PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 08 Mar 2010 00:35

PAK-FA frontal image posted by sumshyam edited using photoshop. Stunning IMO.
via militaryphotos.net

Samay · Post by **Samay** » 09 Mar 2010 01:58

some design comparision images of pakfa and f22

Austin:AL-31 ( 117 ) ---> PAK-FA( 5th Gen )link

AL-31(117) specifications:

Full afterburning thrust,kgf 15,000
Specific fuel consumption.min.kg/kgf.h 0.67
Weight,kg 1370 (1)
Length,m 4.99
Inlet diameter,m ~ 0.93
T/W ~ 10:1

Austin ji: the new engine for pakfa was supposed to be smoke less and to gain supercruise, had they achieved it?
In the pakfa first flight , there was seen some smoke from pakfa engine??

Samay · Post by **Samay** » 09 Mar 2010 01:59

[youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/-HcUXA4z9tI&co ... ram><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/-HcUXA4z9tI&co ... edded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]
[youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/PezVEP0Wabs&co ... ram><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/PezVEP0Wabs&co ... edded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 09 Mar 2010 05:57

wow, the whole stabilizer is a rudder. wouldn't that cause a little roll as well, since it is angled?

\--
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HcUXA4z9tI
what is that she is saying at 2:20, oh boy! she is so cxy, beats Rambha hands down. Perhaps her name might suite pakfa.
--

btw, on the raptor:-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KaoYz90giTk

sumshyam · Post by **sumshyam** » 09 Mar 2010 08:10

Here is translated STORY to read.

Original

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 09 Mar 2010 08:32

Samay wrote:Austin ji: the new engine for pakfa was supposed to be smoke less and to gain supercruise, had they achieved it?
In the pakfa first flight , there was seen some smoke from pakfa engine??

Supercruise was already achieved with the new 117C engine that powers the new Su-35S , the much more capable 117 can comfortably supercruise the PAK-FA and the engine been designed for sustained supercruise performance with many new components , thought that is at a very later stage of flight testing .

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 09 Mar 2010 08:52

sumshyam wrote:Here is translated STORY to read.

Original

Hmm if the translation is good they keep mentioning Variable Cycle Engine , if they can make that stuff it would be gen next

Igorr · Post by **Igorr** » 09 Mar 2010 11:01

Some information came about 'Brahmos' possibility on PAK FA.

Nihat · Post by **Nihat** » 09 Mar 2010 12:13

Igorr wrote:Some information came about 'Brahmos' possibility on PAK FA.

Excellent news about the Brahmos, it certainly looks morelikely to carry 2 missiles externally with a single booster rather than one internally and minimizing internal payload capacity.

P.S. - Since the PAK FA is beyond the first flight now and the discussion has gone back to a more genral trend, can the regular thread be re-opened or the title of this one changed.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 09 Mar 2010 12:24

Austin wrote:
sumshyam wrote:Here is translated STORY to read.

Original
Hmm if the translation is good they keep mentioning Variable Cycle Engine , if they can make that stuff it would be gen next

Whats a variable cycle engine?

ArmenT · Post by **ArmenT** » 09 Mar 2010 12:30

Sanku wrote: Whats a variable cycle engine?

^^^^
Engine that is designed to work efficiently in subsonic, transonic as well as supersonic speeds.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variable_cycle_engine
Prototype F22 had one, but USAF thought it was ahead of its time and went with a conventional jet engine for the production model.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 09 Mar 2010 13:45

ArmenT wrote:
Sanku wrote: Whats a variable cycle engine?
^^^^
Engine that is designed to work efficiently in subsonic, transonic as well as supersonic speeds.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variable_cycle_engine
Prototype F22 had one, but USAF thought it was ahead of its time and went with a conventional jet engine for the production model.

I see thanks; So essentially changing the airflow pattern with engine by operating vents? In addition also use special fans for different airflow regimes in some cases?

GE used a Double Bypass/Hybrid Fan arrangement, but to date has never disclosed precisely how they exploited the concept.

Any more details? Cutaway pics of engines?

