PAK-FA and FGFA: News & Discussion - June 2014

Vips · Post by **Vips** » 05 Sep 2018 18:28

Russians are struggling with 5G technology. At this rate by the time they perfect it and have the plane in numbers, US 6G prototypes would be flying.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 06 Sep 2018 09:37

If it refers to full thrust, the new Izdeliye 30 engine should provide 17 tons, compared to 14.5 tons for AL-41F-1. The engine’s dry weight is estimated at 1,450 kg (3,200 lb.), compared to 1,600 kg for AL-41F-1. Thanks to glass-fiber plastic inlet guide vanes, the new engine fan is planned to have much a smaller radar cross-section in the front view.

If what he says is true than Iz 30 should have a TW ratio of pretty close to 12:1 ...Compare that of AL-31FP on MKI with T:W ratio of 8:1 .

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 07 Sep 2018 11:31

Tests of combat aircraft "in the figure" will help to reduce the number of flights almost twice - UAC

http://militarynews.ru/story.asp?rid=1&nid=490126

09/07/2018 7:30:01 AM

Gelendzhik. 6 September. Interfax-AVN - Tests of combat aircraft, including the fifth generation, can be reduced by almost half due to digitalization, Interfax was told in the United Aircraft Corporation (UAC).

"The tests of a modern combat aircraft of 4+ or 5 generations can last from 5 to 10. If, during testing of third- or fourth-generation aircraft, 500-1000 flights were laid, modern aircraft, for example, of the fifth generation, should commit up to 5,000 sorties to polygons, before the product will be adopted, "- said the representative of the UAC.

He noted that modern digital technologies allow to shorten the time, as well as improve the quality and safety of aircraft testing.

"Today, the UAC has started using methods of testing aircraft systems, such as simulations and end-to-end test results, which can almost halve the number of flights for debugging weapons systems, almost a quarter - to assess aerodynamic characteristics," said the representative of the corporation.
According to him, this uses the capabilities of the newest "supercomputers" and takes into account the results of the previous stages of testing - a similar experience in the UAC has already been obtained by testing the designed "in-figure" civil aircraft SSJ-100 and МС-21.

Su-57 (a promising aviation complex of front-line aviation (PAK FA), T-50) is a Russian multi-role fighter of the fifth generation developed by Sukhoi Design Bureau. It is intended for the destruction of all types of air targets in long-range and near-battles, the destruction of enemy's ground, surface targets with the overcoming of enemy air defense systems, the monitoring of airspace at large distances from the base, the destruction of the control system of enemy aircraft operations. The first flight of PAK FA took place on January 29, 2010 in Komsomolsk-on-Amur.

From 6 to 9 September in Gelendzhik is the 12th International Exhibition and Scientific Conference on Hydroaviation - Gidroaviasalon-2018. The exhibition is located on the territory of the Gelendzhik airport and the experimental and experimental base of the Taganrog Aviation Scientific and Technical Complex (TANTK). Beriev. The organizer of the biannual aviation forum is the Ministry of Industry and Trade of the Russian Federation, the United Aircraft Corporation (UAC), the operator of the exhibition is Aviasalon OJSC.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 07 Sep 2018 16:01

Austin wrote:Tests of combat aircraft "in the figure" will help to reduce the number of flights almost twice - UAC

Computer simulation was to reduce JSF/F-35 testing effort. It didnt.
Computer simulation was to reduce Eurofighter testing effort. It didnt.
Computer simulation was to reduce LCA Tejas testing effort. It didnt.
Computer simulation will now reduce PAK-FA testing effort. Carry on Jeeves

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 09 Sep 2018 23:01

There is a recent AWST feature on the challenges of rectifying JSF defects and the weight reduction exercise.
It is a revelation as to the immense tasks involved in perfecting the bird and the huge difficulties in designing and building the stealth bird, the huge engineering skills required ,which are still going on.A pic of the weapons bay shows such a chaotic mess of equipment, wiring, etc., remarked upon by the author, that it is remarkable that the bird is flying entering service.

This gives one an idea of what must be happening with our own LCA, trying to fit in eqpt. to turn the LCA into an M2K. I shudder to think of the time we're going to field the AMCA when global leaders who've built so many different aircraft in their thousands are taking so much time to do do with their latest stealth birds and at what huge cost.
In this context it is worth rememering the Rand study some years ago predicting a v.tough time for US F-22s in the Pacific against superior numbers of Chin Flanker clones, as they would run out of AAMs in dealing with the superior numbers of AAMs carried by the larger numbers of Flankers.

