
.....On the recent deal India signed with Russia for joint development of a Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft, Mr. Antony said the contract was for a preliminary design. “Given the circumstances, we require a fifth generation fighter. Only they [the Russians] were ready to give us the technology......”
Who else was invited with similar joint development plans????????????????

No one. The statement merely states that we would not have got the same deal if we would have gone with the Americans. F-22 is not for sale while the technology denial by US to her primary JSF partner UK is well known to all.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 08 Jan 2011 14:22

Was looking into specs of 117 and 117S engine , the former is used on PAK-FA and latter on Su-35. It seems Saturn has created a new generation of engine using base line 117 model with a higher thrust to weight ratio compared to all the other engine that powers all other variants of flanker.

Where 117S development was quite known the 117 has been developed in a classified program lasting 5 years and as such as per its designer contains 80 % new components over 117S

Now looking at the specs of AL-31FP ( MKI ), 117 ( PAK-FA ) and 117S ( SU-35 ) there are some specs on their respective Thrust/Weight ratio.

The 117 engine is indeed a nice piece of engineering achievement not only did they manage to reduce the weight of the engine by 150 kg over 117S but managed to add ~ 1 T ( 15500 ) of thrust over 117S ( 14500 ) , compared to AL-31FP they achieved a weight reduction of ~ 150 kg and thrust increase of ~ 2.5 - 3 T

Looking at the T/W ratio of these engine here are some figures

AL-31FP: T/W ~ 8.2:1 [~12500 a/b ( kgf ) / 1520 kg ]
117S: T/W ~ 9.5:1 [ ~14500 a/b ( kgf ) / 1520 kg ]
117: T/W ~ 11:1 [ ~ 15500 a/b (kgf )/ 1370 kg ]

A Thrust/Weight ratio of 11:1 is really nice and should be labeled as new engine in its own right , considering just 5-6 years back AL-31FP was considered as an absolute modern engine by Western Observer and came into praise for its qualities.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 08 Jan 2011 17:03

^^
117 is just a myth. There is only 117S which is also called as 117C by Russians. The fifth generation engine will be AL-41 which is in development.
From NPO Saturn's official site

The 117С is an aircraft turbofan engine with a variable thrust nozzle of generation 4+ developed by NPO Saturn to the Sukhoi Design Bureau order for the export Su-35 fighter.
.....
The modernized engine thrust has been increased by 16% compared to the base AL-31FP engine, and has reached 14500 kgf, the lifetime has been doubled, up to 4000 hours.

From Paralay
http://www.translate.ru/site_Translatio ... kfasu.html

Answering a question of the correspondent "Launch", Victor Chepkin has assumed that similar engines (изд.117С), Most likely, will equip also the first skilled copies perspective Fighter Т-50 developed now by company "Dry" Within the limits of the program of the Perspective aviation complex of front aircraft (PAK FA). And for the future serial fighters of fifth generation NPO "Saturn" Develops essentially new engine of generation «5 +» which Will differ higher characteristics, in particular still Smaller relative density which, according to Victor Chepkina, is The main criterion distinguishing each subsequent generation TRD from previous

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 08 Jan 2011 17:31

The existence of 117 engine was confirmed by Pogosyan , it was a classified work done by Sukhoi for 5 years and never acknowledged till Pogosyan confirmed it.

check this link

“Claims that the fifth-generation jet allegedly has an old engine are wrong. Such claims are made by people with limited knowledge,” he said.

The Saturn Research and Production center made digitally-controlled engines of Project 117 for the new jet. The engine thrust was enlarged by 2.5 tonnes, as compared with the AL-31 engines, while the engine weight was cut by 150 kilograms. That allowed the new jet to move at a supersonic cruise speed, Pogosyan said.

AL-41 engine was the one that was meant for Mig-1.42 but was cancelled along with Mig project.

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 08 Jan 2011 18:05

oh the 117 powers the first flying T-50 alright.

the other designation of the 117 is Al-41F1 and it is a derivative of the Al-41F1S which is the basic 117S or 117C in cyrillic.

so 117 = AL-41F1- 147 kN powers the T-50-1
117S/117C = Al-41F1S - 142 KN powers the Su-35BM

the 117S is derived from the Al-31FP which powers dear old MKI.

Note: 117 is not the final T-50 engine.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 08 Jan 2011 19:06

The confusion regarding designation of 117/S/C engine was created by PiBu in Janes article where he first came up with the designation like AL-41F1A for 117S and AL-41F1 for 117 , I used to have those janes article.

But in reality the only official designation for the engine is 117S and 117 , the AL-41 died with Mig-1.42 but technology and hot parts proliferated to 117 series.

To convert to kilo netwton

Su-35 ( 117C/S ) -- 144 kN
PAK-FA ( 117 ) -- 150 - 155 kN

117 would be the engine for the initial batches till such time a new engine comes up rumoured to go by internal designation 127 , there are also talks of uprating the 117 engine via technologies developed for 127 till such time the new engine takes its own life which is almost a decade from now.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 08 Jan 2011 19:16

any info on the weight reduction materials and techniques used?

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 08 Jan 2011 19:44

Austin wrote:The existence of 117 engine was confirmed by Pogosyan , it was a classified work done by Sukhoi for 5 years and never acknowledged till Pogosyan confirmed it.

check this link

“Claims that the fifth-generation jet allegedly has an old engine are wrong. Such claims are made by people with limited knowledge,” he said.

