Russia’s newest fighter jet is fifth-generation ‘in-name-only’

[INDIAPOSITIVE]

SOURCE: BUSINESS INSIDER

Just as the US is continuing to develop its latest fifth-generation aircraft in the form of the F-35 Lightning II, Russia has likewise been working steadily towards its own version of a next-generation aircraft.

Unfortunately for Russia, its PAK FA, also known as the T-50, is having developmental issues that put its entire premise of being a fifth-generation into question.Reporting from the Singapore Airshow 2016, IHS Jane’s reports that “Russian industry has consistently referred to the Sukhoi T-50 PAK-FA as a fifth-generation aircraft, but a careful look at the programme reveals that this is an ‘in-name-only’ designation.”

This is largely due to a lack of evolutionary technology aboard the plane compared to previous jets that Russia and the US have designed. Indeed, the PAK FA’s engines are the same as those aboard Russia’s 4++ generation (a bridging generation between fourth and fifth-generation aircraft) Su-35. Additionally, the PAK FA and the Su-35 share many of the same on-board systems.

And even when the PAK FA’s systems are different from the Su-35’s, the plane’s specifications are still not up to true fifth-generation standards.

RealClearDefense, citing Indian media reports that are familiar with a PAK FA variant being constructed in India, notes that the plane has multiple technological problems. Among these problems are the plane’s “engine performance, the reliability of its AESA radar, and poor stealth engineering.”

The question of stealth is one of the largest factors currently influencing perceptions of the PAK FA. In 2010 and 2011, two estimates from individuals close to the program estimate that the plane’s radar cross section (RCS) would be between 0.3 and 0.5 square meters, RealClearDefense notes.

A Russia PAK FA during a test flight.

In comparison, the US Air Force has hinted that the RCS of the F-22 is as small as 0.0001 square meters. The F-35’s RCS is larger, but is still minuscule when compared to the PAK FA, as it has a RCS of roughly 0.001 square meters.

However, it is helpful to bear in mind that actual RCS numbers are classified. Neither Russia nor the US have released the actual RCS of their aircraft. Nevertheless, if the estimations are anywhere near accurate, the PAK FA is significantly less stealthy than its US equivalents.

Currently, Russia is planning on purchasing 12 PAK FA down from an initial order of 52 due to problems with the plane, rising cost, andproblems facing Russia’s economy.

 

[jaiind]

looks wise its semi stealth.

 

[Akasa]

Moving the goalposts will neither change how the T-50 performs nor convince potential buyers of its alleged shortcomings. Let's take a look:

The definition of a "fifth generation fighter" varies from country to country and sometimes even from company to company. These definitions are normally drafted as to give one company's product a marketing advantage. Lockheed defines a 5th-generation fighter as one that encompasses (1) all-aspect stealth, (2) LPIR radar, (3) high-performance fuselage, (4) advanced avionics, and (5) the ability to conduct C4I-enhanced combat. Comparatively, the Chinese define such an aircraft by the so-called "4S" rule: stealth, supermaneuverability, supercruise, and STOL. Hence, this kind of profiling is, in essence, a marketing ploy; it is no different from Dassault calling the Rafale "omnirole" or Russia telling the media that its T-14 is a "5th-generation" tank.

The T-50, even by those hefty standards, should be able to meet most (if not all) of the aforementioned criteria:
- All-aspect stealth: while the T-50 could fare better with engines that equip RCS- and IR-optimized nozzles, its airframe should be by leaps & bounds ahead of legacy 4th-generation airframes. Granted, I neither claim nor imply that myself (or anyone) can deduce an aircraft's RCS by mere looks (we'll leave that to KnAAPO), but there should still be a marked difference when juxtaposed against aircraft that were not designed with low observability in mind.
- LPIR radar: this should be inherent of most AESA radars
- High-performance fuselage: the T-50's airframe draws from the that of the Flanker, which is known for its high AoA and sustained turning rates, amongst other things
- Advanced avionics: the N036 radar complex will feature side arrays in addition to its wings' leading edge extensions and forward radome; this should theoretically provide comfortable coverage of the environment. While the Russians aren't as proficient in developing and deploying AESA radars as the US, some Western European states, or the Chinese, it is important to note that they have demonstrated their ability to build powerful radars with the Irbis-E and FGA35, which are used in the Su-35 and MiG-35, respectively.
- C4I capabilities: there is no reason to believe that a nation of Russia's industrial capacity and military history doesn't have institutions that are capable of implementing common datalinks and support aircraft
- Supermaneuverability: the 117S (and later Al-41) engines slated to power the T-50 provide very decent thrust-to-weight ratios. Combined with Saturn's experience in thrust vectoring technology and the T-50's overall Flanker-esque airframe, the aircraft should be able to achieve kinematics unseen on previous Russian jets.
- Supercruise: this shouldn't be a problem once the Al-41 engines enter service

