Russian Fifth-Generation Fighter to Exceed Rivals

[ptldM3]

Fine I admit that I was wrong about the stealth ships

Based on scientific papers along Russia is only at the tip of the iceburg, countries in Africa have papers on metamaterials and etc... too but one would not say that they have broken in

Russia does more than just right papers they actually produce technologies.

Again this is BY WEIGHT DISTRIBUTION, meaning that if I wear to build a plane out of wood and then put a lump of depleted Uranium in it the plane would have Uranium as 99% and wood as 1% even though clearly the plane is not made out of wood.

Saying that 60% of the weight comes from commonly used metals provides no relevant information, just like saying that 99% of the weight from my wooden plane comes from depleted Uranium gives no information about the other part of it.

You are in utter denial, what else is the frame going to be made of , clay? Perhaps newspapers? Wood? All of the above materials are extremely light weight and they still make up the majority of the aircrafts weight.

And this is the most easily copied part, countries like North Korea could easily build the outer shell of the F-22 and attach an engine, but that is all it is a shell what separates the shell from other shells is whats inside the shell and the materials that make up the shell.

If it was that easy everyone would be building airframes and buying engines for them, and i highly doubt North Korea would have the fly-by-wire technology able to keep the aircraft airborn.

And i seriously hope you're not saying Russian avionics are poor, Russia was the first to create many inovations in avionics such as hmc, tvs, coordinated data-link, hud/radar in one, first PESA and much more. Infact Lockheed martin (the builder of the F-22) purchased Russian rocket engines for the Atlas program because it was the most advanced engine at the time.

My argument was based around the fact that the F-22 uses an entire tree of technology thats different from the F-16.

And you're saying the pak-fa uses SU-27 technology? Ahhh no.

a tree of technology that China has shown itself to be adept at or rivaling the USA in most of them.

Yea right, that's why China hired Phazatron to help them develope radars, what about China engine struggles? And if i'm not mistaken the Chinese SD-10 uses a Russian seaker. Any fighter sized AESA? What about China either receiving or asking Russia to help or transfer technology, this includes, cruis missles, SAMs, engines and much more.

A tree of technology that Russia has not demonstrated proficiency in, but from publically available data like scientific papers is behind countries like Italy.

Once China can built a decent engine for serial production, make it's own seakers, stop hiring Russians to help build their radars, submarines, and aircraft than you can talk.

I think that coming up with the conclusion that the PAK-FA probably would not be able to compete with the F-22 and that China probably has a better shot of making something more similar to the F-22 than Russia is a perfectly logical conclusion based on the evidence and arguments that I presented.

Has China even made anything similar to the F-15, let alone the F-22? No it has not, so how is China going to build a stealth aircraft compairable to the F-22?

 

[Devianz]

And this is the most easily copied part, countries like North Korea could easily build the outer shell of the F-22 and attach an engine, but that is all it is a shell what separates the shell from other shells is whats inside the shell and the materials that make up the shell.

OK.... so shall we apply the same to formula1 racing. Now you could say the most important factor that defines the performance of a formula1 car is its aerodynamics, in other words the outer shell like you mentioned. Now if making the outer shell was so easy as you said don't you think the low performing teams would just copy the outer shell from a top team.

My argument was based around the fact that the F-22 uses an entire tree of technology thats different from the F-16.

a tree of technology that China has shown itself to be adept at or rivaling the USA in most of them. A tree of technology that Russia has not demonstrated proficiency in, but from publically available data like scientific papers is behind countries like Italy.

I think that coming up with the conclusion that the PAK-FA probably would not be able to compete with the F-22 and that China probably has a better shot of making something more similar to the F-22 than Russia is a perfectly logical conclusion based on the evidence and arguments that I presented.

Publicly available research papers amounts to nothing in military terms. Now how many of the countless number of papers released by USA are from its military R&D institutes? Or how many papers released by China are actually related to defence. Most of the discoveries or inventions made my defence researchers stay away from public.

The military research capability of a country is not judged by the number of journal papers released by a country but rather by the quality of military hardware made by the country. There are numerous countries that release more research paper than Russia but how many of them actually builds better military hardware than Russia. China to date have shown no signs of competing against Russia in the field of engines, radars or even avionics. Over taking Russia is a distant dream for now.

 

[Jigs]

I never called the PAK-FA 1970's technology

I called the Flankers 1970's technology just like people would call the hummers 1970's

If a hummer was made in 1970 and incorporated 1970s car tech. They wouldn't call a 2010 Hummer a 1970s hummer would they ?

