PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Hiten · Post by **Hiten** » 12 Feb 2012 09:16

T-50 PAK-FA Fifth Generation Fighter in Ace Combat: Assault Horizon

http://www.aame.in/2012/02/t-50-pak-fa- ... er-in.html

tejas · Post by **tejas** » 12 Feb 2012 10:15

http://www.aame.in/2011/09/t-50-pak-fa- ... paper.html

From that same blog some amazing pics of the T-50. I can't wait for the flat nozzles to be installed on this baby.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 13 Feb 2012 13:54

Russia to Increase Number of 5G Fighters in Test Flights

The number of Russia's Sukhoi T-50 5th generation fighters involved in test flights will be increased to 14 from three by 2015, Russian Air Force Commander Col. Gen. Alexander Zelin told RIA Novosti on Monday.

“There are three fighters already in tests, another three are expected to be tested in the nearest future. The entire number of aircraft planned for test flights is 14,” Zelin said.

The T-50, developed under the program PAK FA (Future Aviation System for Tactical Air Force) at the Sukhoi aircraft design bureau, made its first public appearance at the MAKS-2011 air show near Moscow on August 17, 2011.

The fighter, which is being developed in partnership with India, made its maiden flight in the Russian Far East in early 2010.

Zelin also said that Russia’s T-50 outstripped its U.S. and Chinese analogues.

“After a comparative analysis of the fighter’s characteristics with the U.S. F-22 Raptor and Chinese J-20 stealth aircraft, we can conclude that PAK FA exceeds the foreign analogues in maximum speed, flight range, maximum takeoff weight and the maximum overload value,” Zelin added.

http://ria.ru/defense_safety/20120213/564442288.html

General added that THE PAK FA possesses the comparable with the foreign analogs overall sizes and mass, but in this case " it has substantially smaller value of takeoff and landing]".

"In addition to the characteristics of airborne equipment PAK FA is better than their foreign counterparts," - says Zelin.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 15 Feb 2012 03:16

Singha wrote:what is planned for the huge sting volume? some kind of ECM kit or a dedicated rear facing scaled down aesa radar?
if the idea is operating alone outside of awacs coverage, the aesa radar idea would gain traction to generate 360' coverage albeit much reduced ranges due to small size of side array and tail radar...

imo could it be used to stash a cartload of fuel?

Makes sense right for deep strike in contested areas, which would be its primary purpose?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 15 Feb 2012 05:55

It concerns me when countries equate raptor and j20, and position a 5th gen specifications.

It begins the stage for future generation requirements then.. all clever marketing to chew for a long time.

I hope we learn something here with this $30b investment in pak-fa.

Sujata · Post by **Sujata** » 16 Feb 2012 12:30

Hello everyone! I've recently saw a cool video of the J-20 on Youtube, and I was very surprised by what this mini version of the J-20 could do in the air.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lw-gug6GdEI.
I always thought that J-20 was more of a Teck demonstrator until China could steal the design plans for the F22 or Pak, but I was wrong. There design looks really good and has high AOA.

Wow their design really works because it's the YF-23B Navy version of the YF-23 stolen from the USA. I was wondering if the Chinese could steal the design of the YF-23B then India and Hal should borrow the YF-23 design for the FGFA and AMCA programs.It would save time and money ,and you would get the best Stealth Design every made for a jetfighter in my opinion.Watch this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dlFxStiMw_g

How do I know that the YF-23 http://aircraft-list.com/db/YF-23/56/ is a great design to copy because Lockheed Martin copied the YF-23 design for their 6th gen stealth http://defensetech.org/2012/01/05/lockh ... n-fighter/. They just made a couple of cosmetic changes to not lose face,because they know that the YF-23 was the better design,and the LM YF-22 won because of politics not because they had the best airplane.

Why couldn't the IAF and Hal not borrow that design? What would the limitations from a engineering point of view be? It's 20 years old but it was design from the outside in with super computers ,and was 450 million program.Also the Russian have stolen past jet designs from the USA,and even copied some design aspects for the PAK 5th JF from the F22. Why not?
Thank you for any input you can give me.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 16 Feb 2012 13:05

^^^ Are you kidding me ... you are providing a RC video as proof of maneuverability ... the guy is respected in the model world ... but frankly what he speaks about high alpha is plane crap ... check out any RC 3d plane ... For example [youtube]C_YYPEduxTo&feature=related[/youtube]

Badar · Post by **Badar** » 16 Feb 2012 13:12

The US won't let us "borrow" it. The US not only wants to preserve its military dominance, but is also making a global grab for military-industrial dominance. It is not in US interest (nor in UK, France, Russia's) for India to develop a mature defense industry of its own. All of them will assist us technologically only as much as they absolutely must due to go-strategic or economic compulsions.

