PAK-FA Thread - First flight
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
The wing design is interesting , can any aviation guru tell us the virtue of this design.
The reason why Sukhoi does not use a flat nozzle and prefers a round nozzle is because the flat nozzle leads to 20 - 25 % drop in thrust over using round nozzle.
One advantage of using a round nozzle is that you can fully implement 3D TVC
The reason why Sukhoi does not use a flat nozzle and prefers a round nozzle is because the flat nozzle leads to 20 - 25 % drop in thrust over using round nozzle.
One advantage of using a round nozzle is that you can fully implement 3D TVC
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
I found this analysis by ubiquitous08 from secretproject link
First impressions....A Ray tracing approach to stealth not having a supercomputer and RCS prediction programmes at hand...
Clearly a VLO design. Shaping appears robust in X band, L band and probably S band in front and side quaters. Facets are large in the order of over 1 meter which satisfy these frequencies.
In the VHF band side on its flat profile should give it very good RCS versus F 22 / F 35 dominated by large if canted tails. Rear quadrant RCs appears disappointing with a clear emphasis on maneouvrability over YF 23 style aft sector facets to which the design clearly has been influenced. Cockpit canopy bow a disappointment but canted. Planform has more lobes than classic 4 lobe YF 23 layout but Lerxes will generate greater maneouvrability at high AOA and ability to dynamically control direction of lerx airflow clearly an innovation intended to work with 3d nozzles and total vehicle management / control surface scheduling system (a technology pioneered in the preceding rival MFI project).
Planform:
Clearly a hybrid between the Yf 22 and the Yf 23 this design appears to combine the best features of both, much as the Su 27 Flanker incorporated the best lessons of the teen generation that preceded it. Wing planform appears F 22 optimised for supercruise but with all moving butterfly tails an attempt to wring out maximum control authority from tails deliberately sized to reduce supercruise drag and side RCS spikes much as the Northrop Grumman McDonnell Douglas JSF contender utilised butterfly tails to reduce weight and reduce tail size increasing range. Overall crossection appears to be YF 23 influenced to presumably take a advantage of volume and RCS advantages inherent to a flatted diamond (in crossection) design. Forward fuselage appears to blend F35 cockpit canopy integration with the Yf 23 moldline presumably to maximise visibility from the upper half of the diamond crossection unlike the F 22 and Yf 23 that seated canopy moldlines far further up.
Operational Factors:
Clearly the Russians sought the range and volumetric advantages inherent of the Northrop design but without the limitations of this design in maneouvrability. Given the size and reputed loadout of 10 missiles, a Yf 23 design would be a logical choice. Likewise in regards to the nose and tail, the T 50 can be seen as an "2010 update" on the YF 23 concept integrating 3D nozzles for maneouvrability at the expense of aft sector RCS, a similar approach to that taken by the F 35 with its circular nozzles (driven by Stovl and weight saving factors). As such like the F 35 a small narrow lobe in the aft RCS sector may exist. Note in the much lauded VHF band this may even be true of the F 22. Other examples of this "update" include some very F 35 reminiscent shaping solutions in the front assembly and a willingness to try the umproven small tail concept proposed by McDonnell Douglas Grumman Northrop in their JSF contender and later X 36 demonstrator. Unwilling to leave the concept of supermaneuvrability we see some curious nods to Russian obsession with post stall combat; namely a moveable lerx lip above the intakes and integration of 3 d nozzles on a 5th generation design, a first.
Conclusion: A very Russian response to the requirements of range, large loadouts and low RCS performance leveraging the many RCS solutions proposed and / or utilised by the U.S.
First impressions....A Ray tracing approach to stealth not having a supercomputer and RCS prediction programmes at hand...
Clearly a VLO design. Shaping appears robust in X band, L band and probably S band in front and side quaters. Facets are large in the order of over 1 meter which satisfy these frequencies.
