PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

[Rahul M]

the swedes are not exactly human. borg is a swede surname no ?

they always come up with really strange designs. turretless tank, rev thrusters on fighters, draken the list goes on.

[NRao]

They needed it because their planes use national highways, road etc during conflicts. On such small road, etc it is a very useful feature (as one can see in that video). The cost of a reverse thruster was thus mitigated.

[Indranil]

Ever wondered why Gripen doesn't have it? The same story goes for the transition from Tornados to the Eurofighters.

All modern fighters have shorter landing roll using airbrakes, and carbon-carbon anti-skid brakes. Gripen uses its canards as airbrakes. PAKFA uses its rudders. They both obviously have parachutes.

Also what is the use of landing a plane and reversing it on the road unless you load fuel, ammunition etc. In which case, arranging for a tractor is smallest logistical problem.

[Garooda]

KAI_Designs

Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) has displayed two conceptual models for the country’s proposed KFX indigenous fighter programme at the Seoul International Aerospace & Defense Exhibition.

One model represents KAI’s in-house proposal for the programme, while the other represents the ambitions of Seoul’s Agency for Defense Development (ADD).

KAI’s proposal is for a single-engined aircraft based largely on systems developed for the country’s T-50 advanced jet trainer. The company feels that this approach would be more cost effective and draw from its experience with the T-50, which had extensive design input from Lockheed Martin.

The ADD concept is a twin-engined design and would involve considerably more indigenously-developed content.

Both appear to recognise the challenges involved in building a true stealth aircraft. While each bears a passing resemblance to the low observable Lockheed Martin F-35, particularly in regard to the shaping of the intakes and forward fuselage, neither possesses internal weapons bays.

KAI did not state the powerplant for either aircraft, but one source says that it is likely to require similar power to the Pratt & Whitney F100 or General Electric F110, the engines for the F-16 fighter.

Industry sources at the show say that KAI has been actively seeking information on a range of equipment that the KFX would need to be a truly capable fighter jet, including its radar, avionics, mission computers, and other systems.

Although this is the first time KAI has displayed such detailed models at the Seoul show, there is still a great deal of uncertainty about the programme.

To a large degree, Seoul is relying on technology transfer stemming from its F-X III acquisition for 60 fighters to develop indigenous manufacturing capabilities for KFX. Given that F-X III is in limbo following Seoul’s decision to re-tender the competition rather than obtain the Boeing F-15 Silent Eagle over the F-35 and Eurofighter Typhoon, any decision on KFX is effectively stalled as well.

Another challenge for the KFX programme is the presence of Indonesia in the effort as a 20% partner. While Jakarta is generally an ally of the West, the US government could be dubious about providing advanced technologies to Jakarta through the KFX programme, which will invariably require a large degree of foreign content.

In the event that Seoul decides to move forward with the programme, the Korean air force is likely to obtain 120 examples, with Jakarta to take 80. KAI also hopes to win other export orders for the aircraft.

[Sancho]

I see no reason why F-22 would just use 22 % composite by weight when B-2 built earlier has more than 30 % composite by weight and JSF has 50 % by weight.

The size of the B2 for example, that logically means higher weight which can be reduced by more composites. Or the much higher load they carry, which results into less performance, which again can be countered by reducing the emptyweight, while the F22 has a good TWR anyway and was aimed on light A2A weapons mainly.

I have doubt about Rafale with useful load doing SC and EF officially when I last heard can do Mach 1.2 with A2A payload with 2 Drop tank .....although if you show me any official link of SC numbers with payload combination I would be glad to get corrected , since my information is like 3 years old when I saw the data I may not be updated.

Dassaults Fox Three magazin (No 8 page 9) has confirmed that, just like official brochures from the Paris Air Show 2011, that showed SC at Mach 1.4 with.

http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r279 ... Ms-12F.jpg

The Snecma M88 engine in the Rafale develops 11,250 lb of dry thrust and 16,900 lb with afterburner. They allow it to supercruise with four missiles and a 1,250 liter belly drop tank. The naval version (Rafale M) can supercruise up to Mach 1.4

http://siae.netdirect.fr/2011/sites/act ... le_G-B.pdf

The PDF is restricted now, but I posted it on the MP Forum back then:

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/sh ... ost5715025

I dont think so atleast never came across any think serious indicating that , I think all the bays have same depth and perhaps even length.

