PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

[Lalmohan]

kshirin - i see telecoms as being much more than that. we are only now starting to see the groundswell of low cost ubiquitous services delivered via mobile to the mass market. this is just the tip of the iceberg - and things like m-banking, insurance, etc. - will skyrocket in the years to come. and this innovation will come from 'south countries' - india will not be left behind, because the stimulus for this innovation will come from revenue and profits.

i agree that the IT and BPO industry today is 'cyber-coolie' land, but once we start doing IT work at a large scale for our domestic enterprises (and we have barely begun) we will start seeing real IT competence building in India

from this we will create a cadre of trained project and programme managers - which the west did through their long build up of manufacturing industries - who will form the bedrock of our future competence and capability

[amit]

^^^^^

OT here, but just to add to what Lalmohan wrote, a lot of very novel mobile applications are being pioneered in India. Many of them have already made their way to Africa and some even to the so-called "developed" countries - yes even the US of A.

[kit]

Lalmohan, I often wonder how come a forum like BR, which is clearly full of patriots, does not discuss the need for indigenous development of technology more. Yes, people touch upon it and then angle off to other topics. We need to put our best minds together on this issue. I agree we need to develop a real innovation eco system, not one based only on copy catting, but the Chinese have gone way beyond that. While CC-ing, they have re-formed their organisations, nudged enterprises towards the market, implemented dual use and civil military integration strategies cleverly so as to benefit from civilian technology flows which can be used in the military sector, and achieved what even jaded experts acknowledge is a techno revolution in aerospace, maritime, submarine and other capabilities. They have even developed missiles which can take out Russian land forces on their border with Russia. We are really, way, way behind technologically. Any attempt to question DRDO DPSU guys is met with aggressive defensiveness.
And BTW, everyone was once a pirate. Pasting article below. We should not shy away from reverse engineering, opening up black boxes and investing more in R & D, in fact companies should be forced to do so and so should service sector companies which are taking their profits abroad.
Sorry for rambling, just finished Chetan Bhagat's book call centre etc, we are creating sub-par jobs for Indian youth, soul destroying, coolie jobs. We need to upgrade, upgrade, upgrade, not carp about the Chinese, but focus on one goal single mindedly and not quarrel among ourselves while doing so. MOD is trying to push through reforms but this has to be system wide...

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2 ... irates_too
We Were Pirates, Too
Why America was the China of the 19th century.
BY CHARLES R. MORRIS | DECEMBER 5, 2012

The ship carrying Francis Cabot Lowell and his family home from England in the summer of 1812 was intercepted by a British war squadron, which held the passengers and crew for some days at the British base at Halifax, Canada. Lowell's baggage was subject to several intensive searches, for his captors had been warned that he may have stolen designs for power textile weaving machinery, a serious crime in England. Lowell, indeed, had done just that -- but, aware of the risk, had committed the designs to memory.
The British rarely accorded outsiders the privilege of touring their cotton plants. But Lowell was a leading Boston merchant who imported a great deal of British cloth and had solid relations with his British counterparts. One can imagine him on one of his tours, feigning languid disinterest even as he diligently filed away details on gearing and loom speeds. By the gentlemanly codes of the day, it seems dishonorable.
Today, it's China that is the rising power, and the United States that is the hegemon wary of the young upstart. To China, the United States appears much as Great Britain did to Americans two centuries ago. The U.S. Navy is an intrusive presence on its coasts, while U.S. support for Taiwan parallels British sympathies for southern separatists. Most threatening for Beijing is the appeal of America's raucous democracy for China's rising masses.

The Chinese today are as determined as 19th-century Americans were to achieve economic parity with their rival, and like early Americans, will steal all the technology they can. The important difference is that modern documentation standards make theft much more rewarding. Any drawings Lowell purloined would have been mostly dimensionless and only approximately accurate. (He was fortunate that Paul Moody, the genius mechanic who designed and built his plants, was also a skilled weaver.) In the mid 19th century, Americans were also desperate to replicate Britain's famed Sheffield steel, by common consent the world's finest. But the best Sheffield craftsmen the United States could buy failed to replicate it. (The key, which even the British had not guessed, was the local clay used in the heating vessels.)

