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

[Feanor]

To raise the question of deadlines and funding again, if the PAK-FA is delayed (as it's likely to be), I would think it's natural for more Su-35S to be ordered for the VVS. Granted, the VVS themselves would much rather have more PAK-FA, and less Su-35S, but the procurement decisions aren't made at that level so they will be happy to take whatever they get. And given that the market for the Su-35S is not all that large (after all it's not going to China or India), these additional VVS orders might be necessary to keep the project afloat.

I mean so far we have rumors of exports to Libya and that's about it. The earlier rumors of Venezuelan purchases seem to have fizzled, with the oil prices drop, and the economic meltdown last year. China won't buy the plane as a whole, and Russia has refused to export components. India won't buy the plane, although some parts may find their way into MKI upgrades. This leaves a very small market. Vietnam, if it purchases more, will likely opt for Su-30 variants, although it's not impossible that they should order Su-35s. Indonesia already operates two types of Flankers, and in very small numbers. Again adding a third one to the mix doesn't seem likely or worthwhile. Not to mention money is once again an issue. The Su-35 is out of the Brazilian tender. This leaves it with very modest export potential.

What are your thoughts on the issue? Could the VVS end up dedicated to too many types? With over two regiments of Su-35S, upwards of 8 regiments of Su-34, several regiments of MiG-35 (I'm pretty sure they will be the LFI requirement, as at this point another new project is practically out of the question), and a number of PAK-FA this could look problematic.

As it stands the VVS (before the current reforms) had 5 regiments of MiG-31 (most likely to be replaced by PAK-FA in the long run), 5 regiments of MiG-29, 7 regiments of Su-27, and 10 regiments of Su-24. Not counting recon variants, or AVMF units. This leaves us with at least 2(+) regiments of Su-35S, 5 regiments of MiG-35, and something like 9-10 regiments of PAK-FA. Possibly less. And this is granted the very optimistic assumption that no further size cuts come. Otherwise PAK-FA orders could shrink even more. Especially of Su-35 purchases displace it.

I guess this is a bit of rant, but the point I was coming to, is that 1) funding could become an issue as the numbers ordered turn out to be relatively small, 2) it could hit the export market sooner then expected, and 3) the VVS might be looking at a problem with not only size, but also types in service.

 

[Kilo 2-3]

To raise the question of deadlines and funding again, if the PAK-FA is delayed (as it's likely to be), I would think it's natural for more Su-35S to be ordered for the VVS. Granted, the VVS themselves would much rather have more PAK-FA, and less Su-35S, but the procurement decisions aren't made at that level so they will be happy to take whatever they get. And given that the market for the Su-35S is not all that large (after all it's not going to China or India), these additional VVS orders might be necessary to keep the project afloat.

I mean so far we have rumors of exports to Libya and that's about it. The earlier rumors of Venezuelan purchases seem to have fizzled, with the oil prices drop, and the economic meltdown last year. China won't buy the plane as a whole, and Russia has refused to export components. India won't buy the plane, although some parts may find their way into MKI upgrades. This leaves a very small market. Vietnam, if it purchases more, will likely opt for Su-30 variants, although it's not impossible that they should order Su-35s. Indonesia already operates two types of Flankers, and in very small numbers. Again adding a third one to the mix doesn't seem likely or worthwhile. Not to mention money is once again an issue. The Su-35 is out of the Brazilian tender. This leaves it with very modest export potential.

What are your thoughts on the issue? Could the VVS end up dedicated to too many types? With over two regiments of Su-35S, upwards of 8 regiments of Su-34, several regiments of MiG-35 (I'm pretty sure they will be the LFI requirement, as at this point another new project is practically out of the question), and a number of PAK-FA this could look problematic.

As it stands the VVS (before the current reforms) had 5 regiments of MiG-31 (most likely to be replaced by PAK-FA in the long run), 5 regiments of MiG-29, 7 regiments of Su-27, and 10 regiments of Su-24. Not counting recon variants, or AVMF units. This leaves us with at least 2(+) regiments of Su-35S, 5 regiments of MiG-35, and something like 9-10 regiments of PAK-FA. Possibly less. And this is granted the very optimistic assumption that no further size cuts come. Otherwise PAK-FA orders could shrink even more. Especially of Su-35 purchases displace it.