So the F-16 and F-15 which currently makes up the majority of the USAF is 1970s tech ? What does that make the majority of the Chinese air-force ? 1960s tech from Russia ?
Then why are you comparing the F-22 to 1970s flankers and not the PAK-FA. Should we compare the latest "1970s" F-16 block 50/52 to your Lavi influenced J-10 now that wouldn't be a fair comparison would it ? Should i bring the 1970s Block 60 into the discussion ?

Sensor fusion is not new, it is technology that has been used in factories for a long while now factories sensors would measure the weight and temperature and a host of other goodies to feed back into a computer that controls the process.

Apparently it is new in Aircraft we are not comparing factory concepts to 5th gen fighter jets here. Why didnt aircraft in the "1970s" have it ?

Supercruise is the same as regular cruise except faster, Super cruise came from increasing the efficiency and power of the 1970's jet engines so that planes can move faster. Nothing different from making a car engine 1% more efficient

English Electric Lightning which is from the 1950s but it couldn't do it efficently or for long periods or at speeds that substantially exceeded Mach 1. While today's aircraft are able to do all of those much more efficiently due to engine design.

We have had AESA and PESA radars for many years, they were just too big to be put on planes

Ok and now they are smaller.




So what new technology is there since these are all old ones the F-22 and PAK-FA seem to incorporate. This discussion is going around in circles because you don't seem to understand some very simple things. I am out. Live in denial that Russia and the U.S. is far ahead of china and your receive and duplicate concepts.

 

[SBD-3]

Source....

plz listen carefully from 2:20 and 2:25

 

[ptldM3]

Sensor fusion is not new, it is technology that has been used in factories for a long while now factories sensors would measure the weight and temperature and a host of other goodies to feed back into a computer that controls the process.

Your anologies are seriously rediculous, sensor fusion is a realatively new concept. Even if factories have some sort of sensor fusion it can not be compaired to an aircraft's compact sensors, factories often have computers the size of buses while aircraft have computers the size of suite cases, in any case a 100 million-300milllion aircraft will have much better sensors than 99.9% of all factories.

Supercruise is the same as regular cruise except faster, Super cruise came from increasing the efficiency and power of the 1970's jet engines so that planes can move faster. Nothing different from making a car engine 1% more efficient

Supercruise is determined by dry thrust and equally as important is the airframe and drag or lack their of. And if your wondering the SU-35 has supercruise.

We have had AESA and PESA radars for many years, they were just too big to be put on planes

But with China's so called superior technology why can't they make an AESA small enough to house in a nose of an aircraft, while Russian can. Isn't it suppost to be the other way around?

 

[Devianz]

I never called the PAK-FA 1970's technology

I called the Flankers 1970's technology just like people would call the hummers 1970's

The 1970s tech talk is utter bullsh1t. Apparently superiority of 21st century tech over the upgraded 1970s tech will not stop a F-15SE or a Su-35S from kicking the a$$ of a modern euro-canard or JSF (in some scenarios)

Sensor fusion is not new, it is technology that has been used in factories for a long while now factories sensors would measure the weight and temperature and a host of other goodies to feed back into a computer that controls the process.

Supercruise is the same as regular cruise except faster, Super cruise came from increasing the efficiency and power of the 1970's jet engines so that planes can move faster. Nothing different from making a car engine 1% more efficient

We have had AESA and PESA radars for many years, they were just too big to be put on planes

OK so are there anything that is not derived from old technology?
So according to you engine tech is old, AESA is old, stealth is old, supercruise is old, sensor fusion is old. So then answer me... what is new about F-22?

 

[Jigs]

In Chinaownseverything's world everything is actually from 1970 so no technology seems to have evolved since this time. Since everything the F-22 has is actually decades old and flankers seem to be stuck in some type of time paradox where they will always be 1970s technology no matter how much 80s 90s and 00 tech you throw in it. Must be the structure

 

[Devianz]

YouTube - Future Dogfights pt 2
plz listen carefully from 2:20 and 2:25

I'm sorry that doesn't qualify as a source. Its a propaganda video. You might as well read the user comments.

 

[Chinaownseverything]

Russia does more than just right papers they actually produce technologies.

Your argument would be stronger if you had some credible evidence

Chinese scientists create metamaterial black hole

How about some examples of Russian metamaterial technology similar to this?

