PAK FA Busting Myths Video

Military aircraft - Post cold war aircraft, including for example B-2, Gripen, F-18E/F Super Hornet, Rafale, and Typhoon.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

nutshell

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 275
  • Joined: 04 May 2016, 13:37

Unread post12 Sep 2017, 23:48

I heard some rumors about the t50 radar is able to detect and.track up to 16 ufos just sligthly beyond Uranus.

Considering the range with 2.efts.should be enough to.reach the asteroid belt and come home,i'd.say planet earth should be safe enough for the time being.
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 6868
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post13 Sep 2017, 01:21

Apparently the T-50 will be able to pass off target data to the MiG-41 which will be in NEO.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline

babybat{}.net

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 18
  • Joined: 08 Sep 2017, 19:16

Unread post13 Sep 2017, 14:24

geforcerfx wrote:So TopCoat a coating from the 1980's and RAM from the 80's as well. RAM isn't hard to make, making a coating that doesn't require air conditioned hangars and re-coating and touch-ups every 20 hours is the hard part, while still improving overall performance of the RAM. Then you can have a lot of fun and start trying to figure out what's in RAC and trying to manufacture it to the same tolerances as the US.


You are right that we still have much to do.
But Russians are not Chinese, and do not copy.
If you carefully look at photos of some prototypes, you will see that RAM is already present in some places (especially the air intake zone).
However, there are no detritus, no signs of regular work on the surface

mixelflick wrote: Captured F-117 material not withstanding, they're so far incapable of fielding a true VLO/LO design. If the RCS is to be believed, their signature reduction is comparable to a Super Hornet (clean).


Approximate data on F-177 RCS were available in Russia in the early 90's. 1999 they were only clarified. The RCS f-117 (by the Russian measurement technique) in the SAM manuals until 1999 and after is not very different.

The RCS of the SU-57 will be as it is laid down in the technical assignment. The RCS is measured on the ground radio measuring complexes and in flight. While the RCS will not meet the technical requirements, the aircraft will not be accepted for service.

mixelflick wrote:While that's better than any Flanker, it's still miles away from the F-35 and F-22.


This is another way to solving a similar engineering problem
VLO and SDB or LO and cruise missiles in the bays.

mixelflick wrote:Hell, one look at the helmet SU-57 drivers wear should tell you all you need to know.


SU-57 drivers will have ZSH-10 helmet with module structure and VR opportunities

Image

mixelflick wrote:It's going to be another decade before we see a mature SU-57 design, and I can't see them funding more than 200 tops. Their economy just won't support it.


The rate of output in 12 per year is quite real from the year 25 with subsequent acceleration.

mixelflick wrote:It's been just 7 years since the PAK FA took to the skies on its first flight, so they still have a long way to go. Look at the ATF. F-22 was selected in what, 1991? It went IOC in 2005, so 16 long years of testing/weapons integration/tactics etc. I would not be surprised to learn it's going to take until 2030 for the SU-57 to reach front line units in numbers.


There is an opinion that if it were not for the collapse of the Soviet Union, the aircraft would have went IOC much earlier and would have been released by a much larger series.

mixelflick wrote:And by then, we'll have 150 or so souped up F-22's and a few thousand F-35's. They'll be technologically superior and we'll also have a numbers advantage. Thus, the Chinese are the bigger threat, and that was born out in a discussion I had with an F-22 pilot recently. He seemed a LOT more concerned about the J-20/Chinese air to air weapons than anything Russia's working on...


If we talk about the quantity, then the chances of China are greater. Speaking about quality, China still buys some aircrafts in Russia, not Russia in China.
Last edited by babybat{}.net on 13 Sep 2017, 14:35, edited 2 times in total.
Offline

babybat{}.net

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 18
  • Joined: 08 Sep 2017, 19:16

Unread post13 Sep 2017, 14:35

juretrn wrote:You jest, but russia stronk-ists believe this:
Today CRET also works on the creation of a radio-optical radar for PAK FA. The concern intends to create a full-scale sample of the radar station of the future until 2018.

Photonic technologies will allow to expand the radar's possibilities - to reduce the mass more than twice, and to increase the resolution tens of times. Such radars with radio-optical phased array antennas are able to make a kind of "X-ray image" of aircraft located at a distance of more than 500 kilometers and give their detailed, three-dimensional image. This technology allows you to look inside the object, find out what technique it carries, how many people are in it, and even to see their faces.

:doh:
Russia not just stronk, Russia is Starfleet.