I guess this is a bit of rant, but the point I was coming to, is that 1) funding could become an issue as the numbers ordered turn out to be relatively small, 2) it could hit the export market sooner then expected, and 3) the VVS might be looking at a problem with not only size, but also types in service.

Interesting.

I'm of the mind that a domestic-built stealth fighter is a major prestige factor for any nation. As Russia seeks to increase its international presence, the PAK-FA would make an excellent status symbol for Russian technological and military prowess, even if the aircraft was only procured in limited numbers.

The excessive numbers of types might sort itself out since aging aircraft types like the MiG-31, -29, and the Su-27 could be retired, freeing up space and maybe some funding for a PAK-FA purchase. It certainly wouldn't be a one MiG for one PAK replacement, but it would at least allow the VVS to get the PAK operational and replace their aging older airframes with a newer, more competitive one.

But I do agree with you that cost is definitely going to a major, maybe even the deciding factor in the PAK-FA purchase decision.

 

[ghost]

There are still questions whether or not the flight was real? Of course we know about Russians being paranoid about their own people to learn something that is not a secret for the potential enemies... Anyway, without a video materials I wouldn't really beleive to the info given recently by the PM. He's given such a b.sh before...

And... what would that be really??? I've spoken recently to the guy who was working on one of the main companies to develop C(S)-400 missile center many years ago. He says all the "brains" left the company long ago to work either in the commercial projects or abroad where they get paid 10 times more. Those who left are either in their mid-60th or absolutelly dumb. He recalled many people who now manage the huge departments in the companies such as "Almaz", etc. who could not understand the basic math formula about 20-30 years ago. How can they develop something really new???

The 5-th gen fighter was at least designed back in early 80-th when there were good brains there at that time...

 

[Feanor]

You're going to need a little more evidence to demonstrate those claims, then just "I know some guy". The PAK-FA design did not exist in the 80s. That's pretty much fact. And questioning whether the flight was real just smacks of conspiracy theories. In other words... give us something tangible.

EDIT: VPK-News has an excellent (unfortunately in Russian) article on the PAK-FA covering some of the details. I'll summarize the parts that haven't been mentioned in this thread before.

http://www.vpk-news.ru/index.php?op...10661:2010-02-02-08-23-38&catid=5:qq&Itemid=6

So the first thing is that we have additional confirmation that the PAK-FA flew with it's new engines. Additionally, it seems that the engine nozzles were not shaped because Sukhoi did not specify that to Saturn. In other words what we see(with some minor changes) may be the final nozzles. The AESA from Tikhomirov has already been designed and is in testing right now, with flight test of the radar planned this year. The PAK-FA will feature a front X-band AESA array, L-band AESA in the wings, and a rear-facing "observation station". Whether this means a full rear-ward radar, or something more primitive I'm not sure. Additionally it mentions a new powerplant without any specifications however.

 

[ghost]

The work on "future" F-22 begun in USA in late 70s-early 80s. I don't think that Soviet Union was sitting and waiting at that time???
As for "what I know" and "what I think" - you don't need to beleive me and I don't need to bring documented facts. It's a FORUM isn't it. We just express our opinions here.
And...comon...Do you really beleive all that crap discribed in that VPK article??? Don't forget, there is NO free press or media in Russia now. They write and tell what they've been told to.

All the best!

 

[Kilo 2-3]

The work on "future" F-22 begun in USA in late 70s-early 80s. I don't think that Soviet Union was sitting and waiting at that time???
As for "what I know" and "what I think" - you don't need to beleive me and I don't need to bring documented facts. It's a FORUM isn't it. We just express our opinions here.
And...comon...Do you really beleive all that crap discribed in that VPK article??? Don't forget, there is NO free press or media in Russia now. They write and tell what they've been told to.

All the best!

Whoa, settle down a little there. Yelling at everyone doesn't make things any better. yes it is a public forum, and yes there may be some bias in sources, but on DefTalk, I'm getting the impression that not having facts greatly cheapesn your credibility

The timeline for development, if you compare it to the F-22 and assume some similarities, that would would place the PAK-FA's first dev in the 1990s. Since it took about 12 years for the US to get from requirement in 1980 to first flight in 1997. If we assume it took the PAK about the same time then that puts concept start appx. early 90s. (figures off of Wikipedia)

 

[Todjaeger]

The work on "future" F-22 begun in USA in late 70s-early 80s. I don't think that Soviet Union was sitting and waiting at that time???
As for "what I know" and "what I think" - you don't need to beleive me and I don't need to bring documented facts. It's a FORUM isn't it. We just express our opinions here.
And...comon...Do you really beleive all that crap discribed in that VPK article??? Don't forget, there is NO free press or media in Russia now. They write and tell what they've been told to.

