Sukhoi PAK-FA / FGFA: Updates,News & Discussions

[IND151]

India’s share in research-and-development work for the joint Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA) project with Russia is currently limited by India’s domestic industrial capabilities but will gradually increase with the project’s implementation, a Russian military expert said Friday.

India’s The Economic Times newspaper reported on October 17 that Indian military officials were concerned over the country’s work share in the FGFA project, which is currently only 15 percent even though New Delhi is bearing 50 percent of the cost.

According to the paper, India’s defense minister is expected to raise that issue during his visit to Russia beginning November 15.

“The figure cited by the Indian side reflects current capabilities of India’s industry, in particular the Hindustan Aeronautics Limited [HAL] corporation,” said Igor Korotchenko, head of the Moscow-based Center for Analysis of Global Arms Trade.

“With the progress in the implementation of this project, we expect the Indian engineers and designers to approach the share determined in the [Russian-Indian] agreement: 50 percent,” Korotchenko said in an exclusive interview with RIA Novosti.

Russia will certainly provide all necessary knowledge and logistics support to Indian specialists, but developing skills and acquiring experience in design and development of advanced fighter aircraft takes a long time and substantial effort, the expert added.

The FGFA project began following a Russian-Indian agreement on cooperation in the development and production of the perspective multirole fighter, signed on October 18, 2007.

The Indian fighter jet will be based on the Russian single-seat Sukhoi T-50 or PAK-FA fifth-generation fighter, which now has four prototypes flying, but it will be designed to meet about 50 specific requirements by the Indian Air Force (IAF).

In December 2010, Russian state arms exporter Rosoboronexport, India’s Hindustan Aeronautics Limited and Russian aircraft maker Sukhoi Company signed a preliminary design development contract worth $295 million for the new aircraft.

Currently the $11 billion final design and research-and-development contract is under negotiation between the two countries. The total program is expected to cost India about $25 billion to 30 billion.

The IAF had initially planned to order 166 single-seat and 48 twin-seat fighters, but India’s chief of air staff said in October last year that New Delhi would now go for only 144 single-seat jets, with domestic production slated to begin in 2020.

 

[vostok]

Another T-50 took to the air

The fifth prototype fighter of the 5th generation T-50 made its first flight.

 

[DrSomnath999]

link plz

 

[Gessler]

5th T-50 prototype in the air.

 

[vostok]

 

[IND151]

The fifth prototype of the prospective 5th — generation aviation complex (PAK FA, T-50) made its maiden flight in Komsomolsk-on-Amur at the Y.A.Gagarin KnAAZ aircraft plant of the Sukhoi Company. The plane was piloted by distinguished test pilot of the 1st class Roman Kondratiev. The fighter aircraft spent 50 minutes in the air and landed safely on the factory airfield runway. The test flight was a success and in full accordance with the flight plan. The stability of the aircraft and the propulsion system were tested during the flight. The aircraft performed well in all phases of the planned flight program. The pilot confirmed reliability of all systems and equipment.

Upon completing the test flights program in Komsomolsk the aircraft will join the flight tests in the city of Zhukovsky near Moscow. Four 5th — generation fighter aircraft have already joined these tests. Two more planes are involved in ground tests — one as a complex ground stand and the other undergoes static tests.

The first flight of the PAK FA took place on January 29, 2010 in Komsomolsk-on-Amur. Currently work is underway on the full range of ground and flight tests. To date, more than 450 flights were carried out under the flight test program.

http://idrw.org/?p=28720

 

[ejaz007]

Oct 21/13: Indian complaints. Aviation Week reports that India is dissatisfied with their development workshare, in a project they came late to and is close to lockdown on their partner’s side, for which they have only recently managed to produce anything resembling their specifications (q.v. April 10/13):

“We have a major opportunity in the FGFA program,” Indian air force (IAF) Deputy Chief Air Marshal S. Sukumar says. However, “at the moment [the 15% development share] is not very much in favor of Indian development. We are flagging it through the government. It should be much more focused towards indigenous development capability.”

