PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

negi · Post by **negi** » 03 Dec 2010 07:43

Rahul who is the artist in question , and is it an oil painting ? Looks awesome one doesn't come across many oil/water color based paintings of MIL stuff.
Also to me this is one of the best renditions of 2 seat version of the PAKFA.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 03 Dec 2010 08:03

Can some artist do a clear two-seater rambha lobes on pakfa? It would be great to look since that is one of the variants IAF wants. The one Rahul posted is okay, but it could be better.. too many super-imposed objects.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 03 Dec 2010 08:33

Is it just me or does the two seat FGFA look better than the PAK-FA to the rear.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 03 Dec 2010 11:21

superb artwork - would a high res version be available for wall paper use? who is the artist ?

Hawks re-equipping with the FGFA would be a landmark event.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 03 Dec 2010 16:08

Intriguing that "options for more" than the 300 mentioned exists.SU-30MKIs,FGFAs,MMRCAs and LCA/AMCAs appear to be the future inventory of the AIF which should in number be about 1000-1250 at least.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 03 Dec 2010 16:16

Russian fighter development threatens U.S. air dominance, group says

The conservative Heritage Foundation has issued a report warning that Russia's plans for development of a new top line fighter jet could threaten U.S. air superiority since the Pentagon is shutting down Lockheed Martin's F-22 program

With America’s closure of the F-22 production line and the recent debut of Russia’s PAK FA fifth-generation stealth fighter, American air supremacy for the foreseeable future is not as assured as the U.S. Department of Defense once predicted. Indeed, Lieutenant General David A. Deptula, recently departed Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance in the U.S. Air Force, recently made the startling announcement: “For the first time, our claim to air supremacy is in jeopardy.… The dominance we’ve enjoyed in the aerial domain is no longer ours for the taking.”[1]

To preserve traditional U.S. margins of military technological superiority, Congress should review potentially outdated requirements and projections, and policymakers should push defense officials to enact more forward-looking budgeting and acquisition strategies for U.S. fighter fleets. Increased investment in modernization and new partnerships with allies like Japan and Israel will be necessary to prevent the airpower balance from tilting in favor of the Russian and Chinese air forces and to hedge against the potentially destabilizing proliferation of Russia’s PAK FA fighter to unstable actors, non-state groups, and/or terrorism-sponsoring rogue states around the world. For example, if Syria or Iran acquires the PAK FA, it could provide the fighter to the non-state group Hezbollah to form a proxy air force against Israel.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 03 Dec 2010 16:21

^^^how does a non-state actor operate PAk-FA?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Dec 2010 16:25

^^ If CIA funds training non-state actors and mercenaries they can operate PAK-FA

Juggi G · Post by **Juggi G** » 03 Dec 2010 22:09

What Russia’s Stealth Fighter Developments Mean for America

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 03 Dec 2010 22:36

^^ good read, and interesting to note the author says the so called plasma stealth would not be sold to India (assumptions?).

The PAK FA is expected to be built with radar-absorbing material.[45] About 30 percent of the aircraft fuselage will be made of composite materials.[46] It could also be fitted with a “stealthogenic” system, an advanced technology reportedly developed by Soviet scientists. This stealthogenic technology is a form of anti-radar cloaking device using “wisps of plasma formed by pencils of electromagnetic rays from special generators installed on the aircraft; the plasma absorbs radio waves, reducing the aircraft’s radar cross section (RCS) approximately 100 times,”[47] making it almost invisible to radar. The U.S. Air Force is reportedly interested in using a similar, cold plasma cloaking device “as the next generation of stealth technology” for its fighter aircraft.[48]

The Indian version of the PAK FA is said to have a radar cross section of 0.5 square meter, the equivalent of a missile’s RCS. By comparison, older tactical jets have RCSs between 5 and 100 square meters. For example, the fourth-generation Su-30MKI has a RCS of approximately 20 square meters.[49]

Russia is likely to reserve the more advanced stealth capabilities for its own aircraft. The stealthogenic cloaking device under development could reduce the PAK FA’s radar cross section even further, making it potentially as stealthy as the F-22, which has the RCS of a small bird or a bumblebee at between 0.001 and 0.01 square meter.[50] The stealthogenic system may even enable the fighter to carry a full load of missiles, bombs, and/or drop tanks externally and still remain stealthy. It is possible Russia may have already tested the technology successfully; if so, one could reasonably assume Russia would then be readying it for deployment on the operational version of the PAK FA.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 03 Dec 2010 23:24

Austin wrote:^^ If CIA funds training non-state actors and mercenaries they can operate PAK-FA

Most of the rogue states are also funded and armed by the CIA/USG

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 04 Dec 2010 10:25

SaiK wrote:^^ good read, and interesting to note the author says the so called plasma stealth would not be sold to India (assumptions?).

The Plasma Stealth bs has been going on for decades and there is no evidence that they have developed a plasma stealth that can be retrofitted on fighter aircraft ,meet its power requirement and remain functionally useful.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 05 Dec 2010 03:50

Did we get to see this 2nd test flight video earlier. Apologies if posted -

1. Awesome quality of the video - picture clear.
2. The inlet duct sure can take a little bit more curve for the future versions.- check at 4:11, there may be pie left for frontal RCS reduction
- this could be my assumption. But 80% of it is covered.

3. At 0:33, hear the tapping sound. What do you think on the composite material - any sound analysts?
4. It is beautiful and surprisingly still not found a nick name yet in BR (la ramba)

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 05 Dec 2010 05:29

Its official (Finally!) - FGFA deal to be signed on December 21st!

India, Russia to ink fighter aircraft deal
Hindustan Times

India and Russia will finalise an agreement for the joint design and development of the fifth generation fighter aircraft (FGFA) during President Dmitry Medvedev’s upcoming visit to New Delhi. The Russian ambassador to India, Alexander M Kadakin, said all technical issues pertaining to the FGFA program had been resolved and a deal would be inked on December 21 upon the arrival of Medvedev.

Kadakin said India would have a big share in the design and development work. The 30-tonne aircraft will be a swing-role fighter with stealth features, advanced avionics, smart weapons, top-end mission computers and 360-degree situational awareness. It will have supercruise ability, allowing it to fly at supersonic speeds. The prototype of the aircraft made its maiden sortie in January. Trials of the second prototype are due before the year-end.

Hiten · Post by **Hiten** » 09 Dec 2010 01:51

dont' think these were posted earlier

http://www.flickr.com/photos/42740324@N ... otostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/42740324@N ... otostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/42740324@N ... otostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/42740324@N ... otostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/42740324@N ... otostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/42740324@N ... otostream/

apologies if already posted

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 09 Dec 2010 02:10

massive control surfaces! This thing will set new standards for agility!

Real big landing gear tires, no one does rough handling better than Russians I guess!

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 09 Dec 2010 03:37

The last picture rocks! It would really interesting to know what changes have gone in to the second prototype.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 10 Dec 2010 07:04

check at 5:30 about the patented design.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 13 Dec 2010 09:23

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article948540.ece
250 over time..

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 13 Dec 2010 09:49

^^^Numbers likely to go up to 300..

India, Russia to sign $30-bn fighter deal
Indian Express

The total projected value of the deal is pegged at $30 billion ($3,000 crore), with the Indian Air Force (IAF) looking at placing orders for 250-300 of the advanced fighters. With the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) giving a go-ahead, the formal contract for the joint development and production of the fighters will be signed towards the end of this month during President Dmitry Medvedev’s visit to New Delhi.

Sources said while the total value of the contract was expected to be over $30 billion, the Indian government would initially sanction an amount of $10 billion for developmental and production costs. More funds will be released subsequently.

While it was earlier said that up to 250 fighters would be procured, the Defence Minister said that as many as 300 next generation jets were to be ordered for the Indian Air Force (IAF). The Air Chief had earlier said that deliveries were expected to start by 2017.

vavinash · Post by **vavinash** » 13 Dec 2010 10:12

I hope not. I would be happy with 250 FGFA and 450 MCA (~50 mil per pop).

sumshyam · Post by **sumshyam** » 13 Dec 2010 10:57

a naive question:

Will FGFA be like BRAHMOS...?

I mean if we are sharing funds as a partner not purchaser we should be partner in sells to any third party also.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 13 Dec 2010 11:01

^^
Yes, we will be partners in FGFA. However, PAK-FA will be exclusively Russian ip so I do not think that it would benefit us much.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 13 Dec 2010 12:22

Most russian guy i had interacted with say that FGFA will be a twin seat PAK-FA with Indian specific avionic and other customisation and thats likely the case , if they make any drastic change in the design it would be delayed and wont make the schedule 2017 - 2018.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 13 Dec 2010 12:41

Austin wrote:Most russian guy i had interacted with say that FGFA will be a twin seat PAK-FA with Indian specific avionic and other customisation and thats likely the case , if they make any drastic change in the design it would be delayed and wont make the schedule 2017 - 2018.

While that may be the case, it will not make us partners in PAK-FA program. We are partners in MKI program. However, we cannot prevent Russia from selling MKM to Malasia (not that we want to..just giving an eg). The most we can do is to not supply avionics for MKM but that can be replaced by Russia.

I know that we will have much more contribution in FGFA as compared to MKI but that does not matter. Nor does it matter whether FGFA is twin seater PAK-FA or a totally new design. What matters is that we are partners in FGFA program and not in PAK-FA.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 13 Dec 2010 13:39

nice to see the IISC prof type indian standing next to the big bird.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 13 Dec 2010 13:53

Gaur wrote:While that may be the case, it will not make us partners in PAK-FA program. We are partners in MKI program. However, we cannot prevent Russia from selling MKM to Malasia (not that we want to..just giving an eg). The most we can do is to not supply avionics for MKM but that can be replaced by Russia.

Russia will not be able to sell FGFA without India consent or vice verse , but they would be able to sell PAK-FA to its client state , much like they sold Yakhont to Syria and not Brahmos

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 13 Dec 2010 14:20

Austin wrote:
Gaur wrote:While that may be the case, it will not make us partners in PAK-FA program. We are partners in MKI program. However, we cannot prevent Russia from selling MKM to Malasia (not that we want to..just giving an eg). The most we can do is to not supply avionics for MKM but that can be replaced by Russia.
Russia will not be able to sell FGFA without India consent or vice verse , but they would be able to sell PAK-FA to its client state , much like they sold Yakhont to Syria and not Brahmos

Exactly my point.

sunilpatel · Post by **sunilpatel** » 13 Dec 2010 17:04

if they make any drastic change in the design it would be delayed and wont make the schedule 2017 - 2018.

i think around 2017-18 ; it will be those single sitter...read somewhere that india planned to induct 50 single sitter and 200 two sitter...so if russia planning to roll out around 2015 then its highly likely that we can get our first single sitter by 2017-18...3 years for avionics changes etc.. just my 2 cent..

P Chitkara · Post by **P Chitkara** » 13 Dec 2010 17:37

Are we pumping in $30 Bn just for FGFA

Does it imply $0 will go towards development of PAK-FA? I for one, absolutely refuse to believe that.

This means the Russians will use our $$ and will give us absolutely no rights to tech developed from that funding (going to PAK-FA); merrily export it to countries we may not be on best terms with - read chipanda.

If that is the case, we are being taken on the ride of the millennium. Come on, how many people genuinely believe that $30 Bn are required just to develop avionics and mission comp etc.

I sincerely hope though I am proven wrong.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 13 Dec 2010 18:12

The India-specific fighter variant will not be available to anyone without India's nod,stands to reason,but a Q mark exists about any purely Russian version developed without Indian funds.Sincd devlopment has not been completed as yet of the PAK-FA,I don't see this happening ,as Indian funding is a key to final success of the project.In any case,as with the Flankers Russia has sold to the PRC,they are of lesser capability.Given the very large numbers of aircraft that India and Russia want for their own forces,which will be at least 750+,it is going to be quite a while,well beyond 2020 before any other nation will get an FGFA! Therefore,there is little need to worry on this score.

What stands out from the pics is the generous size of the cockpit,which also indicates the size of the huge radar that can be fitted within the nosecone.

P Chitkara · Post by **P Chitkara** » 13 Dec 2010 18:22

Even if the chinese get a lesser capable PAK-FA, at least a part of it would have been developed by our $$. That itself is a serious thing to ponder.

After all, reason we were roped in was that the Russians simply don’t have the funds to complete the project on their own. If they had the $$ they would have gone alone and thn sold us the aircraft for an extremely good price from their POV.

So, to say that we will have no rights on PAK-FA is very concerning.

Hitesh · Post by **Hitesh** » 13 Dec 2010 19:48

Looking at the pictures of the Sukhoi stealth plane, it seems that the F-22 Raptor has more cleaner surfaces and lines, thus implying a greater stealth capability. I saw in the last picture that there were a lot of rivets. Those rivets will put a damper in the total stealth aspect capability. Are the Russians using some other sort of mechanism to improve stealth characteristics?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 13 Dec 2010 20:37

Ivanov has stated recently that PAK-FA development will be continued from Russian funding parallel with FGFA co-development with India.

Perhaps they would want to export it to nations some watered down variant of PAK-FA and maintain an independence on export policy , just in case India may find it politically difficult to accept coz western/US pressure

For most nations India and Russia will find it acceptable and profitable to export FGFA.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 13 Dec 2010 21:50

On the design your own thought- Each rivet-head and skin can be covered by advanced composite or with a deflection lattice surfaces that makes when a radition hits the rivets or any surface, it has nano pyramid shaped deflectors on the surface that can be visible only through a lense. Lets assume depressions of mesh structure that deflects the radiation away by the shape angles. Possible? IMHO - yes - nano tech surfaces should be part of DRDO studies now, perhaps future mk2 versions can convert any shaped a/c to a stealth a/c.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 14 Dec 2010 08:28

Flanker ,PAK-FA , F-22 ( via secretprojects )
highres

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 14 Dec 2010 08:35

the pic makes it clear the F22 is actually quite a short plane....its vertical stabilizers and elevators trail way behind the engine exhaust and make it look bigger...if you cut that out, its wing is trapezoidal (similar to f23 in a less obvious way), which I think translates to high speed and acceleration. the pakfa while on same lines is a longer and heavier plane...and looks more 'evolutionary' .... somewhat similar to F15 wing.

if Ru can work to make their 5th gen engine as shorter and more compact, there will be benefits in reduced plane size/more internal fuel. if the 5th gen engine merely matches the F119 figures, the f22 will still end up with a handy lead in t:w ratios.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 14 Dec 2010 08:44

Hitesh wrote:Looking at the pictures of the Sukhoi stealth plane, it seems that the F-22 Raptor has more cleaner surfaces and lines, thus implying a greater stealth capability. I saw in the last picture that there were a lot of rivets. Those rivets will put a damper in the total stealth aspect capability. Are the Russians using some other sort of mechanism to improve stealth characteristics?

The other possibility is that the advantages of stealth to the degree achieved by the F-22 may be overrated due to a number of mitigating factors - with the cost alone being prohibitive. If you can invest money and make an invisible plane - its no good unless you can arm yourself with at least 250 of them. If you are struggling with funds in that department it means that stealth to that degree may be unaffordable at current prices and tech development.

sumshyam · Post by **sumshyam** » 16 Dec 2010 18:38

A new

"The cost of preliminary design is estimated at $295 million. The work is expected to be complete within 18 months," Nayak said.

What does it mean....is it estimated cost of plane per unit.

SriSri · Post by **SriSri** » 17 Dec 2010 15:11

FGFA/PAKFA - HAL, Sukhoi T-50 Preliminary Design by 2012; Cost USD 295 million