MAKS 2013.......indian angle

[he-man]

I was referring to the pod not its recent snaps.

Its an evolutionary process- trying to figure out where its going to end up getting to is futile.

Lets wait and see.

ITS clear now that it will be a pod only,,,,as they have consistently shown this since maks 2009

Bad development as there is no place inside pakfa where it can actually fit

 

[Dillinger]

ITS clear now that it will be a pod only,,,,as they have consistently shown this since maks 2009

Bad development as there is no place inside pakfa where it can actually fit

Whether there is any space for an internally mounted EOTS is not known, the Russians though are definitely not very keen on it.

 

[he-man]

Whether there is any space for an internally mounted EOTS is not known, the Russians though are definitely not very keen on it.

lets admit,,,there is really no place as the designation itself is POD

foolish sukhoi......what were they thinking??

 

[Dillinger]

lets admit,,,there is really no place as the designation itself is POD

foolish sukhoi......what were they thinking??

Perhaps you misconstrued, the pod obviously cannot be internally mounted. Whether there is space for an internally mounted EOTS is another issue.

 

[he-man]

Perhaps you misconstrued, the pod obviously cannot be internally mounted. Whether there is space for an internally mounted EOTS is another issue.

we have all seen the blueprints.......sadly there is none and this frame remains the same,,,,it has been stressed multiple of times

this maks-2013 confirmed those fears.............and now i understand why russia has publicly claimed the rcs of pakfa to be about .5m2

i am apalled at this

 

[Dillinger]

we have all seen the blueprints.......sadly there is none and this frame remains the same,,,,it has been stressed multiple of times

this maks-2013 confirmed those fears.............and now i understand why russia has publicly claimed the rcs of pakfa to be about .5m2

i am apalled at this

Those blueprints don't mean anything in terms of available space, unless you can get a 3D rendering from the OEM. Its the same hoopla about gauging available space for a large ESA aperture that most jingos here and elsewhere keep harping about- leading to the persistent questions about the "diameter".

As to the RCS of the platform- that's up for grabs since the exact figure will never be revealed and the RCS figures which are released as ballpoint figures are most often for the clean configuration so it has little to do with the EO pod.

As I said, one needs to wait.

 

[he-man]

Those blueprints don't mean anything in terms of available space, unless you can get a 3D rendering from the OEM. Its the same hoopla about gauging available space for a large ESA aperture that most jingos here and elsewhere keep harping about- leading to the persistent questions about the "diameter".

As to the RCS of the platform- that's up for grabs since the exact figure will never be revealed and the RCS figures which are released as ballpoint figures are most often for the clean configuration so it has little to do with the EO pod.

As I said, one needs to wait.

I get all the info from paralay.com and since the last 5 years it has never being wrong for once.
It had foretold all these things 5 years ago and the only place for eots can be between the engines in case for pakfa,,,,,unfortunately its alreagy covered with weapon bays

from the designer himself

""The plane F-22 (American fighter of the fifth generation - Interfax-AVN) - 0.3-0.4 sq.m. We have similar requirements for visibility," - said A.Davidenko. "

 

[Dillinger]

I get all the info from paralay.com and since the last 5 years it has never being wrong for once.
It had foretold all these things 5 years ago and the only place for eots can be between the engines in case for pakfa,,,,,unfortunately its alreagy covered with weapon bays

Paralay feeds off releases and speculative work, some of it is definitely rather good and beyond the reach of the average jingos like us. As I have kept repeating- wait and watch.

 

[he-man]

Paralay feeds off releases and speculative work, some of it is definitely rather good and beyond the reach of the average jingos like us. As I have kept repeating- wait and watch.

Sure man........but i am rather feeling low

 

[Dillinger]

Sure man........but i am rather feeling low

Oho, even if there is no internal EOTS the platform will still perform SEAD/DEAD/ASM/Stand-off strikes quite well. The slag can be picked up by a dedicated bomb truck or if luck serves us well then something akin to the SDB.

