PAK-FA / T-50: Russian 5th Generation Fighter

[Totoro]

As far as I know, it's official.

Tphuang as far as I know total program cost for the PAK-FA+FGFA is estimated at 18-24 billion USD. And is likely to grow. So I think you hit the nail on the head in regards to the question of finance.

But if in 5 years the project airplane looks so much different than what we see today, that'd mean there'd be no serial production before 2020.

 

[nevidimka]

If i'm not mistaken I read that the Indian portion of the project budget has not been utilised yet, coz most of the plane was already done before India came in. But it would be very wise for India to completely put all their resources into this single project instead of splitting it into 2 with a redesigned bird with 2 seat. I think this bird will revolutionise India's defence capability if it was added together with the supporting network and asset to make this plane a real 4th gen fighter.

Yes, i completely forgot about the Su 37 being used, and if i'm not mistaken, Su 39 is also used by the Su 25 update. So that naturalli leaves Su 41 next in line, though Su 40 sounds better.

 

[Grand Danois]

Here is some measurments of the inlet-duct-engine fans.

There is obviously both a vertical and horizontal bend in the intakes.
Perhaps there are also radar reflecting panels inside the intakes?

The horizontal bend/non-allignment can be seen clearly from this angle.
There are allready huge debates on other forums on how much of the Engine compressor blades are hidden or showing through the Air-inlets.

Uhm no. 1) That is a very small s-bend then! 2) When in the air, the jet will incline at an angle and thus radars at same altitude will look straight at the face. 3) So will ground based radars.

I'd think the Russians have solved this with radar blockers similar to the SH solution

Btw, there's a lot of confirmation wrt the state of Russian competence on discrete technologies like LO apertures with the release of PAK FA pics.

SH belly picture:
F18 super hornet belly view on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

 

[nevidimka]

What are radar blockers?

 

[Grand Danois]

What are radar blockers?

AvWeek explains better than I can:

Ares Homepage

Excerpt:
"Engines reflect radio waves marvellously well, hence the need to twist the ducts in a stealth fighter so there is no line of sight to them.

What to do about these insufficiently curvy S-ducts? The answer is that the ATD-X will get radar blockers in the ducts, according to the the former director of the institute's aircraft division, Hayashi Fujio. The radar blockers are presumably baffles or vanes ahead of the engine that prevent radar waves bouncing back out the inlet. We understand that the F/A-18E and F Super Hornet has a similar arrangement."

 

[plasmahawk]

And btw.. is there any chance this plane being named Su 37 Nevidimka?

..range of 5 000km achieved with multiple air refueling sessions.



Plas

PS
I dont think you will get the namesake, it will be probably called The Putin.
&

Su 40 sounds better.

Dont have to worry about export to china

China will never buy the Su 40 name, in Chinese FOURTY is pronounced as Four Ten, and it sounds just like Death Wet/Moist

 

[Feanor]

Btw, there's a lot of confirmation wrt the state of Russian competence on discrete technologies like LO apertures with the release of PAK FA pics.

Could you elaborate please?

 

[Aussie Digger]

Uhm no. 1) That is a very small s-bend then! 2) When in the air, the jet will incline at an angle and thus radars at same altitude will look straight at the face. 3) So will ground based radars.

Funny. People are calling this aircraft all sorts of things and proscribing all sorts of capability to what actually amounts to little more than a development mule at the beginning of it's life and yet don't even have a basic understanding of angle of attack...

 

[SkolZkiy]

everybody just speculate on thread.
Funny also that it has been shown - BUT NO ANY CHARACTERISTICS were OFFICIALLY announced. Even in news was quoted some info from Wiki =)))

About Number. Su-47 officially does not EXIST. there only S-37. Su-37 was demonstrator of the thrust control system. Nothing more. I don't think it will have even number because if you notice - Su-27, Su-35, Su-37, Su15, Su17, Mig-15,17,19,21,23,25,29,31 - only UNEVEN numbers =)

 

[Grand Danois]

Funny. People are calling this aircraft all sorts of things and proscribing all sorts of capability to what actually amounts to little more than a development mule at the beginning of it's life and yet don't even have a basic understanding of angle of attack...

That's why I haven't commented on many other things. I just found it funny that others we're busy arguing that it had a significant s-curved air intake, because they associate this with "5th gen" LO and the F-22/35, when the solution is clearly something else.

I do know it's called AoA, I just like to paraphrase.