Today, Chinese espionage is widely assumed to have targeted virtually all big American technology companies. A long list of firms, including Apple, Boeing, Dow Chemical, Dupont, Ford, Motorola, Northrup Grumman, and General Motors, have pursued successful criminal actions against Chinese moles and other agents.
Back in 1812, finished cotton textiles dominated British exports, accounting for about half of all trade revenues, the fruit of a half century of progress in mechanized mass production. Proportionate to GDP, the industry was about three times the size of the entire U.S. automobile sector today. High-speed textile manufacture was a highly advanced technology for its era, and Great Britain was as sensitive about sharing it as the United States is with advanced software and microprocessor breakthroughs. The British parliament legislated severe sanctions for transferring trade secrets, even prohibiting the emigration of skilled textile workers or machinists.

But the Americans had no respect for British intellectual property protections. They had fought for independence to escape the mother country's suffocating economic restrictions. In their eyes, British technology barriers were a pseudo-colonial ploy to force the United States to serve as a ready source of raw materials and as a captive market for low-end manufactures. While the first U.S. patent act, in 1790, specified that "any person or persons" could file a patent, it was changed in 1793 to make clear that only U.S. citizens could claim U.S. patent protection.

China's modern trade and patent regimes are similarly tilted against outsiders. "Use" patents are freely awarded for Chinese versions of Western inventions. High-value chips are denied import licenses unless companies allow the "inspection" of their source code. Western partners willingly make Faustian bargains to contribute crown jewel technologies for the sake of immediate contracts. German companies that once supplied mag lev technology to their Chinese high-speed rail partners now find themselves shut out by newly born Chinese competitors. Last summer, GE made a similar deal involving its highly valuable, and militarily sensitive, avionics technology.

If anything, the early Americans were even more brazen about their ambitions. Entrepreneurs advertised openly for skilled British operatives who were willing to risk arrest and imprisonment for sneaking machine designs out of the country. Tench Coxe, Alexander Hamilton's deputy at Treasury, created a system of bounties to entice sellers of trade secrets, and sent an agent to steal machine drawings, but he was arrested. While skilled operatives were happy to take U.S. bounties, few of them actually knew how to build the machines or how to run a cotton plant.

The breakthrough came in the person of Samuel Slater. As a young farm boy, he served as an indentured apprentice to Jedidiah Strutt, one of the early developers of industrial-scale powered cotton spinning. As Strutt came to appreciate Slater's great talents, he employed him as an assistant in constructing and starting up new plants. (In his signed indenture, Slater promised to "faithfully ... serve [Strutt's] Secrets.")

Worried about his future in England, Slater made the jump to the United States when he was 21, bringing an unusually deep background in mechanized spinning. Emigrating under an assumed name, he answered an ad from Moses Brown, a leading Providence merchant, who had been badly stung by ersatz British spinning machinery. Brown was sufficiently impressed by Slater to finance a factory partnership, and over the next 15 years, Slater, Brown, their partners, and the many people they trained created a powered thread-making empire that stretched throughout New England and down into the Middle Atlantic states. Former president Andrew Jackson called Slater "The Father of the American Industrial Revolution," the Brits called him "Slater the Traitor."

The development implications were profound, for Slater and Lowell together jump-started American mass-production manufacturing, the essential ingredient in its startling 19th-century growth. The United States' present-day high technology could have much the same implications for China. There is no point appealing to Chinese ethics -- in the great game of nations, ethics don't enter into the conversation. Had Americans invented a magic telescope into British factories, they surely would have used it. A more appropriate response is to apply what some have called "innovation mercantilism": If Lowell had been reincarnated as an American consultant today, he could have told the multinationals to keep all Chinese out of their factories, no matter how friendly they seemed.
Mark Wilson/Getty Images

Charles R. Morris is author of The Tycoons, The Trillion Dollar Meltdown, winner of the Loeb award as the "Best Business Book of 2008." This article is drawn from his recent book The Dawn of Innovation: The First American Industrial Revolution.

