Russian 5th Generation Stealth Fighter PAK-FA has flown.

Originally posted by 3vilscriptYes but is it practical and cheap to fight a war in this manner?

Practical: Yes. very. It saves human lives by not having a pilot commandeering a plane and the UCAV itself can do maneuvers that even the mighty Flankers, SU-50 and F-22's can only dream of.

Without the weight of pilot+support systems onboard the fighter jet, an UCAV can lift up more payload. And the size will get smaller making its RCS far smaller by standard.

Cheap: No expensive pilot training programs, no artificial limits in airframe design, lesser material usage in building a fighter. Those factors are driving down the costs of building a UCAV fighter.

I mean, it would be great if wars were fought only by robots and the sort minimizing human loss, but in the end governments will consider the machines more valuable than a pilot in a cheaper... F-15 or Su-27.

Well, then those goverments are fools that dont understand the concept of arms-race. Imagine a country like Russia being able to attack every country on the planet with impunity. Not a pretty sight eh?

Face it, modern weapons like the SU-50 are so good that they even influence Geo-politics. I just cannot imagine the shockwaves if China for instance, has a full fleged 6th gen Fighter UCAV that outperforms the SU-50 with kill rates of 1:100.

One could argue that the technology will get cheaper and accessible as time goes on, and its true, but it sort of defeats the purpose for "the latest in tech."

ehhh.... what?

I have always been fascinated by Russian tech. There is something so incredibly practical about how they go about things.

Given that Soviet Union/Russia always had such a low millitary budget it shouldnt come as a surprise.

And with WW:II fresh in memory, they saw NATO as a threat just as big as Nazi-Germany, Thats why they dont fool around.

Enough off-topic bitching.

SU-50 painted on its second flight:

reply to post by James R. Hawkwood


Fair enough...

That pic looks awesome!!! One question though, does it look like the thruster nozzle is pointing up? And if so why? Is it landing or taking off?

Nice pic though, wish there was a higher resolution for a wall paper.

Originally posted by 3vilscriptThat pic looks awesome!!! One question though, does it look like the thruster nozzle is pointing up? And if so why? Is it landing or taking off?

The nozzle is probably not pointed upwards. the upper part of the nozzle is hidden so we cant say for certain but i think that the angle is just deceiving us into believing that the nozzle is up.

And its taking off.

Nice pic though, wish there was a higher resolution for a wall paper.

Hopefully we get some HQ/HR pictures from Sukhoi in the comming weeks.

Also: Carlo Kopp has made his preview/review of the SU-50. Yes, you may hate him or love him, he certainly has a detailed oversight.:

www.ausairpower.net...

In short, he is utterly convinced that the F-35 is doomed as an export product and that the F-1* series and the Euro-cannards are obselete when this fighter jet is introduced.

His advice: Buy F-22 with modernisations.

Originally posted by James R. Hawkwood

In short, he is utterly convinced that the F-35 is doomed as an export product and that the F-1* series and the Euro-cannards are obselete when this fighter jet is introduced.

His advice: Buy F-22 with modernisations.

Which is not for sale.. so basically his advice is.. dont do anything..
I tend to take ausairpower with a pinch of salt nowadays.. too many doomsday scenarios..

The F-35 is not a bad pick for the RAAF. Unless it plans to become a regional superpower or something. Which it does not.
Well maybe the Typhoon is a better pick.

A war between USA an Russia is unlikely, so a F-22 vs Pak Fa situation is almost impossible on the other hand F-35 vs Pak Fa is more likely, excluding eHAWKs and other tactical advantages from the equation things get interesting, the all idea of stealth is to be stealthy, radar is not an option, cross section gets almost irrelevant and BVR engagements improbable, making close combats the deciding factor of the outcome of the battle.

Originally posted by Daedalus3Which is not for sale.. so basically his advice is.. dont do anything..

Well, it seems that before the whole F-35 parade was unleashed, the F-22 was being offered to Australia in 2000/2001.

Maybe he is hoping that the AU goverment pressures the US goverment to unblock the F-22's exports.

If Australian goverment does want to buy F-22's, they should do it quickly before the line is closed pernamently.

I tend to take ausairpower with a pinch of salt nowadays.. too many doomsday scenarios..

It has a lot of doomday scens indeed but its better to prepare for the worst anyhow. All IMHO offcourse

The F-35 is not a bad pick for the RAAF. Unless it plans to become a regional superpower or something. Which it does not.
Well maybe the Typhoon is a better pick.

Mixed force of Typhoon's and SU-34's to replace the F-18's and F-111's. That would sound just about right.

=================================================

New pictures of the SU-T50 can be found here:

forum.keypublishing.co.uk...

Its the T-50-0 static airframe.

Notice the massive HUD that the T-50 has!!!

Originally posted by James R. Hawkwood
If Australian goverment does want to buy F-22's, they should do it quickly before the line is closed pernamently.

For all the doomsday scenarios Auspower churns out, it won't get the Oz the F-22.. At least not before say Japan or even Israel (maybe not Israel). Maybe they will be sold off say 15-20 years from now as hand-me-downs

Notice the massive HUD that the T-50 has!!!