In the VHF band side on its flat profile should give it very good RCS versus F 22 / F 35 dominated by large if canted tails. Rear quadrant RCs appears disappointing with a clear emphasis on maneouvrability over YF 23 style aft sector facets to which the design clearly has been influenced. Cockpit canopy bow a disappointment but canted. Planform has more lobes than classic 4 lobe YF 23 layout but Lerxes will generate greater maneouvrability at high AOA and ability to dynamically control direction of lerx airflow clearly an innovation intended to work with 3d nozzles and total vehicle management / control surface scheduling system (a technology pioneered in the preceding rival MFI project).
Planform:
Clearly a hybrid between the Yf 22 and the Yf 23 this design appears to combine the best features of both, much as the Su 27 Flanker incorporated the best lessons of the teen generation that preceded it. Wing planform appears F 22 optimised for supercruise but with all moving butterfly tails an attempt to wring out maximum control authority from tails deliberately sized to reduce supercruise drag and side RCS spikes much as the Northrop Grumman McDonnell Douglas JSF contender utilised butterfly tails to reduce weight and reduce tail size increasing range. Overall crossection appears to be YF 23 influenced to presumably take a advantage of volume and RCS advantages inherent to a flatted diamond (in crossection) design. Forward fuselage appears to blend F35 cockpit canopy integration with the Yf 23 moldline presumably to maximise visibility from the upper half of the diamond crossection unlike the F 22 and Yf 23 that seated canopy moldlines far further up.
Operational Factors:
Clearly the Russians sought the range and volumetric advantages inherent of the Northrop design but without the limitations of this design in maneouvrability. Given the size and reputed loadout of 10 missiles, a Yf 23 design would be a logical choice. Likewise in regards to the nose and tail, the T 50 can be seen as an "2010 update" on the YF 23 concept integrating 3D nozzles for maneouvrability at the expense of aft sector RCS, a similar approach to that taken by the F 35 with its circular nozzles (driven by Stovl and weight saving factors). As such like the F 35 a small narrow lobe in the aft RCS sector may exist. Note in the much lauded VHF band this may even be true of the F 22. Other examples of this "update" include some very F 35 reminiscent shaping solutions in the front assembly and a willingness to try the umproven small tail concept proposed by McDonnell Douglas Grumman Northrop in their JSF contender and later X 36 demonstrator. Unwilling to leave the concept of supermaneuvrability we see some curious nods to Russian obsession with post stall combat; namely a moveable lerx lip above the intakes and integration of 3 d nozzles on a 5th generation design, a first.
Conclusion: A very Russian response to the requirements of range, large loadouts and low RCS performance leveraging the many RCS solutions proposed and / or utilised by the U.S.
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
Awesome News!! The bird is a beauty!!
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
First of all congratulations to Sukhoi OKB.
The conclusion seems very much true. The wing design seems interesting. The Russians always seem to prefer high-wing loading a/c.Austin wrote:I found this analysis by ubiquitous08 from secretproject link
.............................
Conclusion: A very Russian response to the requirements of range, large loadouts and low RCS performance leveraging the many RCS solutions proposed and / or utilised by the U.S.
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
Great news my brothers, absolut blue label vodka for me tonight,and shall raise a toast to mother russia.
now waiting for HAL feb 2...
now waiting for HAL feb 2...
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
^^^ The all moving Small Tail/Vertical Stabilizer is very interesting , i dont know if any aircraft ever had an all moving tail.
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
RM, Yeah, the Madhubala of the skies i tell you! Or she will be be, when she dons IAF colours. Right now she's a Sharapova!
And this time, no tapori names like Rambha please!
And this time, no tapori names like Rambha please!
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
Internal weapon's bay
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
PICTURES & VIDEO: Sukhoi's PAK FA fighter completes first flight
A toast of Vodka to our Russian friends.The first stage of flight trials involving the PAK FA prototype will last until 2012, when the Russian defence ministry and air force are expected to decide on the future of the project. A production version is expected to be designated the T-50.
The new design could also form the basis of a proposed fifth-generation fighter to be produced in collaboration between Russian and Indian companies.
“I am strongly convinced that our joint project will excel its Western rivals in cost-effectiveness and will not only allow strengthening the defence power of Russian and Indian air forces, but also gain a significant share of the world market,” says Pogosyan.
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
Was trying very hard to be there for the first flight but they didnt bite.