Well all the 'advanced' nations of now built on former capabilities of other nations., the patents laws like the MTCR regime and NPT treaties all are designed to keep the status quo of the powers that are.Americans , Japanese everyone has done it.Sometimes that is the only way to learn what is not so expressly given.I think India also had done the same thing in technologies that had matured by now.

[svinayak]

Lalmohan, I often wonder how come a forum like BR, which is clearly full of patriots, does not discuss the need for indigenous development of technology more. Yes, people touch upon it and then angle off to other topics. We need to put our best minds together on this issue. I agree we need to develop a real innovation eco system, not one based only on copy catting, but the Chinese have gone way beyond that.
They have even developed missiles which can take out Russian land forces on their border with Russia. We are really, way, way behind technologically. Any attempt to question DRDO DPSU guys is met with aggressive defensiveness.
And BTW, everyone was once a pirate. Pasting article below. We should not shy away from reverse engineering, opening up black boxes and investing more in R & D, in fact companies should be forced to do so and so should service sector companies which are taking their profits abroad.

Lot of countries want information from India. Lot of things are not discussed
Indians should be more patriotic and support India. Indians have been fed false information about India itself and hence many Indians are confused and blame Indian org. Indians should stop joining other countries and foriegn media to criticize India and Indians.

[SaiK]

++x

[kshirin]

[quote="Lalmohan"]kshirin - i see telecoms as being much more than that. we are only now starting to see the groundswell of low cost ubiquitous services delivered via mobile to the mass market. this is just the tip of the iceberg - and things like m-banking, insurance, etc. - will skyrocket in the years to come. and this innovation will come from 'south countries' - india will not be left behind, because the stimulus for this innovation will come from revenue and profits.

i agree that the IT and BPO industry today is 'cyber-coolie' land, but once we start doing IT work at a large scale for our domestic enterprises (and we have barely begun) we will start seeing real IT competence building in India

from this we will create a cadre of trained project and programme managers - which the west did through their long build up of manufacturing industries - who will form the bedrock of our future competence and capability[/quote]

OK, this is reassuring. Meanwhile, our past follies and misses have ensured India's high cost, high importing economy is being devalued so that costs become more rational - for the foreigner. We have to find a way out to improve competitiveness fast as the stimulus you are talking about will take a very long time to come.

BTW iSPRIT is working on creating indigenous IT products, and moving away from the coolie model.

[Lalmohan]

there are a lot of +ve's happening, it is vital that the economic and governance frameworks enable it to grow

[tushar_m]

new pics of t54

[Hiten]

Carrier-borne PAK-FA

what would the inclined portion circled indicated? catapult with small ski-jump at its end?

via http://www.aame.in/2013/07/naval-t-50-p ... -navy.html

[NRao]

Too early to call. This is one of three proposals it seems.

[tushar_m]

Carrier-borne PAK-FA

what would the inclined portion circled indicated? catapult with small ski-jump at its end?

via http://www.aame.in/2013/07/naval-t-50-p ... -navy.html

something like this

[Philip]

It is excellent if there is a naval variant of the FGFA which can serve on IN flat tops in the future.Since the programme is a JV with Russia,we should plan for at least 100 naval variants apart from the IAF's needs,as by 2020,the number of stealth aircraft being operated by our enemies will have also increased,the threat esp. from China.

What many do not realise about China's sudden indigenous successes,is that an enormous amount of this success has been to China's massive intel network,where it has stolen billions worth of mil and industrial secrets from the US and west,including designs of nuclear warheads,missiles,engine tech.,some of which it is also passing on to the Pakis.Apart from this,there has been a huge transfer of western tech like A-320 manufacture from the EU which is legitimate.