The IAF should operate in the future a balanced force of aircraft including stealth birds in affordable numbers supported by large numbers of heavy, med. and light birds, where the majority should be of the most affordable type that retains credible capability. In all our past wars with Pak, it was the humble Gnats, Hunters, HFs and MIGs
that did the biz. against supposedly superior Sabres, Starfighters and Mirages.Our numerical superiority plus superb training of our pilots enabled us to overcome Pak.

At Kargil we had equivalent - even superior birds in air combat to Pak's F-16s in the form of the MIG-29, why the PAF never dared to swing into action.However, we are losing that numerical superiority advantage today as legacy MIG types in their hundreds are retiring.Added to this is the joint PAF+ PLAAF factor in future conflicts as China starts to pursue a JV mil. strategy against us with the 2.5 front war scenario that we have to plan for, war in both eastern and western theatres and the maritime battle in the IOR.

We will need to possess at least 2 sqds. of FGFAs from 2022+ onwards as China will begin to field the same in Tibet and could even transfer some to Pak on lease if it couldn't afford outright purchase.Therefore , the planned acquisition of the SU-57 outright even if the JV route is abandoned for the current time should be pursued.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 09 Sep 2018 23:36

There is a recent AWST feature on the challenges of rectifying JSF defects and the weight reduction exercise.

There is no weight reduction exercise ongoing. Weight reduction was done back when the program was put into probation by Robert Gates back in the 2010-211 timeframe. This only applied to the F-35B and the program successfully passed the design review for the weight reduction changes at the time . This allowed the next Secretary of Defense to lift the probation in the 2012/13 time-frame. All three F-35 variants currently have a favorable weight margin.

Graham Warwick's article covers all the challenges that they encountered and overcame over the last 15+ years. Remember that the F-35 is no longer in development.It passed that milestone earlier this year. No developmental testing is currently happening to support the SDD phase. They are preparing for follow on development phase now.

t is a revelation as to the immense tasks involved in perfecting the bird and the huge difficulties in designing and building the stealth bird, the huge engineering skills required, which are still going on

There is no "designing" happening at the moment. The F-35 has completed the SDD development test phase i.e. there is no design related issue that the program is working on. There may need to be some subtle design changes for block-4 capability but that is years into the future and will be performed as upgrades as new capability is fielded. Early November is when we will know about the details of Block 4.

A pic of the weapons bay shows such a chaotic mess of equipment, wiring, etc., remarked upon by the author, that it is remarkable that the bird is flying entering service.

What does this mean? There is no "chaotic" mess of equipment inside the weapons bay. The weapons bay, and everything in it has passed both the design reviews and is a frozen design. This is the way the designers intended it to be, and this is the way it will remain. There is some subtle change that will be incorporated on a few F-35Bs that were produced before some of these changes passed their design review but that will be done at the organic depots on those birds. The F-35s bay designs and requirements were strict. 4 BVRAAMs with growth for 2 more (total 6 AMRAAM class missiles), 2000 lb class PGM in both the bays and cruise missiles like the JSM as well. This from a single engine medium sized aircraft with all the sensors and antennas that it also had to house.

Trikaal · Post by **Trikaal** » 10 Sep 2018 01:29

^Is that 6 BVR+2PGM+1cruise or 6 BVR/2 PGM/1 Cruise?
If it's the first case then holy shit!!!

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 10 Sep 2018 01:32

No 6 AMRAAM class BVRAAMs and nothing else internal. The mixed load is 2x Strike weapons + 2 x AMRAAMs. Those two strike weapons can be 2 x 2000 lb bombs, 2 x JSOW's, 2 x JSM stand off missiles, 2 x AARGM-ERs ARMs or up to 8 x SDBs.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 18 Nov 2018 05:44

Why did India leave the Su-57 programme?

After eleven years and development shares of 330 million euros – plus further billions of dollars requested by Russia – India was said to be fed up with Russia’s refusal to share both blueprints and source codes. Those elements are indispensable for the country’s ‘Make in India’ initiative. Without them, decision-makers did not want to invest funds into a still unfinished system. They would say India is better off developing their own stealth jet in the form of the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA).

Possibly. But when? After all, Indian development and procurement processes can certainly be called ‘byzantine’ – they can be measured in decades. Two examples: the recently launched LCA Tejas Mk.1A – whose carrier version was rejected as inadequate by the Indian Navy – has been an ongoing project for 30 years. Efforts to locally produce the BAE Hawk have also been a 22-year process.

Unfinished business

Over the years, the number of Indian jets has been halved from 214 to 144, and then to 127. Yet the two-seater repeatedly demanded by the IAF for complex missions has become – as one Indian Navy test pilot told DIB during an event in Bahrain – “more or less ignored by the Russians”. The latter are instead focusing on their concept of a PAK FA, intended to match the F-22 or F-35.

.....

On the Russian side, no one has officially confirmed the Indian withdrawal. Russian bloggers and forums posters are happy to “finally get rid of the annoying Indians”– but as the Su-57 now has to go it alone, they can provide no solution as to how the aircraft can continue.

The Indians are taking a similar view. For years, personnel at HAL and within the IAF have been obsessed with stealth. The Indians are must consider scenarios of offensive intrusion into well-defended enemy airspace (namely China or Pakistan) and of the destruction of key ground targets. Here at least a different approach to the basic orientation is notable in the FGFA / PMF plans.

Don’t bank on an Indian F-35
For decades, Russia was the main supplier of most weapon systems to the Indian Air Force and Naval Aviation. The 272 Indian Su-30MKI (with 220 since delivered) may have even saved the Russian fighter industry in the economic turmoil of the 1990s. But while it is obvious today that the Indians are increasingly ordering US-built inventory (C-17, P-8, AH-64, C-130J, etc), the FGFA project might have been an instance of ‘too little, too late’. The ‘hard’ stop for the FGFA does not automatically mean that the only alternative is an Indian 35 JSF.

For warplanes, the IAF and MoD want full-scale modernisation and adaptation-authority over the aircraft’s lifespan. That means access right down to the EW systems and their threat libraries. And they would probably get even less of that from the US government or Lockheed Martin than if they paid the Russians their $7bn asking price.

In addition, India would in this instance have to share its most sensitive data with the US, and still – as was reported from Dubai – US military leadership does not see a feasible option in basing or even linking F-35 technology alongside Russian systems. The same issues have arisen in the case of the S-400 sale to Turkey, which has 100 F-35 on its books. So far only Israel has been granted access to the F-35I ‘Adir’ architecture to adapt and modify onboard systems for national use.

Is there a future for the SU-57?
Russia’s T-50 / Su-57 project – launched in 2010 – has suffered a decisive setback.

https://www.defenceiq.com/air-forces-mi ... he-su-57-1

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 18 Nov 2018 10:48

I was waiting for the usual plug to buy the Su-57 and getting worried when I didn't see it. Thank goodness, the last para didn't let us down. But why such a large post when all you could have said was "buy the FGFA or else....".

But to recap. The F-35 sux. The AMCA will not happen yada yada. We need number. Buy Su-57. Or else.

Goodness, some things never ever change.

Philip wrote:There is a recent AWST feature on the challenges of rectifying JSF defects and the weight reduction exercise.
It is a revelation as to the immense tasks involved in perfecting the bird and the huge difficulties in designing and building the stealth bird, the huge engineering skills required ,which are still going on.A pic of the weapons bay shows such a chaotic mess of equipment, wiring, etc., remarked upon by the author, that it is remarkable that the bird is flying entering service.

This gives one an idea of what must be happening with our own LCA, trying to fit in eqpt. to turn the LCA into an M2K. I shudder to think of the time we're going to field the AMCA when global leaders who've built so many different aircraft in their thousands are taking so much time to do do with their latest stealth birds and at what huge cost.
In this context it is worth rememering the Rand study some years ago predicting a v.tough time for US F-22s in the Pacific against superior numbers of Chin Flanker clones, as they would run out of AAMs in dealing with the superior numbers of AAMs carried by the larger numbers of Flankers.

The IAF should operate in the future a balanced force of aircraft including stealth birds in affordable numbers supported by large numbers of heavy, med. and light birds, where the majority should be of the most affordable type that retains credible capability. In all our past wars with Pak, it was the humble Gnats, Hunters, HFs and MIGs
that did the biz. against supposedly superior Sabres, Starfighters and Mirages.Our numerical superiority plus superb training of our pilots enabled us to overcome Pak.