All the best!

Work on the ATF (Advanced Tactical Fighter) began in 1986, and the ATF later morphed into the fighter we now know and recognize as the F-22 Raptor. However, the ATF being worked on back then, bears little or no resemblance to the fighter in now service. That is based off a comment a relative made to be, who had been an engineer working on the ATF when the programme initially started.

As for documentation and sourcing... This is indeed a forum, however here at DT we do try and pay some attention to the difference between facts and opinions. This is where sources come in, the ability to cite sources to either provide facts, or indicate that ones opinions are fact-based (vs. WAGs) makes all the difference in ones credibility here. As indicated above, my source is a relative who had worked on the programme. For reasons of privacy I will not disclose his name on an open/public forum, but if one of the Mods were to request I do so, I would provide the information to them. At the same time, the credibility of my comment could also be checked via independent means by those people familiar with the ATF/F-22 development history.

A last thought, specifially touching upon faking PAK-FA flight footage and/or Russian defence companies being staffed by idiots or the soon to retire; absent proof/sources, such comments are rather hard to believe. Therefore, if someone is going to make such comments the poster should understand that the burden of proof is on them. A failure (or refusal) to provide such proof is likely to lead to a poster being dismissed as someone of questionable credibility.

-Cheers

 

[kgb_agent]

ghost is right that VPK article is sheet. this VPK is inet media, which think that is military experienced.
but russia is free, so any person could create his media and post a shit, like this VPK. so here ghost is wrong.
and also that PAK-FA flight was an "illusion", ghost is wrong too...if earth is not flat, of course.
hello from russia.:

 

[Feanor]

Whoa. Lets calm down here. There is a grain of truth in ghosts words in regards to staffing. There is a huge shortage of new engineers and specialists in the Russian defence field. Almz-Antey is a good example of that. What he doesn't seem to know is that the situation at KnAAPO, and Sukhoi in general, is notably different. And while they do have a large generation of older engineers, they also have a notable number of newer engineers.

And ghost ATF began in 86 (not late 70s ). Of course claims that the PAK-FA flight was an illusion, when there are videos, eyewitnesses, and multiple photos to prove it... The issue with media isn't one to take up in this thread. We can gather what information we can. And by cross-referencing multiple sources we can get a relatively accurate picture. I'm well aware of the press issues in Russia (I'm from Russia after all) but a claim that every single newspaper is censored, especially in dealing with the internet, is silly.

As for when the PAK-FA was developed... it seems that late 90s is the start of the conceptual stage, with early 2000s marking the beginning of an actual development process taking place. There are various indicators of this, from the cancellation of the MiG-MFI program, to the MKI deal with India which was instrumental in giving life to the PAK-FA. If you're unaware of these facts, and simply have an opinion based on what you hear in the media, and personal opinion, you would to well to learn from those here who have done the research.

 

[Spetsznaz]

There is no way Russia would risk making the PAK FA a "Illusion" or fake flight, the risk of people realizing its fake (If it is) getting out is too big for Russia to afford

 

[Scorpion82]

What people seem to dismiss/ignore is that the Soviets had their own approach to the 5th generation with the MiG MFI and the Su-47. These aircraft (I-90 programme) were meant to enter service back in the later 90s with the MiG MFI being a multirole fighter and the Su-47 being a more dedicated air superiority fighter. Following the end of the cold war development slowed down due the shortage of funds and just one prototype of each design was built. Until the later 90s the Russians were keen to select on of the two types as their future 5th generation fighter, as the lack of funds didn't permit the procurement of both types. The Russians recognised that neither the MiG MFI, nor the Su-47 would be able to match the F-22. In the end both prototypes got the status of an experimental aircraft assigned and the RuAF eventually launched a new 5th generation fighter programme in 1999 dubbed PAK FA. Sukhoi was awarded with a development contract in april 2002 and launched development of the new aircraft, which received the company internal designation T-50. The Russians gained some experience with the Su-47 and MiG MFI in terms of airframe construction and flight controls, the AL-41F engine was under development for these aircraft and they experimented with some RCS reduction measures and developed weapon bays as well. Sukhoi and its partners could continue their R&D efforts with the revenues received due the successful sales of the Flanker family which allowed them to keep on track and to fall not to much behind western manufacturers. Selected Sukhoi was therefore the best choice for the Russians as this company was in the best conditions. Though RAC MiG is stated to hold a share of 15% in the PAK FA programme, while Yakolev has left the programme.

It remains yet to be seen how the programme will evolve. The current schedules are ambitious, not to say somewhat unrealistic and no one can predict how long it will really take until the aircraft is production ready and when it could be fielded. I don't think the Russians are in the very same situation as the Americans were back in 1990 with their YF-22 and YF-23 technology demonstrators. The T-50 is meant to be a prototype, but it certainly needs a fair amount of development work. I'm also a little bit sceptical about the quantity which will be purchased, given the more recent experience with other military projects in Russia.

 

[Feanor]

Actually the quantity purchased is likely to be substantial. The VVS right now (as of this moment) have long-term contracts for 172 (32 Su-34, 48 Su-35S, 12 Su-27SM (new-builds, or rather completion of Soviet-era airframes in storage at KnAAPO), 4 Su-30M2, and 64 Yak-130) new aircraft by ~2015. Given that the defence budget has only been growing, and that additionaly purchases have been occuring outside the defense budget rather frequently, we can expect to see significant quantites in service.

 

[T.C.P]

http://www.fighter-planes.com/klein/mig142_r.jpg


to help remove any confusion here is something about the cancelled Mig-1.42?MAPO

The MiG 1-42 MFI (Mnogofunktsionalny Frontovoi Istrebitel - Multifunctional Frontline Fighter), sometimes referred to in the West as "ATFski," is a low-observable (LO) multirole fighter. The primary mission of the 1.42 is air-superiority, which makes 1.42 a direct Russian equivalent of the USAF F-22, but, being a multi-functional fighter, it performs almost just as well in a strike mission. Two prototype have been built, called the MiG 1-44. The program has been suspended many times due to lack of funds but it has survived. It carries missiles in internal bays and on external pylons (like the F-22) and, as MiG MAPO claims, it is stealthier than the F-22. The chief designer of the 1.42 claims it will have greater agility and range than the F-22 (It has 3D TVC and it is big). If it's built, it could enter service around 2006-2008.

It is a twin-engined aircraft with a cranked delta wing, canards, twin tail fins, jet intakes under the nose, and 3D vectoring nozzles. It's supposed to be incredibly agile and it will be able to supercruise. It features the new Phazotron N-014 phased array fire control radar as well as a rearward-facing N-012 radar. To reduce RCS it sports a heavy coating of RAM, S-shaped compressor channels, internal weapon storage, LO airframe geometry, and maybe an active radar cancellation system (RCS) or a plasma cloud stealth (PCS) system. The MiG 1.42 will cost about $70 million, compared to the Eurofighter's $60 million, the USAF F-35 Lightning II (JSF) $36 million, and the F-22's $150 million. Though it will probably never enter service in Russia due to its high price tag and Russia's financial crisis, China and India could supply some of the money to develop it and might be primary customers. It is featured in Jetfighter: Full Burn (as the MiG-42) but looks a little different.

Type: MiG/MAPO 1.42
Function: Multirole Fighter
Crew: 1
Engines: 2 * Two three-dimensional thrust-vectoring Saturn/Lyulka AL-41F turbofans, capable of 44,100 lb of thrust in afterburner
Wing Span: 16.40 m
Length: 20.00 m
Height: 5.60 m
Max.Weight: 34500 kg
Empty Weight: 16500 kg
Speed: 2450 km/h
Ceiling: 18945 m
Range: 4000 km
Armament: 1*cannon 30 mm
6000 kg payload
12 internal hardpoints
Text : Alex Stoll

Mikoyan Project 1.44

The Mikoyan Project 1.44/1.42 is a Russian Air Force prototype fifth-generation air-superiority fighter aircraft. Apart from a number of names along the lines of "Object/Project 1.44/1.42", the aircraft is also known as the MiG-MFI. It was unofficially known as the MiG-35 although MiG is now using this designation for the export version of the MiG-29OVT. The MFI has also been referred to by some sources as the MiG-39. Despite the prototype status of the 1.44/1.42, NATO has assigned the reporting name "Flatpack" to this aircraft. The relationship between the 1.44 and 1.42 designations is unclear outside the military world, and these are generally used interchangeably.
Design

The 1.44 is a delta-winged, twin-tailed single seat air superiority/strike fighter with an all-moving forward canard plane. Its physical appearance and design characteristics most resemble the EFA-2000 Eurofighter (both of which provided much inspiration in the design of the People's Republic of China Chengdu J-10).

It is powered by two Lyulka AL-41F afterburning, thrust vectored turbofan jet engines, each generating 175 kN (39,340 lbf) of thrust (these engines are still in development). Both engines are fed by a single air intake placed under the fuselage. The 35-ton aircraft has a theoretical at-altitude maximum speed of Mach 2.6, and is capable of long-term supersonic flight. The 1.44 has a tricycle landing gear system, with a single, dual-wheel landing gear in the front, and two in the rear.

Avionics on the 1.44 are considered cutting-edge by Western standards: the glass-cockpit-enabled fighter features a pulse Doppler radar with a phased aerial array antenna. The radar system is linked to a fire control system that allows the fighter to engage up to twenty separate targets at the same time. It is claimed that the radar system also enables the 1.44 to compete with the likes of the F-22 at beyond visual range (BVR) aerial combat.

The handling and manoeuvrability characteristics of the 1.44 are estimated to be on par with that of the F-22, since the MiG features thrust vectoring, digital fly-by-wire flight control, and two powerful engines. Its internal bay is large enough to carry 8 R-77 missiles. It is believed that Project 1.44 is test-bed for Russian plasma stealth technology granting stealth capabilities without compromising airframe design.
Specifications

Type: Project 1.44
Function: Multirole Fighter
Crew: 1
Engines: 2 * 3D thrust-vectoring Lyulka AL-41F turbofans, 176 kN (39,680 lb) each
Wing Span: 15.00 m
Length: 19.00 m
Height: 4.50 m
Max.Weight: 35000 kg
Empty Weight: 18000 kg
Speed: Mach 2.6
Ceiling: 17000 m
Range: 4000 km
Armament: 1 * 30 mm Izhmash GSh-301 cannon
6000 kg payload
12 internal hardpoints
sorce- Fighter planes.com

 

[T.C.P]

The Su-T-50 flight an Illusion??????wow thats an accusation!

 

[Scorpion82]

TCP da Devil,
you could just have fitted these for posts (including the double post) into a single one. Those information about the MiG MFI is to some extend off track and ridiculous, but that's another matter. The MFI programme was in fact the precursor of the PAK FA and was canceled in spring 1997 after the Russians recognised that their approach to the 5th generation would be inadequate to counter the American approach to the 5th generation.

 

[T.C.P]

TCP da Devil,
you could just have fitted these for posts (including the double post) into a single one. Those information about the MiG MFI is to some extend off track and ridiculous, but that's another matter. The MFI programme was in fact the precursor of the PAK FA and was canceled in spring 1997 after the Russians recognised that their approach to the 5th generation would be inadequate to counter the American approach to the 5th generation.

scorpion82, i mentioned in my post that the Mig MFI was a precursor to the Pak FA and that it has been cancelled.
the double post was due to a small problem wiyh the key board

 

[Feanor]

The MiG-MFI program iirc survived until early 2000s. It even flew. I think it was beaten by Sukhoi not only for technical reasons, but also largely for political and financial reasons. Otherwise the project may have survived.

 

[T.C.P]

The MiG-MFI program iirc survived until early 2000s. It even flew. I think it was beaten by Sukhoi not only for technical reasons, but also largely for political and financial reasons. Otherwise the project may have survived.

you are right. I heard that the Mig-1.42 was technologically superior to the Su-47 but it cost around 110 million dollar per unit sth Russia could not afford, so they chose sukhoi as their project was more cost effective. I also heard that the t-50 has its origins fro not just the Su-47 but also the Mig-1.42, Is it true?

 

[nevidimka]

Since the Pak fa is a collaborative effort of both sukhoi and MiG, it seems perfectly well that it would have had its fair share of origin from both the s 37 and the MiG 1.44 demonstrators.
What I'm waiting for is some new on board system that is more revolutionary compared to evolutionary that would come with the PAK FA, and if it is kept hush hush. Thats not a problem..

 

[nevidimka]

Now that the pak fa is out n how it closely resemble the leaked photos, I think the chinese attempt will look closely like this going by the experience they gained from their J 10 and perhaps the documentation of the MIG 1.42 fighter.