The lenght should be the same, but it would make sense if the frontal one is deeper because of the different design of the T50 or the YF23. I always wondered why it has 2 seperated bays, instead of 1 single long bay, that could house longer weapons cruise missiles, K100 or even Brahmos mini, but a flatter bay in the rear would be an explanation. But we have to wait and see for more infos to come out, the latest 5th prototype has some interesting changes too, sooner or later we might see a prototype with opened weapon bays to get a better idea.
Speaking of the 5th prototype, don't you think the new DRICM will block the field of view of the frontal MAW sensor?

[Sancho]

The FGFA planned to carry upto 3 BMos missiles ,apart from the Super (upgraded) Sukhois,would be able to deliver devastating stand-off strikes deep into enemy territory unmatched by our two traditional enemies.

I share your point on the importance of Brahmos as a missile and a JV, but only the MKI will be able to carry 3 of them, at least that's the plan. FGFA is aimed to carry 2 of them, 1 at each internal wingstation, while the MKI can carry another one at the centerline station, which doesn't exist for the FGFA, because of the internal weapon bays. However, the main point is that FGFA will be able to carry Brahmos mini, since that gives us far more operational strike range, which is important by the lack od dedicated bombers.
The mini also gives our forces a missile that really can be procured in high numbers, since more applications are possible. From triple configs at MKI, or Rafale possibly, to sublaunched versions, be it through VLS, or maybe as a replacement of the Klub-S missiles launched via torpedo tube (important for our Scorpenes later!!!). In fact, the whole criticism about Russia not buying Brahmos could end with the mini, since A it's a completely new developed version, not just an upgraded version of a missile that they already have and B, that they can use it as a Klub-S replacement too. The chances are even high that India and Russia will go for high numbers of that version, while the current version is not that interesting for them.

[Austin]

Dassaults Fox Three magazin (No 8 page 9) has confirmed that, just like official brochures from the Paris Air Show 2011, that showed SC at Mach 1.4 with.

http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r279 ... Ms-12F.jpg

The Snecma M88 engine in the Rafale develops 11,250 lb of dry thrust and 16,900 lb with afterburner. They allow it to supercruise with four missiles and a 1,250 liter belly drop tank. The naval version (Rafale M) can supercruise up to Mach 1.4

http://siae.netdirect.fr/2011/sites/act ... le_G-B.pdf

Yes I have come across those before but Dassult does not officially mentions any thing about Supercruise for Rafale on their website , If the capability existed for Rafale that was significant and not condition specific ( Payload/Fuel Capicity/Altitude ) they would have certainly advertised about it officially.

I think the capability of EF and Rafale to supercruise is based on certain conditions and not across the wide capability like those seen with 5th Gen Fighter.

[Austin]

Photos: T50-5

http://i-korotchenko.livejournal.com/772847.html

High Res - http://www.knaapo.ru/rus/gallery/events ... t-50-5.wbp

[John]

Austin
Thanks for the link, the 5th looks great. More composites than the 4th?

I share your point on the importance of Brahmos as a missile and a JV, but only the MKI will be able to carry 3 of them, at least that's the plan. FGFA is aimed to carry 2 of them, 1 at each internal wingstation, while the MKI can carry another one at the centerline station, which doesn't exist for the FGFA, because of the internal weapon bays. However, the main point is that FGFA will be able to carry Brahmos mini, since that gives us far more operational strike range, which is important by the lack od dedicated bombers.

As it stands MKI can carry only one and that requires modification. I am highly skeptical PAKFA as it stands can carry any Brahmos.

[Austin]

Austin
Thanks for the link, the 5th looks great. More composites than the 4th?

Not sure since they dont put up officially how does one PT differ from the other so your guess is as good as mine.

May be looking at the pictures the build quality looks better then the first prototype.

As it stands MKI can carry only one and that requires modification. I am highly skeptical PAKFA as it stands can carry any Brahmos.

If they strengthen the wing or perhaps it may already be the case they may carry two brahmos on the inner pylon , the centerline would carry internal weapons bays hence no chance of attaching a pylon unlike MKI.

I think by the time FGFA enters service we would have hypersonic brahmos and they say it would be lighter then air launched supersonic ones , so it could be worth carrying two of those in a pylon that perhaps can be ejected after launch. then rely on internal weapon to maintain LO.

[Philip]

Alternatively,the FGFA could even carry underwing lt-weight stealth pods housing the missile,just as is being done with the advanced SH,a large under fuselage pod capable of carrying a range of ordnance. If the missile has inbuilt stealth features,this wouldn't be necessary.

[Austin]

link

“The FGFA (fifth generation fighter aircraft) is on the right track and on schedule,” R. P. Chakraborty, Deputy General Manager (IMM) at HAL said on Wednesday.

When asked about the delays in the project, Chakraborty said they were on account of the design documentation in the contract, an issue that has already been resolved. The contract to develop a sketch and technical project of the fighter was completed in April 2013.

“A team of Indians is already in Russia and a Russian team is already in the design centre to go ahead with the work on the design,” Chakraborty said.

While emphasising that schedules are being met for the Multirole Transport Aircraft (MTA), a medium-lift military transport aircraft, Chakraborty said there is a greater urgency to develop the FGFA. “Both Russia and India need the FGFA…but in the case of MTA, it’s not the Russian government that requires it. We need it,” he said

[Austin]

T-50-5 arrives in Zhukovsky

High Res --> http://s017.radikal.ru/i433/1311/bf/b74f368eccc7.jpg

[Hiten]

T-50-5 arrives in Zhukovsky

High Res --> http://s017.radikal.ru/i433/1311/bf/b74f368eccc7.jpg

what explains this particular paint job?

[SaiK]

can't they skin the dual engine rears?

what explains this particular paint job?

'm thinking they have excluded the sensor areas.. that shows there is no wing top passive sensors like in the raptor.

also note the visual signature reduction.

[VinodTK]

India Pushes Russia For Greater Inclusion In Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft Development

India and Russia have been long-term collaborators on defense technology. The two countries together produced the supersonic BrahMos cruise missile — the fastest cruise missile in production. The relationship hasn’t always been balanced in India’s favor, however, and this has come to light recently with India’s stake in the development of the Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft, based on the Russian Sukhoi T-50 (PAK FA).

According to Defense News, India has conveyed its displeasure to Russia over its “low level of participation in the joint development of the Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA), despite being an equal financial partner in the project and placing an order of more than US $30 billion for the new planes.” The joint effort is a major component of India’s continued air force modernization. According to RIA Novosti, India currently bears 50 percent of the costs of development.
:
:
:

[Leo.Davidson]

India Pushes Russia For Greater Inclusion In Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft Development

Can some one tell me what Indian participation will amount to 50% ? Are the Russians lacking in a specific field where Indian expertise can add to.

[SaiK]

it is not just expertise alone. say, i am to charge you heavy for a course in advanced computing.. and now i say, $x per semester. now, i say, the syllabus and curriculum will be prepared as we go, and as i deem fit based on your expertise and knowledge level. you get the idea? will you commit to my course?

[Leo.Davidson]

it is not just expertise alone. say, i am to charge you heavy for a course in advanced computing.. and now i say, $x per semester. now, i say, the syllabus and curriculum will be prepared as we go, and as i deem fit based on your expertise and knowledge level. you get the idea? will you commit to my course?

Here's the article

India and Russia have been long-term collaborators on defense technology. The two countries together produced the supersonic BrahMos cruise missile — the fastest cruise missile in production. The relationship hasn’t always been balanced in India’s favor, however, and this has come to light recently with India’s stake in the development of the Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft, based on the Russian Sukhoi T-50 (PAK FA).

According to Defense News, India has conveyed its displeasure to Russia over its “low level of participation in the joint development of the Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA), despite being an equal financial partner in the project and placing an order of more than US $30 billion for the new planes.” The joint effort is a major component of India’s continued air force modernization. According to RIA Novosti, India currently bears 50 percent of the costs of development.