But again, the PAK FA is an evolutionary program, and any unforeseen changes to either its supply chain or mission will undoubtedly affect the aforementioned parameters.

 

[Maarkhoor]

@Windjammer
i personally believe stealth is just a myth a hype created by USA to prove its superiority but in reality stealth fight are stealth on from front and below, any other aircraft flying high above the stealth aircraft can detect it easily and fire BVR missile.

 

[FlyCheatter]

@Windjammer
i personally believe stealth is just a myth a hype created by USA to prove its superiority but in reality stealth fight are stealth on from front and below, any other aircraft flying high above the stealth aircraft can detect it easily and fire BVR missile.

..made by Russian prof. Ufimtsev ...

the same way stol nozzle were made back in yearly 80-s for su-27, just does worth (as they found out):
Су-27 с поворотными соплами /Авиабаза =KRoN=/

 

[Windjammer]

@Windjammer
i personally believe stealth is just a myth a hype created by USA to prove its superiority but in reality stealth fight are stealth on from front and below, any other aircraft flying high above the stealth aircraft can detect it easily and fire BVR missile.

Not sure with the intake slung so much away from the main body, how can it remain stealthy at all hence in aviation circles, it's refereed to as a follow up Flanker.

 

[Maarkhoor]

Not sure with the intake slung so much away from the main body, how can it remain stealthy at all hence in aviation circles, it's refereed to as a follow up Flanker.

And our Indian members are humping about joint production of stealth fighter with Russia when even Russia still not able to produce stealthy skin and engine nozzles.

 

[gambit]

..made by Russian prof. Ufimtsev ...

I have Ufimtsev's textbook in my little home library and it has nothing to do with 'stealth'. In fact, yrs after the F-117, Ufimtsev had no idea that his work, which was dismissed by the Soviets, contributed to the F-117's development.

Think about your argument for a moment...That if Ufimtsev's work actually had anything to do with low radar observable designs, then why not the Soviets the first to come up with an actual 'stealth' aircraft ?

Fundamentals of Stealth Design & Concepts of RCS Reduction | Page 3

You can swallow the Russian government's propaganda about 'stealth' all you want, but that is not going to work here.

 

[帅的一匹]

Does T50 have weapon bay?

Not sure with the intake slung so much away from the main body, how can it remain stealthy at all hence in aviation circles, it's refereed to as a follow up Flanker.

T50 is failed design far below expectation due to short of funds. As PAF has F31 in its shopping list, maybe PAFcan have air superiority in the future as IAF has no option yet.

If you wanna be a superpower, you shall be both good business man and smart head. Russians are not good at doing trade, the only income are from nature resources and weapon export. It's just a matter of time we surpass them. As to USA, we still have long way to go.

Still we shall not underestimate Russians.

 

[mkb95]

And our Indian members are humping about joint production of stealth fighter with Russia when even Russia still not able to produce stealthy skin and engine nozzles.

nobody can actually achieve full stealth in current or future warfare.its all about reducing rcs.
look at j20's canards

or look at smoke from j31's engine

both of those things compromises stealth.
and russia not being able to produce t50 is all about lack of funds and bad economical period.
just speaking out of common sense.

T50 is failed design far below expectation due to short of funds. As PAF has F31 in its shopping list, maybe PAFcan have air superiority in the future as IAF has no option yet.

thats not gonna happen.we still have option of buying f-35.
U.S. open to selling F-35 jet fighters to India| Reuters

 

[wiseone2]

building a 5th gen aircraft is not easy