 

[he-man]

Oho, even if there is no internal EOTS the platform will still perform SEAD/DEAD/ASM/Stand-off strikes quite well. The slag can be picked up by a dedicated bomb truck or if luck serves us well then something akin to the SDB.

i have only this to say

 

[Umair Nawaz]

more goodies

1)helmet mounted display system
"They are integrating a helmet mounted display early in the process. The dual visor approach, where there is an inner visor for the display, and an outer one for glare and environmental protection."

2)stealth coating on engine itself!!
"They will be applying radar absorbent material to the spinner and inlet guide vanes. "

"http://i.imgur.com/dhWuhtW.jpg
@Abingdonboy @Dillinger @Flamingo @Umair Nawaz(my brother)

Mera answer wohe ha mery school going putr.

Jungli loog khaab b dekha krty the.

 

[Penguin]

Ok. You are 30 km faster. But An-70 A400
Carrying capacity,t 47.0 37.0
Dimensions of cargo cabin (l / w / h), m 22.4 / 4.8 / 4.1 17.7 / 4.0 / 3.8
Max. ceiling, m 12000 11300
Range, 6,600 km (loaded 20 tons) 6400 (loaded 20 tons)
Horsepower 4 x 13880 4 x 11 000
and most important PRICE 51 mln euro 136 mln euro

And according to the French: A400 > lower operating cost (i.e. one would need to consider lifetime cost > acquisition + (annual operatingcost x lifetime)

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

we have all seen the blueprints.......sadly there is none and this frame remains the same,,,,it has been stressed multiple of times

this maks-2013 confirmed those fears.............and now i understand why russia has publicly claimed the rcs of pakfa to be about .5m2

i am apalled at this

''Sukhoi has claimed that the rcs of the PAK FA will be 1/40 of the Su-35S. Based on estimates of the Su-35S, this would place the PAK FA's frontal signature at around -13 to -19 dBSM. Therefore, an estimate of -20 dBSM seems reasonable. To provide some context, the F-22A has an rcs around -40 dBSM or .0001m^2 while the F-35 is intended to have an rcs of .0013m^2.''
That would mean sukhoi's statement is more akin to a .01m^2 RCS for pak fa.
.5m^2 for PAK fa is insane as even rafale/eurofighter is in range of .1-.3m.

http://manglermuldoon.blogspot.in/2012/06/threat-analysis-of-foreign-stealth.html

http://theboresight.blogspot.in/
This btw is an interesting blog.As is this.Both have articles analyzing the pak fa.

 

[he-man]

''Sukhoi has claimed that the rcs of the PAK FA will be 1/40 of the Su-35S. Based on estimates of the Su-35S, this would place the PAK FA's frontal signature at around -13 to -19 dBSM. Therefore, an estimate of -20 dBSM seems reasonable. To provide some context, the F-22A has an rcs around -40 dBSM or .0001m^2 while the F-35 is intended to have an rcs of .0013m^2.''
That would mean sukhoi's statement is more akin to a .01m^2 RCS for pak fa.
.5m^2 for PAK fa is insane as even rafale/eurofighter is in range of .1-.3m.

American Innovation: Threat Analysis of Foreign Stealth Fighters Part II: Sukhoi PAK FA

The Boresight
This btw is an interesting blog.As is this.Both have articles analyzing the pak fa.

most of the discussion about pakfa in american innovation blog is actually me,,,no kidding

About rcs,,,they claimed one foteith value over mki dude not su-35s

''Sukhoi has claimed that the rcs of the PAK FA will be 1/40 of the Su-35S. Based on estimates of the Su-35S, this would place the PAK FA's frontal signature at around -13 to -19 dBSM. Therefore, an estimate of -20 dBSM seems reasonable. To provide some context, the F-22A has an rcs around -40 dBSM or .0001m^2 while the F-35 is intended to have an rcs of .0013m^2.''
That would mean sukhoi's statement is more akin to a .01m^2 RCS for pak fa.
.5m^2 for PAK fa is insane as even rafale/eurofighter is in range of .1-.3m.

http://manglermuldoon.blogspot.in/2012/06/threat-analysis-of-foreign-stealth.html

http://theboresight.blogspot.in/
This btw is an interesting blog.As is this.Both have articles analyzing the pak fa.

plus the wikipedia page giving avionic suite of su-35 and pakfa was edited by me