In a visit to Moscow earlier this month, Indian Defense Minister A. K. Antony pushed Russia to increase India’s share of the development work to 50 percent, in line with its financial equity in the project. Antony, speaking at the 13th meeting of the India-Russia Inter-Governmental Commission on Military Technical Cooperation, stressed the necessity for the two longterm partners to cooperative equally in “all the phases — design, development and production — in the execution” of the FGFA project.

New Delhi’s push for equitable inclusion in military technical cooperation with Russia is related to its long-unachieved strategic goal of developing self-sufficiency in indigenous military production. India is the world’s largest importer of weapons technology. Indeed, Defense News cited a Russian diplomat in New Delhi as saying that part of the reason that the Russians limited India’s share in the FGFA project is due to “India’s capabilities in military aircraft research and industrial infrastructure.”[This is baloney - they've limited us because we are better]

The agreement to jointly develop the FGFA was signed between the Indian and Russia Air Forces in 2007, with the final design, research, and joint development contract expected to exceed more than $10 billion. Although that contract is yet to be signed, Defense News reports that “In December 2010, Rosoboronexport, India’s state-owned Hindustan Aeronautics and Russian aircraft-maker Sukhoi signed a preliminary design development contract worth $295 million.”

The Indian Air Force is likely to order around 200 units of the single-seat, twin-engine fighters. The Sukhoi T-50 possesses a supersonic cruising ability which, combined with its ultra-manuverability, makes it a potent addition to the Indian Air Force. The jet is expected to increase the versatility of the Indian Air Force. As part of India’s stake in the development of the aircraft, it is expected to be able to specifically tune the units it purchases to the specific needs of its air force.

Antony’s visit to Moscow came just a couple days after India inducted the INS Vikramaditya — formerly the Russian Admiral Gorshkov. India’s naval modernization, which has reached new heights in recent years, has largely been dependent on its cooperation with Russia as well. In his recent visit, Antony also addressed a prospective nuclear submarine lease from Russia to India.

[SaiK]

right... all these are chewing tactics. none in the world will share like what our MoD is asking for.
so, what do you do? build your own PAKFA --> AMCA. Let us be happy with MKI++ till then

if they want to share, let them come asking.. the demand/supply equation has to be known.. if we behave like our politicians do, then everyone will take us for a ride.

btw, if our drdo men are under funded, and lacking expertise or vision, we have now new friend - japan. they are the ideal partner for us to get into AMCA from all first principles - they are interested in ATD-X development as well.

[Eric Leiderman]

I agree and have articulated the same opinion in the AMCA thread. We have to partner with Japan for the AMCA they have the material science's background with utilisation in very diverse applications. They are also masters in improving on a proven design.
Their production engineers are the best in the world there techniques are being replicated in many different industries.
They have an aero space base. (maybe not in fighter aircraft , but then our experience is limited in that sphere too.)
With the Panda rattling the status quo it just might happen.
We have money a low cost human resource, we also have a requirement for large numbers of aircraft, to make the venture cost effective.
There is synergy.

[SaiK]

http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/fr ... epage=true
By BC

According to Dr. Singh, “India and Japan have a shared vision of a rising Asia.” Translating that vision into practice demands strengthening their still-fledgling strategic cooperation and working together to ensure a pluralistic, stable Asian order.

Japan, in keeping with its pacifist Constitution, does not possess offensive systems, such as nuclear submarines, large aircraft carriers, and long-range missiles. But with the world’s sixth largest defence budget, it has a formidable defensive capability, an impressive armament-production base, and Asia’s largest naval fleet, including top-of-the-line conventional subs, large helicopter-carrying destroyers, and Aegis-equipped cruisers capable of shooting down ballistic missiles.

India — the world’s largest arms importer that desperately needs to develop an indigenous arms-production capability — must forge closer defence ties with Japan, including co-developing weapon systems and working together on missile defence. The most stable economic partnerships in the world, such as the Atlantic community and the Japan-U.S. partnership, have been built on the bedrock of security collaboration. Economic ties that lack the underpinning of strategic partnerships tend to be less stable and even volatile, as is apparent from China’s economic relationships with India, Japan and the U.S. Through close strategic collaboration, Japan and India must lead the effort to build freedom, prosperity and stability in the Indo-Pacific region.

