Russian Air Force News & Discussion
- Thread starter Haavarla
- Start date
The second prototype PAK-FA is supposed to be ready soon.
ÂÇÃËßÄ / «Ñóõîé»: Âòîðîé îïûòíûé îáðàçåö ÏÀÊ ÔÀ ïðèñîåäèíèòñÿ ê èñïûòàíèÿì
ÂÇÃËßÄ / «Ñóõîé»: Âòîðîé îïûòíûé îáðàçåö ÏÀÊ ÔÀ ïðèñîåäèíèòñÿ ê èñïûòàíèÿì
my pleb answer is no, (something like the following, but the ones that know are welcome to correct)
AC 'can' work on low frequency radar/sonar, attenuation of spikes ( lots of if's, when's and but's)
AC has its hands full to work on aesa, high frequency that changes, encoded, LPI, target bouncing many different freq returns from various parts of platform
MBDA is testing, for their cruise missiles against very low freq. radar
sweetman started a baseless rumor on ac for the rafale, (in an interview, subject didnt answer the question, so its true) that has been brought to urban myth standard over the years
that seems the basic info i have gleamed from the net
I'm wondering if the russians are working on ARC on the PAK Fa. But if it doesnt work on the AESa then i guess its a no.
Scorpion82
New Member
Zhuk-AE the production radar for the PAK FA? I don't think so! The Zhuk is from NIIR, while the AESA radar for the PAK FA is developed by NIIP. It's subsequently quite unlikely that the aircraft will be fitted with the Zhuk-AE or an derivative (should be Zhuk-AS if any at all). The PAK FA will be fitted with an all new system, not a variant of the Irbis as many falsely assert and no variant of the Zhuk-A either.
King Comm
New Member
ÏÀÊ ÔÀ: îáñóæäåíèå 2
There are rumours that T-50 suffered a set back, the vortices generated by the LERX have managed to tear off the vertical stabiliser, can anyone confirm?
There are rumours that T-50 suffered a set back, the vortices generated by the LERX have managed to tear off the vertical stabiliser, can anyone confirm?
Do you have a source?
Haavarla
Active Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #50
Just wondering about this missile R-27P/ R-27EP..
I thought it was cancled years back.
In favor of the R-27AE?
Have Vympel found a way around the Seeker head and power supply problems?
This is a mockup from MAKS 09.
http://i.flamber.ru/files/st2/1211922554/1251840467_o.jpg
Vympel offers R-27EP anti-radar air-to-air missile
Piotr Butowski
Vympel is offering the R-27EP anti-radar version of its R-27 (AA-10 'Alamo') series of air-to-air missiles on the export market, writes Piotr Butowski. It showed a model of the weapon at the recent FIDAE defence exhibition in Santiago, Chile.
The missile is not a totally new concept. The first test launchings of the original R-27P passive-radar homing missile were made from a MiG-29 testbed in 1984. In 1987, the R-27P missile was adopted for service with what was then the Soviet air force, and in 1991 the Artem factory in Kiev, Ukraine, made a short production run of missiles. These are currently in service with the Russian Air Force.
Until recently, the existence of the R-27P could not be confirmed. Reports described it as being a weapon for use against fighter aircraft, AEW aircraft or standoff jammers. The first direct evidence for the weapon came when the Ukraine company Artem offered it for export.
Production of R-27P ended after the disintegration of the Soviet Union. Although the Artem factory is still offering the R-27P, it is unlikely to be able to deliver these because the homing head - an essential component of the missile - is made only by the CKBA factory in Omsk, Russia.
The R-27P and -EP missile - P for passivnaya (passive) - are equipped with a PRGS-27 (or 9B-1032) seeker developed by CKBA. This operates at centimetric wavelengths, and guides the round to the radar of enemy fighter aircraft. The missile is intended for use against enemy fighters at long range, when the launch aircraft may still be beyond the maximum range of the target's radar. Since the weapon uses passive homing, it will give the target no warning that a launch has been made.
Vympel offers two versions of the missile: the standard R-27P with a maximum range of 72km and the 'energetic' version R-27EP with a bigger rocket motor which gives a maximum range of 110km. This maintains the dual-standard policy set by the original active-radar and infrared-guided versions, which were fielded in medium (R-27R and -27T) and long-range (R-27ER and -27ET) variants respectively. The R-27P and -27EP retain the basic configuration of the earlier members of the AA-10 'Alamo' series, including the novel trapezoidal 'butterfly' control surfaces.
