PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 12 Mar 2010 07:17

andy B wrote: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.

Anand can you summarise key points from Air International issue out here , is it possible to scan the whole article and email it to us ?

sumshyam · Post by **sumshyam** » 12 Mar 2010 08:19

Another draw of Air Inlet of Pak-Fa...from keypublishing forum.

andy B · Post by **andy B** » 12 Mar 2010 11:03

Austin wrote:
Anand can you summarise key points from Air International issue out here , is it possible to scan the whole article and email it to us ?

Saar I will scan it and you will have it ova the wkend...

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 12 Mar 2010 18:03

unless we have a close up shot on the inlet, that keypub drawing is all speculation.

besides..

I'd love to see pak-fa, especially Indian FGFA on these lines:

YES WE CAN!

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 12 Mar 2010 18:35

andy B wrote:Saar I will scan it and you will have it ova the wkend...

Thanks mail it to josephdotaustinATgmail.com

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

The saw tooth end type are really effective from direct rear end and JSF is not really a stealth benchmark one can measure against , JSF has by and large settled for band specific stealth( X-band largely ) then all aspect stealth.

But then JSF is also suppose to be widely exported "Stealth Aircraft" and developed by and for International Partners

Well lets see how PAK-FA and more importantly the FGFA shapes up its really early days

I wont be surprised if the present design remains for Mark 1 variant for PAK-FA/FGFA and all aspect stealth is progressively introduced in Mark 2 , Mark 3 variant with design changes , the Russian tends to spread out the risk management aspect over long development cycle typically for PAK-FA/FGFA it will be ~ 40 years per Russian officials.

If one measures it against the development cycle of Su-27 flanker one can see and measure how basic flanker has progressed from Su-27 to Su-35S and all that comes in between over the period of ~ 35 years and still come up with a very competitive product.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 12 Mar 2010 18:49

Well lets see how PAK-FA and more importantly the FGFA shapes up its really early days

I wont be surprised if the present design remains for Mark 1 variant for PAK-FA/FGFA and all aspect stealth is progressively introduced in Mark 2 , Mark 3 variant with design changes , the Russian tends to spread out the risk management aspect over long development cycle typically for PAK-FA/FGFA it will be ~ 40 years per Russian officials.

Mr. P has stated that India will/should get the first 50 from stock PAK-FA - as in single seaters.

And, how far away will the FGFA wander from the PAK_FA basic form remains to be seen, but as you mention it is a matter of managing risk, and this time it will be the Indians that will be taking that risk within the framework of the "PAK-FA". Pure speculation, but my gut feel is that India will take that risk. My feel is that there is an under current within India to go it alone as quickly as possible - difficult as it may be due to large areas where India is still lacking.

The original MCA was finless and that was 10+ years ago. So, there are dreamers in India. The good news is that technology wise India is far more advanced and confident.

Let us see.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 12 Mar 2010 19:31

from aerodynamics perspective (vortex issues), what would be the reason these advanced generation fighters not go for inlets from above the wing as shown in the video clip design (the last one)?

it would be the stealthiest, i'd think

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 12 Mar 2010 19:48

NRao wrote:The original MCA was finless and that was 10+ years ago. So, there are dreamers in India. The good news is that technology wise India is far more advanced and confident.Let us see.

Well 20 years ago I could draw a UFO type object which had no wings at all , just because I could draw it does not make it an engineering reality , the no VS design of MCA was a no starter no brainer design from word go,it still is a very concept plane with the technology level we are in and for that matter most of the advanced countries as well.

Designing and building a 5th gen fighter puts one in a different league , only two countries have demonstrated building such a fighter and that too with years of experiencing and building prototypes , there are many countries now who have demonstrated building a 4th 4 plus gen fighter , some even claim their gen 4 fighter is as good as 5th.But none could develop a true 5th Gen fighter barring US and Russia.

It will be interesting to see if India and China can go alone and build a 5th gen fighter , considering both nations have built their 4th with outside assistance and help.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 12 Mar 2010 20:02

Certainly. Without a doubt.

But, as I have said before, some of these "dreamers" were no yoyos. There is no doubt in my mind that it was/is doable. The "5th gen" being a later concept to the tailless plane. And, note that the MCA was as small as the LCA is in its realm. If I am not mistaken, even today the MCA/NGFA/NMCA is still the smallest in its category.

The point being, yes, there will be reliance on outside help. But I think that gap can be closed in many respects - certianly not in all respects.

With that in mind, IF there is enough funding AND time we can expect a FGFA that is some-what to quite different than the PAK-FA.

IMHO, even the current version of the FGFA is not the final version. After that too I expect radical changes - IF RU has enough funds (which I think they do not have - I expect the "PAK-FA will struggle only for this reason).

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 12 Mar 2010 21:19

NRao funding will always be a problem for any program , the F-22 got cut due to fund , JSF is becoming unbearable due to cost increase , even the MCA/LCA or PAK-FA will at some point in their development will face funding issue and cuts are bound to happen.

I am mighty surprised and doubt MOD/MOF can fund two 5th gen fighter program plus spend $10 billion on MMRCA , it is just a matter of time some program status will be reviewed , canceled or delayed till it becomes irrelevant.

One should appreciate the fact that countries like US or Russia managed to develop most program on their own with their own resources and technical capability and lead in what ever their did , most of the time there was never such a thing like generous help from outside available like Chinese or Indian program have got , they had to slog their arse and just develop it if they wanted to be relevant and lead.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 13 Mar 2010 02:05

Funding has been a problem in the US vs. RU for totally different reasonS. Even PAK-FA, so far, is not an RU funding!!!! The state did not provide any financial support.

IF a "healthy" USSR was still around I would expect a better tussle between the bear and the eagle. F-22 would have been funded and we would, perhaps, not have this international bazar backing the F-35. That focus has been lost - and for good reasons.

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 13 Mar 2010 21:06

Russia to make 200 stealth fighter jets for India

Russia will build more than 1,000 stealth fighter jets within four decades, including at least 200 for its traditional weapons buyer India, the head of plane maker Sukhoi said on Friday.

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 13 Mar 2010 21:28

VinodTK wrote:Russia to make 200 stealth fighter jets for India

Russia will build more than 1,000 stealth fighter jets within four decades, including at least 200 for its traditional weapons buyer India, the head of plane maker Sukhoi said on Friday.

So is India not going to be building any?

dejan · Post by **dejan** » 13 Mar 2010 22:31

SaiK wrote:from aerodynamics perspective (vortex issues), what would be the reason these advanced generation fighters not go for inlets from above the wing as shown in the video clip design (the last one)?

it would be the stealthiest, i'd think

I believe it would be difficult to obtain a "healthy" air flow for engines in high angle of attack maneuvers, or at least that concept would limit AoA.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 14 Mar 2010 02:01

GeorgeWelch wrote: So is India not going to be building any?

at least certain parts I guess., and there would be at a later stage a new agreement for screw driver tech transfer., and depending on demand and supply, and how well our factories are capable, we would relinquish those rights as we did for MKI for speed up delivery.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 14 Mar 2010 03:55

IMHO, it would better if Russia builds the FGFA. India participates in the design (25% !!!!!), funds as much as possible and let them integrate them (I assume India does not have an option in this filed) and build the FGFA. I think it would be far more cheaper to build them in RU. Not to talk of potential delays that may occur in attempting to make them in India.

India should concentrate on the NMCA (MCA/NGFA) (before they are drowned in acronyms).

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 14 Mar 2010 06:27

Tushar wrote: Anyways, from the article, I can derive that countries such as Vietnam and Libya have shown interest in the product, and therefore can be future customers. This seems very odd, since the Viet airforce and Libyan airforce are some of the most rubbish airforces in the world. They cannot even maintain their soviet era aircrafts yet want to invest in jets which will cost well over $100 million a piece and not even at flyaway costs. I think the journalist or the representative are a little hyperactive and are just giving a false promotion to the product in development.

Indirectly the article is trying to compare India with countries such as Libya and Indian elite is not even aware of such bogus report and made a fool of.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 14 Mar 2010 16:00

Russia,India to sign contract for sketching 5th generation jet soon

“We are in the process of negotiations. They will be completed in the near future and we shall ink a contract for the technical sketch project of this plane then,” Pogosian said, adding that such major undertakings were very time-consuming.

This is one of the reasons why the contract was not signed during Vladimir Putin’s visit to India, he added.

On February 16 Industry and Trade Minister Viktor Khristenko said that a Russian-Indian project for jointly developing a fifth generation fighter would enter into the active implementation phase this year.

Russia and India, he said, “are starting joint work on this product being well aware that they will share the copyrights.”

Also, Khristenko said that the parties would share benefits from selling the plane not only on their domestic markets, but also on the markets of third countries.

“This is an unprecedented situation. India is the sole country with which we have decided to establish such partnership,” Khristenko said.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 14 Mar 2010 18:02

Is this the first report of a possible cost of the FGFA - per piece? .. more close to the F35 cost than the F22.. Hopefully!!

Bangalore-based Hindu stan Aeronautics, which already assembles Mig, Sukoi and Hawk jets, is seeking at least a 25 per cent share in the production of a two-seat version of the aircraft. The fighter, estimated to cost more than $85m apiece, would also be equipped with BrahMos cruise missiles, which have been developed and tested jointly by the two countries.

Russia in dogfight for India contract

sumshyam · Post by **sumshyam** » 14 Mar 2010 18:57

More Sukhoi T-50s To Fly In Next 12 Months

Sukhoi executives suggest the second prototype will likely enter testing this year, while the third and fourth prototypes will appear in 2011. The first two will not be fitted with radar or weapon control systems, and will be used primarily for flight performances and major systems evaluations.

Sukhoi designers are trying to compress the T-50 development through the extensive use of specialized system-integration test benches. The development of previous aircraft types was supported with the use of “iron bird” rigs for complex flight control system checks and an “electronic bird” for the avionics package testing, coupled with stationary engineering simulators used for “man-machine” interface development.

For the T-50, in addition to these tools, Sukhoi seems to have built an additional prototype not intended for flights—the so-called T-50-KNS. This airframe is fitted with operational systems, equipment and engines.

Sukhoi’s production facility in Komsomolsk has used the T-50-KNS for checking the use of new manufacturing technologies, while designers were able to examine all wiring, ducting, equipment and engine installation within the actual dimensions of the aircraft. The T-50-KNS and other test-bench checks ensured the initial flights of the T-50-1 prototype. Pogosyan says a 24-deg. angle of attack was reached on the T-50-1 after only three flights.

The company’s T-50 chief designer, Alexander Davidenko, says almost 70% of the outer surface— 25% of the aircraft’s empty weight—consists of composites . The T-50’s digital flight control system is around 30% lighter than the Su-27’s and can reconfigure in case of failure or combat damage, says Pogosyan.

“This is a completely new engine,” he contends, “developed especially for this aircraft. It has a modern design, which is able to ensure the T-50’s long-term operation.” A completely new powerplant could be developed in the next 10-12 years, he adds.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 14 Mar 2010 19:37

So right now as PAK-FA stands it will have composites by total weight ~ 25 % and 75 % by Surface area , perhaps some time in the future they should try to aim and reach the tejas figure of 45 % by weight and 90 % by surface area

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 14 Mar 2010 20:37

I would expect that kind of improvement in the FGFA, perhaps not as quickly in the PAK-FA.

biswas · Post by **biswas** » 14 Mar 2010 20:54

shukla wrote:Is this the first report of a possible cost of the FGFA - per piece? .. more close to the F35 cost than the F22.. Hopefully!!

Bangalore-based Hindu stan Aeronautics, which already assembles Mig, Sukoi and Hawk jets, is seeking at least a 25 per cent share in the production of a two-seat version of the aircraft. The fighter, estimated to cost more than $85m apiece, would also be equipped with BrahMos cruise missiles, which have been developed and tested jointly by the two countries.
Russia in dogfight for India contract

I thought it was a 50-50 venture for the FGFA?

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 14 Mar 2010 21:45

biswas wrote:I thought it was a 50-50 venture for the FGFA?

Well it's already flying, so I'm not sure how much development work India could hope to get.

It sounds more like India will help pay for the development of Russia's next fighter and in return Russia will let India buy some from them.

Samay · Post by **Samay** » 14 Mar 2010 22:36

Well they first thought of a 100 % indigenous project ,a decade ago...

came down to 50% JV in around 2005

recently ruskies were heard saying that Indian portion will be 25%

then after reading such reports

one could only pray that we get pakfa on delivery schedule(2016) and on fair price ~ 100 mn

.

and chinks dont get it as well

reality is that when our babus visited russia to review pakfa project, they were very upset that India is not purchasing this time ,but going to produce on on its own ,ruskies saw a shadow of arjun tank and lca on their project,so they thought they have to make Indian babu happy...

and we all know ruskies find solutions very fast ,....

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 15 Mar 2010 05:43

let us put it this way.. we can only cheer for russkier advancement, and when it comes to purchase, it would as similar to gorshkov price gouging shtyle of deal.

and.. why would the Russians provide us everything.. and let us become a free bird. which nation can afford to sell everything without a ransom handsome deal. If we can think in their shoes, we would be doing the same.

it is important that we have more focus on LCA and MCA (NGFA)., and maximize our venture in pak-fa (FGFA) so that we have some learning for MCA.

