offline
- acatomic
- Legendarni građanin
- Pridružio: 10 Jun 2008
- Poruke: 4227
|
Pošto več godinama pratim razvoj PAK-FA mislio sam da znam skoro sve šta ima da se sazna o tom lovcu sve dok nisam našao jedan forum i na njemu jednog tipa koji je izgleda vrlo blizu vojsci i zna puno toga o PAK-FA. Tako da sam se odlučio da stavim sve njegove poste na jedno mesto (MyCity) pa čemo videjeti sledeče godine da li je čovjek bio u pravu ili ne (ja mislim da jeste). Ako se bude ispostavilo da je u pravu onda čemo imati pouzdani izvor informacija i o drugim budučim projektima u Rusiji.
Njegov nick je : RSM55
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
19th May 2008, 15:27
It has been times immemorial since I've posted in this forum, and God knows it was not for lack of good conversation and arguments. Returning to this thread I must confess that I find it apalling how shallow a discussion about a speculative matter can become... But this is nobody's personal fault, it is the way speculative discussions go...
More than a year ago, I have already stated that, according to my info, the PAK FA will be more like the YF-23 than the Raptor. It did not mean, of course, that the PAK FA will be like the 23. My source was serious and I have quite good reasons to believe it.
Now, the status of the PAK FA programme is quite clear: they are REALLY working like hell to stay within schedule, they got all the funding they need, and my personal belief is that they will get the thing into the air in 2009 as stated. Possible delays will be linked with system integration progress, not with airframe and structural component unreadiness.
I kindly would like to point out that Russia's MoD doesn't accept any kind of "block I, II and maybe III" production clusters, and any fighter has to be fully operational before being accepted into service within the AF. Maybe that's why their GAO has little to say about the programme up to the present day.
As for the fighter itself, my source is adamant about the following points:
- no, it will be NOT inferior to the Raptor in terms of overall combat efficiency, which is not surprising since it's still end-of-20th-century tech vs. (basically) 80s-90s tech, and since no one changed the basic requirements since the programme was started;
- the biggest difference with the Raptor is that the PAK FA will have a genuine strike capability from the beginning on. Knowing the standard A-G Russian arsenal, it explains the very big internal bay.
- my original assertion about "all-sector sensor integration" has duly been misinterpreted by some net warriors as "360 deg. radar", which is of course nonsense. The RWR and passive scanning apparatus of the PAK FA will effectively be more potent than the Raptor's equivalents, and it will most certainly integrate new gen. optronic sensors. But no one is speaking about an even-layered spherical radar coverage. Active sensors in the back hemisphere are discussed, though.
- Supersonic cruise is a given.
- active ECMs are extremely potent (in the domestic version)
- there is no agreement as now regarding export customers. India will get (if anything) a very downgraded version. It will basically be the PAK FA airframe and a downgraded radar. The Indians have not been very helpful with the programme as a whole and the Russians not willing to show them the real specifications, as the programme was advanced anyway and the Indians wanted to change the specs with their own interests in mind. Further coop regarding upgrades is considered nevertheless.
- and no, it will not have any "plasma shielding" or anything of the kind. The front radome shielding got an totally different treatment.
- last but not least, they will test a new camo scheme.
----------------------------------------------------------------
19th May 2008, 16:34
Citat:Originally Posted by Distiller
Wonder where this idea of a VERY BIG weapons bay comes from.
From me, dear And it's not an idea.
Citat:In a twin you either have a tank, OR you have a weapons bay.
No.
Citat:For a fighter the F-22A's bay is pretty maxed out, PAK-FA will not have anything larger.
If it has the layout of the Raptor, you're right. Otherwise, you're not.
Citat:As previously said, I expect PAK-FA to be somewhat longer than the F-22A
No.
Citat:that does not necessarily translate into a tac-bomber style bomb bay.
No one talked about that, ever. It is still a fighter.
Citat:Then you'd have to build high, because you need space to lead the intake ducts up and around.