The homing head is capable of detecting a target from a range of more than 200km, but the R-27EP cannot carry out an interception at such distances. The flight time would exceed the operating duration of the missile's onboard power supply. Vympel is working on ways of increasing the operating time of the power supply in order to allow R-27EP engagements at up to 200km.
Series manufacturing of R-27P/EP missiles would be carried out at Vympel's facilities in Moscow. The company does not envisage large production orders for such a specialised weapon, so it would be able to meet the likely demand using its own workshops. At present Vympel is manufacturing small batches of R-77 (RVV-AE) and Kh-29 missiles for export. Annual production of these amounts to only 200-300 examples.
Vympel R-27P/EP anti-radar air-to-air missile specification R-27P R-27EP
Launch weight 248kg 346kg
Warhead weight 39kg 39kg
Length 4,000mm 4,700mm
Diameter 230mm 260mm
Wing span 772mm 800mm
Fin span 972mm 972mm
Maximum altitude of the target 20 km 20 km
Maximum g-load of the target 5.5 5.5
Maximum range 72km 110km
Minimum firing distance 2-3km 2-3km
My best answer is I don't know. As far as I know they're trying to delivery R-77 in quantities to the new Su-27SM units. That's all I've heard on new munitions for the VVS.
Offered for export may not mean that the missile is ready for production. Raw, or requiring finishing, projects have been "offered for export" before.
Offered for export may not mean that the missile is ready for production. Raw, or requiring finishing, projects have been "offered for export" before.
Haavarla
Active Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #52
While the Russian Aircraft manufactors put out news(Sukhoi), the Russia missile manufactors is lip closed just about anything of news...
Is it your thought that the R-77 has replaced the R-27 series completly?
From my view, it seems the R-27 series had some evolution potensial, especial the 'longburn' version.. perhaps on the Mig-31 and the emerging Su-35S with its increased operational range and interceptor role.
Yet it is fair to say Russian missile manufactors may not have market access enough to develop two different missile designs manly target for the same platforms both domestical and export.
The missile on the Pak-Fa should come with some modified models, with retracteble fins perhaps..
Is it your thought that the R-77 has replaced the R-27 series completly?
From my view, it seems the R-27 series had some evolution potensial, especial the 'longburn' version.. perhaps on the Mig-31 and the emerging Su-35S with its increased operational range and interceptor role.
Yet it is fair to say Russian missile manufactors may not have market access enough to develop two different missile designs manly target for the same platforms both domestical and export.
The missile on the Pak-Fa should come with some modified models, with retracteble fins perhaps..
Haavarla
Active Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #53
On the same note, is this due to the apperent lack of new development both on UAVs and missile systems?
President Medvedev appoints new UAC head
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has appointed General Director of the Sukhoi and MiG aircraft companies Mikhail Pogosyan as head of the United Aircraft Corporation (UAC), presidential aide Arkady Dvorkovich said Monday.
Pogosyan will replace current UAC President Alexei Fyodorov, who will lose his post for failing to implement Medvedev's orders on drafting innovation programs for the company.
"The president ordered the administration and the government to evaluate the responsibility of a number of companies [for failure to implement innovation programs], and the decision on one of the companies has been made...Pogosyan will take over the United Aircraft Corporation," Dvorkovich said.
Dvorkovich earlier said about 60% of Russian state-run companies failed to draft innovation programs and increase spending on R&D by the end of last year in line with Medvedev's instructions.
UAC, a state-controlled corporation, was established in 2006 to streamline the Russian aircraft making industry. It incorporates aircraft-making and affiliated firms engaged in the manufacture, design and marketing of civilian and military aircraft, including unmanned aerial vehicles.
ARZAMAS (Central Russia), January 31 (RIA Novosti)
President Medvedev appoints new UAC head
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has appointed General Director of the Sukhoi and MiG aircraft companies Mikhail Pogosyan as head of the United Aircraft Corporation (UAC), presidential aide Arkady Dvorkovich said Monday.
Pogosyan will replace current UAC President Alexei Fyodorov, who will lose his post for failing to implement Medvedev's orders on drafting innovation programs for the company.
"The president ordered the administration and the government to evaluate the responsibility of a number of companies [for failure to implement innovation programs], and the decision on one of the companies has been made...Pogosyan will take over the United Aircraft Corporation," Dvorkovich said.
Dvorkovich earlier said about 60% of Russian state-run companies failed to draft innovation programs and increase spending on R&D by the end of last year in line with Medvedev's instructions.
UAC, a state-controlled corporation, was established in 2006 to streamline the Russian aircraft making industry. It incorporates aircraft-making and affiliated firms engaged in the manufacture, design and marketing of civilian and military aircraft, including unmanned aerial vehicles.
ARZAMAS (Central Russia), January 31 (RIA Novosti)
Scorpion82
New Member
For what exactly? That Zhuk is a development of NIIR isn't news, as is the fact that NIIP has been stated to be the developer for the T-50's radar. The antenna diameter is different as well as the nose couldn't accommodate the antennas used by the Irbis or Zhuk.
The part about NIIP developing an independent AESA design. I've heard nothing on it.
Scorpion82
New Member
Tekhomirov NIIP AESA radar unveiled for PAK-FA - The DEW Line
PICTURE: Russia unveils AESA radar for PAK FA fighter
Maybe you can find some info here as well
Ð“Ð»Ð°Ð²Ð½Ð°Ñ Ñтраница
I unfortunately don't speak Russian...
PICTURE: Russia unveils AESA radar for PAK FA fighter
Maybe you can find some info here as well
Ð“Ð»Ð°Ð²Ð½Ð°Ñ Ñтраница
I unfortunately don't speak Russian...
Thanks for the heads up.
Scorpion82
New Member
No problem
I'm aware that there are a lot of sources out there suggesting that the aircraft would be fitted with the Irbis or even a scaled up/modified variant of the Zhuk-A, but taking a closer look unveils that neither of these sources are official and that it's mere speculation besides some journalists/observers. Applying some common sense also suggests that given the difference in nose diameter and shape neither of the two former radars would fit and it simply doesn't make sense to use a non stealthy radar in a LO/VLO platform either. I think the confusion is partially based on the fact that the Su-35 leveraged some of its avionics from the PAK FA development programme and that the aircraft may subsequently act as a first test bed for some of the technologies. Some may have misinterpreted it the way that the T-50's avionics are the same as for the Su-35, which is only partially true. The T50's cockpit layout for example is almost identical to that of the Su-35, but with a new wider angle HUD, new HOTAS controls and with the smaller lateral MFD being located to the right instead of the left side of the cockpit. I could well imagine that the T-50's navigation and communication gear might be similar to that of the Su-35 among possibly other systems. But they are most likely developments which will be further refined. Adopting sensors is difficult however as the platform itself is different and expected sensor locations etc. are different. That's one of the reasons why defenders of the F-22/F-35 claim it's not possible to retrofit new sensors to existing platforms in the same way as they weren't designed with them in mind. That's to a certain extend true and applies here as well.
I'm aware that there are a lot of sources out there suggesting that the aircraft would be fitted with the Irbis or even a scaled up/modified variant of the Zhuk-A, but taking a closer look unveils that neither of these sources are official and that it's mere speculation besides some journalists/observers. Applying some common sense also suggests that given the difference in nose diameter and shape neither of the two former radars would fit and it simply doesn't make sense to use a non stealthy radar in a LO/VLO platform either. I think the confusion is partially based on the fact that the Su-35 leveraged some of its avionics from the PAK FA development programme and that the aircraft may subsequently act as a first test bed for some of the technologies. Some may have misinterpreted it the way that the T-50's avionics are the same as for the Su-35, which is only partially true. The T50's cockpit layout for example is almost identical to that of the Su-35, but with a new wider angle HUD, new HOTAS controls and with the smaller lateral MFD being located to the right instead of the left side of the cockpit. I could well imagine that the T-50's navigation and communication gear might be similar to that of the Su-35 among possibly other systems. But they are most likely developments which will be further refined. Adopting sensors is difficult however as the platform itself is different and expected sensor locations etc. are different. That's one of the reasons why defenders of the F-22/F-35 claim it's not possible to retrofit new sensors to existing platforms in the same way as they weren't designed with them in mind. That's to a certain extend true and applies here as well.
Haavarla
Active Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #59
The second and final state test trials on the Su-34 is complete.
By the report, this was a live firing weapons trial.
It doesn't say which type weapons was tested.
ÎÀÎ "Êîìïàíèÿ "Ñóõîé" - Íîâîñòè - ÑÌÈ î êîìïàíèè