At Kargil we had equivalent - even superior birds in air combat to Pak's F-16s in the form of the MIG-29, why the PAF never dared to swing into action.However, we are losing that numerical superiority advantage today as legacy MIG types in their hundreds are retiring.Added to this is the joint PAF+ PLAAF factor in future conflicts as China starts to pursue a JV mil. strategy against us with the 2.5 front war scenario that we have to plan for, war in both eastern and western theatres and the maritime battle in the IOR.

We will need to possess at least 2 sqds. of FGFAs from 2022+ onwards as China will begin to field the same in Tibet and could even transfer some to Pak on lease if it couldn't afford outright purchase.Therefore , the planned acquisition of the SU-57 outright even if the JV route is abandoned for the current time should be pursued.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 27 Dec 2018 10:03

clear view of the real forms of the plane

rajsunder · Post by **rajsunder** » 28 Dec 2018 11:07

Austin wrote:clear view of the real forms of the plane.

pretty big panel gaps.

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 28 Dec 2018 12:18

^ you forgot to mention the rivets

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 28 Dec 2018 13:17

^ is this the production ready version with skin, ram coatings and all? If so, the above comments in the pics a might be sensible otherwise, wee premature.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 20 Feb 2019 03:58

https://twitter.com/livefist/status/1097857642452656128 ----> FLASH: “We may be interested in the FGFA/Su-57 as a commercial sale once Russia fully develops it,” says Defence Secretary Sanjay Mitra. (In other words, no chance of India returning to the program as a partner of any kind.)

Mukesh.Kumar · Post by **Mukesh.Kumar** » 20 Feb 2019 18:03

And while browsing Russian forums for PAK-FA pics, here are some beauties.Can't say that she's not beautiful, even though she's someone else's bride today.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 14 Mar 2019 19:57

Su-57 fighter: TsAGI innovative solutions

http://www.tsagi.ru/pressroom/news/4264/

In early 2010, for the first time, a prototype of the T-50 aircraft took off. The Russian fifth-generation multifunctional fighter, developed by the P.O. Sukhoi in the framework of the project "PAK FA" (Perspective Aviation Complex of Frontal Aviation), now bears the name of Su-57.

In the Central Aero-Hydrodynamic Institute named after professor N.Е. Zhukovsky new aircraft began to be developed in the framework of research work in 1999. The specialists of the leading center of aviation science, together with the Sukhoi Design Bureau, were to create a fighter with a number of unique features that have properties whose implementation is mutually contradictory. It was necessary to develop an aviation complex with the functions of a fighter, interceptor and strike aircraft. High combat effectiveness of the PAK FA should be provided by technical solutions in the field of aerodynamic layout, stability and controllability, control systems, power plant, radar and infrared visibility, avionics and armament.

Together with the staff of the Sukhoi Design Bureau, the TsAGI scientists developed an aerodynamic shape of the aircraft that meets the requirements of the fifth generation fighter. An unobtrusive air intake, which has no world analogues, was created, which ensures stable engine operation in all flight modes. The specialists of the institute have worked out control systems for a maneuverable aircraft that is statically unstable in the lateral and longitudinal control channels. Ensuring the durability of the airframe design with the extensive use of new and composite materials is another challenging task that TsAGI scientists have successfully solved. As a result, the requirements were met for the weight parameters of the design of the aviation complex, the weight perfection of the aircraft. In a short time, work was carried out in the areas of security from flutter,

Specialists of the Institute conducted a unique design calculation of the layout of the fighter. In the wind tunnels of TsAGI, 28 different aircraft models were investigated; The total number of tests exceeded 32 thousand. Successfully performed tests of new materials and structural elements.

After the first flight of the prototype, studies on the finalization of the flight vehicle continued. So, over the next nine years, the TsAGI refined the aerodynamic characteristics of the complex, compared it with the results of flight tests, practiced the safety of using new aircraft weapons. In the process of preparing and conducting flight tests, frequency tests of all the aircraft designed for this purpose were conducted.

