Su-57 novi ruski lovac

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

Procitajte post iznad

Za uporedjivanje aviona koji se do sada nisu susreli imate temu Virtuelni dogfight
O raketama imate temu rakete V-V
F-22 ima svoju temu,F-35 svoju
Za chat imate mibbit.com,Skype,MSN ili privatne poruke pa tamo pricajte o cemo god hocete.Od kad je predstavljen avion napisano je 30 strana od toga uglavnom prepucavanja ciji je veci i navijanja nekih kako je T-50 naj bolji a juce poleteo prototip i leteo 40 minuta.Postavite ako imate nesto novo o T-50,misljenja strucnjaka,analize,vesti…
Gusite temu(neki posebno) sa praznim pricama i poceli ste da koristite ovu temu za razna prepucavanja,od motora i stelta do raketa….
Tema ce proci ciscenje a vi se koncentrisite na T-50,ako imate nesto novo da kazete.

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

mean_machine ::Resetke mogu da nestanu na finalnoj verziji ili mogu da imaju sistem koji ce da ih drzi sklopljene sve dok im ne trebaju (ti bi MiG mogao dosta da pomogne jer isti sistem postoji na MiG-29)

Ne razumem sta si hteo reci u vezi F-35 izduvnika? Ako radar ozracuje F-35 sa strane videce izduvnik. Prednost F-35 izduvnika je u tome sto je izlomljen pa je znatno manje uocljiv za radare visokih frekvencija (preko 7GHz).

Tako nesto mozemo videti i na finalnoj verziji PAK-FA.

Uglasti IC senzor deluje mocno ali ako sest DAS kamera na F-35 ne smanjuje stelt ili ako FLIR na F-117 ne smanjuje stelt ne verujem da OLS utice na stelt. Po meni EOTS ima onakav oblik pre svega zbog reklame.

Ok verovatno su skracena krila ali to ne menja problem nekompatibilnosti. Ako oces jos jedan AIM-120 ne mozes da sletis i nakacis JDAM vec moraju da izvade ceo nosac i ugrade stari.

sve sto si naveo je ono sto na t-50 nema, a trebalo bi ispraviti. da li ce do toga da dodje ili ne, ne mozemo sad znati. ja svoja zapazanja baziram na onome sto smo do sada videli.
resetke koje se otvaraju i zatvaraju mraju uzasno precizno da se izvedu, sa minimalnim zazorima. videcemo...
i ono sto zameras f35 - nosaci, bi moglo da se promeni i ugrade neki univerzalni.
izduvnik f35 je dobrom delom zaklonjen bocnim panelima koji nose horiz.rep.

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

Djurdevdan ::Evo mene s posla, krivu sam sliku okačio dogodi se Prva slika je F22 gde se isto tako vidi da je pun zakovica ili pop nitni druga slika je F-35 gde se vidi da je taj avion isto od zakovica ili pop nitni, možeš da skineš ali uz pomoć bušilice i svrdla
Sebab aj sad reci da ih F22 nije pun?

R72 si izvukao odakle??? koja je to raketa molim te??

R73m2 je operativna raketa već neko vrijeme isto kao i aim-9x block I
r74 i aim9x block II su rakete na kojim se provode testiranja obje rakete će imat lock on posle lansiranja
Ti hoćeš da kažeš da sa R73 nemožeš da gađaš avion koji ti se približava? gde ti živiš??

Za škrge sam ti govorio da služe jel usisnici u sebi po shematskom prikazu imaju radarsku blokadu i time se nadoknađuje zrak koji je potreban za motore

ako se skine ram, verovatno se moze uociti imbus zavrtanj.

ocigledno "stamparska greska"... r73, naravno, nemoj da se palis...

opet negativne vibracije - efikasnost u susretnom kursu svih klasicnih ic tragaca je relativno mala. "sverakursne" rakete je izraz koji postoji ali stvarnosti se gadjanje u celo retko primenjuje. efikasnost protiv aviona sa smanjenim ic odrazom i mamcima dodatno se smanjuje. fpa senzor je potpuno druga prica.