However,the main reason is the will of the Chinese leadership to be No.1 in the future,whereas,our great Indian leadership under western flunkey Dr.Singh and his Italian born party leader is to see that India remains a servile vassal sate always kowtowing to firang interests.It will require a truly national party to be at the helm of the Indian state to first overturn the insidious policies of the UPA-2 that have sold us to a "neo East India Co.",which is buying up the family silver lock,stock and barrel.

[Austin]

Russia close to completing its F-22 aircraft rival

According to United Aircraft Corporation CEO Mikhail Pogosyan, five T-50s are participating in the testing program, which has allowed Russian designers to speed up the process and close the gap with the United States.

The F-22 has been serving in the U.S. Air Force for a long time and, for good reason, is still considered to be the most advanced fighter. Far less is known about its Russian rival.

According to its designers, the T-50 is the embodiment of the latest in Russian aircraft technology.

A number of innovative solutions have been implemented in the machine, including stealth technology, new construction materials and coatings, artificial intelligence and the element base, which have brought Russia’s military aircraft building to a qualitatively new technological level.

A whole range of the latest polymer carbon plastics have made their debut on the T-50. They weigh 50 percent less than titanium or aluminum of comparable rigidity, and they are 20-25 percent lighter than steel.

New materials cover 70 percent of the fighter’s surface. Its weight has been reduced to just a quarter of that of a fighter made of conventional materials, allowing the designers to increase its combat load.

The Sukhoi Design Bureau has mentioned “the PAK FA’s unprecedentedly low level of radar, optical and infrared visibility.” The T-50’s effective reflective area will amount to 5.3 square feet (its predecessor, the Sukhoi-30MKI, has 215 square feet).

This means that the Sukhoi-30MKI appears on the radar screen as a large metal object, while the T-50’s reflection would only be one-fortieth of that, making it much more difficult to notice or aim weapons at it — especially since the machine benefits from the exceptional maneuverability that has been a hallmark of Sukhoi fighters.

In addition, the T-50 meets the main requirement of modern fighters—a high degree of intellectualization.

Its radar, complete with an active electronically-scanned array (AESA), can “see” everything that is going on in the air or on the ground at a distance of hundreds of miles.

It can track multiple airborne and surface targets simultaneously, while keeping them in the crosshairs of its weapons.

Several dozen sensors attached to different parts of its hull not only enable it to monitor the surroundings but also to exchange real-time data with ground control and within its airborne unit at the same time.

The T-50’s “e-pilot” functionality is constantly analyzing the situation, offering the pilot several options on which to act.

The pilot will receive the bulk of flight and combat data in the form of symbols and signs, making it easier to process and substantially easing the pressure on the pilot, while allowing him to focus on the tactical mission at hand.

The T-50 can take off and land from a runway that is only roughly 1,100 feet long. Going forward, it will serve as a basis for a navy variant. Weapons will be stored completely in internal compartments, to meet the stealth technology’s requirements.

According to certain reports, those compartments would be able to carry up to eight R-77 air-to-air missiles, or two 3,300-pound, guided aerial bombs.

Additionally, two long-range missiles could be suspended externally, to allow the fighter to engage targets located as far as 250 miles away.

The fact that India has joined in development of the fighter suggests that the program is promising and meets the highest standards. New Delhi has allocated almost $25 billion for this purpose and expects to obtain a proprietary version of the fifth-generation fighter by 2018.

It is this machine that will be exported, according to Russian specialists, while the Russian-made T-50 will remain an exclusively domestic model—like the American F-22. Russian airmen expect to take delivery of the first serially produced fighters as soon as 2013, and they plan to purchase at least 70 units.

[SaiK]

Is the engine close to competing with the raptor yet?

[vasu raya]

The Sukhoi Design Bureau has mentioned “the PAK FA’s unprecedentedly low level of radar, optical and infrared visibility.” The T-50’s effective reflective area will amount to 5.3 square feet (its predecessor, the Sukhoi-30MKI, has 215 square feet).

