What's new

2nd Pak FA prototype maiden flight pics

Explain look stealthy..

Is it something regarding the pic?/ I mean the stealthy planes are not visible in picture posted and T-50 is not stealthy so it appears to naked eye sort of??/

he means if it is not a copy and paste job and stolen technology of another 5th gen aircraft- like their J20. any other attempt/look certainly cannot be 5th gen. remember these guys from a country that says don't lead , just copy/paste/steal others work.

Funny story a week ago, I had one these Chinese reps come to me at a show and say " you must come to China joy conference with your technology platform". I looked him at said " everyone I know rather stay away, in lieu of their technology being copied". He had a big smile and said " yeah yeah we are trying to do something about that in the govt". Then he said something about Chinese govt would like to have our technology ... I asked ' then what about the fact that you require everything must be hosted within your walls ?".. he just smiled and walked away.
 
.
This has been discussed to death.

The canards are actually smaller than the rear wings on either the F 22 or T 50

They present a problem if they are off alignment but if locked in place they actually provide smaller radar surface area then conventional control surfaces.

Canards generate additional lift and provide extreme maneuverability even when locked in place.

Transparent composites used in other earlier planes and also likely used here would make the canards seem nonexistent as it is a single piece with moving parts within the plane itself.

Yeas if transperant composites are there and if it is locked in place. I dont mean to troll, but i met and f-16 USAF pilot who had the chance to fly f-22 ( i met just last month) and he said both the t-50 and j-20 need more work to be designated as 5th generation. For t-50 though he said the one major problem was the postion of air intakes. It basically is su-27 under belly on t-50. then when i talked about j-20 with him i told him how forward canards can be useful and if composties are used then it will make it seem virtually non-existant. He debated that since they are forward canards locked in place or not it will still produce a consirdeable amount of RCS. he added that the size of the aircraft cound hint that it might be used more as a bomber or ground support aircraft rather than an actual air superioirty fighter. Yea he bascially was trying to say that t-50 and j-20 are both pieces of sh!t and that American aircrafts rule!! Capitalism at its best. Because we atalked about MMRCA and how we was so sure that f-16 IN would win and not even rafale would stand a chance dispalys that he is one big lobbyist for American products. Anyways he is very knowledable man and everything he said is mostly true.
 
.
This has been discussed to death.

The canards are actually smaller than the rear wings on either the F 22 or T 50


It does not matter.

They present a problem if they are off alignment but if locked in place they actually provide smaller radar surface area then conventional control surfaces.


They do not. A conventional aircraft is a continues surface, so when the EM wave traverses the body of a conventional aircraft the EM energy scatters or diffracts when it reaches an abrupt area (like the end or edge of a wing). When this scattering happens the EM energy spreads out in a conical fashion (edge diffraction) on most aircraft the edge diffraction occurs so that the EM energy is directed away from the aircraft, usually this is when most EM energy scatters off of the horizontal stabilizer.

The J-20's canards can pose a problem because they are not a continues surface, instead they abruptly stop and cause edge diffraction to occur in front of the aircraft as opposed to behind it. The J-20's design may defeat this problem but it is also possible that it may contribute to the RCS or return signal to the original source. What we know for certain is that canards do contribute to RCS, this is one of the reasons sukhoi chose not to put canards on the SU-35.

As for the fan boys such as loca, pay attention, and stop posting fan boy garbage.
 
. .
It does not matter.

Size does matter though less than the placement.


They do not. A conventional aircraft is a continues surface, so when the EM wave traverses the body of a conventional aircraft the EM energy scatters or diffracts when it reaches an abrupt area (like the end or edge of a wing). When this scattering happens the EM energy spreads out in a conical fashion (edge diffraction) on most aircraft the edge diffraction occurs so that the EM energy is directed away from the aircraft, usually this is when most EM energy scatters off of the horizontal stabilizer.

The J-20's canards can pose a problem because they are not a continues surface, instead they abruptly stop and cause edge diffraction to occur in front of the aircraft as opposed to behind it. The J-20's design may defeat this problem but it is also possible that it may contribute to the RCS or return signal to the original source. What we know for certain is that canards do contribute to RCS, this is one of the reasons sukhoi chose not to put canards on the SU-35.

As for the fan boys such as loca, pay attention, and stop posting fan boy garbage.