Also you can't really extrapolate performance from a foam RC model, extremely cool though the video was.

Sujata · Post by **Sujata** » 16 Feb 2012 13:18

indranilroy,Wow really, I posted the J-20 to start a conversation about stealth fighters,and it wasn't the main point of my post.I just thought it was a cool video to see.Also I didn't know you were an expert on the J-20 ,and the Chinese aren't going to let you get a full blown report on video of what it can really do.If you don't like what I posted don't comment on it. The main point of my post was about IAF and HAL borrowing the YF-23 5th Generation Design after the fact that China stole the YF23B Navy version

Sujata · Post by **Sujata** » 16 Feb 2012 13:21

Badar,Thank You for your respectful response!

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 16 Feb 2012 13:23

Well I did not mean to offend you and I am sorry if I came across that way ... but if you want to believe the performance of actual jets based on RC models, I will have nothing left to say

Sujata · Post by **Sujata** » 16 Feb 2012 13:37

indranilroy I accept your apology,and I'm not a Jet fighter expert or anything. I was trying to have a conversation about Stealth fighters that's all.You could still learn from a RC models because it still has to fly.I still think India and HAL should borrow that design,and if China stole that other one why hasn't USA done anything about it.I don't think Boeing would care,and they would just sue for the money out of court,and as long as you didn't export it either.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 16 Feb 2012 13:40

There are two things you are missing here:

You missed the discussion of the jets ... there were over 100 pages of discussion on the China thread itself when J-20 was launched ... this is the second thread of the PAKFA ... so you missed the discussion here as well ... you might want to delve into the archives ... you might find interesting information.

What do you expect USA to do ... sue China? ... what will they gain?

Sujata · Post by **Sujata** » 16 Feb 2012 14:01

indranilroy I will look into the J-20 thread,but I would really like to see India and HAL to not try to reinvent the wheel ,and save money ,and time by studying or copying a great design like the YF-23.I think that the FGFA and AMCA will look very similar to the PAK-50,but if it look like the YF-23 then why not.

Save time and money and speed up the building process of the FGFA,and AMCA. USA sues then say you copied a design they didn't want ,but it works so who wouldn't.

nash · Post by **nash** » 16 Feb 2012 14:44

Sujata wrote:indranilroy I will look into the J-20 thread,but I would really like to see India and HAL to not try to reinvent the wheel ,and save money ,and time by studying or copying a great design like the YF-23.I think that the FGFA and AMCA will look very similar to the PAK-50,but if it look like the YF-23 then why not.

Save time and money and speed up the building process of the FGFA,and AMCA. USA sues then say you copied a design they didn't want ,but it works so who wouldn't.

Can you please tell us how YF-23 is better compared to FGFA look wise and what will be its effect on performance of a/c.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 16 Feb 2012 16:25

it has those sexy flat shielded engine exhausts and a pure trapezoid wing optimized for a higher speed and and a better looking nose?

but it had the raptors weakness of a single main weapons bay only due to closely spaced engines.

kmkraoind · Post by **kmkraoind** » 16 Feb 2012 18:42

Oops, mistake, self-deleted.

Sujata · Post by **Sujata** » 17 Feb 2012 05:20

nash,
Pak-FA is a evolutionary design of a Sukhoi jet ,while the YF-23 is a Revolutionary design for maximum stealth,speed and maneuverability.YF-23 is considerard one of the most beautiful jet fighters ever made.

Is it not just a big Math problem when you try to design your own stealth fighter.So if the math problem has already been solved why would you try to redo all of that work when the answer is starring you right in the face. I hope that India and HAL could learn a lot from the YF-23 program ,and incorporate that into the FGFA and AMCA programs. Even if they copied the body of it ,and put in Indian avionics why not get the best.