This means that the Sukhoi-30MKI appears on the radar screen as a large metal object, while the T-50’s reflection would only be one-fortieth of that, making it much more difficult to notice or aim weapons at it — especially since the machine benefits from the exceptional maneuverability that has been a hallmark of Sukhoi fighters.

The latest article from geopolitics.in mentions that for an aircraft delivered bomb, so far the Mirage was the choice, however to cover Chinese landmass and arrive at its eastern board for bomb delivery, the MKI might be the preferred choice with its 13 hr endurance, yet due to its larger RCS the MKI is vlunerable to interception. In this context, does the MKI have a terrain following mode like the Rafale and what would be its endurance flying low in such a scenario.

[PratikDas]

AA Me, IN: Look Maa, No Hands!!

click on the picture to view larger-sized photograph



Terrain following shouldn't be too much of a stretch?

[Austin]

Is the engine close to competing with the raptor yet?

In Terms of T:W ratio the current 117 engine is high above raptor with a T:W ratio of 10.5:1 , Even EJ200 has a T:W ratio of 10:1 compared to F-22 119 T:W ratio of 8:1

The F119 though has a high thrust of 16T compared to 117 engine thrust of 15 T .... considering F-22 is a draggier design with much larger wet surface area , it needs that high thrust.

Infact there is a joke at TSAGI which says F-22 design is a triumph of Engine Thrust over Aerodynamics.

[SaiK]

wouldn't inlet design of raptor less draggier than pak-fa under the belly?

[Austin]

I am no aerodynamic guru like Indranil or other out here but PAK-FA seems to have evolved from a Flanker Lifting Body Design that offers optimised L/D ratio and F-22 seems to have evolved from F-15 design that offers less of aerodynamic novelty but relies on pure engine power and has perhaps better all aspect stealth.

A good example of Lifting Body Design in action would be Su-35 that beyond aerodynamics also has most engine power of all flanker and its recent display at Paris and compare it to any best display of F-22 so far one would see the difference.

[SaiK]

but under the belly should provide more lift and compensate perhaps... or it may be aerodynamically better option than raptor style.

[Austin]

5th-Gen fighter plan hits hurdle as Russia hikes cost - TOI

NEW DELHI: India's biggest defence project in the making, the critical joint development of the fifth-generation fighter aircraft (FGFA) with Russia, has flown into some rough weather.

Defence ministry sources said the inking of the final design and R&D contract for the stealth fighter has been hit by a huge delay, with Russia also jacking up costs for the futuristic project. "It's very unlikely the FGFA final design contract will be concluded in the 2013-2014 fiscal," said a source.

This contract was to be inked in 2012 as per the then revised timeline after completion of the preliminary design contract (PD C) phase. India will eventually end up spending close to $35 billion over the next two decades to induct over 200 such "swing-role" fighters.

The plan till last year was that India would begin inducting the FGFA from 2022 onwards, with IAF test pilots getting three prototypes in 2014, 2017 and 2019 for trials at the Hindustan Aeronautics manufacturing facility at Ozar.

"The timeframes will now have to be revised. MoD has established a committee of specialists and finance officials to verify the rise in costs. An internal contract negotiation committee is also in progress," said the source.

But India remains firm about rejecting the US offer for joining its Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) or the F-35 'Lightning-II' programme. "A lot of money and time has been invested in the FGFA with Russia. India simply cannot afford two FGFAs, both financially as well as logistically" he said.

The 18-month PDC worth $295 million for the FGFA with Russia was inked in December 2010, under which Indian designers and scientists have even been stationed in Russia to work out the blueprints and documentation for the fighter.

Though the Indian "perspective multi-role fighter" will be based on the Russian single-seat FGFA called Sukhoi T-50 or PAK-FA, which now has four prototypes flying, it will be tweaked to IAF requirements. IAF had initially pitched for 166 single-seat and 48 twin-seat fighters but will go for only single-cockpit jets now to reduce costs as well as protect stealth features.