The Saturn Research and Production center made digitally-controlled engines of Project 117 for the new jet. The engine thrust was enlarged by 2.5 tonnes, as compared with the AL-31 engines, while the engine weight was cut by 150 kilograms. That allowed the new jet to move at a supersonic cruise speed, Pogosyan said.
AL-41 engine was the one that was meant for Mig-1.42 but was cancelled along with Mig project.

Thanks for the info Austin. It is very good to know that 117 exists. 155KN is a phenomenon amount of thrust. Even if AL-41 is 10-12 years away, it really does not matter with such an excellent engine. And with 150 kg weight reduction, it is a tremendous achievement. BTW, any information regarding the dimensions of 117? Was there also any decrease in diameter?
Thanks.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 08 Jan 2011 19:48

Thanks Austin. What is the targeted thrust of 127? So the prototype T-50 is flying with 117 and not 117S.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 08 Jan 2011 19:58

Kanson wrote:Thanks Austin. What is the targeted thrust of 127? So the prototype T-50 is flying with 117 and not 117S.

IIRC its 175KN with variable bypass ratio. Also there is a possibility of reverse thrust feature.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 08 Jan 2011 20:28

manish.rastogi wrote:
D Roy wrote:b) airframe

No. AMCA will have superior stealth characteristics much greater use of composites and coatings.

Composites is a place where India is doing quite well.

I believe airframe relies more on design factor than composite factor....and its for sure that russians have greater experience in designing than us!!

it depends on the idea or the design... to me, greater exterior permeability and least interior permittivity is the best stealth design. But that might increase weight a little bit, but negligible considering the weight of the total a/c. few lower hundreds -kg- (assume), if we think of advanced composite and internal metal composites with ideal shape characteristics [like shaped foil wraps].

This way, we look at both reflection based and absorption based technique, while maintaining high aerodynamic aspects to get mach2++.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 08 Jan 2011 20:39

SaiK wrote:any info on the weight reduction materials and techniques used?

Nothing specific they always talk in generics and all the good stuff are in Russian language which I cannot read and some are lost in google translation , but here is something for you if you understand Russian

Pictures via Andy_UA

Saturn 117 Engine
117C-1 Engine
117C-2
117C-3
117C-4
117 on Testbed

This is Salyut engine technology roadmap
Salyut Engine
Salyut Engine Materials

BTW, any information regarding the dimensions of 117? Was there also any decrease in diameter?

Gaur , AFAIK the dimension is the same as 117C , 117 form the base to different engine with different T/W ratio and differ by hotparts and materials , you can find the dimension of 117C on NPO-Saturn website. ( Just note that like PAK-FA the 117 engine is official a classfied project and we do not have any official info on its specs except for some direct quote , may be we may get some more detail or official specs at MAKS 11 )

What is the targeted thrust of 127? So the prototype T-50 is flying with 117 and not 117S.

Kanson thats right and its was confirmed by Russian official that T-50 prototype is being flown by 117 engine.

On 127 project nothing official but from what i could gather the new one (127) will be interchangable with the 1-stage T-50 engine nacelle,will have thrust reverse, be far more stealthy than 117, it will feature a completely new technologies developed for it(variable cycle, counter-rotating rotors not confirmed as it is very expensive), the technologies developments started in mid 00's(R&Ds - Eniseysk-B, Demon Project...) willl be - 17.5-18 afterburner, 12t dry. PAK-FA by design is limited by max speed of ~ M 2.1

Added later: Personally i do not think PAK-FA needs more raw thrust with the new engine , what they need to do with new technologies and materials is to improve the thrust to weight ratio , increasing the T/W ratio from 11 to 13 or 14 will be a more significant achievement rather then just pumping in 17 tons of reheat thrust other improvements can be improving fuel consumption and greater dry thrust

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 08 Jan 2011 22:03

mashallah the MKI in its MLU can hopefully switch over to AL31FPM3 engine.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 08 Jan 2011 22:07

^salut to that!

Austin, some of those links does not work for me.

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 08 Jan 2011 23:44

In this pic, fan blades are visible to naked eye!! say bye bye to lower RCS.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 08 Jan 2011 23:53

In this pic, fan blades are visible to naked eye!! say bye bye to lower RCS.

I thought this was discussed way back. They are not fan blades. ???????????????

I would think, even with very, very low funding, the Russians will never made that one mistake.

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 09 Jan 2011 00:04

what ever it is, it still doesn't help in lowering RCS. this is exactly what we see in Su 30.

http://vayu-sena.indianmilitaryhistory. ... D_mesh.jpg

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 09 Jan 2011 00:16

Sid, I remember posting that pic here long time back. The consensus then was that we cannot tell from the pic whether what we are seeing are the fan blades or the radar blocker. They do look somewhat similar.

Edit: For e.g. The radar blocker on the Super Hornet

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 09 Jan 2011 00:34

How about this plane

YF-23 Black Widow
It has the same lines as the PAK FA
The engine needs a mount to make it stealth and it would be similar.

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 09 Jan 2011 00:35

Thanks nachiket. Lets hope Russian black magic work

Here is a closeup of the same image. They sure do look like compressor blades.

and this is what YF-23 intakes used to look like.

http://data3.primeportal.net/hangar/how ... _of_51.jpg