PAK-FA / T-50: Russian 5th Generation Fighter
- Thread starter vrus
- Start date
- Status
T is to designate that it's a prototype. The Su-27, for example, was the T-10 when it was a prototype. The Su, MiG, T, BMP, BTR, etc. designations are only given to models that are accepted into service. That's why the Black Eagle is the Object 640, even though it's a completed project.
HarshKalra
New Member
I dont understand y ppl think eurofighter Typhoon is that good...Its maneuverability is less than that of the Su-30MKI. Even the radars are not that good. The radars of HAL Tejas and a EF typhoon are similar. Its just the EF has supercruise capabilities. And as far as the FGFA is concerned it is highly classified bout its features. Only a few have been let out such as supercruise and 3d TVC and Stealth. But be sure it would be better than the F-35 in many aspects.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
Care to provide any sources for some of your claims?
So far the only two that I am aware of that might be true is the Su-30MKI being more manueverable at low speeds that the Typhoon. The other being that the features of the PAK-FA/FGFA being highly classified . Regarding the maneuverability, even that might not be accurate, since those who truly know how maneuverable a particular aircraft is, does not provide that for security reasons. The Su-30 and other similar aircraft have certainly made many airshow demonstrations of the mauevers they can perform, however, few of those done at airshows are of any benefit in combat
Stating that the radar/avionics package of the HAL Tejas aka LCA is similar to those of the Typhoon, after stating that those systems aboard that Typhoon are "not that good," should definately be explained. Particularly since the LCA has not actually been introduced into service and was designed for a different role than that of the Typhoon.
Also, an explanation of how/why the 'highly classified' features of the PAK-FA will work so well that one can "be sure it would be better than the F-35 in many aspects?"
Absent some explanation of the statements, or a demonstration of expertise on the subject matter and one will be forced to conclude that statements without merit.
-Cheers
Last edited:
HarshKalra
New Member
Well firstly, i Think u mean the Su-30MKI n not the Su-20MKI, there is no such aircraft.
Secondly, The LCA's radars are pretty good. You could read bout it on wiki...i cant yet post a link. But the EF has the ablity to reduce radar cross-section.
Thirdly, the reason i said that the PAK-FA/FGFA would be better than F-35 is because the designers of the F-35 themselves said that this plane wont be very maneuverable, and that the TV would only work while taking off[ie vertical take off] and at post-stall situations not other wise. Which means it would not be able to do flat-bed spins...unless something similar to the TOP GUN situation happens...lol. This is because their missiles can point at the direction of the target. But that means their airspeed will slow down drastically since the weapons bay would have to be open for a longer time. Note:- the weapons bay can also act as an air brake.
It is also noted that it is not completely stealthy, but partially. But the thing tat not even F-22 can do is to open its weapons bay in supersonic speed and fire a missile, including the F-35, but thanks to the help of Indian scientist this is possible in the PAK-FA/FGFA.
But i would like to say that the Americans do make good Fighter Aircrafts but sometimes end up making something which contradicts itself. Just like the F-22 Raptor. A beautiful FA but with less missile and a gun. The gun is not a prob but the less missiles is. With this I have an understanding that they eventually want the Raptor to get into a dog fight while in air conflict.
Why on earth would want a stealthy FA to end up in a dog fight, whereas it can easily win hand down in BVR. I mean thats y u would u a stealth so that no on knows n ur gone.
You don't really know much about this do you?
As Todjaeger has already requested, please back up your claim. For your information wikipedia is not a valid source. So, LCA radar and avionics claims in comparison to the EF-2000. Do you have sources for the performance of the two aircraft?
How some alleged manoueverability advantage on the part of the PAK-FA makes it better then the F-35 is beyond me. You have given no consideration to the avionics, radars, IRST, weapons, IR signature, RCS, etc.
The fact that you even use the words "partial stealth" gives away that you don't know much on the subject. Far from being an expert, even I understand that LO features are relative to the operating environment. To compare the tactical significance of the RCS reduction used on the F-35 and PAK-FA would not only require a specific setting, but also tons of classified data.
As Todjaeger has already requested, please back up your claim. For your information wikipedia is not a valid source. So, LCA radar and avionics claims in comparison to the EF-2000. Do you have sources for the performance of the two aircraft?
How some alleged manoueverability advantage on the part of the PAK-FA makes it better then the F-35 is beyond me. You have given no consideration to the avionics, radars, IRST, weapons, IR signature, RCS, etc.
The fact that you even use the words "partial stealth" gives away that you don't know much on the subject. Far from being an expert, even I understand that LO features are relative to the operating environment. To compare the tactical significance of the RCS reduction used on the F-35 and PAK-FA would not only require a specific setting, but also tons of classified data.
HarshKalra
New Member
Okay so you dnt want wikipedia as source, then check out the lca.tejas.org. This website will let u know bout everything there is to the LCA. Now the difference here is that EF has been in service and LCA is not, thus they can only be compared on paper[i m talkin only about avionics and radars]. And as it is when they would be developing the LCA they must have put their experience they had got from the Su-30MKI.