The final design contract now being negotiated was pegged at $11 billion, with India and Russia sharing $5.5 billion each towards the cost of designing, infrastructure build-up at Ozar, prototype development and flight testing. Each fighter was to cost over $100 million.

IAF is quite confident the T-50 will meet its future requirements. Apart from ultra-manoeuvrability and supersonic cruising ability, the FGFA will carry its weapons inside the fuselage to lower its radar signature. With a cruising speed of Mach 1.7 to 1.8, it has both long-range strike and high-endurance air defence capabilities.

IAF is currently making do with just 34 fighter squadrons (each has 14 to 18 jets) despite needing at least 44 to keep both Pakistan and China at bay. It's banking upon the ongoing induction of 270 Russian Sukhoi-30MKIs for around $12 billion as well as the early inking of the almost $20 billion project to acquire 126 French Rafale fighters to plug operational gaps till the FGFA becomes a reality.

[vina]

I am no aerodynamic guru like Indranil or other out here but PAK-FA seems to have evolved from a Flanker Lifting Body Design that offers optimised L/D ratio and F-22 seems to have evolved from F-15 design that offers less of aerodynamic novelty but relies on pure engine power and has perhaps better all aspect stealth

Austin Powers! I have no idea where you get this Rodina Rah-Rah brochure reading about some mythical secret sauce of "Lifting Body Design" of the Flanker (and also Fulcrum) that is not there in the F-15 (or for that matter F-14) .

All of them have it ! . In fact, if you don't believe me, just google around for images of an Israeli F-15 that came back to land on it's own power , safely after a whole WING was torn off (the plane flew on just one wing )!

[geeth]

Dakotas also had flown with part or most of a wing torn away..they too had lifting bodies..!

[Austin]

No aerodynamic guru like you or Indranil but read F-15 design was described as conventional with Integral body Design but Flanker along with Fulcrum was described as Lifting Body Design.

Some aspect of Flanker design and history is described by Sukhoi
http://www.sukhoi.org/eng/planes/milita ... k/history/

[JTull]

Stop AMCA development (under guise of pushing thru LCA), pay Russians more and fill your own pockets. Screw the nation.

Business as usual.

[Singha]

but sire problem is if MK2 is not delivered to spec or on time, IAF will not commit to any production run of AMCA or the huge funds needed to make it a viable product. it will end up as science project no more no less in such a case. remember Saras ?

HAL needs to get back in good graces of the IAF fighter community by first finishing up mk1 and then deliver mk2 - a fact which is now emphasized from Defmin and Chander sir repeatedly stressing on tejas completion.

[Indranil]

No aerodynamic guru like you or Indranil but read F-15 design was described as conventional with Integral body Design but Flanker along with Fulcrum was described as Lifting Body Design.

Some aspect of Flanker design and history is described by Sukhoi
http://www.sukhoi.org/eng/planes/milita ... k/history/

Austin ji, I am not a aero guru. Just an enthusiast.

Vina ji is right here, even F-15 uses lift generated by the body. But Sukhoi (albeit following Mig-29) use it more. Both of the later fighters have straight air intakes below the body with a continuous channel in between. With a significantly curved upper side, this gives them significant lift from the fuselage.

Having said that almost all modern fighters create lift using the body (including 5th gen planes like F-22/J-20 etc). This lets them have thinner wings which allows them faster acceleration and higher top speed. Also, by lowering the wing loading you can save on structural elements.

[VinodTK]

Russia Delays India’s 5th-Gen. Fighter Program

According to news reports this week, the Indian Air Force (IAF) might have to wait longer before it can induct its first fifth-generation fighter aircraft (FGFA) after Russia, with which it is co-producing the platform, imposed delays and unexpectedly hiked development costs.

Despite the U.S. encouraging India to join the fifth-generation F-35 Joint Strike Fighter consortium, New Delhi committed itself to the Sukhoi/ Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) FGFA variant of the Sukhoi PAK FA PMF T-50, also known as the “perspective multi-role fighter.” The program was initiated during a visit to New Delhi by then Russian President Dmitry Medvedev in December 2010.