Against this background, the Emperor’s visit promises to live up to Mr. Abe’s hope of being a “historic event.” It is likely to herald an enduring Indo-Japanese strategic partnership.

[NRao]

Boom...................... Procurement for us.

Dec 10, 2013 :: Proposed 5th gen fighter aircraft JV yet to get defence ministry seal

The Indo-Russian proposed joint venture (JV) on the fifth generation fighter aircraft (FGFA) seem not yet out of the woods, as defence minister AK Antony presented a list of four ongoing JVs in Parliament sans T-50.

The list did not include the T-50 or as Indian Air Force calls it FGFA JV that was to struck between Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) and the Sukhoi Bureau, on the basis of a 50:50 investment sharing.

There have been reports lately that the Russian-built T-50, which was to be modified by HAL to bring in more stealth and supercruise etc, have run over time and budget. There were also reports that IAF could be reducing the size of the order, as one former top honcho said, ‘The price of the contract will be phenomenally high, almost double of what we will have to pay for the Rafale.’
The senior IAF source confirmed that the FGFA JV can only take off after the Russian prototype is provided to HAL. The current date that is being talked about is 2019-2020.

In response to the question, Antony detailed the ‘Present status of JV proposals between Indian Defence Public Sector Undertakings (DPSUs), Ordnance Factory Board (OFB) and Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO) and Russia are: Multi-role Transport Aircraft Ltd (MTAL), Indo Russian Aviation Limited (IRAL), Joint Venture for SMERCH Ammunition, Joint Venture for SMERCH Ammunition and BrahMos Aerospace.

The MTAL JV was formed between the HAL- really a new Indian entity United Aircraft Corporation Transport Aircraft - and Rosoboronexport, Russia, with both handling 50 per cent share each. ‘General contract and preliminary design phase contract have been signed in May 2012 and October 2012, respectively.’

Indo-Russian Aviation Ltd, a JV company was incorporated in September 1994 with participation of ‘HAL (48%), ICICI Bank (5%) and Russian partners (RAC MIG, RYAZAN, AVIAZAPCHAST) (47%).’
The JV company is for maintenance of engines, accessories, aggregates and avionics, modernisation and re-equipping all the Russian origin aircrafts. The company provides its services globally.

‘Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on joint venture to include Transfer of Technology (ToT) for co-production of SMERCH (Multi Barrel Rocket Launcher) ammunition has been signed between Ordnance Factory Board (OFB), JSC Rosoboronexport and SPLAV SPA Russia on 27 August 2012.

The BrahMos JV, one of the biggest success stories of the Indo-Russian strategic partnership was formed between DRDO India and NPO Mashinostroyenia (NPOM) Russia under an inter- governmental agreement in February 1998 for joint design, development, production and marketing of supersonic cruise missiles for armed forces of both the countries, and export to mutually agreed third friendly countries. Two variants of the BrahMos missile has been jointly developed and is under serial production in India and Russia.

[Vivek K]

so how long is India willing to wait for pakfa? it seems like time to jump ship and work seriously on the AMCA

[SaiK]

i am wary of anything coming out of this congress gov. sorry for being little political.

[Austin]

Recent pics of T-50 ( 053 )

http://russianplanes.net/images/to127000/126559.jpg
http://russianplanes.net/images/to127000/126450.jpg
http://russianplanes.net/images/to127000/126361.jpg
http://russianplanes.net/images/to127000/126340.jpg
http://russianplanes.net/images/to127000/126243.jpg

[Austin]

PAK-FA & Yak-130

http://russianplanes.net/images/to127000/126627.jpg

[NRao]

Very interesting stuff:

New Russian Air-to-Air Missiles Will Field Almost Perfect Accuracy.

Russia’s new T-50-variant Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (PAK FA) may feature the most accurate air-to-air missile system ever devised. The new system specifically targets the ability of skilled fighter pilots to engage in violent maneuvers to break missile locks in older-generation technology, based on a radar system held within the nose of the missile.