Quite clearly the most beautiful wing form I have seen on any aircraft. Quite stunning.
Vishnu Som
Quite clearly the most beautiful wing form I have seen on any aircraft. Quite stunning.
Vishnu Som
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 150
- Joined: 30 Jan 2009 18:49
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
Woooow, what a bird,
it made my day,
Great achievement by Indian/Ruski engineers,,,,,,,
It seems this time ruskies did what they promised
All hail PAKFA
it made my day,
Great achievement by Indian/Ruski engineers,,,,,,,
It seems this time ruskies did what they promised
All hail PAKFA
Last edited by Samay on 29 Jan 2010 18:40, edited 1 time in total.
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
the diameter of the back tyres look like 4'
maybe the front tyres size can be the back tires in indic version. the huge tyres make it look like
a model airplane inspite of its massive size.
maybe the front tyres size can be the back tires in indic version. the huge tyres make it look like
a model airplane inspite of its massive size.
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
SR-71, a-5 vigilante. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PyIOyQniNe0 and the F-35 of course.Austin wrote:^^^ The all moving Small Tail/Vertical Stabilizer is very interesting , i dont know if any aircraft ever had an all moving tail.
madhubala it will be then !Dmurphy wrote:RM, Yeah, the Madhubala of the skies i tell you! Or she will be be, when she dons IAF colours. Right now she's a Sharapova!
And this time, no tapori names like Rambha please!
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
no wonder ! well at least you tried ! better luck in the future.Vishnu wrote:Was trying very hard to be there for the first flight but they didnt bite.
Quite clearly the most beautiful wing form I have seen on any aircraft. Quite stunning.
Vishnu Som
p.s. will you have a stab at LCH first flight on feb 2 ?
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
Vishnu sir,Vishnu wrote:Was trying very hard to be there for the first flight but they didnt bite.
Quite clearly the most beautiful wing form I have seen on any aircraft. Quite stunning.
Vishnu Som
we are expecting a slot on NDTV on Pakfa,
hope you design it soon . Good luck
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
It is absolutely a gorgeous plane.
Here is a quite interesting analysis from Liberation.fr blogs by Fabien Marine.
Please use Google translator to read the remaining comments.
Here is a quite interesting analysis from Liberation.fr blogs by Fabien Marine.
SourceIt is quite obvious it has little to do with the F-22, but more with the Black Widow (profile only).
So why the nickname Raptorski, especially here?
Even the U.S. blogs have not dared to seriously compare it with the Raptor.
As for the differences, they are significant even with the family of Flankers, and also with the F-22:
1. Double Bay carriage house much larger than the F-22, capable of accommodating 8 missiles: air-to-air medium and short range missiles or even air-to-ground much more massive missiles
2. Vertical surfaces extremely small compared to F-22/YF-23, indicating a flight control very sophisticated and the future inclusion of a thrust vector nozzles (which is expected anyway)
3. Massive use of composite materials
4. The LERX (Leading Edge Root Extensions) fully mobile throughout the wing, first in the world on a fighter plane, hiding Additional radar antennas (there will be 3 in total)
5. A tail container that contains no parachute, but another device (as shown in the video).
It should of course be noted that this is only the demonstrator flight (there are 3 in total) and that the AESA radar is not yet quite ready, besides the 117 type engines are not truly 5th generation but they suffice for now.
Please use Google translator to read the remaining comments.
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
are it that my eyes are deceiving me or is the PAF-FA HUD much broader compared to the MKI?Yury wrote:and HI-RES
http://lenta.ru/news/2010/01/29/pakfa/pak.jpg
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
KrishG, the wing design shown in this graphic is not accurate. The wing starts much further behind if you look at the video.KrishG wrote:Internal weapon's bay
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
If we try to put in brahmos there it will eat up all the space...does the pak-fa also have the provision to carry external loads?KrishG wrote:Internal weapon's bay
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
External pylons will be present in the final production version. But if it can really carry 8 AAMs internally then it won't carry external loads whenever stealth is a priority.Vinito wrote:If we try to put in brahmos there it will eat up all the space...does the pak-fa also have the provision to carry external loads?KrishG wrote:Internal weapon's bay
And I don't think the Brahmos would fit there.
