What's new

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

http://idrw.org/?p=28906

@sancho @DrSomnath999 > any news on radar blockers for Pak Fa?

Also I rae that S type air intake made B-1B less observable (hidden fanblades) but reduced its max speed too. Is this applicable to fighter jets like F-22 and Pak Fa?

Nope No news yet as it's engine has not been finalized yet


See
I beleive PAK-FA doesnt need radar blockers at all

as even SU 35 has achieved some stealth reductions it's air intake & Engine compressor face
even if it may be straight air intake showing full engine compressor face meanwhile PAK_FA air intakes are canted( slant) & exposing 1/3 rd of compressor face compare to SU 35
the (RCS treated?) front end of the 117S (117C):

41d487211bcaea18050b.jpg


On top of it there are many russian sources of non metallic engines blades being developed Who knows??


CHEERS
 
New paint job, supposedly dark bottom and light top. Sukhoi is keeping the tradition of god awful, appallingly gross and plainly retarded paint schemes.

let's see, they have the smurf green, the top black bottom smurf, multiple blues, gloss black (stupid), and the funky hipster pak-fa with two tone grey and a big white blob in the middle.

Whoever comes up with these paint combos should be arrested.
 
New paint job, supposedly dark bottom and light top.

Sure about that? Recent Su 35 and Su 34 paint jobs were the other way around:

143473_92007116_119654.jpg


143473_691788802_123895.jpg


Could be wrong, but it might have to do with high flying at day and low flying at night don't you think? The blue bottom should make the fighter less visible from the ground, compared to a blue sky at day times. Similarly, the dark top should make it less visible from the sky, compared to the dark ground or?
 
Sure about that? Recent Su 35 and Su 34 paint jobs were the other way around:

143473_92007116_119654.jpg


143473_691788802_123895.jpg





Could be wrong, but it might have to do with high flying at day and low flying at night don't you think? The blue bottom should make the fighter less visible from the ground, compared to a blue sky at day times. Similarly, the dark top should make it less visible from the sky, compared to the dark ground or?



Latest eye witness reports say that it is simply dark. This could still mean that the bottom half could be painted smurf green but hopefully not. If the entire aircraft is dark this could mean that the aircraft is treated with RAM, which would mean that the 5th prototype could be used to test and validate RCS outside of what was done in labs. Or Sukhoi just got bored with the current paint.
 

Looks like a lot got said there. Translations anyone?
there are captions in the video...............turn them on

it just states that pakfa will look lke a tennis ball i radar compared to mki that looks like a football
 
If the entire aircraft is dark this could mean that the aircraft is treated with RAM, which would mean that the 5th prototype could be used to test and validate RCS outside of what was done in labs.

Wouldn't it be more logical to test the RCS with a somewhat final config for the external shape, before adding coatings? I mean the T55 obviously tests new optical sensors, while others were deleted again, which not only capability of the sensors are tested, but possibly different locations too. So without all sensors or parts installed that can affect the RCS, it wouldn't make much sense to do tests in this regard now right?

Btw, do you have any idea what these parts could be, or what could be integrated in them later?

Sukhoi PAK-FA / FGFA: Updates,News & Discussions | Page 108

http://s7.directupload.net/images/131110/4givtb7d.jpg


Also, do you have any new infos on the weapon bays and their size? Do you also think that they differ in dept and if so, any possibility that the frontal bay could offer comparable configs like the YF23:

http://www.yf-23.net/Pics/Walkaround/Weapons Bay/PAV2 weapons bay fwd 1 623.jpg

http://www.yf-23.net/Pics/Plans/PAV1 weapons bay schematic 1023.gif
 
Wouldn't it be more logical to test the RCS with a somewhat final config for the external shape, before adding coatings?


The aircraft had been designed for reduced RCS, we know from past experience that the aircraft had likely been subject to software analysis even Kopp ran the pak-fa through physical optics test. Apart from that static tests had probably been conducted. Like I said the new paint could be just that--paint. For all we know there are still changes to be made to the aircraft, but if it is RAM it could be to test it's durability in real world conditions.




Btw, do you have any idea what these parts could be, or what could be integrated in them later?

Sukhoi PAK-FA / FGFA: Updates,News & Discussions | Page 108

http://s7.directupload.net/images/131110/4givtb7d.jpg


I don't know.


Also, do you have any new infos on the weapon bays and their size? Do you also think that they differ in dept and if so, any possibility that the frontal bay could offer comparable configs like the YF23:

http://www.yf-23.net/Pics/Walkaround/Weapons Bay/PAV2 weapons bay fwd 1 623.jpg

http://www.yf-23.net/Pics/Plans/PAV1 weapons bay schematic 1023.gif


Only a few people would know that, but based on the depth of the fuselage I wouldn't expect them to have a depth much deeper then what is seen on the YF-23.
 
Wouldn't it be more logical to test the RCS with a somewhat final config for the external shape, before adding coatings? I mean the T55 obviously tests new optical sensors, while others were deleted again, which not only capability of the sensors are tested, but possibly different locations too. So without all sensors or parts installed that can affect the RCS, it wouldn't make much sense to do tests in this regard now right?

some russian members in russian defence net had said there would be a separate model for RCS evaluations .These protypes what we are seeing are just for aerodynamics ,sensor evaluation & later
engine & weapon trials

But for RCS evaluation model would not be displayed .

Btw, do you have any idea what these parts could be, or what could be integrated in them later?

Sukhoi PAK-FA / FGFA: Updates,News & Discussions | Page 108

http://s7.directupload.net/images/131110/4givtb7d.jpg
4givtb7d.jpg

first image,- conformal antennas of some navigation system

2nd image-3 UV-50 chaff& flares dispensers in the beaver tail (one facing down).

confirmed in KEY PUB forums


Also, do you have any new infos on the weapon bays and their size? Do you also think that they differ in dept and if so, any possibility that the frontal bay could offer comparable configs like the YF23:

http://www.yf-23.net/Pics/Walkaround/Weapons Bay/PAV2 weapons bay fwd 1 623.jpg

http://www.yf-23.net/Pics/Plans/PAV1 weapons bay schematic 1023.gif

that is too much of an asking to someone to be honest :lol:

no one can say those until & unless we see a similiar kind of pics of J20 weapon trials


CHEERS
 
2nd image-3 UV-50 chaff& flares dispensers in the beaver tail (one facing down).

The one facing down is visible on some pics and would be comparable to the one on the Su 34, however, the two locations that I marked are facing not upwards like it is the case for the MKI or Su 35, but slightly to the outside. For flare dispencers that would be strange, especially since the TVNs are in that direction too. :undecided:
 
The one facing down is visible on some pics and would be comparable to the one on the Su 34, however, the two locations that I marked are facing not upwards like it is the case for the MKI or Su 35, but slightly to the outside. For flare dispencers that would be strange, especially since the TVNs are in that direction too. :undecided:
i think they are engine coolants
 

the upper body is already flawless

the only change i need would be in the engines,,ie type 30

if the enine is compact and smaller than this one,it would make loads of diff and acc to russian sources the new engine will be about 150 kg lighter than current product 117
 
Back
Top Bottom