If this objective can't be met, it is better we settle for outright purchase like Gripen/Rafale/EF2K kind a/c.

This is the reminder for MRCA decision as well. EF partnership can put us on a different level, as we would be learning lot more at a little extra price, that is long standing.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 15 Mar 2010 10:21

Samay wrote:
Well they first thought of a 100 % indigenous project ,a decade ago...

came down to 50% JV in around 2005

recently ruskies were heard saying that Indian portion will be 25%

then after reading such reports

one could only pray that we get pakfa on delivery schedule(2016) and on fair price ~ 100 mn .

and chinks dont get it as well

reality is that when our babus visited russia to review pakfa project, they were very upset that India is not purchasing this time ,but going to produce on on its own ,ruskies saw a shadow of arjun tank and lca on their project,so they thought they have to make Indian babu happy...

and we all know ruskies find solutions very fast ,....

If we pay a hefty price to be partners in the program then why would they be upset if we build the planes for ourselves? I think it would be great if we can make one big down payment into the FGFA program and get the tech.

nrshah · Post by **nrshah** » 15 Mar 2010 13:03

I was just wandering we want so much from Russians...

we want full technology, license rights, no sale to third party without our approval, we want contribution in R & D to equal level (notwithstanding we have not yet inducted 4.5gen aircraft that we are developing)...

People comment we should not form JV with them if we are not provided with equal status, TOT (100% incl radars, airframes and engines)...

But surprisingly, in case of americans, all of above requirements become mute...

We dont mind Americans selling its plane to our time tested enemy/rival.
We dont mind they not giving us any decent TOT (not to mention dumb radars)
We dont mind singing intrusive and restrictive EUM and others
we dont mind when they dont allow us MKize their soon to be phased out fighters (Assumption based on Israel case)
We dont mind when they pitch for f 35 and clearly state TOT will not be happening

Interesting!!!

P.S - I know i will be reminded of some 5 bn USD which we contributing in the project... But can you name any other 5th gen fighter we can get by contributing 5 Bn USD with atleast half of what we are expecting from russians... Forget can we even get the source of codes of its radar? (assumption based on UK case)

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 15 Mar 2010 13:55

Carl_T wrote:and we all know ruskies find solutions very fast ,...
If we pay a hefty price to be partners in the program then why would they be upset if we build the planes for ourselves? I think it would be great if we can make one big down payment into the FGFA program and get the tech.

Depends what one means by hefty price , rather it would be the cost of FGFA program and the specific TOT that Indians have opted for.

Russia would have spend multibillion dollar over last decade and the cost involved in R&D,manufacturing ,Technology , then there is sunk cost in the now canceled 5th Gen fighter program ( Mig-1.44/Su-32 Berkut ) which would have aided in flighting testing and technology development that went into the current PAK-FA program.

Considering we are putting in $10 billion for a 4th gen fighter program MMRCA and getting some peanut technology from West as part of TOT deal/offsets and manufacturing right to build 126 fighter for that cost .

The quoted figure of $5 billion for a 5th gen program that we are investing in FGFA ,we are getting 25 % TOT and indigenous/3rd party technology integration rights to customize the FGFA to our needs its a good deal

shanksinha · Post by **shanksinha** » 15 Mar 2010 14:37

^^ Dear nrshah I congratulate you on a very hard hitting and insightful post. You have laid things out very well.

However to utter such ugly truth on these forums is a cardinal sin. So better duck for cover!

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 15 Mar 2010 15:41

nrshah wrote: But surprisingly, in case of americans, all of above requirements become mute...

We dont mind Americans selling its plane to our time tested enemy/rival.
We dont mind they not giving us any decent TOT (not to mention dumb radars)
We dont mind singing intrusive and restrictive EUM and others
we dont mind when they dont allow us MKize their soon to be phased out fighters (Assumption based on Israel case)
We dont mind when they pitch for f 35 and clearly state TOT will not be happening

Well you always expect your mother to be kind hearted , generous , take care of all your demands and you still complain , but would be more than willing and happily oblige/bend to your girlfriend diktat.

nrshah · Post by **nrshah** » 15 Mar 2010 15:50

Austin wrote: Well you always expect your mother to be kind hearted , generous and take care of all your demands , but would be more than willing and happily oblige/bend to your girlfriend diktat.

Ya, But do you seriously think America is our girl friend? And good to find we compare Russia as our mother who will take care of us in all times no matter whatever we do...

biswas · Post by **biswas** » 15 Mar 2010 16:02

Austin wrote:
nrshah wrote: But surprisingly, in case of americans, all of above requirements become mute...