voleo bih da vidim referencu za r73m2 da ima domet 40 km, mada se na forumima spominje 18 milja - ako je nautickih, 33 km. ako se amraam sa dometom 75 km na vezbama i u ratu obicno lansira sa daljine recimo 25 km, dakle sa 1/3 dometa, zasto bi 30 km ili mozda cak 40 km mnogo znacilo protiv cilja koji manevrise i izbacuje dimne mamce bila neka jako velika prednost nad aim-9x ciji se domet deklarise na 26 km (procene idu i do 40 km, mada ja u njih ne verujem)? neuporedivo je vazniji kvalitetan senzor.

odakle radarska blokada? gde se to vidi osim u tvojoj masti? resetke su prilicno blizu uvodnika, pa ne vidim kakve veze ima sa bokadom koja sigurno nije odmah iza uvodnika vec negde u tunelu?

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

@sebab

aj ovako pogledaj ovu sliku avion je premazan ramom i lijepo sam ti označio gde se vide nitne imbusi itd Još nešto da ti odmah napomenem ovo je prefarban raptor, Pak-fa nije ofarban


R-73M2:
110 kg. (243 lbs))
warhead wt: 7.4 kg. (16.32 lbs.)
envelope: 300 m. to 40 km.
(985 ft. to 22 NM.)
max range: R-73M1: 30 km. (16.4 NM.)
R-73M2: 40Km. (21.8 NM.
time of flight limit: 23 sec.
max speed of target: 250 kph (11367 knots)
maneuvering tgt. loads: 12 G
seeker gymbol limits: ±20°
seeker field of view: 2.5°

Izvor:
warfare.ru/?compare=true&linkid2=2518&linkid=1673&catid=262

Shematski prikaz usisa na Pak-fi jel se ovde ne vidi radarska blokada ispred škrga???

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

To je slika koju je napravio neko od avio entuzijasta koliko mi se cini i ne mora da predstavlja resenje mada mislim da bi bilo veoma glupo od ruskih inzenjera da su ostavili vidljive lopatice a isli na smanjenja RCS-a na drugim mestima. Verujem da postoji ili zakrivljeni usisnici ili nesto sto zaklanja motore inace bi to negiralo napor da se ulaze u stealth konstrukciju.

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

@Djurdjevdan

i sta, kada ga ofarbaju, nestace sve? nemojmo biti naivni - i gde je mu farba uopste? verovatno jos uvek nije gotov njen razvoj, kao ni motora, ic senzora, radara. ja vidim da je samo zmaj poleteo, leteo i sleteo.

na istom pise i da je domet aim9x do 18 milja, znaci razlika je vrlo mala u dometu, ali u tragacu je neuporediva. samo potvrdjuje sta sve vreme govorim.

crtez je plod necije maste. skrga ima i ispod uvodnika i ako malo bolje pogledas, ako je crtez tacan uopste, kroz skrge od ispod, moguce je videti motor. osim toga, ako postoji blokator kao na crtezu, interesuje me kako ce avion biti stelt dok je u rezimu superkrstarenja. takodje, kroz uvodnik se jos uvek moze videti motor sa blokatorom - mozda ne direktno spreda, vec malo iskosa prema dole.

@Besotted

mozda su isli na ram na prvom stepenu lopatica kompresora.

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

Da izjavim nesto i ja "za dnevnik" posto sam uspeo da odvojim malo slobodnog vremena....

Procenat titanijuma kod T-50

60-70% Titanijum (ustvari legura na bazi titanijuma)

dodaj tome 20-30% kompozit a ostatak aluminijum.

Ovo su preneli mediji posle prvog leta T-50....neki strucniji izvor zasad ne mogu da nadjem....meni 70% izgleda kao mnogo

Uporedjenja radi, kod F-22 situacija je sledeca:

- titanium alloys 39%
- composites 24%
- aluminum alloy 16%
- thermo plastic 1%.