Canards on the J 20 are placed differently than on the J 10. The J 20 canards do line up the main lifting wings. I'm sure canards do contribute to RCS. The question is how much. With transparent composites, plane aligning, RAM, and locking it just seems to be a molehill made into a mountain like the 2 piece canopy on the T 50.
 
.
second prototype of the Russian fifth-generation T-50 fighter pics

Russian_Pak_FA+_2nd_Prototypes_Maiden_Flight_Pics.jpg


Russian_Pak_FA+_2nd_Prototypes_Maiden_Flight_Pics_1.jpg
 
. . .
Check the lower pic (post 110) in regard of "look" and you will see that T50 has just the same stealth shapings of the airframe, canopy, air intakes, or tail fins like any other 5th gen fighter as well.
The funny thing imo is, that so many people hype the J20 now, although so less is known about it and it's capabilities and although Pak Fa instead even at this stage of the development sets new benchmarks of capabilities!

- the only 5th gen fighter with up to 5 (maybe even 6) AESA radars
- the only 5th gen fighter, that will have a dedicated IRST (F35 has a targeting pod with A2A modes)
- the only 5th gen fighter with movable LERX
- highest SC speed
- biggest internal weapon bay with up to 10 AAMs
- the rumored radar blocker is a completely new technology as well and would make serpentine ducts pointless


How many of these things will J20 have, or what completely new feature will it offer, that no other fighter has?
Don't even start to guess, because you simply don't know it!
J20 is a good step forward for China, but so far it is not clear how far the development really is and how capable the fighter really will be.
T50 is under development as well, but the things that we already know, are more than impressive and obviously puts in a league with US stealth fighters. Performancewise it seems to be even better then them and that with the interim engine only, now consider how good it will be with the final engine, TVC and all stealth features integrated.
Arey...you forgot about plugging into satellite feature. If it gets possible it would be single most important feature of T50.

the design of t-50 is new, stealthy shape and su-27 style whole body lifting surface combined, which makes the stealthy shape apparently difference from the US. its new and thats why its precious to me, unlike j-20. new stuff is rare nowadays.
I tried to explain this before also. Russians are taking this whole stealthy business from a different point of view. According to them Americans have misunderstood the concept of stealth.

problem of t-50 j-20 which is better is all about where you put your a$$ on. both in prototype phase, radar, engine not ready not confirmed, and j-20 dont even got design data. no matter what, Russian and Indian r sitting on t-50, u cant expect they will agree j-20 is better, same goes for the chinese.
Very precise...But i agree with some fellow member that looking at the size of J20 its not meant for air-superiority but instead its meant for bomber role.

Also it would really help if you guys post some of the features or new tech in J20 because nobody here knows anything about J20 accept that it is the best fighter in the world and that rest of other fighters have one or the other problems and J20 is perfect. No disrespect but throw some light on your mystery fighter jet. Also please don't just start comparing with those only few blurred pics which are taken from long distance. Instead share some official links with some features, in short don't speculate.
 
.
"Although the twin -engined , tandem -seat 17 .2 - tonne FGFA ( known in Russia as the Mnogofunktsyonalniy Frontovoy Samolyot , or MFS project) will be a derivative of the heavier , 24 - tonne single- seat T -50"
Hey guys....is this true ??/
 
.
Got this from BR, interesting....

1) Six DRDO labs to work on stealth, aerodynamics, avionics, composite material, test and evaluation of FGFA.
2) IAF will start induction from 2017.
3) IPR will be shared by both countries.
4) Preliminary agreement for 250 FGFA signed.



fgfar.jpg
 
.
Arey...you forgot about plugging into satellite feature. If it gets possible it would be single most important feature of T50.

No, didn't mentioned it because US fighters might get this capability as well and I wanted to show the unique new features that Pak Fa / FGFA brings in to the 5. gen!

Regarding SATCOM, crossposting from the MP forum from Andy_UA:

PAK FA Glonass reciever antennae [shell without recievers]

d95a5d55639a.jpg

25e2ef1ed23d.jpg


with recievers

fc37eed75315.jpg


Developed in Solidworks, article here - http://www.solidworks.ru/images/stor...de_2010.03.pdf

The reicevers are beaming up without giving up the aircraft position...
Also its ECM protected...
 