We dont mind Americans selling its plane to our time tested enemy/rival.
We dont mind they not giving us any decent TOT (not to mention dumb radars)
We dont mind singing intrusive and restrictive EUM and others
we dont mind when they dont allow us MKize their soon to be phased out fighters (Assumption based on Israel case)
We dont mind when they pitch for f 35 and clearly state TOT will not be happening
Well you always expect your mother to be kind hearted , generous , take care of all your demands and you still complain , but would be more than willing and happily oblige/bend to your girlfriend diktat.

Ye ki analogy hain ji?

lilaspr · Post by **lilaspr** » 15 Mar 2010 20:49

SaiK wrote:unless we have a close up shot on the inlet, that keypub drawing is all speculation.

besides..

I'd love to see pak-fa, especially Indian FGFA on these lines:

YES WE CAN!

Nice pics

VishalJ · Post by **VishalJ** » 16 Mar 2010 06:36

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 16 Mar 2010 08:47

nrshah wrote: Well you always expect your mother to be kind hearted , generous and take care of all your demands , but would be more than willing and happily oblige/bend to your girlfriend diktat.

Austin wrote: Ya, But do you seriously think America is our girl friend? And good to find we compare Russia as our mother who will take care of us in all times no matter whatever we do...

I believe that analogy is perfect.

America is the girl we long for.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 16 Mar 2010 14:46

If there is a yardstick for true friendship,follow this.The US is unwilling to share JSF tech with poodle Britain,unwilling to sell long-time ally Japan the F-22,even to any of its NATO allies and Israel! The Russians are ready and willing to enter into a full partnership with India for their equivalent 5th-gen aircraft,devlop an Indian version too and share with us full TOT! Who is a true friend? QED!

Brando · Post by **Brando** » 16 Mar 2010 16:11

Philip wrote:If there is a yardstick for true friendship,follow this.The US is unwilling to share JSF tech with poodle Britain,unwilling to sell long-time ally Japan the F-22,even to any of its NATO allies and Israel! The Russians are ready and willing to enter into a full partnership with India for their equivalent 5th-gen aircraft,devlop an Indian version too and share with us full TOT! Who is a true friend? QED!

That yardstick is an apples to oranges comparison.

Russia and the US are at two different places. The US knows that the F22 is its trump card and they have invested heavily to make it so. They also know that they are the supreme military power on this planet and they don't want that to change. They also realize that technology is power and when they part with their technology they also part with their power. The Russians have different considerations. They know that they are no longer the power they once were and that they no longer hold the sway they once had. From the russian perspective, them offering the PAK-FA to countries like India or some other country gives them power by leverage. Also, indirectly it dilutes the US technological superiority and hold over the world enabling more countries to resist US pressure and prevent US dominance. The Russians also get paid to do this as they make money off sales and spares. Were the tables reversed, the Russians would NEVER sell their technological secrets- allies or NOT. At the end of the day, the Russians sell because it is in their interests to sell, while the US doesn't because it isn't in its interests to sell. The US can get by with peddling the JSF.

Also, the US never transferred stealth technology to Britain even during the Cold war. The B2s and the F111s were always USAF. They only gave away technology that helped themselves like giving away MIRV or SLBM technology to the Europeans to counter the Soviet numerical nuclear superiority.

nrshah · Post by **nrshah** » 16 Mar 2010 17:38

That yardstick is an apples to oranges comparison.

I am afraid it is not the case. From a third nation's point of view, it does not matter what is the prospective of each country in selling/not selling (Forget co developing) their top notch technology. I am only concerned with what i am getting and it does not matter me what is the reason for you to sell/ not sell the same.

sumshyam · Post by **sumshyam** » 16 Mar 2010 17:45

Brando wrote:That yardstick is an apples to oranges comparison.

Russia and the US .........nuclear superiority.

Brando, I think it is wrong to say that it is oranges vs apples.

I think, trying to not to part with technology and shear arrogance and extreme of a paranoia.

As you said, Americans shared some of their technology with Europeans...to counter Russians...It itself can be considered an effort to dilute contemporary USSR military capability.

And yes, even if in the era of cold war, Russian shared a greater degree of co-operations.

Yes, Americans are superior in terms of technology on this very day....but it is not their parental property....and I think this is the bottom line...!

And Yes, the talk was not for the trend of US military co-operations...but was for friend considerations and mutual respect for the partners...and Russians win it...without a doubt.