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
and what on earth is this ?
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
From the BBC article:
Easy translation to a naval carrier borne version.
That is one BIIIIIG HUD screen
Now if this is not Short take off then what is it?Its features include: all-weather capability, ability to use a take-off strip of just 300-400 metres, capacity for sustained supersonic flight including repeated in-flight refuelling, advanced avionics, simultaneous attacks on air and ground targets.
Easy translation to a naval carrier borne version.
That is one BIIIIIG HUD screen
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
This is present on the other side too, much more clearer. It looks like a Pylon cover? Shielding of some kind.
It doesn't look like it is part of the rear landing gear flap covering.
Gawd knows what black magic the russians have put in the bends and curves.
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
imho housing for L-band side facing aesa array. less powerful than ereyie but with a azimuth of say 150, it will permit almost 180' defensive SA even without any awacs cover. useful for offensive dpsa/sweeps out beyond
your own friendly awacs bubble/awacs downtime.
there's sure to be a high-bw datalink for one emitter to feed the pic to others passively waiting down the threat axes....then some big meaty missiles are going to drop out of that bay and lance out into the dark sky...
your own friendly awacs bubble/awacs downtime.
there's sure to be a high-bw datalink for one emitter to feed the pic to others passively waiting down the threat axes....then some big meaty missiles are going to drop out of that bay and lance out into the dark sky...
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
possible, but sure seems odd to destroy the aerodynamic profile in that way. unless it also serves as a control structure.
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
http://warfare.ru/?linkid=2280&catid=255
Estimated Performance:
----------------------------------
Dimensions (m):
- wing 14,2; S=78,8 m2
- length 22
- height 6,05
Weight (kg):
- max 37000
- normal 26000
- empty 18500
Fuel (kg): 10300
Combat load (kg):
- max 7500
- AA max 2260 conformal
Speed (km/h):
- max 2100; M2,0;
- rate of climb 350 m/s
- min 0 OVT
- cruise 1300
Alt (m): 20000
Flight range (km): 4000/5500 (2x2000kg)
- supersonic 2500
Runway (m): 350 (w/o OVT)
G-force (g): 10-11
EPR: 0,05 m2
Wing overload (kg/m2):
- max 470
- normal 330
Thrust-to-weight ratio:
- max 0,84
- normal 1,19
Fuel rate: 2,55 kg/km
Flight time: 3,3 h
Engine: AL-41F (117C on first prototypes)
- thrust 2x15500/2x9800
- compressor: diameter 932mm, 3 steps
- weight 1350 kg
- pressure increase 4,2-4,5
- life time 4000 hours
- overhaul life 1500 hours
- nozzle:
weight: 380 kg
deviation angle +-16 deg in any direction, +-20 deg flat
deviation speed: 60 deg/sec
Electronics:
N050(?)BRLS AFAR/AESA
Armament: ? 2x30mm gun
Hardpoints: 10 (conf.), possible 2*4 external
Estimated Performance:
----------------------------------
Dimensions (m):
- wing 14,2; S=78,8 m2
- length 22
- height 6,05
Weight (kg):
- max 37000
- normal 26000
- empty 18500
Fuel (kg): 10300
Combat load (kg):
- max 7500
- AA max 2260 conformal
Speed (km/h):
- max 2100; M2,0;
- rate of climb 350 m/s
- min 0 OVT
- cruise 1300
Alt (m): 20000
Flight range (km): 4000/5500 (2x2000kg)
- supersonic 2500
Runway (m): 350 (w/o OVT)
G-force (g): 10-11
EPR: 0,05 m2
Wing overload (kg/m2):
- max 470
- normal 330
Thrust-to-weight ratio:
- max 0,84
- normal 1,19
Fuel rate: 2,55 kg/km
Flight time: 3,3 h
Engine: AL-41F (117C on first prototypes)
- thrust 2x15500/2x9800
- compressor: diameter 932mm, 3 steps
- weight 1350 kg
- pressure increase 4,2-4,5
- life time 4000 hours
- overhaul life 1500 hours
- nozzle:
weight: 380 kg
deviation angle +-16 deg in any direction, +-20 deg flat
deviation speed: 60 deg/sec
Electronics:
N050(?)BRLS AFAR/AESA
Armament: ? 2x30mm gun
Hardpoints: 10 (conf.), possible 2*4 external
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
comment by Trident in secretproject.co.uk forum:
Also, when the T-50 is shown taxiing in after landing in another video, a small ball-shaped appendage is seen aft of the canopy - MAWS? A second IRST?