And as far as the stealthiness of F-35 is concerned, in spite of being smaller than the F-22, the F-35 has a larger radar cross section. It is said to be roughly equal to a metal golf ball rather than the F-22's metal marble.
And this is from defenseindustrydaily.XXX/f22-raptor-procurement-events-updated-02908/]The F-22 Raptor: Procurement & Events[instead of the XXX put com, I still cant post links.]
The F-22A offers full stealth, unlike the F-35 which has a very good radar profile from the front, a less stealthy profile from the sides, and a least stealthy profile from the rear quarter.
If u want u can read the whole article. This huge so will take some time. Its more about the F-22 but has somethings about the F-35 as well.
This is from the same article:
The F-35 will not supercruise, and design and airflow limitations mean that adding it would require fundamental physical redesign. Lockheed Martin says the F-35 is designed for better transonic acceleration that current top-line fighters, but outside studies are less confident, and transonic sustainability remains the key tactical question.
The F-35 will not offer combat thrust vectoring.
The F-35 lacks all-aspect stealth, which has caused a number of observers to question its survivability against anti-aircraft systems that have improved a great deal since it was designed as a “good enough” lower-cost fighter. It also lacks supercruise, which enhances its vulnerability by keeping it in the target zone longer. In its favor, it has superior embedded sensors and sensor fusion, and will carry a wider range of weapons internally that include powered strike missiles. It will also be built for several nations in numbers that make investments in new weapons, and upgrades in areas like like AESA radar capability, more likely. The question is whether its first 2 fundamental limitations end up making its advantages irrelevant, especially as enemy systems continue to improve.
The F-35’s initial qualified weapons set will also fail to include radar-killing missiles, and it will not have powered weapons in its internal bay, either. Subsequent upgrades and country-specific programs are expected to address both issues over time.
Well I need not say more. The above features are all available in the PAK-FA/FGFA program[which r available as well as missing in the F-35]. Now only time can tell when more info on the FGFA is released on who really would edge out the other. for the Indians and Russians there is nothing to lose as they have been improving and shortening the gap, but for the Americans the have their pride on the line.
Last edited:
HarshKalra
New Member
Guys u can check out more bout the LCA in these video
youtube.XXX/watch?v=JLIbYdTgl2Y
youtube.XXX/watch?v=vRf4Xr_G6Lk
[Replace the XXX but com since i cant yet post an URL]
youtube.XXX/watch?v=JLIbYdTgl2Y
youtube.XXX/watch?v=vRf4Xr_G6Lk
[Replace the XXX but com since i cant yet post an URL]
Haavarla
Active Member
Hi HarshKalra and welcome.
I see you are new here.
If you would just wait for some additional news and development from the Pak-Fa program.
Later this year we'll see the next flying prototype.
By next year two more prototypes by Sukhoi own words.
Much more on the Prod series Pak-Fa will be clear by then.
I really don't see your point in your lastest post here.
LCA belong in other threads, lets keep this thread 'clean'.
And as far as the F-35/F-22A goes, we know very little about any of them to make any assessment or comparison at all.
And mind you, 'compair aircraft' isn't very popular around here per say.
Pls check this out: http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/a...rrelevent-nonsense-replies-will-deleted-1967/
Anyway if you just trail back a bit on those Pak-Fa threads here, you would find a lot of usefull post and perhaps some answers.
Thanks
I see you are new here.
If you would just wait for some additional news and development from the Pak-Fa program.
Later this year we'll see the next flying prototype.
By next year two more prototypes by Sukhoi own words.
Much more on the Prod series Pak-Fa will be clear by then.
I really don't see your point in your lastest post here.
LCA belong in other threads, lets keep this thread 'clean'.
And as far as the F-35/F-22A goes, we know very little about any of them to make any assessment or comparison at all.
And mind you, 'compair aircraft' isn't very popular around here per say.
Pls check this out: http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/a...rrelevent-nonsense-replies-will-deleted-1967/
Anyway if you just trail back a bit on those Pak-Fa threads here, you would find a lot of usefull post and perhaps some answers.
Thanks
Last edited:
HarshKalra
New Member
Yes, very true. It is still early days to base comparisons, but from whatever information I have been able to collect on both I have based some comparison, on which, I found the PAK-FA at a upper hand to the F-35. But this is just on paper. We will have to wait for some more time to see wat these FA have in them.
Well i just brought up the LCA post bcoz ppl wanted some links to back up my points which I have.
cheers
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
Okay, a few things to go over here. First, yes, Wikipedia is not considered a viable source here at DT, simply because anyone can edit it to state anything.Okay so you dnt want wikipedia as source, then check out the lca.tejas.org. This website will let u know bout everything there is to the LCA. Now the difference here is that EF has been in service and LCA is not, thus they can only be compared on paper[i m talkin only about avionics and radars]. And as it is when they would be developing the LCA they must have put their experience they had got from the Su-30MKI.