2018 is a journalists joke.
I do not know about the aviation, but the optical-radio converter for SAM laser pumping radar has already been tested.
Delivering power to modules from a single source by fiber is an absolutely obvious solution that solves many problems. I do not see anything fantastic in this.
I am sure that similar work is conducted by the US.
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1641
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post13 Sep 2017, 14:42

True combat capable Raptors are most certainly classified.

But in speaking with an F-22 driver from Tyndall, his exact words were: "All of our F-22's are combat capable". Is Tyndall not where they train F-22 pilots? Was he referring to ALL USAF F-22's as combat capable, or just Tyndall's? I do not know. The impression I got was that all F-22's retain their stealth properties, can shoot missiles and dogfight.

Perhaps not all with the latest and greatest radars, communications equipment etc. But honestly, does anyone feel like even a "downgraded" Raptor can't wax any Flanker derivative currently flying?

If worse came to worse, you can bet every last Raptor would be pressed into service. And to an airframe, they'd be a hell of a lot more effective than anything other than perhaps the F-35...
Offline

juretrn

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 180
  • Joined: 31 Jul 2016, 01:09

Unread post13 Sep 2017, 15:32

babybat{}.net wrote:2018 is a journalists joke.
I do not know about the aviation, but the optical-radio converter for SAM laser pumping radar has already been tested.
Delivering power to modules from a single source by fiber is an absolutely obvious solution that solves many problems. I do not see anything fantastic in this.
I am sure that similar work is conducted by the US.

What is retarded here is, as you already stated: to start putting this into service by 2018...

and then this:
"X-ray image" of aircraft located at a distance of more than 500 kilometers and give their detailed, three-dimensional image. This technology allows you to look inside the object, find out what technique it carries, how many people are in it, and even to see their faces

ugh.
scanning aircraft from 500 km away and being able to tell what's inside. LOL.
Offline

aaam

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 846
  • Joined: 21 Aug 2010, 22:52

Unread post13 Sep 2017, 19:13

mixelflick wrote:True combat capable Raptors are most certainly classified.

But in speaking with an F-22 driver from Tyndall, his exact words were: "All of our F-22's are combat capable". Is Tyndall not where they train F-22 pilots? Was he referring to ALL USAF F-22's as combat capable, or just Tyndall's? I do not know. The impression I got was that all F-22's retain their stealth properties, can shoot missiles and dogfight.

Perhaps not all with the latest and greatest radars, communications equipment etc. But honestly, does anyone feel like even a "downgraded" Raptor can't wax any Flanker derivative currently flying?

If worse came to worse, you can bet every last Raptor would be pressed into service. And to an airframe, they'd be a hell of a lot more effective than anything other than perhaps the F-35...


Any F-22 that can fire a weapon can be said to be "combat capable". "Combat coded", to my understanding , refers to aircraft that have the full set of avionics and weapons packages and are capable of being kept fully up to date with new capabilities as they evolve and is ready to go and intended for full combat operations right now as is. Some Raptors have already been retired. Some of the early builds are not able to economically be brought to the full capabilities of combat coded Block 35s. These could include Block 10s and pre-Block 10s engineering birds. No doubt some of the training aircraft, which don't all need full capability for their role, can be brought up to Block35, and that's been talked about, but the question is whether or not it's worth the cost and the time, in the gov't's view. If this proceeds, they can't be counted as combat coded until the work is complete.

So, between all that and however many aren't being used for test work, or are in deep maintenance (including being upgraded), there may not be 150 ready to go when a sudden need arises. Plus, there is the issue of how many will be in a position to go where needed in a sudden hot spot emergence pretty much means that Raptors locally can expect to fight outnumbered (thank you Robert Gates).
Offline

babybat{}.net

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 18
  • Joined: 08 Sep 2017, 19:16

Unread post15 Sep 2017, 18:44

juretrn wrote:scanning aircraft from 500 km away and being able to tell what's inside. LOL.


I do not advise you to read Russian newspapers. There is practically no reliable information about promising developments. Journalists do not have enough competence to fantasy something plausible.
Offline

terrygedran

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 105
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2017, 14:48

Unread post16 Sep 2017, 13:54

babybat{}.net wrote:
juretrn wrote:scanning aircraft from 500 km away and being able to tell what's inside. LOL.

Journalists do not have enough competence .

Quite right.
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1641
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post17 Sep 2017, 18:19

Wow, some of what this dude is posting sounds straight out of Sputnicknews.com

OTOH, I can understand some of his other points. But to be fair, here is what seems undeniable - at least until 2025:

* The SU-57 will be underpowered
* The SU-57 will be available in miniscule numbers
* The SU-57 will have lots of bugs to be worked out
* The SU-57 won't be a true stealth aircraft, only a reduced RCS design

Due to the RCS issue, the SU-57 will be a sitting duck for F-22's and 35's. I'm not saying it'll always lose, but for sure more often than not. It will however be a big threat to all American/European 4th gen designs. However, whether it fully matures depends largely on the following..