Or sideways.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
19th May 2008, 16:38
Citat:Originally Posted by Jon James
it seems everything about the PAK-FA comes from these silly line drawings
You're right in the respect that the paralay drawing are pure speculation and have nothing to do with reality at all. The Saturn drawing about which everyone was rambling about is even less realistic.
But you certainly understand that the ones who know will not tell, and the ones who know and can tell cannot take pictures, and even if they could would not show them to paralay and the like.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
19th May 2008, 17:01
Citat:Originally Posted by Levsha
The USA had long already developed high off boresight missiles and HMS before the Soviets' R-73 system. Just because you decide it's to expensive to do something doesn't mean you don't have the know-how to actually do it...
You're right, but the discussion was about the systems fielded.
And anyway, I find it rather ridiculous to discuss the "10 years behind" lags and so on... Why not 12 years? Why not 5? What is the bloody scale the people use when they assert these senseless utterings?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
19th May 2008, 17:21
Citat:Originally Posted by Jon James
Yeah i understand it very well that those who know don't talk, unfortuantly many here don't and seem to read far to much into these fantasy pictures.
Which is a pity. But it still does not mean than the Russkies will not surprise us all in a year or so. I'll bet (because I know) that the thing will cause quite a stir. From what I know, visually it will be not so spectacular, but if what I know about its capabilities is true - it will be a beast. At least till 2030 or so.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
19th May 2008, 18:19
Citat:Originally Posted by hexpop
If it is to have an A2G weapons internally (which was clear) it means a heavy fighter and i can't imagine it to be shorter than Raptor.
Who said shorter? I just meant "not much longer than"
Oh gosh, you got me: take your YF-23, put the air ducts a bit closer to each other, enlarge the horizontal surfaces, sweep them backwards, reduce the vertical fins, indtroduce a large flat horizontal aft section, remodel the forward section - you have your PAK FA.
Then you don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure out the presence or the absence of TVC, refuelling system, large internal bay, the shape of the air intakes etc etc. It all derives from what I've just said and the requirements.
Besides, a massive payload of AG weapons does not have to be carried exclusively internally according to the Russian battle application doctrine - if the air dominance is secure and/or the enemy AD weak anyway. 3-4 FAB-500L carried internally or the equivalent in guided missiles will do. Look at the size of current Russian tactical AG missiles (esp. the anti-radiation ones) and you'll get it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
19th May 2008, 19:46
Citat:Originally Posted by Distiller
A main fuselage shaped like a surfboard-Calisson, getting wide fast to accomodate the weapons bay, basically YF-23 style, wider and less high than on the F-22, but a longer nose than the F-22 (which is quite short). The fuselage could become almost as wide as two engines very fast. A blended full-length spine, but not to the extent, that it impedes rearward visibility.
Intakes well back of the cockpit, as not to offend area ruling, basically F-22 style, but flatter, like on the YF-23. Short strakes, if any. The intakes flowing into a broad, boat-shaped wedge (area-ruled) left and right of the Calisson-fuselage, ending in pronounced booms, and mounting the tail assembly. That wedge also houses a Su-27 style landing gear, and sensors at the rear.
Wings mounted high, basically very similar to the F-22, save the cut-outs.
The tail a 45 degree V, based on the edge of the above mentioned wedge, pretty wide apart, like three engine diameters.
The engines close together, MiG-35 style TVC. Shielded by pulling in the ducts quite sharply from the intakes. (That's why the wedges left and right).
One weapons bay shallow between cockpit/nose gear and engines. Without the frame that devides the F-22's bay. Even with a very wide fuselage I'd say not more than four medium range AAMs side-by-side, plus a fifth central bay long enough to hold two short-range missiles in tandem. I don't believe in putting anti-AWACS monsters internally. (A minority programme burdening the layout too much for what is gained).