. .
Russians are taking this whole stealthy business from a different point of view. According to them Americans have misunderstood the concept of stealth..
Rusians have shown the world they can´t even make a desent stealth air plane...:disagree: I doubt the T50 is as stealthy as the old F-117, let alone the F-22, but sinse the J-20 took an already proven design like the F-22(front RCS) we should be as stealthy if not stealthier than the F-22 and given the 20 years of advancement in computers we have since the 1980's we ALL can say the J-20 is Stealthier than the failed T-50...:china:
 
.
localoca

and you have shown the world, that you are just another fanboy who hates the PAK FA because its Russian, and thinks the J-20 is better just because it is chinese.:no:


Now lets see what the US thinks about the J-20.


The Air Force’s recently retired intelligence chief warns the U.S. to pay close attention to the Chinese stealth fighter that took to the air last month, saying the aircraft could turn into a formidable opponent.

The Chengdu J-20 took off Jan. 11 and flew for about 15 minutes over an airfield in the southwestern city of Chengdu. Lt. Gen David Deptula said the fifth-generation fighter “may turn out to be a very, very formidable aircraft” if the Chinese can effectively harness active electronically scanned array radars, engines and stealth.

The J-20, like the F-22, would be able to cruise at supersonic speeds at very high altitudes, Deptula said. But it would also carry more weapons, including three types now under development: air-to-air missiles with longer ranges than their U.S. counterparts; anti-ship and anti-surface weapons; and, potentially, weapons to destroy U.S. satellites.

Such a plane might be used against U.S. refueling planes and large sensor aircraft such as the E-3 Sentry and E-8 JSTARS, he said.

The emergence of both the J-20 and the Russian fifth-generation fighter, the PAK-FA, indicates that a U.S. advantage is slipping away, Deptula said.

“The United States has owned a monopoly on stealth for the last 25 years, and now, as both the Russians and Chinese acquire that same capability, you’re going to see that advantage we used to hold disappear very quickly, and that is going to have a very significant effect on our current operational plans,” Deptula said. “The first flight of the J-20 needs to be a wake-up call to the strategic complacency of those in the United States who assume continued air and naval dominance in the Pacific.”

The J-20’s appearance also should “cause prudent decision-makers to reconsider the closure of the F-22 [production] line,” Deptula said.

Lockheed Martin officials said they are on track to deliver the 187th and last Raptor, with tail-number 4095, in April 2012. Following Air Force orders, the company is working to preserve the tooling and knowledge necessary to restart the production line, said Jeff Babione, Lockheed’s F-22 general manager, in an e-mailed statement.

Deptula also said the J-20 should prompt the U.S. to begin work on a replacement for the F-22, noting the Chinese jet would enter service in five to seven years, when the Raptor will be more than 15 years old.

Loren Thompson, an analyst at the Lexington Institute, Arlington, Va., said the J-20’s appearance is consistent with that of a long-range strike aircraft designed to further Chinese goals of denying U.S. forces access to the western Pacific.

But he said the J-20 appears to have a particularly small radar cross-section only from the front, somewhat like the U.S. Navy’s F/A-18E/F Super Hornet.

“Having stealth in the forward aspect and not having it on the sides or the back would be consistent with an aircraft designed to strike distant ships at sea or nearby countries like Japan,” he said.

Thompson said he doubts the J-20 is an air-superiority fighter similar to the F-22, but “given the geographic asymmetry of our circumstances, perhaps a long-range maritime strike aircraft is more worrisome to us than something like an F-22.”

Analyst Richard Aboulafia of the Teal Group, Fairfax, Va., poured even more cold water on the J-20.

“It’s a kludge,” or a machine thrown together from mismatched parts, he said. “I’ve never seen so much hysteria.":rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

Aboulafia shares Thompson’s view that the Chinese lack the systems integration skills and the technology for a true fifth-generation fighter. In particular, he said, the Chinese have difficulties developing engines.:whistle:

Aboulafia said the J-20 might not even be all that stealthy from the front, thanks to its canards, which reflect radar energy as they rotate during flight.:woot::woot:

The U.S. may be overestimating the Chinese aircraft, just as the Air Force overestimated the Soviet MiG-25 Foxbat during the Cold War, Aboulafia said

“I think Joseph Nye said it best in Foreign Policy [magazine] this month: There is an American tendency to overestimate them, and Chinese hubris based on self-overestimation,” he said.
 
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom