What's new

Move over, F-22 Raptor !

The biggest problem of the T-50 is that the current prototype is hardly stealthy at all. Its rough finish, uneven surface, exposed blade, untreated exhaust make no stealthier than some fourth gen fighters like the EF-2000. I doubt if the RCS is less than 1m2 at the current configuration. The T-50 needs some seriously improvement before it can be considered a stealthy fighter. Sure it is very agile, but what's that good for when the enemy can see you and you can't see the enemy?
LOL, all of those concerns will be addressed in the future prototypes. The first two are no where near the production models. The F-22 prototypes didn't have perfect surface finishes, there was no need for that. Why worry about the finish when you have more important things to test. Its been stated many times that PAK-FA will get new eninges with Flat Nozzles like the F-22. Also, Sukhoi seems more than confident in their inlet configuration, if the proposed radar blocker works as well as it can in theory, it will be just as good as an S-duct. If you take a look at the earlier designs for PAK-FA they originally included S-ducts! They were taken out for a reason.
 
I know that work force in Russia is cheap, but it does not explain that huge cost difrences between F-22 and T-50. Yanks used over 60 billion to make F-22... According state run media T-50 project has cost only 6-10 billion so far.
T-50 = SU-35 in a new shell?
Some of the technology has been tested on the MIG 1.44, SU-35 and SU-47 I don't know if that is included in the 6-10 billion. The cost for PAK-FA will be greater than the 6-10 billion, but you have to remember that there will be more PAK-FA's produced than F-22's so the cost can be spread out.
 
Comparing a Prototype to a Fully completed 5 gen jet is laughable, First improve the Russian economy then maybe they can actually have real Jet.

Whether Russians'll admit it or not, their advanced weapons programs are now more profit driven businesses and less state sponsored strategic assets like in the Soviet days. If the customers stop coming, their R&D collapses.
 
It was actually the opposite. On paper the F-4 was superior to the Mig-21 in every way yet in Vietnam the F-4 was literally slaughtered like cattle. It was only faced with 3rd generation airplanes that the Mig-21 couldn't beat it.
Operation Bolo had the F-4 slaughtered the MIG-21 like cattle.

Operation Bolo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For the North Vietnamese (and their Soviet allies who supplied the MiG-21 aircraft and helped set up the integrated air defense network), the two reverses forced them to husband their assets by grounding the MiGs for several months for retraining and devising of new tactics.
Any more lies?

---------- Post added at 07:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:51 PM ----------

Is there also not a gap between the F-22's intakes and fuselage?

If you use gaps between fuselage and intake as an indicator of lack of stealth (which is completely justified, seeing that constructive interference of radio waves can occur when it reflects off the interior of the gap) then the J-20 is the best of all with its fused intake.
You clearly did not learn much. The gaps are not significant contributors when compared against other contributors. That is how body shaping works. Everything must be planned in balance with other elements.

---------- Post added at 07:56 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:54 PM ----------

Yes I agree, so I am subjecting the F-22 to the same scrutiny. Others have said that the F-22 is undoubtably the most stealthy plane in the world and it would be foolish to question this, yet here I am pointing out that it has a huge problem, also present on the T-50, that would compromise its stealth, and is not present on other competing designs.
No...You are exaggerating an alleged problem. If anything, the J-20's canards are more problematic as far as RCS control goes than the imaginary problems created by the F-22's intake.
 
Operation Bolo had the F-4 slaughtered the MIG-21 like cattle.

Operation Bolo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Any more lies?

Measures & countermeasures evolve; but it must be acknowledges that MiGs in conjunction with integrated AirDef systems was really a pain in the a$$ for the Americans. Let us just say that Amerikans were upto some latest SAMs & planes & casualty rate was higher!! (something that is missing in modern American conflicts :azn:)

This is a video I cut out from a documentary where a Soviet technicians based in Vietnam tells the effectiveness of the employed SAMs against US planes
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Russia has a ways to go with the PAK-FA project. It is still a prototype.