Feanor. Aperture design is critical at they represent discontinuities in materials and shaping, and they need to be sympathetic to the rest of the airframe. What we've seen on the PAK FA demonstrator/prototype in terms of apertures and method of assembly indicate that it has the same design philosophy, technology and production methods as the Su-27/35. It will also have the Su-27/35 avionics. And currently also the Su-27/35 engines. I.e. no quantum leaps, just a new airframe produced with the same manufacturing tech and design capability. Apart from the planform, internal bays, inlet shaping, probable blockers, and novel adjustable lerx - it's basically a Su-27/35 with reduced observability and better supersonic performance (since the Su-27/35 is essentially a subsonic fighter with dash capability, what will make the difference is wing sweep, new engines, clean airframe, inlet design).

It still has a very long way to go.

But it is a very kewl and menacing looking jet. The Russians are good at this, just like with their warships.

 

[Feanor]

Just to respond to a part of your comment, does your judgement apply to the current prototype or the machine intended for serial production a few years from now?

 

[Grand Danois]

Just to respond to a part of your comment, does your judgement apply to the current prototype or the machine intended for serial production a few years from now?

The prototype, there should be a fair amount of time to improve on the points mentioned, e.g. finish, apertures, engines, on the serial version. I do expect the avionics to be Su-35S-ish, though, which is very respectable.

I should clarify that my point was that in my very subjective opinion, this demo/prototype represent an evolution from Su-27/35 more than a revolution, like the Raptor/Lightning II was/is over the F-15/16.

 

[Pyongyang]

I have to say that I am impressed. From an uneducated eye the prototype looks more stealthy then the latest F-35, but not more stealthy then F-35 first prototypes...LOL

 

[Kilo 2-3]

I have to say that I am impressed. From an uneducated eye the prototype looks more stealthy then the latest F-35, but not more stealthy then F-35 first prototypes...LOL

Appearances can be deceiving... I don't deny the T-50 is quite the good-looking machine, but it does have some interesting features.

Designers seem to put a fair amount of effort in making the lines of many (but not all) of their prototypes, technology demonstrators and whatnot, fairly good-looking . It certainly doesn't hurt sales potential and it gives laymen a reason to like it. Hence the reason we see the nifty paint jobs on aircraft like the F-15 S/MTD or X-29.

Also prototypes lack all the operational gear of their production counterparts, so their lines are generally (but not always) much cleaner.

I wonder how the final version will differ in appearance from the prototype flying today? The tubular engine fairings and the IR ball should be cleaned up for sure. Cockpit visibility also might need some improvement.

 

[Aussie Digger]

I have to say that I am impressed. From an uneducated eye the prototype looks more stealthy then the latest F-35, but not more stealthy then F-35 first prototypes...LOL

From a head on look, I suppose that's a fair enough opinion.

But looking underneath and from the rear is a different story. I don't see much in the way of saw-toothing going on back there...

 

[funtz]

The prototype, there should be a fair amount of time to improve on the points mentioned, e.g. finish, apertures, engines, on the serial version. I do expect the avionics to be Su-35S-ish, though, which is very respectable.

I should clarify that my point was that in my very subjective opinion, this demo/prototype represent an evolution from Su-27/35 more than a revolution, like the Raptor/Lightning II was/is over the F-15/16.

I think this was expected/reported for a long time, that the avionics development program would be shared with the Su-35 program, from what i read the nature of avionics has evolved as in requiring much less efforts to upgrade.

Mr. Putin was talking about a 2015 timeline even back in 2007..

If you remember, it was said that there was an agreement to freeze the design.

http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/a...ns-have-started-build-pak-fa-7048/#post122408

From a head on look, I suppose that's a fair enough opinion.

But looking underneath and from the rear is a different story. I don't see much in the way of saw-toothing going on back there...

There has not been any previous projects in Russia that fielded any amount of the complex 'stealth' technologies.

The reported work was in radar absorbing material being applied to the certain places like inside the radome, engine blades etc.

So this is really the first comprehensive project in the field that they have started.

 

[Feanor]

Well the cost figures from that older article are clearly up in smoke at this point. The Su-35S is a testbed for all the avionics, and somewhat engines. However we can suppose major upgrades with all of those.

For the difference between an F-16 and F-35, the issue here is ultimately money. The amount of money the US invested into the program (and the F-22 as well) is so enormous that it allowed for a massive leap in capability. Something Sukhoi can not afford. The Su-35S is just that, a cost-saving measure. And the VVS order for the 48 Su-35S has as much to do with supporting Sukhoi as it does with getting new fighters for the VVS.

 

[funtz]

Well the cost figures from that older article are clearly up in smoke at this point. The Su-35S is a testbed for all the avionics, and somewhat engines. However we can suppose major upgrades with all of those.

For the difference between an F-16 and F-35, the issue here is ultimately money. The amount of money the US invested into the program (and the F-22 as well) is so enormous that it allowed for a massive leap in capability. Something Sukhoi can not afford. The Su-35S is just that, a cost-saving measure. And the VVS order for the 48 Su-35S has as much to do with supporting Sukhoi as it does with getting new fighters for the VVS.

Perhaps over a period of time.

F-35, has three versions which includes a STOVL plane

News will have some information, some opinions and some errors, a agreement between HAL and Sukhoi would be a very comprehensive agreement which would include several factors, IPR rights, components, timelines, to legal language, these will take time.

As far as direct quotes go this article was very accurate in establishing what stage of the program some days before the first flight happened.

Bangalore-based HAL has negotiated firmly to get a 25 per cent share of design and development work in the FGFA programme. HAL’s work share will include critical software, including the mission computer (the Su-30MKI mission computer is entirely Indian); navigation systems; most of the cockpit displays; the counter measure dispensing (CMD) systems; and modifying Sukhoi’s single-seat prototype into the twin-seat fighter that the Indian Air Force (IAF) wants.

India will also contribute its expertise in aircraft composites, developed while designing the Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA). Russia has traditionally built metallic aircraft; just 10 per cent of the Su-30MKI fuselage is titanium and composites. The FGFA’s fuselage, in contrast, will be 25 per cent titanium and 20 per cent composites. Russia’s expertise in titanium structures will be complemented by India’s experience in composites.

With India’s work share almost finalised, the 2007 Russia-India Inter-Governmental Agreement (IGA) to build the FGFA will soon evolve into a commercial contract between Russia’s United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) and HAL. Ashok Baweja, until recently the chairman of HAL, told Business Standard: “[U]When HAL and UAC agree on terms, they will sign a General Contract. This will include setting up a JV to design the FGFA, and precise details about who will fund what.”[/U]

For long, the UAC argued that HAL could not expect a major role in the FGFA because Sukhoi had finished much of the work while New Delhi dithered about joining the project. UAC asserts that 5,000 Sukhoi engineers have worked for five years to design the FGFA. Such claims are hard to verify, but it is known that the Sukhoi Design Bureau has about 8,000 engineers, distributed between many different programmes.

With Sukhoi ploughing on alone, Minister of State for Defence Pallam Raju admitted to Business Standard: “The longer India waits to join the project, the lesser will be our contribution. But, we are not sitting idle. Through the defence ministry’s existing programmes [such as the Tejas LCA] we are building up our capabilities.”

Most Indian officials agree that India has not lost much. Even if the FGFA makes its much-anticipated first flight this year, it is still at a preliminary stage of development. Ashok Baweja assessed in early 2009, “The FGFA’s first flight is just the beginning of the programme. My understanding is that the Russians are going ahead (with the test) to validate the FGFA’s “proof of concept” (conceptual design). Whatever composite materials they have now, they’ll use. But, because the composites will change… the FGFA will keep evolving for a fairly long time.”

A top ministry official estimates, “It will take another 4-5 years to develop many of the FGFA’s systems. Then, the aircraft will undergo at least 2000 hours of certification flying and, possibly, some reconfiguration. The FGFA should not be expected in service before 2017. And the twin-seat version may take a couple of years longer.”

With just a 25 per cent share of design, South Block policymakers still believe that the FGFA project is a vital step towards India’s emergence as a military aeronautical power. “Developing 25 per cent of this fighter is far better than just transferring technology to build it in India, as we did with the Su-30MKI,” points out a defence ministry official.

Broadsword: India to develop 25% of fifth generation fighter

 

[Pyongyang]

Well the cost figures from that older article are clearly up in smoke at this point. The Su-35S is a testbed for all the avionics, and somewhat engines. However we can suppose major upgrades with all of those.

For the difference between an F-16 and F-35, the issue here is ultimately money. The amount of money the US invested into the program (and the F-22 as well) is so enormous that it allowed for a massive leap in capability. Something Sukhoi can not afford. The Su-35S is just that, a cost-saving measure. And the VVS order for the 48 Su-35S has as much to do with supporting Sukhoi as it does with getting new fighters for the VVS.

A fairly good point. But then again you could probably get allot more manpower in Russia cheaper then in the US. But it's really impossible to say how good this plane will be.

 

[Grand Danois]

I think this was expected/reported for a long time, that the avionics development program would be shared with the Su-35 program, from what i read the nature of avionics has evolved as in requiring much less efforts to upgrade.

No disagreement there. It's just the contrast with e.g. US systems, where everything has to be transformational.