--------------

Answering my own question (and edited to correct a mistake earlier)

http://www.skynet-aviation.com/sr-71_bl ... ibles.html

http://www.nap.edu/html/tech_21st/pl3.htm

sumshyam · Post by **sumshyam** » 09 Mar 2010 14:09

ArmenT wrote:Prototype F22 had one, but USAF thought it was ahead of its time and went with a conventional jet engine for the production model.

I don't understand this concept...WELL AHEAD OF TIME....doesn't every one want to lead the time...than being led by..!

Anyhow...does it mean that they were unable to interface the engine with body/avionics even for what ever reasons..!

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 09 Mar 2010 14:59

Two photoshopped images of PAK-FA. Stunning IMO.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 09 Mar 2010 15:00

Another render of PAK-FA.
http://www.hitechweb.genezis.eu/images/ ... PAK_FA.jpg

Jamal K. Malik · Post by **Jamal K. Malik** » 09 Mar 2010 16:45

India, Russia to sign agreement for dev of FGFA

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 09 Mar 2010 17:26

via flanker/secretprojects

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 09 Mar 2010 18:52

Gaur wrote:Two photoshopped images of PAK-FA. Stunning IMO.

wow! Thanks for the pics..

neerajb · Post by **neerajb** » 09 Mar 2010 19:29

The MFD configuration is so F-35ish. Any specific advantages of this configuration?

Cheers....

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 09 Mar 2010 19:46

neerajb wrote:The MFD configuration is so F-35ish. Any specific advantages of this configuration?

Cheers....

The cockpit is similar to Su-35S cockpit , this is quick fix to use as much as tested and proven Su-35 component on the first few TD of PAK-FA to minimise and manage the risk.

I really would like to know what is the advantage of using two large multipurpose MFD , karthik or any one can explain ?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 09 Mar 2010 21:36

presumably very nice imagery could be quickly projected onto a screen for stuff like laser
designation vs peering in a small 8x8 prev-gen screen.

if we let apple design the UI wonderful touch activated apps could happen

tejas · Post by **tejas** » 10 Mar 2010 08:04

Gorgeous PAK-FA illustration:

sumshyam · Post by **sumshyam** » 10 Mar 2010 11:26

from keypublishing forum: SIZE and PLACEMENT of COMPRESSOR

sumshyam · Post by **sumshyam** » 10 Mar 2010 22:11

PAK-FA frame-less canopy::

Translated

Original

Samay · Post by **Samay** » 10 Mar 2010 23:31

sumshyam wrote:PAK-FA frame-less canopy::

Translated

Original

3 yrs for the bubble

Samay · Post by **Samay** » 10 Mar 2010 23:54

[youtube]<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/KaoYz90giTk&hl ... ram><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/KaoYz90giTk&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>[/youtube]

raptor=Pakfa's potential threat
now even japanese wont buy it,. They should outsource its production to India or perhaps to chinese to save usaf's a$$.

manoba · Post by **manoba** » 11 Mar 2010 02:46

Ending was very touchy "Who knows, may be the USSR will rise from the dead and give us a use for them someday"... to swat them like houseflies!

Bad glue problem... F-22 Raptor Airframes Falling Apart Due to Bad Glue

Same thing from flightglobal blog: Bad glue causes F-22A mishap

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 11 Mar 2010 06:28

from the translated link sumshyam posted:

Core avionics is a powerful new type of AESA radar from NIIP development center, which was first publicly presented at aerosalóne MAKSUT 2009th. It consists of up to 1526 separate receiving and transmitting modules. radar 200 km. A similar radar-zuk MSF during tests in 2004 demonstrated the ability to reliably detect airborne targets over a distance of 200 km.. At the same time be able to track 24 targets and 6 to 8 of them from approaching armor. 1×1 meter, The terrain mapping mode has a distinctive ability to 1 × 1 meter, so the appropriate software to search for terrestrial objects according to their physical shape. Phasotron company offered its defense system, consisting of BRLS Sokol polosféru the front and the rear BRLS pharaoh.

-didn't say the RCS of the "approaching armor".
-200km perhaps for 1m2. - assumption
-24 targets, and only 6-8 from front [wondering if the rear radar is far more powerful?]

confusing.. it says similar radar.

mixed messages!

sumshyam · Post by **sumshyam** » 11 Mar 2010 07:31

manoba wrote: Bad glue problem... F-22 Raptor Airframes Falling Apart Due to Bad Glue

Same thing from flightglobal blog: Bad glue causes F-22A mishap

Don't they have FEVICOL, FEVIQUICK kinda thing....Anyhow, Never mind I just said.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 11 Mar 2010 09:00

not surprised about raptor glue stuff.. in fact the lo observable light weight composite sheets are glued on top of raptor as skin attachment. may be its 1980s tech. check nat geo /sci channel show for details.

sumshyam · Post by **sumshyam** » 11 Mar 2010 18:21

A conceivably good article from planeman. It do has some notes and pictorial sections about PAK-FA.

Here.

sumshyam · Post by **sumshyam** » 11 Mar 2010 20:52

India, Russia agree details of joint 5G-fighter project

India and Russia have agreed in general on shared responsibility for the joint development of the fifth-generation fighter, the chairman of the Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) said.

Moscow and New Delhi are expected to sign a contract on the joint development of the new fighter in the near future, focusing on the design concept and technical requirements put forward by India.

"Currently, broad areas of work sharing have been identified. Composite materials, avionics, etc. could be some of the focus areas of HAL," Ashok Nayak said in an exclusive interview with RIA Novosti.

Nayak did not specify the cost of the project but said it would be split evenly between India and Russia.

The sides agreed to develop both a single-seat and a two-seat versions of the aircraft by 2016, focusing on the single-seat version in the initial stages of development.

"Both versions will be put in service with the Indian Air Force," Nayak said.

The HAL chairman said the Indian side had already specified technical requirements for the single-seat version and passed them on to Russian manufacturers.

"The general agreement is that we work on both sides - the Russians and the Indians will cooperate on both versions of the aircraft," he said.

The new aircraft will be most likely based on Russia's T-50 prototype fifth-generation fighter, which has already made two test flights and is expected to join the Russian Air Force in 2015.

Russia has been developing its fifth-generation fighter since the 1990s. The current prototype, known as the T-50, was designed by the Sukhoi design bureau and built at a plant in Komsomolsk-on-Amur, in Russia's Far East.

Russian officials have already hailed the fighter as "a unique warplane" that combines the capabilities of an air superiority fighter and attack aircraft.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 11 Mar 2010 21:06

I hope the Indian version could focus on both front and rear stealth (RCS reduction), tuck in that ols projection or better shape it, advanced mems and radar absorbing techniques, more in line with MCA requirements (LCAMMR++), with vetrivel++, more weapons integration and store management especially the concealed types and more importantly on the passive sensors integration for tracking and fire control [israeli/eu help thus far should have materialized in some knowledge gain].

BTW, those pylons for fgfa must have stealth designs as well. Perhaps gives a new flip to our drdo missile program to convert many of its air launch-able types to stealthier types.

$100b dev money should be spent judiciously.. its hard earned money of middle class Indians.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 11 Mar 2010 23:08

SaiK wrote:I hope the Indian version could focus on both front and rear stealth (RCS reduction),

Good Point and I wanted to bring this for a long time but didn't want to spoil the party.

The current design of PAK-FA as seen on 1st prototype has poor Aft (engine nozzle ) and bottom stealth ( aft and centre lower fuselage ), since the bottom part (rounded curves ) are very conventional as on any Su-3x fighter , its a fundamental design problem cannot be overcome with band specific RAM

Such compromise on aft and lower bottom will affect its all aspect stealth , Sukhoi seems to have made this compromise to make gains in maneuverability/agility by using rounded 3D nozzle.

This should make PAK-FA vulnerable to ground based SAM and Aft shots in BVR/Close combat.