Under the two-decade, US$35 billion program — India’s largest single-item defense investment ever — the IAF was to receive three variants of the aircraft in 2014, 2017, and 2019, with the final version entering service from 2020 (since then induction has been pushed to 2022). The IAF intended to induct a total of 200 FGFAs — 166 single-seats and 44 twin-seats — but that number has since been trimmed down to 144 single seaters, ostensibly for financial considerations.

After initial joint development in Russia and the inking of a preliminary design contract, the final design and R&D contract was to be signed in 2012. However, The Times of India now reports, citing industry sources, that as a result of the additional costs and delays imposed by Moscow, there is little likelihood that the final design and R&D contract will be signed during FY 2013, or even in 2014, which will inevitably have implications for the consortium’s ability to deliver the first aircraft by 2022.

According to Russia’s Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation, the first Sukhoi/HAL prototype is now expected to appear sometime in 2015-2016, one to two years behind schedule.

The Russian Federation’s first T-50 prototype, which is intended to become the successor to the highly successful MiG-29 and Sukhoi-27, carried out its first test flight in early 2010, and its longest yet, covering a distance of 7,000km, in January this year. Sukhoi is also developing three other prototypes.

The IAF, which says it doesn’t have enough aircraft to meet its security requirements vis-à-vis Pakistan and China (it currently relies on 34 fighter squadrons), is also awaiting delivery of 115 Sukhoi-30MKI Flanker-H air-dominance fighters — also a co-production effort between Sukhoi and HAL — from 2015, though that program also appears to be facing production delays.

Combat aircraft were the largest single component of Russia’s defense exports in 2012, accounting for 40 percent of its sales. With US$15.2 billion in arms exports in 2012, Russia is the world’s largest arms exporter after the U.S. India and China are among the largest recipients of Russian arms exports.

[Sancho]

Customizations for FGFA

The last versions of the T50 showed more and more IR installed, once the frontal IRST, but also additional MAWS all around the airframe.
By the fact that we use UV MAWS for LCA, upgraded Mig 29s or MKIs as it seems, isn't it likely that we will go for an own system too? Is anything reported about DARE or BEL developing systems for FGFA today?
There were reports that BEL develops an own IRST, Samtel is at least licence producing Rafales FSO, most likely with the IR channel too. So what are the chances to replace the Russian system with another one?
Another important point would be the laser guidance for weapons, where the Russians seems to look for an external LDP, which hardly makes sense for a stealth fighter. BEL on the other side could licence produce the Damocles pod, while the chances for the more advanced Litening G4 seems to be even higher, but what are the chances for an EOTS like system for FGFA?

[Austin]

Rarefied air: Russian 5G fighters boast cutting-edge life support systems

[kshirin]

http://vpk.name/news/93162_rf_i_indiya_ ... sboev.html

Russian sources say there is no delay in the PAK FA project....

16.07.2013
Russia and India are discussing the establishment of a fighter of the 5th generation without fail

No deviations from the schedule negotiations on a package of agreements associated with the joint production of a fifth generation fighter between Russia and India is not, told RIA Novosti on Monday, a source close to the negotiations.

On the eve of the Indian newspaper Times of India quoted a source in the Ministry of Defense reported that the signing of the contract for the development work on the Russian-Indian fifth-generation fighter (PMI / FGFA) is delayed because of the increased price of the project by the Russian side.

"This kind of publication associated exclusively political considerations rather than business. Project is profitable both countries, investment - 50 to 50, so any increase in prices and a slowdown in negotiations is not" - said the source.

Meanwhile, a source told the Indian edition, remains a very small chance that the contract for the work on the MIT will be signed in the fiscal years 2013-2014. According to him, the time frame will be revised, with the Defense Ministry set up a committee of experts, technicians and financial experts who will be engaged in checking the validity of value growth.