The new missile, pegged the K-77M, was described by Russia Today as an “absolute killer.” It notes that what sets the K-77M’s technology apart from its counterparts is the implementation of a “active phased array antenna (APAA)” which essentially solves the lock-on problem by addressing the radar’s “field of view” problem. Previously, this limitation allowed pilots to swing their jets out of the range of a tailing guided missile when in close proximity, evading the scope of the radar’s view. The K-77M essentially implements a solution similar to the Raytheon’s Patriot surface-to-air (SAM) missile system, according to Russia Today.

Russia Today explains the technology in more detail: “An active phased array antenna consists of a large number of cone-shaped cells installed under a transparent-to-radio-waves cap on the nose of the missile. Each cell receives only a part of the signal, but once digitally processed, the information from all cells is summarized into a ‘full picture,’ enabling the K-77M missile to immediately respond to sharp turns of the target, making interception practically inevitable.”

The development of this air-to-air missile — suspected to be the most accurate missile ever developed in its class — could be a major coup for Russia’s Detal design bureau, the developer. Russia Times notes that the chief engineer of the Detal design bureau hopes to begin manufacturing in 2015 after establishing a production facility. The economics of the missile appear to be favorable, even given the tall price-tag associated with APAA-equipped missile technology. Given the all-but-guaranteed accuracy of the system, Russia is likely to find several buyers. The K-77M could also render the PAK FA a more compelling purchase for buyers. The K-77M is reportedly compatible with previous generation Sukhoi fighters as well.

Russia already has interested buyers in the PAK FA. India is a major financial and research partner in the development of the next-generation fighter, and is expected to order around 200 units. The jointly-developed version is referred to as a the Sukhoi/HAL Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft, a further derivative of the main PAK FA project. Until now, the primary Russian pitch on the Sukhoi PAK FA was its low cost compared to the U.S. F-22 Raptor and F-35 Lightning II. The addition of the hyper-accurate missile tech offers a compelling value-add in Russia technology, at least in the short term. The allure of an air-to-air missile that both in theory and practice never misses may be too much for prospective buyers to resist.

As far as The Diplomat was able to confirm, the United States does not seem to have air-to-air missile technology in existence or in known current development to compete with the K-77M’s accuracy.

[SaiK]

are they thinking of frameless canopy?

[NRao]

More urgently, are they thinking of getting rid of the IRST "bulb"? I think they will.

[SaiK]

it is like the cindy crawford's black mole on her face. i would think it is hard to remove. how else they can place it?
remember raptor has little defense against long ranged OLS system, and even against DAS/eots of f35.. so, it is mandatory need, and perhaps even needs strengthening and augmenting the range, precision and sensitivity.

even pirate is ugly looking (rcs wise).

all dog fights has to be on IRST based slaving... and perhaps even the mid range bvrs (around 50miles). if you ask me, that is the most vital part for pak-fa to even speak of 5th gen at the current levels.

may be they tuck in - copying from a chippanda site:
http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/attach ... -das-1.jpg

[Singha]

the shape of the glass cover whether curved or faceted will not help RCS as the glass is transparent to radar. there will be RCS off the metal parts inside. perhaps a faceted cover will distort the optics of the IRST sensor? a gold coating like on some F16 canopy might help to prevent higher RCS off interior parts. or better, find some way to house the electronics inside the nose and expose only glass and plastic parts inside the bubble...that I think is already the case.

[Aditya G]

Naval T-50K



... aboard the successor to Kuznetsov class



From: http://charly015.blogspot.in/2013/07/pr ... no-de.html

(Excellent site btw)

[Viv S]

it is like the cindy crawford's black mole on her face. i would think it is hard to remove. how else they can place it?
remember raptor has little defense against long ranged OLS system, and even against DAS/eots of f35.. so, it is mandatory need, and perhaps even needs strengthening and augmenting the range, precision and sensitivity.

In real world conditions, it would over-optimistic to expect long range target acquisition from the OLS (or for that matter any current IRST system). And this may in fact be a blessing in disguise for the PAK FA since it will likely have a very high IR signature (assuming the 117 is an evolution of the AL-31 family).

all dog fights has to be on IRST based slaving... and perhaps even the mid range bvrs (around 50miles). if you ask me, that is the most vital part for pak-fa to even speak of 5th gen at the current levels.