That all would result in a plane that looks like a elongated, but flattened F-22 with a wide YF-23 tail. And they'll be happy to do it below 25 metric tonnes. But the length of the fuselage is given by engine diameter and the need to shield them from frontal view. Weapons bay and area ruling dedicate the forward fuselage. The wing as large as possible, but RCS seem to dictate 45 degree plus leading edge, so area results in length. And then you have to put the tail assembly on booms.
Only way out of this spiraling requirements is going single engine.
Distiller:
Read it, fairly good projection. Apart from a couple of details (the angle of the vertical surfaces, the closeness of the engines, short strakes) it is very close to the general layout AFAIK. And yes, they will probably not make it below 25 tons.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
28th May 2008, 21:01
Citat:Originally Posted by Otaku
Hmmm...incidently, the fairing added to the S-37 recently (with the serrated doors), was probably because the original bay wasn't 'deep' enough...maybe they are going rotary! or maybe they'll have one rotary bay & the others with conventional release/launch mechanisms- for mission redundancy.
Sorry to be a party pooper again - but the Berkut has no bomb bay - just fairing demonstrators and an internal launch test mechanism. It is not a proper bomb bay in any case.
In any case: bear in mind that other mechanisms exists that "look like" a bomb door and bear in mind that there could be other solutions to push a missile out of a bay than the rotary launcher or the normal railed (passive or pneumatic) solution.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
29th September 2008, 16:40
Citat:Originally Posted by Austin
I can understand different electronics and radar , but what do they mean by different wings ?
Because they will be two totally different fighters. The PAK FA "Indian version" story is primarily intended for the Indian home audience. I've already stressed several times that the Russian PAK FA has nothing to do with the Indian TOT and requirements, and that the Russians have not yielded regarding Indian demands to change their own design and henceforth delay the programme.
The Russian Air Force officially stated last week that there will be a 10 years gap between the entry into service of the Russian PAK FA and the that of the Indian version. Development costs for the Indian version amount to 10 billion USD and the Russians expect India to bear the whole burden. I do not think this programme will result in anything else as India eventually license-building its own version of the PAK FA, without the critical components. When was the Tejas commissioned, again?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
13th November 2008, 15:19
Citat:Originally Posted by over G
The market need lighter. simpler and cheaper planes, i hope both sukhoi and mig are considering more practical solutions, than the 90's-80's estravaganza
And seems Mig is involved in the pakfa (since, seems they will build them also), what is the involvement level of the mikoyan house?
Come on, guys, get real.
If anything, this threat should be renamed "how would you speculate on bits of info that have nothing to do with the subject matter".
The bottom line of the article is that Pogosyan will lead the military division of the OAK.
It means he finally won.
He will remain head of Sukhoi Works, and "Skunk works"
He will get RSK MiG, and therefore will either put the focus on the mod. of the 29 and 31 series (which is official) or eventually "kill the *******s".
That's it. Period.
No one is planning a "lighter PAK FA" or anything like that.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
28th November 2008, 17:48
Guys, all of you are right
The Russian AF is indeed VERY interested to acquire the Su-35.
Not only as an interim fighter before the PAK-FA, but as a replacement for a part of its SU-27 regiments and certainly most of its MiG-29 numbers.
The Su-35 is still undergoing tests. No way the RuAF is going to formally order an aircraft that hasn't finished its test phase yet.
By contrast, the Su-34 has been accepted into service and a small batch has been ordered for combat eval, but there are still discussions in the AF about the real need for such an aircraft vs modernisation of the Su-24M to the M2 or GM levels and the "multirolisation" of the existing Su-25/27 fleet.
PAK FA will fly next year indeed. The procurement programme itself might be delayed, because of the reasons stated above. It'a a risk assessment after all. My guess is that the RuAF will opt for a batch of 100+ PAK FAs for the coming 12 years, with 150+ later. Not more.
The PAK FA will basically mirror the Raptor numbers and missions, as well as some Lighting missions, and will be deployed much more massively in the Far East and the Northern District than in the West/South, whereas the Su-35 will basically mirror the (big) niche of the Super Hornet and the F-15E.