Unbufreakinleavable, Russia produces nano RAM, which is a metamaterial, Russia produces AESA radar which is also metamaterial, Russian also produces magmatized metamaterials, fly-by-opics should also be considered metamaterials, I can keep going all day.

Nano ram is not made by Russia

Nano-RAM - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nano-RAM is a proprietary computer memory technology from the company Nantero.

Aesa radar cannot use meta materials

Active Electronically Scanned Array - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Now look at some of the planes that use it

Northrop Grumman E-2 Hawkeye - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

First flight 1960

Now lets look at history of meta materials

History of metamaterials - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Invention of the metamaterial

Look at the first date 1990

Not going to even bother to disprove the rest of your claims, you seem to have no understanding of what a meta material really is

You are in utter denial, what else is the frame going to be made of , clay? Perhaps newspapers? Wood? All of the above materials are extremely light weight and they still make up the majority of the aircrafts weight.

Are you kidding me? Aluminum is light? Do you know that Aluminum can refer to thousands of types of metals? Crack open a materials science textbook sometime there are literally thousands of aluminum alloys, different types of aluminum depending on how the aluminum is processed , aluminum super alloys all of these can range from being extremely light to extremely heavy and extremely weak to extremely strong.

And i seriously hope you're not saying Russian avionics are poor, Russia was the first to create many inovations in avionics such as hmc, tvs, coordinated data-link, hud/radar in one, first PESA and much more. Infact Lockheed martin (the builder of the F-22) purchased Russian rocket engines for the Atlas program because it was the most advanced engine at the time.

Discussion has nothing to do with avionics

And you're saying the pak-fa uses SU-27 technology? Ahhh no.

I actually said the opposite of this, some indian mentioned that past technology like flankers is proof that Russia can make something similar to the F-22. I think countered by showing that the F-22 uses a whole new field of science that was only first recognized in the 1990's

Yea right, that's why China hired Phazatron to help them develope radars, what about China engine struggles? And if i'm not mistaken the Chinese SD-10 uses a Russian seaker. Any fighter sized AESA? What about China either receiving or asking Russia to help or transfer technology, this includes, cruis missles, SAMs, engines and much more.

I never claimed China had superior avionics, only that they had better computers and mastery of meta materials.

The F-22 is created by melding things from new fields of sciences and combining them with the field of avionics. A new fields of sciences that China is ahead in while Russia is playing catch up.

Has China even made anything similar to the F-15, let alone the F-22? No it has not, so how is China going to build a stealth aircraft compairable to the F-22?

The F-15 has nothing to do with the F-22, just like teleporting atoms has nothing to do with the F-22

 

[Chinaownseverything]

In Chinaownseverything's world everything is actually from 1970 so no technology seems to have evolved since this time. Since everything the F-22 has is actually decades old and flankers seem to be stuck in some type of time paradox where they will always be 1970s technology no matter how much 80s 90s and 00 tech you throw in it. Must be the structure

The F-22 uses meta materials, the field of science was only recognized in the 1990's

Flankers use things that already existed in the 1970's except that improvements on these things allowed them to fit on planes

History of metamaterials - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Invention of the metamaterial

Historically, and conventionally, the function or behavior of materials can be altered through their chemistry. This has long been known. For example, adding lead changes the color or hardness of glass. However, at the end of the 20th century this definition was about to be expanded.[9]

In the 1990s Sir John Pendry, a physicist from Imperial College in London who was consulting for a British company, Marconi Materials Technology, as a condensed matter physics expert. The company manufactured a stealth technology, a radiation-absorbing carbon, for naval vessels. However, the company did not understand the physics of the material. The company asked Pendry if he could figure it out.[9]

 

[Chinaownseverything]

Your anologies are seriously rediculous, sensor fusion is a realatively new concept. Even if factories have some sort of sensor fusion it can not be compaired to an aircraft's compact sensors, factories often have computers the size of buses while aircraft have computers the size of suite cases, in any case a 100 million-300milllion aircraft will have much better sensors than 99.9% of all factories.




Supercruise is determined by dry thrust and equally as important is the airframe and drag or lack their of. And if your wondering the SU-35 has supercruise.



But with China's so called superior technology why can't they make an AESA small enough to house in a nose of an aircraft, while Russian can. Isn't it suppost to be the other way around?

I already explained the difference between improvements of old things and actual creation of something new. Supercruise and all that cool stuff just came from improvements of old technology.

Again I explained to you why China can't make AESA, Theres a fundamental difference between OLD technology and NEW technology.

Just because you can do new technology does not mean you can do old technology.

China is ahead in brand new fields like super conductivity, metamaterials and all of those other fields.

But behind in already established fields like avionics.

Just because a country is advanced enough to teleport things it is still possible for that country to lack basic technology like crop rotation for agriculture.

Following this thought process that there is a difference between old and new technology. Building a F-16 does not mean that you can build a F-22.

 

[sssss]

And guess,India has already signed these 5th gen fighters,which unfortunately China has on papers and Pakistan has no hopes.

 

[500]

And if your wondering the SU-35 has supercruise.

Only partial. Su-35 can support supersonic speed without afterburners, but it cant pass sound barrier without afterburners.

 

[TCS]

And guess,India has already signed these 5th gen fighters,which unfortunately China has on papers and Pakistan has no hopes.

Engine, Radar are heart of any fighter and Russians are way ahead of China in this field

 

[ptldM3]

Your argument would be stronger if you had some credible evidence



Chinese scientists create metamaterial black hole

How about some examples of Russian metamaterial technology similar to this?

I'll send some old articals writen on Russian RAM development, when i can find them.

Nano ram is not made by Russia



Nano-RAM - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nano-RAM is a proprietary computer memory technology from the company Nantero.

Do you have any idea what the definition of of nano is? Nano is something that is small enough on the melecular level.

Aesa radar cannot use meta materials

Again do some better research:


http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...kYCuCw&usg=AFQjCNG7Xv8L9wP-h2TLQVYP39yCQPZZhg

Metamaterials: Can be used to make conformal arrays where otherwise not posssible; can make “Superlens Lens” which focuses beyond diffraction limit at optical wavelengths; potentially can stealth targets; used commercially in wireless router where it reduces size of antennas (8 of them) by large amount and increases isolation between the antennas

Now look at some of the planes that use it

Northrop Grumman E-2 Hawkeye - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

First flight 1960

Now lets look at history of meta materials

History of metamaterials - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Invention of the metamaterial

Look at the first date 1990

Not going to even bother to disprove the rest of your claims, you seem to have no understanding of what a meta material really is

What are you trying to prove? That aircraft such as E-2's use AESA? You should have learned from your other post that Weki can be garbage, much of the none US aircraft listed do not use AESA, instead AESA was in the development stages, Either way what were you trying to prove?

And it's you that has a hard time understanding.

Are you kidding me? Aluminum is light? Do you know that Aluminum can refer to thousands of types of metals? Crack open a materials science textbook sometime there are literally thousands of aluminum alloys, different types of aluminum depending on how the aluminum is processed , aluminum super alloys all of these can range from being extremely light to extremely heavy and extremely weak to extremely strong.

Thanks captain obvious, but certain aluminums dominate the aerospace industry:


MakeItFrom.com: 2024 Aluminum

Alloy 2024 was introduced by Alcoa in 1931 as an alclad sheet in the T3 temper. It was the first
Al-Cu-Mg alloy to have a yield strength approaching 50,000-psi and generally replaced 2017-T4
(Duralumin) as the predominant 2XXX series aircraft alloy. With its relatively good fatigue resistance,
especially in thick plate forms, alloy 2024 continues to be specified for many aerospace structural
applications. 2024 varient alloys, such as higher purity 2124 and 2324, with improvements in
strength and other specific characteristics, have also found application in critical aircraft structures.
An improved sheet alloy for fuselage applications was introduced in 1991. Alclad C188 offers
improved fracture toughness and fatigue crack growth while maintaining the strength characteristics
of 2024.

Discussion has nothing to do with avionics

You were boasting that Chinese computers are better than Russian computers...

The F-15 has nothing to do with the F-22, just like teleporting atoms has nothing to do with the F-22

Read my statement carefully.

China is ahead in brand new fields like super conductivity, metamaterials and all of those other fields.

But behind in already established fields like avionics.

Just because you can do new technology does not mean you can do old technology.

So now China is behind in avioncs, shouldn't it be ahead because of it's science base and better computers?

And avionics in the US and Russia are always changing; for instance, the OLS-35 was a radical departure from previous systems, and DAS is also unique. There are always avionics breakthroughs, established feilds should be no excuse, infact it should be easyier since you are working with an existing technology instead of something new and unfamiliar.