Compare the lines, the fit and finish, especially around the cockpit, the radome, the exhaust area. The PAK-FA isn't quite there yet. Look at the gap between inlet and fuselage, the protuberances near the canopy. The PAK-FA canopy isn't even tinted with radar-reflective materials, yet. It will be eventually, but the canopy bow will remain.

It is undoubtedly very capable, but not F-22 class. To say "Move over" is premature.

F-22andT-50.jpg

Comparing finished product with prototype.. Unfair... How bout it??? :P

pakfacombate.jpg
 
Is there also not a gap between the F-22's intakes and fuselage?

If you use gaps between fuselage and intake as an indicator of lack of stealth (which is completely justified, seeing that constructive interference of radio waves can occur when it reflects off the interior of the gap) then the J-20 is the best of all with its fused intake.
I used to wonder about these things.This article seems to have an explanation for the same.
Unlike the F-22, which uses stealth technology, 85 percent of the surface of Russian T-50 is covered with unique nanotechnological materials that decrease both the visibility of the plane and the air drag. The technical specifications of the missiles for the jet exceed the analogues of the US aircraft. In addition, the T-50 can fire the missiles hidden in internal departments at hypersonic speed. The US fifth-generation aircraft can not do this and has to decelerate for the purpose.

---------- Post added at 05:00 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:59 PM ----------

Operation Bolo had the F-4 slaughtered the MIG-21 like cattle.

Operation Bolo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Any more lies?

---------- Post added at 07:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:51 PM ----------


You clearly did not learn much. The gaps are not significant contributors when compared against other contributors. That is how body shaping works. Everything must be planned in balance with other elements.

---------- Post added at 07:56 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:54 PM ----------


No...You are exaggerating an alleged problem. If anything, the J-20's canards are more problematic as far as RCS control goes than the imaginary problems created by the F-22's intake.

Any idea about the nanotech materials spoken about in the article?

Unlike the F-22, which uses stealth technology, 85 percent of the surface of Russian T-50 is covered with unique nanotechnological materials that decrease both the visibility of the plane and the air drag.
 
Measures & countermeasures evolve; but it must be acknowledges that MiGs in conjunction with integrated AirDef systems was really a pain in the a$$ for the Americans. Let us just say that Amerikans were upto some latest SAMs & planes & casualty rate was higher!! (something that is missing in modern American conflicts :azn:)

This is a video I cut out from a documentary where a Soviet technicians based in Vietnam tells the effectiveness of the employed SAMs against US planes
Wonder why everyone avoid the facts of Operation Bolo in front of them. The majority of US air losses in Vietnam came from ground defense, not air-air combat. The lie consistently presented by the Chinese members through misuse and misinterpretation of figures imply the opposite.
 
It's not just the quality of plane but the quality of pilot also that which determines outcome of a dogfight.
 
Any idea about the nanotech materials spoken about in the article?

Unlike the F-22, which uses stealth technology, 85 percent of the surface of Russian T-50 is covered with unique nanotechnological materials that decrease both the visibility of the plane and the air drag.
No idea. Sounds flaky, to me.
 
Unlike the F-22, which uses stealth technology, 85 percent of the surface of Russian T-50 is covered with unique nanotechnological materials that decrease both the visibility of the plane and the air drag.

Russian gobbledygook.
 
Well Russians are trying to claim they have built some kind of cloaking skin. Utterly pointless and beyond believable. Pilots don't actually use their eyes.
 
USA is probably working on a sixth gen aircraft now.

Seventh gen would also be in the pipeline somewhere down the decade.

...this when the world is still to move to fifth gen.
6th and 7th generation? Now what does this mean? Can you specify the likely technologies that would be incorporated into these so called 6th or 7th generation aircraft?:what:
 
Well Russians are trying to claim they have built some kind of cloaking skin. Utterly pointless and beyond believable. Pilots don't actually use their eyes.

Maybe that's not what they meant.
 

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Military Forum Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom