What's new

Sukhoi PAK-FA / FGFA: Updates,News & Discussions

@ptldM3 i guess your points have been repeated again and again while Martian lives in delusion while he is brainwashed j-20 is an alien while others T-50 is not, so how ever you and already been argued by lot of us in the past it is waste of time.. So let us all wait for the production version of T-50 to come out, it will definitely shut his mouth once an exercise is been carried out
 
Su-30 is not stealthy. Therefore T-50/Pak-Fa is not stealthy.

Everyone agrees the Su-30 is not stealthy. In the following picture, I have identified 10 important non-stealth features of the Su-30. Interestingly, the T-50/Pak-Fa has the exact same 10 non-stealth features.

It seems to me there are only two logical choices. Either you agree with me that the T-50/Pak-Fa is not stealthy. Or you can make the incredible claim that both the T-50 and Su-30 are stealthy. I leave the choice to you.

o8lKM.jpg

Su-30 is not stealthy. Here are 10 non-stealth features.

Xs31G.jpg

In an interesting coincidence, the T-50/Pak-Fa shares all ten Su-30 non-stealth features.
 
No disrespect to anyone, i am not an aeronautical engineer and neither i am someone who is pretending to know about 5th generation aircrafts but i have few doubts, please indulge with me the other senior members like sancho, kinetic etc.

@Martian2

According to the photograph you posted above...
1) Protruding IRST : Well in F35 it is much more hidden and F35's IRST (AN/AAQ-40) is no doubt advanced but you cannot see it on top near canopy because in F35 IRST is located near chin. But you are right it has to be little bit hidden or just for show Russia should also install their IRST somewhere near chin were fans can't see in the photographs.

2) Metal-Frame Canopy : Is it metal ? You know it can be a composites or may even be high strength plastic (there are plastics which have strength close to steal).

3) Same round and tall Su-30 Fuselage :
Are you saying it is okay for F22 to have such fuselage and not PakFa ?
F-22-PAKFA1.jpg

I hope you know that frontal RCS of fuselage of both F22 and PakFa will be almost same. PakFa fuselage resembles more like YF-23 which if i am not wrong has lower RCS than F22.
YF-23_800x600.jpg

yf23roll.jpg

Its just a prototype and considering there will be 14 of those, this can be resolved later but i personally think Russian might not make this particular structural change and may reduce RCS somewhere else or by some other way. Remember ultimately goal is to reduce RCS and the way US has design F22-F35, its not the only way.

4) Engine fan blades in straight airduct reflect radar. Need S-duct redesign : And i suppose you are saying this because you have the whole 3-d view and x-ray vision of inside the aircraft unlike me who can see only one side of the aircraft in the picture. I suppose you mean something like this.

intakes0.jpg


Its a picture from a t50 presentation which you will know if you even try to read this forum itself.
There's alot of stuff on this forum itself, biggest one are the US stealth aircraft programs are based on the research of a Russian scientist. Russians know what is needed to make 5th generation aircraft like the ones made by US, they will be using different things to achieve the same level of RCS as US aircrafts as expressed by the head of university which is responsible for stealth research.
Also do you know the VTOL technology for F35 is also Russian. Also what the heck is all about this 2-D thrust vectoring business ??? I mean people think that unless PakfA changes to 2-d nozzle with serrated ends it won't be a 5th gen aircraft. Well work on Russian 5th gen aircrafts started in late eighties and early nineties and Russians rejected a 2-d .ozzle

5) Metal engine pod reflect radar : This shows that its a prototype not the final aircraft.

6) Round shape reflects radar to emitter. Need angular airduct cladding to deflect radar : I hope you know this is not the engine for PakFa, the final engine will be ready by 2015. Also the portion of engine you are pointing at is round in every engine as far as i know except that it is hidden in aircraft body and not left open like in this prototype which i think will be changed or atleast they will put some kind of coating on it.

7) Lack of stealthy saw-toothed edges on bay doors : As i said its just the 3rd prototype and if they put RAM coating or radar aborbing material there the RCS will definitely be reduced there. In short there's not just one way to reduce the RCS. Also i personally don't give a **** about bay doors. I mean who is gonna open the bay door in the middle of the flight ? They are only open while landing and take-off and at that time the protection of the aircraft is on the SAM's installed at the air-base (correct me if i am wrong).