The Su-35 has never been thought about as a pure air superiority fighter.
Its aim is to provide potent and effective airspace denial capability while carrying a big inventory of ordonance for AG operations if needed, and still being a capable fighter should danger come ahead.
It's basically a AG/anti-ship missile and bomb bus on steroids, with a very powerful radar. And a decent interceptor against most of the threats Russia will face in the coming 20 years. I know it's not the standard reading on this thread, and even on Russian threads - but that's what the RuAF wanted. They didn't want a "kinda Raptor without stealth".
Specialised interception missions will remain the privilege for upgraded Foxhounds. Specialised strike missions will be given to upgraded Frogfoots and (maybe) UCAVs resembling the Skat prototype - if the eggheads in the MoD finally understand the importance of such assets.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Malo stariji postovi ali na kraju ima zanimljivi post o avioniki:
16th April 2007, 17:03
It should be clear to anyone that the picture mentioned above does not represent the real shape of the thing.
I think I won't reveal a very big secret by saying that according to my info, the PAK FA or whatever it's called looks more like the YF-23 than like the Raptor... Another hint in that direction is that it actually has a "T" designator and not an "S" one. I let you guess why (and maybe even someone will remember what design the USAF once favoured for a strike aircraft instead of an "enlarged" Raptor...). The point is that the 5th gen. fighter is not intended to exlusively replace the Su-27 and consorts only...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
19th April 2007, 17:43
Citat:Originally Posted by Zare
I don't think it will look like F-22/YF-23, at all, eg. won't resemble American stealth fighter designs.
My assumption is based on pretty much nothing, it's just speculation, and projection of my personal preference and point-of-view.
That means, it's based on same stuff as those "PAK-FA pictures".
If you read carefully what I've written about the first point, you'll notice that I never said that the PAK FA looks like the YF-23, only that it looks more like the YF-23 than the F-22.
One of the reasons why I... let's say "guess" it it that the PAK FA allegedly has a very large internal wepons bay (compared to other current and known designs) - that fact transpired recently so I'm not disclosing anything. Guess what kind of layout is more suited for that. The other thing is that its primary weapon will be a series of new "square-profile" SAs, i.e. it seems that the Russians are giving priority to speed and range when it comes to its weapon systems (meaning high volume ratios) and not when it comes to the vector itself (it is again known that the speed requirements for the aircraft were reduced from M 2.14 to M2.00). Again, that reduces the number of suited layouts (while providing more flexibility for the design nevertheless, due to the reduction in dash speed requirements).
The other thing about layouts and engine intakes it that Saturn's new AL is rumoured to be a kind of... let's say "Advent engine-like" design. People familiar with the concept (which typically features non-variable air intakes) will remember that it does not marry well with classic rectangular intake designs.
Otherwise, you're right, all these pictures (and even more this ugly blending of the Replica and F-35 called "MiG-39") are pure speculation (or fan's fantasies).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
13th August 2007, 14:28
PAK FA's tech specs and "documentation" has been officially transmitted to factory level earlier this week.
Design, materials, manufacturing etc is finalized.
Avionics are AFAIK around 80% finalized (AESA is at least functioning and as far as the last news I got go, functioning well).
"Glass-cockpit", MFDs, new IRST and man-machine interfaces are already manufactured, some of it could be shown at MAKS (i.e. what wasn't already displayed previously, for ex. at the Bourget and the Maritime show lately).
The big P here seems to be the engine - but it's obvious now that the pre-series (and probably the early series) will fly with the 117 with or without thrust-vectoring.
There are NO funding problems AFAIK - the programme still has top priority and will remain under very close and personal scrutiny from the gov. side in the future. Problems have less to do with lack of funds than with the amount of funds available - every contractor and sub-contractor wants to maximize its piece of cake. Hence the wailing and bitter tears.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
13th August 2007, 16:09
Citat:Originally Posted by RSM55
The big P here seems to be the engine - but it's obvious now that the pre-series (and probably the early series) will fly with the 117 with or without thrust-vectoring.