Press service of FSUE TsAGI
(495) 556-40-32
(495) 556-40-38
press@tsagi.ru

ArjunPandit · Post by **ArjunPandit** » 14 Mar 2019 20:31

Rakesh wrote:https://twitter.com/livefist/status/1097857642452656128 ----> FLASH: “We may be interested in the FGFA/Su-57 as a commercial sale once Russia fully develops it,” says Defence Secretary Sanjay Mitra. (In other words, no chance of India returning to the program as a partner of any kind.)

so the initial $$ invested go down the drain??

gpurewal · Post by **gpurewal** » 14 Mar 2019 21:00

ArjunPandit wrote:
Rakesh wrote:https://twitter.com/livefist/status/1097857642452656128 ----> FLASH: “We may be interested in the FGFA/Su-57 as a commercial sale once Russia fully develops it,” says Defence Secretary Sanjay Mitra. (In other words, no chance of India returning to the program as a partner of any kind.)
so the initial $$ invested go down the drain??

At worst, consider it a sunk cost. The Indian side of the FGFA committee would have factored in the benefits of continuing the program versus the detriments/downsides. They must have concluded that continuing with the program was more detrimental than ending the involvement.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 18 Mar 2019 21:15

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/1107343179777335296 ---> Obviously, for India to consider the India-Russia Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft project again, all source code must be shared with it. Plus, technology transfer for the Izdeliye 30 engine to be built from the raw material stage in India.

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/1107345098642079745 ---> Also, do remember that the interim engine for the Su-57 was the AL-41F1 or Izdeliye 117. The AL-41F1S or Izdeliye 117C is used on the Su-35.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 18 Mar 2019 22:43

https://yadi.sk/a/WWdBbxDH3Vnim8

view of the workship for the fabled izedliye 30 engine that is in flight test for 16 months now.

11 tons dry and 19 tons wet ie akin to a 20% growth version of the JSF F135 engine.

with better sfc and durability than al31-41 family, and with pakfa a smaller airframe than flanker, should permit more brute power in a2a mode.
with 2 internal bays probably 8 full caliber ERAM shtics.

may not be a ELO penetrator platform through heavily monitored airspace but makes very few if any compromises in the LO a2a long persistence role. it can replace the foxhounds and flankers for sure in the ways that russia uses

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 10 Apr 2019 10:45

Prototype 2 Under construction and glimpse of new Id 30 engine with LO Nozzle ( via TR1 )

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 11 Apr 2019 09:37

Let's hope the wait to get Su-57Ki is worth it. The Russians have put their heart, soul and some serious money, considering their economy, into this project. It is their priced jewel, and they wouldn't be willing to give it away without a pound of flesh.

Mihaylo · Post by **Mihaylo** » 11 Apr 2019 09:40

Wow, this thing is huge. I betcha it can carry a Tejas under each wing

. Jokes aside it is a thing of beauty.

negi · Post by **negi** » 11 Apr 2019 10:27

The pattern is consistent with everything Russian i.e. when B2 came Tu-160 blackjack had to do everything better fly faster, bigger payload , longer range . Same with when F-15s arrived on the scene the Russians introduced the Flanker . This could largely due to the fact that they have a vast landmass to defend and cover . In fanboy duniya we can say Russians copied the Levcon from NLCA .

Bharadwaj · Post by **Bharadwaj** » 11 Apr 2019 10:48

One understands IAf's concerns about this bird but there appears to be no long term strategy to replace the su30s while our neighbor has a large LO bird entering service. There is no doubt that the rafale plus spectra can deal with this but that is only 36 aircraft and it also does not offer some of the capabilities of a very large tactical fighter. I think 4-5 squadrons of the fgfa built at Nashik is not such a bad idea. The AMCA will eventually come but even that is a medium weight bird and not a large tactical fighter.

Prasad · Post by **Prasad** » 29 Aug 2019 16:38

http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1163033.shtml
Interesting observations about the Su-57 prototype.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 02 Sep 2019 12:47

Pictures of PAK-FA from MAKS 2019

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 02 Sep 2019 12:47

From MAKS 2019

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 02 Sep 2019 12:49

MAKS 2019 Flight Display

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 02 Sep 2019 12:55

T-50 Short Landing Demonstration , The chief designer of the Su-57 said that the early parachute release, and short runway landing was in fact a design feature (as expected) primarily for use on unprepared/rough airplane runways.