Where in the hell is the $ going to come from, when Russia is supposedly developing the Mig-41, a supposed Mach 4 plus interceptor operating in near earth orbit? And it'll be stealthy too? IF that can be done, God only knows how many rubles that's going to take, or as the case may be takes away from the SU-57. I don't see the US doing this, let alone Russia. By the time they get their 5th gen in service, the US sixth gen/PCA should be rolling off the production lines..
Offline

babybat{}.net

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 18
  • Joined: 08 Sep 2017, 19:16

Unread post17 Sep 2017, 19:26

mixelflick wrote:The SU-57 won't be a true stealth aircraft, only a reduced RCS design

Due to the RCS issue, the SU-57 will be a sitting duck for F-22's and 35's. I'm not saying it'll always lose, but for sure more often than not.


It surprises me that every second on this forum has the skills of measuring the RCS of a serial aircraft from a photograph of the prototypes.
Perhaps the Russians should not finish building a new ground radar measuring complex, but simply invite one of you? This can save tens of millions of dollars.
Offline

milosh

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 505
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 23:40
  • Location: Serbia, Belgrade

Unread post17 Sep 2017, 20:03

mixelflick wrote:Where in the hell is the $ going to come from, when Russia is supposedly developing the Mig-41, a supposed Mach 4 plus interceptor operating in near earth orbit? And it'll be stealthy too? IF that can be done, God only knows how many rubles that's going to take, or as the case may be takes away from the SU-57. I don't see the US doing this, let alone Russia. By the time they get their 5th gen in service, the US sixth gen/PCA should be rolling off the production lines..


High speed and stealth don't go together so no MiG-41 will not be stealth, but it would have much smaller RCS then supersonic locomotive (MiG-31).

Space flight is probable misunderstand, what probable happen MiG CEO said MiG-41 would be capable to engage targets in space, which really isn't new idea (F-15 and ASM-135) but having high altitude 4 Mach launch platform would be quite beneficiary for that role.
Offline

babybat{}.net

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 18
  • Joined: 08 Sep 2017, 19:16

Unread post17 Sep 2017, 21:12

milosh wrote:(F-15 and ASM-135)


The complex 30p6 (the mig-31d and 79m6 with the kinetic interceptor) was also tested.

Image
Offline

nutshell

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 275
  • Joined: 04 May 2016, 13:37

Unread post18 Sep 2017, 00:25

babybat{}.net wrote:
mixelflick wrote:The SU-57 won't be a true stealth aircraft, only a reduced RCS design

Due to the RCS issue, the SU-57 will be a sitting duck for F-22's and 35's. I'm not saying it'll always lose, but for sure more often than not.


It surprises me that every second on this forum has the skills of measuring the RCS of a serial aircraft from a photograph of the prototypes.
Perhaps the Russians should not finish building a new ground radar measuring complex, but simply invite one of you? This can save tens of millions of dollars.


You silly, ofc you cant't determine the precise signature of a frame from all the angles, yet you can estimate if a design is more, less or roughly equal to another one.

Assembly quality, shape of various parts of the aircraft and the shape of the nozzles are decente cues.

In fact, the same guys you're mocking now nailed it when it came down to visibility of the rafale, rhino and typhoon.
And to be frank; i'm trusting their judgement on the J20 and eventually the su57.

Much more then some troll's hilarious ppt slides, that's a given.
Offline

babybat{}.net

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 18
  • Joined: 08 Sep 2017, 19:16

Unread post18 Sep 2017, 01:00

nutshell wrote:You silly, ofc you cant't determine the precise signature of a frame from all the angles, yet you can estimate if a design is more, less or roughly equal to another one.

Assembly quality, shape of various parts of the aircraft and the shape of the nozzles are decente cues.


I do not argue with the fact that the su-57 RCS will be larger than that of the F-35.
I just state that there are no exact values in open sources. And the statement that the RCS of the upcoming su-57 = RCS SH is based on fortune-telling on photographs.


nutshell wrote:In fact, the same guys you're mocking now nailed it when it came down to visibility of the rafale, rhino and typhoon.
And to be frank; i'm trusting their judgement on the J20 and eventually the su57.

Much more then some troll's hilarious ppt slides, that's a given.


I do not know what are you talking about. These questions are not for me.
I did not say anything about the rafale, nor about the typhoon, and I have nothing to do with this ppt.
PreviousNext

Return to Modern Military Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot] and 8 guests