According to the newspaper, despite the delay in signing the contract with the Russian Federation, India still will not accept the U.S. proposal to buy the F-35 Lightning-II, since a large amount of money already invested in the project of MIT and India can not afford to maintain two similar programs, both from a financial point of view and from the point of view of the organization of technical support.

The agreement on the joint development and production of fifth generation fighter aircraft was signed on 18 October 2007 in Moscow. It is the largest joint project of Russian-Indian military-technical cooperation. In December 2010, FSUE "Rosoboronexport" company "Sukhoi" and Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (Hindustan Aeronautics Limited) signed a contract for the development of conceptual and technical design of aircraft.

At the heart of the Indian "perspective multirole fighter" laid a Russian fighter of the 5th generation "Sukhoi T-50" or PAK FA with the structural modifications to the conditions of the air forces of India. Initially, the Ministry of Defence of India has made a request for 166 single rooms and 48 double machine, but later decided to buy only single.

[NRao]

Time will tell.

Something just does not seem right.

[NRao]

Question time.

The tail of the PAK-FA is certainly not as stealthy as a tail can get to be. So, would the PAK-FA be considered a true/complete 5th Gen?

Or is there some tech they may/could use to reduce it's RCS to conceal it?

[SaiK]

couple of options:

1. skin cover of course being the first one.. something from a distance that looks like some regular surface but it could be honeycomb composites sandwiching internal shape deflectors at 45* angle - or some such nano tech materials.

2. there have been talks about plasma stealth.. no idea how it works from the rear.

besides they have this IR signature reduction needs. will they reduce signature by chemical means or take a retractable reactive approach on missile warning as being done in EADS

[Austin]

Reportedly the Elbrus-2C+ is currently powering the new AESA radar for PAK-FA
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elbrus-2C%2B

Reportedly there is Elbrus-4C under works to power future systems

[Sancho]

Customizations for FGFA

The last versions of the T50 showed more and more IR installed, once the frontal IRST, but also additional MAWS all around the airframe.
By the fact that we use UV MAWS for LCA, upgraded Mig 29s or MKIs as it seems, isn't it likely that we will go for an own system too? Is anything reported about DARE or BEL developing systems for FGFA today?
There were reports that BEL develops an own IRST, Samtel is at least licence producing Rafales FSO, most likely with the IR channel too. So what are the chances to replace the Russian system with another one?
Another important point would be the laser guidance for weapons, where the Russians seems to look for an external LDP, which hardly makes sense for a stealth fighter. BEL on the other side could licence produce the Damocles pod, while the chances for the more advanced Litening G4 seems to be even higher, but what are the chances for an EOTS like system for FGFA?

Nobody an idea which Indian companies could take over these requirements for FGFA and if similar systems are already under development?

[kit]

Reportedly the Elbrus-2C+ is currently powering the new AESA radar for PAK-FA
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elbrus-2C%2B

Reportedly there is Elbrus-4C under works to power future systems

manufactured by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company .

[Austin]

For Strategic and Military applications they have a fab facility at St Petersburg which is Voronezh Semiconductor Plant that makes 90 nm chips also a small facility to make 65 nm

For other application and large scale mass production it takes place at Taiwan or Israel.

[NRao]

Dated article:
India’s Version of Sukhoi T-50 Delayed by Two Years

However a few nuggets:

................... HAL is also responsible for navigation and countermeasure dispensing......................


The 30-ton {?????}FGFA will be “a swing-role fighter with highly advanced avionics, giving 360-degree situational awareness, stealth to increase survivability and smart weapons,” said now-retired Indian Air Force Chief P.K. Naik. Capable of covering long ranges without refueling, it will feature supercruise along with advanced mission computers. The Indian Air Force has specified 43 improvements to the design following its observation of flying trials at the Zhukovsky airbase.

[Singha]

it would be most interesting to know what these 43 were..cannot be in sensors / radar / cockpit as they are in development ..... 43 improvements to airframe would be quite a lot of change .... ??