a nice PSed pic to remove the shadows:
http://img137.imageshack.us/i/pakfa2201 ... 51036.jpg/
Also, when the T-50 is shown taxiing in after landing in another video, a small ball-shaped appendage is seen aft of the canopy - MAWS? A second IRST?
a nice PSed pic to remove the shadows:
http://img137.imageshack.us/i/pakfa2201 ... 51036.jpg/
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
Wiki says that program cost is 15 to 80 bn US $.
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
Why do the two intakes look differently shaped? The right one looks squarish while the left one has slanted sides.Singha wrote:comment by Trident in secretproject.co.uk forum:
Also, when the T-50 is shown taxiing in after landing in another video, a small ball-shaped appendage is seen aft of the canopy - MAWS? A second IRST?
a nice PSed pic to remove the shadows:
http://img137.imageshack.us/i/pakfa2201 ... 51036.jpg/
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
Congrats to Sukhoi OKB!! God I love this top view
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
That is one gorgeous beauty!!... Tejas, I agree. That top view has me floored .
And welcome to the frameless 'huge' HUD. Good way to start a year which should bring a lot for us armchair generals and pilots!!
And welcome to the frameless 'huge' HUD. Good way to start a year which should bring a lot for us armchair generals and pilots!!
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 13112
- Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
- Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
It might be some form of a wing fence for it is along the same line where wing sweep changes from low to high .Moreoever if you see under the left wing whatever this thing is its pretty thin and if it is of same thickness throughout then we can rule out any L-band array .Rahul M wrote:possible, but sure seems odd to destroy the aerodynamic profile in that way. unless it also serves as a control structure.
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
unlikely.Ajatshatru wrote:Could the Russians also end up selling PAK-FA to the chinese?“I am strongly convinced that our joint project will excel its Western rivals in cost-effectiveness and will not only allow strengthening the defence power of Russian and Indian air forces, but also gain a significant share of the world market,” says Pogosyan.
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
To me ...It looks like...It can be modified to meet the Carrier requirements.....!Singha wrote: Estimated Performance:
Runway (m): 350 (w/o OVT)
G-force (g): 10-11
And about G forces....I had feeling that human limit is 9-G....anyhow....I perhaps am an illiterate in biological terms...open for words of wisdom from gurus.
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
As is, unlikely.Could the Russians also end up selling PAK-FA to the chinese?
Major components, perhaps.
Some components, certainly.
RUians have to make a good living and overcome local corruption. And Chicom has the funds.
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
The Chinese are supposedly working on their own version. IIRC there were some pics of one such prototype.Could the Russians also end up selling PAK-FA to the chinese?
Any ideas about rearward looking radar between the engines? Seems like a lot of real estate there based on that top view.
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
Why do the two intakes look differently shaped? The right one looks squarish while the left one has slanted sides.[/quote]nachiket wrote: http://img137.imageshack.us/i/pakfa2201 ... 51036.jpg/
I wondered about that. It appears to be because the intakes are also tilted backwards from inner side to outer side - with the latter being further back,
Re: PAK-FA Thread - First flight
More likely the nose has been extended?the wing design shown in this graphic is not accurate. The wing starts much further behind if you look at the video.
BUT, it does not, to me, look like any other plane! It has a few features that are common - but that is to be expected (otherwise we could have a disc shaped flying saucer).
Nice, but nothing out of the wild as far as I am concerned.
However, from reports, it is suggested to have plenty of electronic crammed into it, latest and greatest techs. Which is what matter, IMHO. That it can do a cobra and all is irrelevant.