The was a production version called FA-23.http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/YF-23%204%20View.gif
http://www.yf-23.net/Pics/F-23A/F-23A%2 ... 201415.jpg

The YF-23 took a very raidcal departure from the conventional design of aircraft. By using a very unusual shape the aircraft became very maneuverable and had a high top speed. By using the same angle on all flying surfaces (i.e. the nose, wing fronts, wing backs, ruddervator {rudder/elevator} fronts, ruddervator backs, and engine exhausts), the stealthiness is increased. Another advantage of using such unusualy shaped flying surfaces, is that the uncontrolability of the aircraft is increased so that when fly-by-wire is used, the manueverablity of the aircraft is increased greatly.

Northrop chose a far more radical airframe layout, driven by the objectives of stealthiness and supercruise. The extensively blended fuselage has rudimentary chines which smoothly blend into the wing leading edge, the blending allowing good area ruling and low supersonic drag. The low wing aspect ratio is used to optimise supercruise performance.

The Northrop/MDC YF-23 employed planform shaping with extensive blending, the latter technique used to advantage with the large B-2A. Blending has the major strength of not compromising high speed aerodynamics, the blended airframe offering very low drag by avoiding vortices which may be produced by a faceted geometry. In addition to RCS reduction through shaping, the YF-23 also employed carefully shaped exhausts to conceal the engine hot end, yet another technique developed during the B-2A program. The unusual 'diamond' planform of the YF-23 is a 2 major lobe design, as all major edges fall into groups of two parallels. The result of the low observables techniques was a major reduction in aircraft detectability by radar, and in the YF-23, also detectability by Infra-Red Search & Track (IRS&T) systems. This will radically shrink the usable envelope of hostile radar guided weapons and in the instance of the YF-23, also heatseeking weapons.

The YF-23 was a very agile aircraft. The YF-23 is a very unstable aircraft; however, when this instability is coupled with a fly-by-wire control system, this results in a very agile aircraft. Another attribute that lends itself to high mobility is the uniqueness of the tail. On the YF-23, instead of using two rudders and two elevators, it uses a ruddervator, a combined rudder/elevator. This ruddervator is angled at a roughly 45° angle to horizontal.

The YF-23 was stealthier than the F-22 Raptor. The two ruddervators reduce the Radar Cross Signature of the YF-23 significantly. This is beacuse instead of having four extremly large control surfaces on the tail, there are only two. The F-22 Raptor design utilizes the traditional configuration of two rudders, which are canted outward, and two elevators. This make the RCS larger. Another RCS reducing feature is the engines. These are mounted in nacelles in the wing that blend gracefully into the wing on the top, and form an extension of the fueslage on the bottom. The larger bottom fuselage lets it pack more missiles and other expendable weapons. The intake duct is angled up and inward to reflect radar beams and keep them from hitting the fast moving compressor face. The intake duct starts on the lower edge of the wing and moves through it onto the top of the wing. This feature can also reduce the RCS signature from a look down-shoot down radar from an aircraft flying overhead. Also reducing the RCS, is the way the leading and trailing edge of all surfaces are angled. All of the leading and trailing edges are angled the same. Therefore, the front of the right wing is parallel to the left wing's trailing edge, and the left section of the nose. For example, the leding edge of the wing is parallel to the trailing edge of the wing on the other side.

The YF-23 had a greater fuel capacity and therefor a longer range. By having a larger wing area and greater fuselage volume, the fuel storage of the YF-23 is increased over the F-22 Raptor. As a result of this, the YF-23 can fly longer CAP (Combat Air Patrol) missions. It can also fly deeper into enemy territory without the need to be refueled by tankers. As a result of the first one, fewer aircraft must be purchased. As a result of the second, less money needs to be spent on refueling tankers.

nash · Post by **nash** » 17 Feb 2012 07:30

@sujata

i appreciate your work of googling, but one request the sites from where you got this info., go through the other sections of those sites about FGFA and you will know how FGFA beat western stealth fighter in terms of agility, maneuverability,range,payload,maintenance,etc..

Also don't you think it will quite odd that US give us their design for Russian fighter project...

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 17 Feb 2012 08:09

http://en.ria.ru/mlitary_news/20120216/171344471.html
so, who is going to fund the competitive second type?