And as far as the stealthiness of F-35 is concerned, in spite of being smaller than the F-22, the F-35 has a larger radar cross section. It is said to be roughly equal to a metal golf ball rather than the F-22's metal marble.
And this is from defenseindustrydaily.XXX/f22-raptor-procurement-events-updated-02908/]The F-22 Raptor: Procurement & Events[instead of the XXX put com, I still cant post links.]
The F-22A offers full stealth, unlike the F-35 which has a very good radar profile from the front, a less stealthy profile from the sides, and a least stealthy profile from the rear quarter.
If u want u can read the whole article. This huge so will take some time. Its more about the F-22 but has somethings about the F-35 as well.
This is from the same article:
The F-35 will not supercruise, and design and airflow limitations mean that adding it would require fundamental physical redesign. Lockheed Martin says the F-35 is designed for better transonic acceleration that current top-line fighters, but outside studies are less confident, and transonic sustainability remains the key tactical question.
The F-35 will not offer combat thrust vectoring.
The F-35 lacks all-aspect stealth, which has caused a number of observers to question its survivability against anti-aircraft systems that have improved a great deal since it was designed as a “good enough” lower-cost fighter. It also lacks supercruise, which enhances its vulnerability by keeping it in the target zone longer. In its favor, it has superior embedded sensors and sensor fusion, and will carry a wider range of weapons internally that include powered strike missiles. It will also be built for several nations in numbers that make investments in new weapons, and upgrades in areas like like AESA radar capability, more likely. The question is whether its first 2 fundamental limitations end up making its advantages irrelevant, especially as enemy systems continue to improve.
The F-35’s initial qualified weapons set will also fail to include radar-killing missiles, and it will not have powered weapons in its internal bay, either. Subsequent upgrades and country-specific programs are expected to address both issues over time.
Well I need not say more. The above features are all available in the PAK-FA/FGFA program[which r available as well as missing in the F-35]. Now only time can tell when more info on the FGFA is released on who really would edge out the other. for the Indians and Russians there is nothing to lose as they have been improving and shortening the gap, but for the Americans the have their pride on the line.
Secondly, in terms of LO, yes, the F-35 is not designed to have as much signature reduction as the F-22. It still has something like 1/10th (perhaps, depending on numbers used maybe 1/50th or 1/100th) the signature of other modern 4.5 Gen fighter like the SHornet, Typhoon or Rafale. Nevermind current Russian designs like the Su-30 which has an RCS of ~10 sq. m. Can Russia reduce that? Certainly. The PAK-FA has a number of signs that the RCS has been reduced. What remains to be determined is just how much the RCS was reduced, as well as other areas where sig management is an issue. We do not know yet. For someone to claim that they do, then they need to prove it.
-Cheers
Going slightly OT here, but I just want to make one remark on Wikipedia: I agree completely that Wikipedia should be used with great care.
I do use Wikipedia from time to time however in a different way from what most people seem to be doing:
Towards the end of a well written Wikipedia article there is always a list of references. Look up those references and you avoid the problem of having a non-viable source. In this way you are actually not using WIkipedia as the source but rather as a way to find a source
Could someone who knows Russian give us a summary of this article?
aviaport.ru/digest/2010/04/09/193257.html
It appears that Russia is postponing the development of the new engine designed specifically for the PAK-FA for at least 10 years. I've only got access to google translate, of course.
aviaport.ru/digest/2010/04/09/193257.html
It appears that Russia is postponing the development of the new engine designed specifically for the PAK-FA for at least 10 years. I've only got access to google translate, of course.
Scorpion82
New Member
Russia isn't postponing the engine, it is said that the new engine will take that long (10-12 years). It's an entirely new design.
Haavarla
Active Member
Its back in the air where it belongs again!
Live long and prosper T-50s
Some hi-res for you.
http://photo.strizhi.info/v/airwolf/airwolf/airwolf_001/20100429.jpg.html
Thanks
Live long and prosper T-50s
Some hi-res for you.
http://photo.strizhi.info/v/airwolf/airwolf/airwolf_001/20100429.jpg.html
Thanks
Last edited:
Haavarla
Active Member
Hard to say.
Including the previous six flights, it would be a few more by now.
The Pak-FA program still has a looong way to go, so Komsomolsk-on-Amur factory better put out the 52, 53, 54 prototypes fast.
According to some reports, the "52" will come out late 2010 or early 2011.
Thanks
Including the previous six flights, it would be a few more by now.
The Pak-FA program still has a looong way to go, so Komsomolsk-on-Amur factory better put out the 52, 53, 54 prototypes fast.
According to some reports, the "52" will come out late 2010 or early 2011.
Thanks
Last edited:
Ummm, maybe this should not be discussed but has anyone, and this thread is like 50 pages, and I dont want to spend 3 hours reading it, but did anyone mention the performance of the F-35 and F-22 in Pacific Vision training excersie, since there is a lot of comparison between F-22 and F-35 with PAK Fa
- Status