It's a bit weird to quote and amend oneself, but the latest piece of news is that the other important issue is the PAK FA OLS integration - thought to be based on the new OLS by NII PT. Could be connected with stealthiness issues, but got no confirmation (would be obvious, actually, considering the size of the device). The OLS is allegedly codenamed "Basilisc" (don't know if it's a production codename, a military designator - don't think so - or just a nickname of sorts - fits quite well IMHO for an optical seeker-tracker .
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
13th August 2007, 23:31
Citat:Originally Posted by Pit
Some questions if you don't mind
Hi Pit, of course I don't, still bearing in mind that there is a thing called "art. 283 of the Penal Code of the Russian Federation"...
Citat:a) What's the name of the AESA set planned for 5th Gen Russian Fighter?...is NIIP product?, did Epaulet-A test-bed have anything to do with it?, what TMR tech will use?, GaAs or GaN?. Any information?
The name is not known to me, neither is the product designator. It is thought to be designed by the Tikhomirov bureau indeed, with some backsourcing from the experience gained through the Zhuk-AE (FGA-29) Phazotron programme, but the array size will be different. No idea about the details. Allegedly, it is supposed to have all the modern fashionable gimmicks (TWS, passive lock, stealth tracking and lock, ECM mode etc.). Don't know whether it will feature gallium-nitride conductors, the institute for Applied Materials did some research on them for many a year in any case (starting with the ill-fated NO-14 project).
The Epaulet-A is mainly and purely a tech testbed for something that will indeed find an application in the future AESA, but it is not "just" AESA tech. The Russians did a very good job at making everybody believe it was an AESA test bed.
Citat:b) Is there any information about ESM/RWR products developed in Russia after the L-150 "Pastel" series?...this seems to be the last they ever developed for airborne solutions, not bad through, superheterodyne receivers, and some niceties, but that's a 1982 project. Aside of Avtomatika (TsKBA) who else do this kind of work?...I know ECM are researched by KNIRTI and TsNIRTI in airborne uses. This question applies to any RWR for any new russian fighter (Su-35, Su-34, etc)
That's a very good question - the ESM suite of the PAK FA is one big secret within an enigma...you know the rest. What I know is:
- ESM/RWR and some radar sensors will be distributed conformally on the whole airframe
- The new SPO is based on the Pastel indeed, but will be much more capable in terms of man-machine interface (bearing and distance indicators within full 3D environment)
- ECM suites in the Post-Soviet world are essentially a multiple-contractor product, the leading research institutes only provide overall coordination. AFAIK, the leading contractor is Avtomatika, but it most probably works in cooperation with several others.
On the other hand, things seem to be going quite well with electronic suites R&D and integration, especially since the decision to retain and modernise the MiG-31 fleet with new sensors and avionics - they seem to work like hell on that particular issue - with the announced aim that the Foxhound "benefits from all the electronic suites developped for the PAK FA". They even train young lieutenants to fly it now (and not first class pilots like in the past).
Citat:c) Any info on new datalink/NWC solutions?, last I have ever heard was "MSPD", you can read something about at: http://www.gzas.nnov.ru/produkt/avia/r11.htm
But I don't get very good the specs, per example, what's the transmission rate?, can you comment on it?
Heard rumours about a new "top secret ultra-secure super-cool" laser beam datalink system, with tremendous bitrates, but nothing definite.
The MSPD simply means "Communication and Data Transmission Module" and is actually fairly old. Transmission rate is between 75 and 16000 baud, it has 2 effective MIL-STD channels, 14/4 entry/exit consecutive and 96/16 parallel channels. Its advantage is that it's (relatively) light (10 kg) and small, making installation easier on smaller types of aircraft or helos.
Something similar is being done for the PAK FA by the FGUP "TsKBA" at the moment.
Citat:d) Why have been so many announces in the press about the bad state of the PAK-FA program according to you?