Izvor:
Global Security
J-wing magazine

--------------------------------------------------------


U vezi "problematicnih" motora kod T-50, Americko resenje nije jedino. Moguce resenje za snizenje radarskog odraza je obloga od keramickog RAM-a......dobija se manji RCS dok istovremeno motori mogu da rade punom snagom (uz 3D Vektorisani Potisak)

Sledeci clanci su iz 2003/04

Citat:

The ITAE and its partners use plasma technology for applying ceramic coatings to the exhaust and afterburner.

Multi-layer coatings formed from microparticles of dielectric, metal, or semi-conductor material are deposited by an arc-discharge plasma under atmospheric pressure.

Challenges include the need to keep the ceramic bonded to the metal structure over a wide temperature range (600°C to 1,200°C), despite the fact that the materials have widely different thermal-expansion characteristics.

The coating materials also need to maintain constant electrical characteristics in the face of widely varying temperatures.

Researchers describe this problem as "partially solved," and engines treated with ceramic RAM have already been flight-tested.



Izvor (vredi pogledati - ima dosta zanimljivog)

Russian Stealth Research Revealed
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showpost.php?p=801988&postcount=4

---------

Vezano za gornji clanak


Citat:Andrey Lagarjkov, Director General of the United Institute of High Temperatures of the Russian Academy of Sciences (and an Associate Member of the Academy), talks about Russian stealth technology in the following interview with the Russia/CIS Observer.


Until recently, all Russian developments in the field of stealth technologies were strictly classified. There weren't any reports made concerning research institutes dealing with these issues. The veil was raised somewhat last year when it was announced for the first time that the United Institute of High Temperatures of the Russian Academy of Sciences was carrying out research in the domain of reduced aircraft visibility.

The information was rather sketchy. It was reported that the institute is specialized in creating materials with new properties, in particular with ferromagnetics and so-called artificial magnetics. It was pointed out that technologies developed by the institute were used in designing and manufacturing the Sukhoi Su-27M and Su-37 (Su-47). Director General Lagarjkov, who hasn't spoken about such matters in public before, told Sergey Sokut about work of his institute in greater detail.

How does Russia's way of making aircraft stealthy differ from the American technology?

- The Americans have two approaches. The first, and earliest one, was used for the F-117 and B-2. The low radar cross-section (RCS) was achieved through the shape of the aircraft and the use of radar-absorbing materials to cover the airframe. In this application, the principle of minimal level of visibility was a cornerstone - and other characteristics had to be sacrificed. For example, both aircraft are subsonic. Later the Americans tried another approach: modern radar absorbing materials are applied to F-16 and F-18, as well as to 5th generation F-22 and JSF combat aircraft, which have a traditional shape.

The low level of visibility is achieved through different techniques, which Mikhail Pogosyan, director of Sukhoi, and I are going to reveal in the near future. We and the Americans are close to each other in this type of technology. Russia possesses the technology for upgrading in-service aircraft with modern stealth characteristics, and moreover, this technology is demanded by foreign operators of Russian aircraft. We, together with Sukhoi, have achieved world-class results in this area, which are confirmed by tests of real aircraft. We also can optimize the shape of the aircraft to lower the level of visibility, but I still wouldn't like to speak about the use of our techniques for 5th generation aircraft.

When would it be possible to speak about achieved results?

- Some discussion is possible today. The exact results of radar cross-section reduction will never be disclosed, neither here in Russia nor abroad. But sometime ago it was announced that the RCS of a MiG-21 fighter after its treatment by our institute is approximately 0.25 sq m. This corresponds to the characteristics of a cruise missile.

How far is it possible to go in reducing visibility of the 4th generation aircraft, and what additional improvements can be achieved in the next generation?

- My MiG-21 example demonstrates that the RCS of upgraded/modernized aircraft can be reduced 12-15 times. If we speak about new designed models, I wouldn't want to discuss the numbers publically.

In the press, information has been published about exotic technologies for providing low visibility, for example, plasma. How effective is it?