8) Venst reflect Radar : Really !!!! And how how can you tell ? Don't tell me because in the photograph the side view of PakFa doesn't looks like F35 or F22 because of different color scheme and little bit difference in structural geometry.

9) Uneven heights of underside reflect radar : You are right to some extent here, i hope some changes are made but i doubt Russian aircraft manufacturer are idiots and they are definitely not the fanboys like us. They will do something about it and it may not be the way US did. Also i would like to say that this uneven height of the underside might not be that big as it appears on the photographs like this one.

10) Gaps between airducts and fuselage reflect radar : I doubt it as there will radar absorbing material.

flight-pak-fa-fighter.n.jpg


But who am i to say, i am not an aeronautical engineer and neither am i someone who is part of any 5th generation aircraft.

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

As far as Chinese J-20 is concerned. The aircraft design is good but a 5th generation aircraft is 5th gen because of its avionics, radar, engine, EW suite, various external sensors etc. which i don't think Chinese have able to build and so right now i have serious doubts but Chinese are hard workers.

---------- Post added at 04:11 AM ---------- Previous post was at 04:09 AM ----------

Hey Sancho,

Nice post, i guess !!! Do you understand what is written on that poster ??? If yes please translate....
 
Look the insecure J-20 cheerleader is back.

Su-30 is not stealthy. Therefore T-50/Pak-Fa is not stealthy.



Your are a plain joker. Many of the same features that are on the J-10 can also be found on the J-20, so let me use your moronic tactic. The J-10 is not stealthy. Therefore the J-20 is not stealthy.





In an interesting coincidence, the T-50/Pak-Fa shares all ten Su-30 non-stealth features.

In an interesting coincidence the J-20 shares many of the none stealthy features of the J-10.


Let me stoop to Martians level because that is all he knows



The J-20 is a copy of the J-10 (according to Martians theory). Martian concludes that similarities between the pak-fa and Flanker definately means that the pak-fa is a copy of the Flanker, even if geometrically they are completely different.

Martian's logic:

J-10 has rear fins, so does J-20
J-10 has DSI, so does J-20.
J-10 has canards , so does J-20.
J-10 has engine curvature, so does J-20.
J-10 has nose enttenna, so does J-20.
J-10 is a delta, so is J-20.
J-10 strait fuselage aft of canopy, J-20 same feature.

Therefore the J-20 is a copy of the J-10 (Martian's theory) and has many none-stealthy feature of the J-10 (Again Martian's theory).

And since Martian enjoys talking about bumps, curves, and so called edge alignment let take a look at the J-20. Take note that many of the highlighted areas on the J-20 are unstealthy, according to Martian, but because the J-20 is Chinese it is excused from the same rules.


2i71ijd.jpg
 
Hey Sancho,

Nice post, i guess !!! Do you understand what is written on that poster ??? If yes please translate....

I would say the same as on the right side in english, they just have different designations for the same systems I guess. Btw, the F35 has no real IRST, that's why the EOTS is located at the chin. It's an improved Sniper targeting pod, integrated into the fighter, which has some IRST functions, the main aim is guiding A2G weapons though.
 
Technical reply to issues raised by Angeldemon_007.

1. Su-30 and T-50/Pak-Fa IRST creates a radar signature, because AESA radar is X-band. X-band wavelength is 2.5 (one inch) to 4cm. Also, IRST is a round sphere and not a shaped nose (e.g. duck bill shape/continuous curvature or faceted/diamond shape).

Therefore, X-band radar will detect the Su-30/Pak-Fa IRST. Hence, the Su-30/Pak-Fa is not stealthy.

Citation: HowStuffWorks "How does stealth technology work?"

"How does stealth technology work?
...
Most conventional aircraft have a rounded shape. This shape makes them aerodynamic, but it also creates a very efficient radar reflector. The round shape means that no matter where the radar signal hits the plane, some of the signal gets reflected back:
..."