Sujata · Post by **Sujata** » 17 Feb 2012 09:05

Nash, It's hard to understand what you are asking me.The overall design of the YF-23 is one of the best stealth designs that you could incorporate into future 5th gen. design for the India Air Force. When you read past my pictures of my last post the information is from an article from GlobalSecurity. Lockheed Martin 6th gen. design looks http://defensetech.org/2012/01/05/lockh ... n-fighter/
a lot like a YF-23,and China stole the plans for Navy version of the YF-23.Gee wiz go figure why both of them would do such a thing because the design of YF-23 works so they copied it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGIjJbBVyOU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQi-IaFO3kk

I'm sorry but the PAK-50 has just started, and it hasn't beaten anybody yet.

nash · Post by **nash** » 17 Feb 2012 09:54

Sujata wrote:Nash, It's hard to understand what you are asking me.The overall design of the YF-23 is one of the best stealth designs that you could incorporate into future 5th gen. design for the India Air Force. When you read past my pictures of my last post the information is from an article from GlobalSecurity. Lockheed Martin 6th gen. design looks

I'm sorry but the PAK-50 has just started, and it hasn't beaten anybody yet.

Is it so hard to understand what i am asking ..ok let me try again..

why US will give us their design of YF-23 which we gone use in their traditional rival Russia's fighter PAK-FAor FGFA or T-50(not PAK-50) ?

i hope u understand now.If you can answer this question then we can discuss, otherwise you can continue with what you are doing ..

Sujata · Post by **Sujata** » 18 Feb 2012 14:27

nash, The USA is not just going to hand over the design plans of the YF-23 fighter to Indian government ,or anybody else. They wouldn't what India to have such a capable jet fighter. India just has to tell USA politely that they will incorporate most of the design features into their Stealth fighter program.If you tell them ahead of time they can't say you stole it from them because the knew about it from the start. Something that China would never do.USA might sue India ,but it doesn't mean they could physically stop India from doing so.

In order for the YF-22 to become the F-22 raptor it had to have a major design change ,and that happen because it borrowed a lot of the YF-23 features that I found on another board" the shape of the nose, the way the aircraft brakes, the probes measuring AoA on the side of the radome, the minimum number of edges on every panel, the topside of the engines, the clipping of the all moving tails. Yet the YF-23 design features stealth/performance blending from the next level, like the inlet cone design".

So if the F-22 Raptor had to borrow design features from the YF-23 that would only mean one thing ,and that is the YF-23 is the best full stealth(Front,Side,and Back) fighter with speed and maneuverability in the world.

The PAK-FA is not full stealth,and if borrowed stealth features from the F-22 ,then what the Russians really did is copy from YF-23 jet fighter.

So why doesn't India and HAL copy all of the YF-23 for the FGFA and AMCA programs ,and sell it back to the Russians and China.

India and HAL don't have to waste time and money trying to figure out a stealth fighter math formula Design

that has all ready been solved ,and that is YF-23. Why do you think the Lockheed Martin 6th Generation Fighter looks just like a YF-23 because they couldn't make it better.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 18 Feb 2012 15:29

If you simply copy this design or that design provided you even understand fully how that design would work which is not possible in absence of design ,test data and know why , then you will suffocate your ability to innovate and think out of the box .... and if the original design fails for some reason that is not known , your design also has a high likely hood of failing.

In other words copying is satisfactory short cut to achieve something but that will make you a follower never a leader.

The reason why US and Russian design bureau thrives and leads is because they innovate , they might not be successful in every thing they do but thats the risk of the game.

sudhan · Post by **sudhan** » 18 Feb 2012 15:48

Sujata, can you please explain how you came to the conclusion that the J-20 is same as the YF-23?

To me the design philosophy behind the aircraft seem totally different.

The youtube video shows a model that resembles the YF-23 but the real J-20 is nowhere close to the YF-23

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 18 Feb 2012 17:18

4th T-50 fighter jet to go on test flight
Voice of Russia

Sujata · Post by **Sujata** » 19 Feb 2012 13:44

Austin wrote:If you simply copy this design or that design provided you even understand fully how that design would work which is not possible in absence of design ,test data and know why , then you will suffocate your ability to innovate and think out of the box .... and if the original design fails for some reason that is not known , your design also has a high likely hood of failing.

Austin, India and HAL have been working on the Tejas project for the last 30 years. I don't see a whole lot of innovation in those 30 years with a entry level jet fighter that hasn't even been mass produced yet. You can only be innovative if you do Reach and Development with multiple programs which only happens with lots of money to throw into them.

In other words copying is satisfactory short cut to achieve something but that will make you a follower never a leader.