As Aviation Week points out, 4 Russian T50 prototypes have performed more than 200 test flights since January 2010, and the VVF plans to begin inducting the fighter in 2015-2016. That doesn’t leave a ton of room for development, which requires fast decisions that begin the partnership early, when the design is still very much in need of refinement. India’s desires and its modus operandi are once again in conflict, and the question is whether the dichotomy will become a stumbling block in negotiations for the final $11 billion system development contract. At this point, the only way to square that circle would be to increase the number of differences between the Russian and Indian fighters, or to involve India in developing a “Block 10″ type successor to a fighter whose core technologies are already a huge stretch for them. Either approach would drive up overall costs for the contract under negotiation (q.v. July 15/13), and add substantial risk to India’s plans to begin manufacturing at HAL in 2022 – itself a problematic proposition, given HAL’s record. Sources: Aviation Week, “India Concerned About Fifth-Gen Fighter Work Share With Russia”.

https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/india-russia-in-negotiations-re-nextgeneration-fighter-03133/

 

[sancho]

Some changes are visible:

 

[DrSomnath999]

@ Sancho

1st part u have posted 2 same pics edit it , but yes u are correct

2nd & 3rd part are neglible changes though

But strange the russians havent done a proper paintshop this time

It reminds me of 1st prototype . This was thought to be used for weapon trials i think

CHEERS

 

[Gessler]

@ Sancho

1st part u have posted 2 same pics edit it , but yes u are correct

2nd & 3rd part are neglible changes though

But strange the russians havent done a proper paintshop this time

It reminds me of 1st prototype . This was thought to be used for weapon trials i think

CHEERS

All prototypes have the usual yellow + grey paint during the first flight I suppose. Even the
4th prototype had same paint scheme as the 5th one you see now, but later on it receives
the blue/grey/white scheme and Russian STAR insignia.

 

[sancho]

@ Sancho

1st part u have posted 2 same pics edit it , but yes u are correct

2nd & 3rd part are neglible changes though

But strange the russians havent done a proper paintshop this time

It reminds me of 1st prototype . This was thought to be used for weapon trials i think

CHEERS

No I didn't, both pics are from the same side, but from different angles.

Not at all, since these are the first aerodynamical changes of the T50 and it should be interesting why they made these changes.

As Gessler said, the first flight was always done without painting.

 

[DrSomnath999]

Interview of Tikhomirov-NIIP Director General Yuri Bely from take off ru March 2013

CHEERS

 

[Gessler]

 

[vostok]

 

[DrSomnath999]

The Stealth value of a stealth plane is highly classified thing no body knows / it is a highly classified data .

but the western standard of RCS value is considerably lesser than russian value of RCS value .

simple examples i can give

1)Vladimir Zagorodnii, chief designer of "Vladimir Tikhomirov NIIP" said

It is interesting to compare the "dueling" possibilities of aviation systems 27SM2-Su (Su-35) and the F-22A «Dry" equipped with "Irbis", can detect a target with RCS of 0.1-0.5 m2 (approximately in this range is the value of the effective radar scattering surface unobtrusive Aircraft Lockheed Martin F/A-22A) at a distance of 165-240 km. At the same time, the American fighter "sees" his opponent with RCS of 1 m2 at a distance of only 200 km (Jane's All the World's Aircraft 2005-2006). Thus, the low-profile "Raptor" with its AESA radar on board of the complex does not have any real advantages over the modernized "dry" in a dogfight missile for "vnevizualnoy" range. "Vladimir Zagorodnii, chief designer of "Vladimir Tikhomirov NIIP" The minimum effective area of the cross section (RCS) are targeted through "Irbis" targets is 0.01 m2 (parameter corresponding to the EPR sverhmalozametnogo
aircraft type American strategic cruise missiles ACM AGM-129).
"http://translate.google.co.in/trans...viewforum.jsp?page=4&id=57&xid=879291&act=url

2)Alexander Davydenko, chief designer of OKB
The chief designer Alexander Davydenko aircraft indirectly hinted at the size of the effective area of the cross section (RCS) of the future fighter. According to him, the old generation EPR aircraft (such as the Su-27) is about 12 m ², whereas the F-22A Raptor, it is in the range of 0.3-0.4 m ². EPR PAK FA "will not exceed the parameters F-22A, it will be very close to them."
http://translate.google.co.in/trans...://www.inosmi.ru/army/20100313/158588233.html

3)AN Lagarkov. Director of the Institute of Theoretical and Applied Electrodynamics.
All of the above technological development is carried out in our country and in leading foreign countries. We demonstrate the global trend of the radar signature of supersonic maneuverable aircraft (Fig. 6). If in the 1980s, aircraft such as the F-15 had an ESR of more than 10 m2 then modernized aviation complex EPR is 1-1.5 m2, while promising fifth-generation aircraft systems such as the F-22, JSF, - 0.3 m2. An even smaller value of the EPR in the modernized Russian MiG-21.

http://translate.google.co.in/trans...prikladnye_problemy_stels-tehnologii/&act=url

meanwhile if u read the western sources article they have relatively very lesser value of RCS of F22 & 4.5th gen plane standards take for example KAAPO from air power australia articles


SO NOW EVERYONE CAN APPRECIATE THAT RUSSIAN CLAIM OF 0.5 M2 RCS IS NOT SO BAD AFTER ALL FOR STEALTH PLANES


CHEERS