Because Russia is becoming more and more like the US by the day Same sh..., sorry, interesting reporting as about the F-35. As usual: lots of cash, lots of interests, various intra- and inter-corporate feudal wars... F.e.: Salyut wants more cash but doesn't want to invest too much, especially since in 2001 or so it wasn't even clear whether the PAK FA will remain indefinitely on paper, so it re-labels yet another iteration of the much-tortured AL-31F and shouts "we made it! on our own funds! reward us!", forgetting the fact that they are a public company and that therefore, the said funds aren't "their own" - and the fact that they are just another factury that has to do what it's told to (meanwhile Saturn leads a coop with UMPO, TSIAM Baranov, Soyouz, VILS, STAR, Motor and it works out well, NB). So when Salyut loses its only lobbyist (Mikhailov) everything goes down the tube (or the combustion chamber, as you please) and who does one turn to when the sh.. hits the proverbial fan? - right, the press.
Same thing about the radar, same thing about alleged problems at the KnAAPO (that was the Irkutsk factory wanting some more shares) etc etc etc.
Besides, some real problems arise, of course, as with any project - but they are not accessible to the press.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
14th August 2007, 15:59
Citat:Originally Posted by Pit
a) Wich area of radio-electronic industry did you think Russia is falling behind?
Falling behind: High versatility comms, broadband (but that's about to change), downsized satnav assets, digital signal processing (but NOT on the algorithm level!), network-centric PM, digilinks.
Catching up: mutli-sensor busses, EW systems (qualitatively - because before, they compensated with sheer output power), radar tech.
Still unsurpassed: laser tech, optical sensors, encryption, command and control algorithms and software integration.
Citat:Originally Posted by Pit
my opinion is mostly on EW systems (being passive ESM/RWR gizmos, most acute case, compare it with the very rich and fluid european and american markets with lots of companys and products in the area)
There are 1000+ companies in Russia doing the same - the problem is more that they need to consolidate their sector and do something the customer really needs.
Citat:Originally Posted by Pit
but radio-comunications for aircraft is something I have never heard that much..looks as something not important, but is there anything in Russia right now at service, compared per example to Have Quick II radio with frequency-hopping, burst transmission and so?.
Of course, they're implementing them at slow pace, though. New encrypted digital radios used in Chechnya from 2001 on are said to be at least on par with Western systems - the Army is very content with them, at least. As for the AF, it's more a doctrine problem - in case of war, most comms will run encrypted and on different channels, but it is forbidden to activate them in peacetime (i.e. they were practically never activated since 1945). Same thing is true about radar modes, EWR etc (the Tu-95, 22M3 and 160 have f.ex. a big sealed button marked "war", by activating which all the systems switch to a different mode. The seal on it is one of the first thing that the ground personnel checks after a flight ). Practically, it means that any radio amateur can hear pilots talking crap when listening in the vicinity of Lipetsk Burst transmissions gizmos aren't fitted to all aircraft, of course, but there are some devices with burst and HOP modes on Su-34, -27SMs, -33, the MiG-31B variant (unconfirmed) and almost all aircraft whose designator ends with a "R" (save the MiG-25).
Citat:b) What is all about the different Vympel products?, Izd 170-1, Izd-180, Izd-760, Izd-300?, they were reported one year back at a conference backed by GosNIIAS, and K-77-1 (Izd 170-1) was announced to be in "state tests"...how did those missiles (170-1 and 180) really fare with the earlier known R&D made on K-77M and ramjet-powered R-77?...what happened to supposed IR-Adder and Anti-radar-Adder?
Its still classified tech, so no one would comment on it freely... The Adder derivates are supposedly cancelled, but they have been "accepted into service", i.e. they completed factory and state trials. AFAIK the 170 is still being evaluated as the main long-range armament for the AF, along with another entirely different programme for the PAK FA (modular high velocity missile to replace the R-77) and the programme aiming at modernising the armament of the MiG-31.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