Some how Sukhoi is very very obsessed with maneuverability over all aspect stealth , may be that suits RuAF defensive requirement , but considering this is just the 1st prototype and emphasis is not on stealth but on flying qualities we will have to wait and see how the next 3 prototypes of PAK-FA takes shape and what approach towards aft,bottom and general all aspect stealth comes along

India will have to penetrate the dense double digit SAM environment of Chinese dominate and fight it out , such gains on maneuverability over all aspect stealth is not desirable.

We should make sure that FGFA gets emphasis on all aspect stealth even if it means opting for serated 2D nozzles as seen on F-22 over current conventional 3D nozzle. With the current design and control surfaces PAK-FA should still be very much super-manouverable with a 2D TVC nozzle and making the appropriate design changes on aft and centre lower fuselage to meet the VLO all aspect stealth requirements very much doable.

Considering PAK-FA has got the stealth 75 % right there is no point in compromising on the rest , atleast we should not do with our FGFA .

chiru · Post by **chiru** » 11 Mar 2010 23:48

serated 2D nozzles as seen on F-22 over current conventional 3D nozzle

austin saar an easier fix would be making individual elements of the tvc fins with saw tooth ends as seen on the f-35 without loosing on the 3-d nozzle tech

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 12 Mar 2010 00:05

I like how the FGFA is accepted because a) Russians say it is 5th Gen b) HAL "could" do "some work" on the project c) it looks nice and has flown, and d) the brochure tells us how good it will be.

Wonder if this was the MCA would we accept it based on the above criteria?

Samay · Post by **Samay** » 12 Mar 2010 00:30

We must get 100% technology if we are financing a russian project .

On the other hand we may agree to purchase N no of pakfa if russia also does so,.

Btw I dont think we are going to get any profit sharing from pakfa exports, because from the beginning this project is not like brahmos,may be it turns like that ,
but for now we should not give a blank cheque to the russian karate master .

karthik · Post by **karthik** » 12 Mar 2010 00:30

Lets not get carried away...!Its only clever forward thinking by uncle.The USAs new enemy does not even own a Radar let alone bother about a 352million dollar plain, for the next 50years the terrorist are going to bleed US in other ways, so it only makes sense for them to concentrate their resources on adapting to new methods.

The other enemy China is closer to the US than kissing cousin's matter of fact its called Chimerica now and the one dies without the other. Either way the USA has far far more fleet strength than China or any other nearest potential threat coupled with the fact they are geographically also well protected by two mighty oceans.

Its not the US that should be worried about stealth, we need the Pak-Fa more than anyone else. Even if it is not very stealthy its still has TVC,new engines,new radar and looks toward the future and if what the Russians say is true about its price then its defiantly a better bet than relying on Europe or someone else.

That said i would be more happier if we spent that 5billion or 25,000 corers on making our own fighter, with that sort of money we could even build new universities to recruit and train the next generation of engineers here who would do a better job.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 12 Mar 2010 02:07

sumshyam wrote:A conceivably good article from planeman. It do has some notes and pictorial sections about PAK-FA.

Here.

Pardon me if I am cluttering this thread, but I found these diagrams to be very intriguing (F-22 vs. PAK-FA) (they do not for some odd reason appear in-line!!):

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_7SvKgIpSQ6k/S ... t_Comp.jpg

Internal weapons storage:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_7SvKgIpSQ6k/S ... AA_JPG.jpg

Radar placements:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_7SvKgIpSQ6k/S ... Radars.jpg

Cockpits:
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_7SvKgIpSQ6k/S ... pPhoto.jpg

Cockpit layouts:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_7SvKgIpSQ6k/S ... ompJPG.jpg

Control surfaces:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_7SvKgIpSQ6k/S ... ityJPG.jpg

FGFA:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_7SvKgIpSQ6k/S ... h/FGFA.jpg

andy B · Post by **andy B** » 12 Mar 2010 03:00

To the Breapers:

I currently have the latest air international which has a good article on Bad boy PAK FA. With due permissions I would like to summarise some pointers and post it here if its okay.

Anand.