India ,and the Indian Air Force have been a """Follower""" of the Russian air force for the past 40 years. You think they want you to lead,and develop your own Jet Fighters by yourselves? No,and that's because they wont make any money out of it. If India made 200 or 300 YF-23 5th generation jet fighters you would rival the USA air force.

The reason why US and Russian design bureau thrives and leads is because they innovate , they might not be successful in every thing they do but thats the risk of the game.

Like I said before it takes a lot of money to fund projects and I don't think India does a whole lot of that.The amount of Funding in the jet fighter programs and bombers is probably 10 times what India invests in it's own program so that's why they look so innovative.

Borrowing the design of the YF-23 with not slow down the Fighter Jet programs or make Indian Scientist less intelligent,but it will increase the level of which India could defend it self from it's aggressors.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 19 Feb 2012 13:58

sorry, how the heck are we supposed to 'borrow' YF23's design and why should we do it ?

the newbie thread is there for this kind of discussions. continue there.

nash · Post by **nash** » 19 Feb 2012 14:00

shukla wrote:4th T-50 fighter jet to go on test flight
Voice of Russia

Deliveries of the initial batch of T-50 aircrafts will kick off in 2013. “Everything is going according to plan,” Mr. Pogosyan assured the press-conference.

Is it like LSP of T-50 ? and if so far according to plan then by 2015 RuAF will get their I sqd. of PAK-FA and if all go well then we get our first PAK-FA around 2017-18 .. may be initial jet will come from russia then HAL can use MKI prod. line for domestic production.

may be 50-60 PAK-FA by 2022, atleast.

Sujata · Post by **Sujata** » 19 Feb 2012 14:41

deleted.

this is the PAKFA/FGFA thread, not hypothetical yf-23/J20 thread.

Sujata · Post by **Sujata** » 20 Feb 2012 10:38

My sincere apologies to Rahul M ,and other mods for posting off topic material. I was overly excited to talk about my favorite 5th gen. fighter that I got carried away with it. My wholehearted desire was to inform you as much possible about other great 5th programs. I would like to see the India Air Force get a great(the best) 5th gen. jet fighter to defend it's people from unfriendly neighbors. I will try to not make that mistake again,and I couldn't send you a private message either Rahul M.I'm very sorry for that.

karan_mc · Post by **karan_mc** » 21 Feb 2012 15:04

Russians seems to be planning a new stealth aircraft post 2020

Stealthy close support aircraft to replace Russian Su-25SM by 2020

koti · Post by **koti** » 21 Feb 2012 15:21

^^ Can we push in AMCA there? Anyone.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 21 Feb 2012 16:36

AMCA is not a CAS type aircraft but a multirole fighter.

Yogi_G · Post by **Yogi_G** » 21 Feb 2012 17:22

By 2020? Either this aircraft must have been in the works for some time now or it must be borrowing a lot from the PAK-FA programme. Given their funding needs for PAK-FA I dont see how the Russians could have funded this project in the first place assuming that it has been in the works for some time. If it is to be started from now on I dont see how they can borrow much from the PAK-FA programme as the nature of both of the aircrafts are diametrically opposite.

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 21 Feb 2012 18:01

'Indo-Russian fighter jet better than Chinese, US aircraft'

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 21 Feb 2012 18:09

I suspect this is a Unmanned Aircraft , since they are working on X-47B class UCAV with 15T MTOW ... but one never knows.

Perhaps CAS is too important role to be ignored in their doctorine ....considering they are still upgrading and keeping the Su-25 in service.

munna · Post by **munna** » 21 Feb 2012 20:05

Austin wrote:I suspect this is a Unmanned Aircraft , since they are working on X-47B class UCAV with 15T MTOW ... but one never knows.

Perhaps CAS is too important role to be ignored in their doctorine ....considering they are still upgrading and keeping the Su-25 in service.

Suspects may also include versions or derivatives of

(1) Su- 47 Berkut
(2) Mig LFI or MFI designs
(3) Some other designs shelved post 1991 by Soviet/Russo Labs

karan_mc · Post by **karan_mc** » 21 Feb 2012 22:22

Mikoyan LMFS ??

Nick_S · Post by **Nick_S** » 10 Mar 2012 05:08

Pics courtesy of TR1 - AFM.

http://russianplanes.net/ID69400

http://russianplanes.net/ID69399