During dogfighting, yes, something like the DAS will be invaluable (but I don't believe such a system is under development). At BVR ranges, tracking a head-on target with an IR sensor is still a challenge.

[Karan M]

>>In real world conditions, it would over-optimistic to expect long range target acquisition from the OLS

Depends on long range and its definition. Against quasi-stealth fighters (i.e. those with RF LO) a range of ~40-50 km frontal would be sufficient for a fighter to use a range of means to either engage the target or avoid it..

[Viv S]

Depends on long range and its definition. Against quasi-stealth fighters (i.e. those with RF LO) a range of ~40-50 km frontal would be sufficient for a fighter to use a range of means to either engage the target or avoid it..

40-50km might be achievable against conventional fighters, but that figure will fall much further when pitted against the F-22 and F-35 which are both designed to be LO in the IR spectrum. Information about the J-20/31 is limited, but I wouldn't be surprised if they featured some degree of IR reduction as well.

[Karan M]

Depends on long range and its definition. Against quasi-stealth fighters (i.e. those with RF LO) a range of ~40-50 km frontal would be sufficient for a fighter to use a range of means to either engage the target or avoid it..

40-50km might be achievable against conventional fighters, but that figure will fall much further when pitted against the F-22 and F-35 which are both designed to be LO in the IR spectrum. Information about the J-20/31 is limited, but I wouldn't be surprised if they featured some degree of IR reduction as well.

F-22 yes, but F-35? Thats the most powerful fighter engine ever built, stuck in an airframe which is not exactly the most aerodynamic one out there. Friction heating alone will do a fair bit of damage. And against newer gen OLS with QWIP detectors, I wouldnt count on much..
J-20/J-31 TBH at this point are more hype than substance. They will be challenges in the RF arena but IR & even overall sophistication, the PRC has a long way to go.

[Viv S]

F-22 yes, but F-35? Thats the most powerful fighter engine ever built, stuck in an airframe which is not exactly the most aerodynamic one out there. Friction heating alone will do a fair bit of damage. And against newer gen OLS with QWIP detectors, I wouldnt count on much..

With regard to the engine, its got a very high bypass ratio (for a fighter jet) that more than compensates for the high thrust figure. Secondly, the F135 was structurally designed for a lower heat signature, being a further development of the LOAN concept.

Coming to the airframe, the engine is buried deeper in the fuselage than other aircraft, to partially insulate it. It has an IR topcoat applied, and employs active cooling particularly to cater to frictional heating of the airframe.

Also, while IRST tech will no doubt continue to evolve, development in materials and redesign to meet higher IR goals also continues unabated (eg ADVENT/AETD program). Its too early to suggest that the balance will decisively tilt in favour of the sensor in the near future.

J-20/J-31 TBH at this point are more hype than substance. They will be challenges in the RF arena but IR & even overall sophistication, the PRC has a long way to go.

Maybe. Trouble is, there isn't enough information available publicly, to say one way or the other. Their limitations in the field of jet engine development are well known, but there's far more opacity in terms of design expertise or say.. progress on advanced composites.

[SaiK]

Austin had earlier posted detailed link about 101KS-V (OLS-50M).. I tried to search, but it did not result in.. perhaps my search string was wrong. anyone has that info?

[member_20317]

Several years back I had read in a magazine named 'Chanakya' how the Brits were developing a sensor able to identify a plane from its IR signature and then go on to predict the place where the cockpit would be. They wanted to enhance the lethality of their AAMs. The aircrafts shown in the pictures were Harrier (short hot plume hot body) and Tornado (long hot plume relatively cooler body). And the cockpits were marked quite well.

A big big engine like that of F-35 not getting seen may be a good idea.

But once its seen the cockpit not getting predicted may not be much difficult. Well its gonna be ahead in general of the plume by x ft. when the plume is y degrees hot or measure approx. zd mtrs. by zee mtrs. Off course after some damn difficult processing in a crazy algorithm that nobody besides the designers understand. So the active cooling systems may already have been countered by the Brits and probably some other more tech advanced nations. Do other Gen 5 crafts have this active cooling plumbing?

Or I could just be wrong. But I am sure of the features of what I read. What I said in the first para about the magazine, is what I read.