https://rossaprimavera.ru/news/ad6b5c38

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 02 Sep 2019 12:58

Chief Designer of PAK-FA Mikhail Strelets , Explaining the Short Landing at MAKS

chief designer of the Su-57 Mikhail Strelets explains the reason for the release of a brake parachute at a height of 2-3 meters when landing the fighter, was posted on August 29 by belenkur on his YouTube channel. When asked about the reasons for the release of the latest Su-57 fighter when landing a brake parachute, even before touching the ground, Strelets assured that this was a normal situation. “This is somewhere around two meters the release of a brake parachute, to ensure landing on a shortened area,” the chief designer of the fighter commented. “Professionals immediately realized that this was a regular mode. It is used for landing on a destroyed site (runway, - approx. IA Krasnaya Vesna), ”added Strelets. He also said that the aerodynamic configuration of the fighter with the possibility of releasing a brake parachute before touching the ground allows the Su-57 to land on very short sections of the surface. Recall, on August 25, a video quickly spread over social networks where, when landing the Su-57 at a height of two meters, brake parachutes opened. See also: Published video of a strange landing of the Su-57 in Zhukovsky After which a lively discussion began among experts and amateurs regarding the causes of such strangeness. Some decided that this was an element of the show for MAKS-2019, others put forward an assumption, just confirmed now by the chief designer of the Su-57.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 02 Sep 2019 13:35

Ex IAF Pilot , Vijainder Thakur Pics from MAKS 2019

https://twitter.com/vkthakur/status/1166369531989823488

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 02 Sep 2019 18:17

Austin wrote:
http://www.tsagi.ru/pressroom/news/4264/

An unobtrusive air intake, which has no world analogues, was created, which ensures stable engine operation in all flight modes. The specialists of the institute have worked out control systems for a maneuverable aircraft that is statically unstable in the lateral and longitudinal control channels.

Isn't Stealth Fighter supposed to have 'Y' Duct like Tejas ?

Su 57 engine fans will be so visible to radar

RKumar · Post by **RKumar** » 02 Sep 2019 18:24

Austin sir ... thanks a lot for the brochures and picture.

Any inputs on what is not working normal or short coming of the Russian stuff. What could be improved?

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 03 Sep 2019 15:41

I just finished watching the AMCA analysis on Rajya Sabha TV and wanted quench my thirst for a 5G a/c from this thread.
We need to buy 64 of these babies in a one off buy instead of licensed or tech share arrangement.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 03 Sep 2019 17:24

Deeply disappointed with the PAK-FA fit & finish so far. No evidence yet of significant stealth work, sawtooth shaping, or RAM evident, wonder when the finished proto will emerge. Also very little revealed on AESA & Himalaya + sensor fusion + pilot associate progress!

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 03 Sep 2019 19:50

Manish_Sharma wrote:
Austin wrote:
http://www.tsagi.ru/pressroom/news/4264/
Isn't Stealth Fighter supposed to have 'Y' Duct like Tejas ?

Su 57 engine fans will be so visible to radar

Partly, yes. Mitigated by blockers iirc.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 03 Sep 2019 22:14

negi wrote:The pattern is consistent with everything Russian i.e. when B2 came Tu-160 blackjack had to do everything better fly faster, bigger payload , longer range ......

Blackjack (White Swan) was built in answer to B1b Lancer:

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-b ... wins-15626

Sumeet · Post by **Sumeet** » 04 Sep 2019 02:20

Manish_Sharma wrote:
Austin wrote:
http://www.tsagi.ru/pressroom/news/4264/

Isn't Stealth Fighter supposed to have 'Y' Duct like Tejas ?

Su 57 engine fans will be so visible to radar

Su 57 is not a proper Stealth design due to these and other reasons (Gaps between panels, rivets, rear side stealth compromised by engines, engine blades visible via duct, not stealthy if someone is looking at it from below [not flat/smooth like F-22], it has spherical ball shape IRST above and below). Comparatively AMCA the way it is planned is much much better.

Su-57 currently just has internal arms bay, edge alignment and in future RAM coating contributing to stealth in EM spectrum.

Also, stealth fighter can have a Y duct for single engine aircraft and serpentine for twin engine aircraft so that EM waves don't have direct passage in and out to enemy radar. They attenuate while bouncing off RAM coated duct internals.

That said here is a list of some positives you can attribute to PAK FA:
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/2 ... ew-fighter