Zae3a.jpg

Three posts ago, Gambit was arguing the T-50/Pak-Fa IRST probe is like a two-dimensional saw-toothed edge and is therefore stealthy. Do you agree with him? Or does the T-50/Pak-Fa IRST probe look like an excellent round radar reflector to you?

2. Look at the picture above with the rivets. Does it look like a metal-framed canopy to you? Even China's advanced materials science doesn't have the high-strength plastics that you are theorizing. Everyone has to climb the same tech ladder.

The F-22 uses a frameless bubble cockpit canopy. China also developed a frameless bubble cockpit canopy for the J-20. It is highly unlikely that Russia could just leapfrog past the next technological step of a framles bubble cockpit canopy.

3. Look at your picture again (see below). I have drawn the surface area of the fuselage behind the pilot. The T-50/Pak-Fa is much taller and occupies a lot of area. This will strongly reflect radar at many angles.

If you look at other pictures of the F-22 and J-20, you will notice they use continuous curvature to shape the area behind their cockpit canopy. However, when you look at pictures of the T-50/Pak-Fa, you will see two large triangular slabs from the side.

HaqNy.jpg

Compare the small surface area behind the F-22 pilot to the large surface area behind the T-50/Pak-Fa pilot.

4. RULE #1 - never look at cartoons in performing an analysis. Let me show you real photographs of the T-50/Pak-Fa. All of them show there is no S-duct on the T-50/Pak-Fa.

Edr9E.jpg

From the midpoint of the airduct to the midpoint of the engine, it is a straight line. There is no curved duct. The T-50/Pak-Fa engine layout is identical to the Su-30.

T1hMC.jpg

From a lateral view, we will once again draw a line from the midpoint of the airduct to the midpoint of the engine, it is clearly a straight line. There is no curved duct.

5. It has been two years and Sukhoi's T-50/Pak-Fa third prototype looks exactly like the first prototype externally. Unless Sukhoi performs a radical redesign (which increasingly appears unlikely), a straight airduct will mean the T-50/Pak-Fa will be almost as non-stealthy as a Su-30.

When the enemy radar waves bounce off the single-crystal metallic engine fan blades on the T-50/Pak-Fa, the F-22 or J-20 radar screen will light up like a Christmas tree.

6. It has been two years and Sukhoi hasn't been able to wrap the T-50/Pak-Fa engines in RAM cladding. As more years pass, it becomes increasingly unlikely that Sukhoi can fix this problem. I believe it is a cooling issue.

If we keep seeing this exposed metal-engine problem on the next few prototypes then it means Sukhoi can't change the design due to a likely cooling need for the engines.

7. When the T-50/Pak-Fa or Su-30 bay doors are closed during flight, they lie flush against the fuselage. However, due to the non-saw-toothed edges, enemy radar will reflect off the large discontinuities. The F-22, F-35, and J-20 all have saw-toothed bay doors to minimize this RCS problem.

8. Vents are not stealthy, because of radar scattering from edge diffraction.

9. An uneven underside is not stealthy. It creates many new angles for a radar reflection. Australia Air Power wrote a detailed report and criticized the modified F-35 for the "lumps and bumps" along its underside. The original F-35 prototype had a clean and flat underside like the F-22 and J-20.

Due to the need for air-to-air missiles with the development of the J-20, the F-35 underside is a mess and it is less stealthy.

Reference: http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-2009-01.html

10. When an enemy radar hits the "back wall" (or intersection between fuselage and airduct), it will produce a nice radar return. This is poor stealth design. This problem exists on both the Su-30 and T-50/Pak-Fa.
 
Technical reply to issues raised by Angeldemon_007.

1. Su-30 and T-50/Pak-Fa IRST creates a radar signature, because AESA radar is X-band. X-band wavelength is 2.5 (one inch) to 4cm. Also, IRST is a round sphere and not a shaped nose (e.g. duck bill shape/continuous curvature or faceted/diamond shape).

Therefore, X-band radar will detect the Su-30/Pak-Fa IRST. Hence, the Su-30/Pak-Fa is not stealthy.