- We use plasma in solving the problems of RCS of an aircraft's nosecone. In general, plasma technologies are very useful at flight altitudes of more than 25 km. At low altitudes it is impossible to use them, because there is not enough power on board.

What is the share of stealth technologies in the total aircraft cost?

- If stringent, but reasonable requirements for visibility are implemented in the project from the very beginning, it won't be too large. I'd like to point out here that at my institue, we have carried out advanced work in fundamental research. I also want to stress here that we had to do this without governmental support - funding our research from out-of-budget sources during the last 10-15 years.

It is known that you cooperate closely with Sukhoi. What about the institute's work with other design bureaus?

- Recently, we have started cooperating intensively with the others as well.

If we compare achievements of different countries in the reduction of aircraft visibility, who would the leaders be? Obviously, the Americans would hit the top, wouldn't they?

- The Americans are no. 1 because of the application of stealth to a large volume of real products.

But considering the understanding of the whole problem in general - and the potential - I don't think the Americans are better than we are. We are able to achieve, and already have achieved, the same - and even in some areas, we have had somewhat better results. Another plus for the Americans is their broader application of stealth. In particular, they are entering the world market with the stealthy aircraft.

Similar developments are being made in Europe, but the level of these countries is not so high. The French are tackling this problem as well. They have very good research equipment - anechoic chambers, for example. Their Rafale fighter is advertised as an aircraft with a low radar cross-section.

The original article was published in Nov. 2003
http://www.ato.ru/

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

odlicni textovi.

ima nekoliko zanimljivih stvari:

1. ram na bazi keramike za visoke temperature za hipersonicne i obicne avione i rakete

2. mig-21 ima radarski odraz od 0,25x12-15=3-3,75 m2. izgleda je mig21 jako pogodan za smanjenje radarskog odraza jer koristi duboko "usadjen" motor, nevidljiv kroz uvodnik, pa kad jos naprskaju unutrasnjost uvodnika, milina. isto verovatno nece biti u toj meri moguce sa mig29/su27-35, kao ni f-16/15/18. s tim da je vec nesto uradjeno na f15/16/18 i operativno.

3. franuzi su ipak izgleda ozbiljni igraci u steltu - spectra i premazi na rafalu su izgleda odlicni, mada i ef2000 i gripen su vrlo dobri. moguce je ocekivati cifre od 0,1-0,5 m2, kao i kod modifikovanog mig21.

kad se saberu materijali na f22 dobija se 80 %, ne 100 %. nesto fali...

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

Taso ::
dodaj tome 20-30% kompozit


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3uaS7pRGqE

Према информацијама са овог видео снимка удео композита је око 40 %.
Могло би се рећи да је ово званични извор.

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

@Sebab
pa ti celo vreme govoriš kako raptor ima nitni tj imbusa samo na jednom panelu ja ti pokazujem da ih je avion i prefarban pun jel to teško toliko za prihvatit?? Pak-fa je prototip i isto kad bude ofarban vidjet će se koliko i na raptoru. Stvar je u tome što ti uporno tvrdiš kako to smeta steltu i da raptor toga nema e pa evo dokazano da ima

onda imaš priče kako se na raptoru sve savršeno poklapa svi poklopci čine jednu celinu ja ću ti sad dat 5slika gde se vidi kako je tolerancija među materijalima velika sve to izdaleka izgleda savršeno al pogledaj avion izbliza.

Dal imaš neku sliku pak-fa uvodnika da izgledaju drugačije? Daj neki svoj dokaz a da nije proizvod tvoje mašte!

Zar stvarno misliš da su na R-73m2 za koju ti tvrdiš da ima domet 30km radili samo na dometu a tragač imaju iz 1983g??? ne zaboravi da rusi imaju familiju raketa koje rade na ic tragaču i za puno veće udaljenosti.

evo pa pogledaj koliki domet ima R-27c1 ili ec1 sa još povećanim dometom i lepo ti piše za stariji tip R-73E da služi za gađanje u prednju ili zadnju stranu aviona