Citation: (insert here)

Thank you, for confirming that all of those rounded surfaces on the J-20 are 'not stealthy'. :lol:

I know what is comming, 'the J-20 Mighty Dragon has stealthy shaping that is covered in RAM' :lol:
 
HaqNy.jpg

Compare the small surface area behind the F-22 pilot to the large surface area behind the T-50/Pak-Fa pilot.

Goodness gracious, you are a desperate clown. Now compare the surface area of the stabalizers or the rest of the fuselage. Like it or not the J-20 has a bloated fuselage and its the largest of all three aircraft so it has the most surface area.

Compare the entire fuselage, and by this i also mean the nose and vertical stabs. It's clear that the J-20 is the longest aircraft and the thickes or most bloated aircraft.
 
Goodness gracious, you are a desperate clown. Now compare the surface area of the stabalizers or the rest of the fuselage. Like it or not the J-20 has a bloated fuselage and its the largest of all three aircraft so it has the most surface area.

Compare the entire fuselage, and by this i also mean the nose and vertical stabs. It's clear that the J-20 is the longest aircraft and the thickes or most bloated aircraft.

Vertical stabilizers are canted and reflect radar away from the emitter. Your argument is not relevant.
 
Stabilizers are canted and reflect radar away from emitter. Your argument is not relevant.

This is why you should be dismissed. Even if a surface is canted it can still emit returns via the surface itself and by this I mean any small imperfects. To further trash your argument the vertical stabilizers are a moving control surface, with that you not only have to surface itself but the control mechanisms such as rudders. You also contradict yourself, you made a claim the the pak-fa has more surface area, yet when i mentioned the rudder you claimed that the surface area is not important because the vertical stabalizers are canted. Lets look at it more logically, what will have a greater return a 1x1 steel plate or a 10x10 steel plate? The only person's argument that is not relevant is yours.

And here tell everyone which aircraft has the largest surface area. The sad part is that the photo of the pak-fa is taken much closer yet it is still has less surface area.

Looks like your trolling backfired.

 
As far as Chinese J-20 is concerned. The aircraft design is good but a 5th generation aircraft is 5th gen because of its avionics, radar, engine, EW suite, various external sensors etc. which i don't think Chinese have able to build and so right now i have serious doubts but Chinese are hard workers.
well those are more important things compare to stealth as Stealth doent mean the plane is invincible but reduced EM/IR
radiations & when u fight with another stealthy plane then all these things count ,which is more stealthy becomes irrelevant .Got it
 
T-50/Pak-Fa IRST is not stealthy.

Do you see the giant radar return (see top diagram below) from a one-foot metal sphere? The T-50/Pak-Fa IRST is approximately a foot in diameter and should have a similar radar return.

How far away do you think an AWACS can detect the T-50/Pak-Fa IRST? The IRST is clearly not stealthy and it is terrible stealth design to have a round sphere on the T-50/Pak-Fa nose.

TmmzY.jpg

Measuring radar cross sections in an anechoic chamber is a fundamental part of validating radar measurements. The above images show radar cross section measurements made in the anechoic chamber of the University of Oklahoma Radar Innovations Laboratory. Data of a live tethered bat were collected using a low-power X-band pulsed Doppler radar. A 12-inch metal sphere was used for calibration. Results are shown in the plots. Similar data are being collected for other species.

Reference: Animal Migration Research, Jeff Kelly Lab
 
T-50/Pak-Fa IRST is not stealthy.

Do you see the giant radar return (see top diagram below) from a one-foot metal sphere? The T-50/Pak-Fa IRST is approximately a foot in diameter and should have a similar radar return.
well martian i think this is the most important avionics a 5th gen fighter must have as more future wars would be fought within
visual range as stealth planes comes in future wars .Remember it is very difficult to achieve complete suppresion of IR
signature no matter how a stealthy a plane .So u can compromise some stealth for it as it is definiltely worth of having it in
your plane.


ofcourse IRST can also be gold coated to reduce RCS
Part828.jpg



BTW Excuse me Martian the article states it a complete metal sphere, but IRST frontal part is not completely metal infact it is metal +
composite fiber
 

Back
Top Bottom