Notice the Weapons loadout Master Screen on the bottom right hand side. The aircraft is depicted as a saucer on wheels
But it seems to be a weird loadout representation which does not accurately depict two internal bays in tandem.
Maybe its something else?
Sure does look like a loadout display though. Maybe its fake

Originally posted by orangetom1999
Hmmm......??? How stealthy is the IR signature of this aircraft.

Here is something the military doesn't want everybody to know. Just because you have designed an aircraft for thermal stealth doesn't mean it wont still be very conspicuous. Reducing the exhaust signature might help a bit in poor imaging conditions or from hundreds of miles away but there is still a fundamental issue that hasn't be overcome.

The problem is that even if the entire surface of the aircraft approximates the temperature of the surrounding air (say for example -60C) it is still over 200 degrees hotter than the background (space). You may be able to expend a ton of energy pumping that heat away from the surface of the aircraft with a lot of heavy machinery for a short period (I doubt this has ever been put into practice) but that's a lot of thermal mass so very soon you'll have to dispose of it somehow. A difference of 200 degrees is extremely conspicuous for modern thermal imaging systems which now have resolutions below a tenth of a degree.

You may be thinking that because the aircraft is the same temperature as the surrounding air it should appear neutral, in effect blending in and appearing as the same "color". The reason this doesn't happen is because air is completely transparent across many parts of the thermal IR spectrum. Aircraft are not. So when you look into the atmosphere you see what is suspended in it or what is on the other side of it. So in this particular case it is not the air you see but the aircraft and space, and perhaps a bit of moisture (water is not transparent in the thermal part of the spectrum).

An interesting note here is that the amount of heat that a surface naturally radiates or reflects is known as its emissivity. Flat black surfaces have a very high emissivity so stealth aircraft such as the F117 and B2 will appear relatively bright against the background sky. I think this may be part of the reason that modern stealth aircraft are getting away from the flat black surface coatings.

Anyway, I use this methodology while imaging to spot aircraft at night on a regular basis. Here is video of a distant jet that I thermal imaged. Keep in mind that the exhaust plume is transparent in this part of the spectrum and not being imaged. What you see is the entire body of the jet which is at some temperature well below freezing. As you can see, even with a hand held thermal imager the size of a Mag-light and despite the heavy handed compression technique used by the ATS media portal, the jet makes for an easily detectable object.

Originally posted by Daedalus3Notice the Weapons loadout Master Screen on the bottom right hand side. The aircraft is depicted as a saucer on wheels

Wow! nice catch Daedalus! A flying saucer...

Maybe it is a general frontal view and that the other data on that screen section is devoted either for weapons loadout or engine stats.

For the weapons loadout, those "wheels" of the "saucer" are infact the R-73M sidebays.

For the engine stats maybe it is the engine config and that you can change the settings of the inlet doors.

But it seems to be a weird loadout representation which does not accurately depict two internal bays in tandem.
Maybe its something else?

Sure does look like a loadout display though. Maybe its fake

Like above, it could either be engine stats or weapon loadouts.

I am pretty sure that the info is just a test screen to give the designers a general view of how the info would be projected on the screen.

reply to post by James R. Hawkwood


you know what.. it looks like the MFD displays for the Su-35. Compare the saucer pic you linked in that forum with the MFD pic in the ausairpower article..
Same? I think. Just a switcharoo..

your not serious about those factory/testing photos are you?? Do you see anyting wrong with them????

Think it through. I understand that this is a prototype..but think about the pbotos for a few minutes.

Thanks,
Orangetom

reply to post by orangetom1999


What do you mean?


More photos....

Now, no matter how the duct of PAKFA is, this device show more advantage of LO to RCS than a simple S duct.

Yet anotehr boring ho hum aircraft that an alien starship could send straight to the ground. If hostile aliens bent on conquring exist, and can eaily get to us, they must ignore taking us over being that it might bore them to death to engage us. What jokes the governments of the world are, wasting everyones money on a constant flood of low-tech noise-polluting air-polluting garbage like this. Sick of it.

Originally posted by intrinsicYet anotehr boring ho hum aircraft that an alien starship could send straight to the ground.

... Realy? Gee, some of you people out there are very strange indeed. Alright, lets take you serious.

1: This plane might be boring but it is designed by a country who wants to protect its airspace from future fighters like the F-35 or the J-XX.

2: Aliens of that inteligence and technological level dont exist as of now. So why spend much needed money on a threat that dont even exist whilest there are far more realistic and dangerous entity's here on planet earth?

Russia is far more concerned about a country ending invasion of NATO or China if they dont invest in defencive equipment like these to counter the NATO and Chinese equipment.

If hostile aliens bent on conquring exist, and can eaily get to us, they must ignore taking us over being that it might bore them to death to engage us.

Then lets be boring then! No joy for them, peace for us!

What jokes the governments of the world are, wasting everyones money on a constant flood of low-tech noise-polluting air-polluting garbage like this. Sick of it.

You imply that this plane is low tech? Are you serious? This plane is even more maneuverable then the Flanker series of aircraft and its stealthyness factor fits inbetween the F-22 and 35 which is damn impressive and has 5 radar stations and possibly has DAS.

For earthly terms, that is extreemly impressive without costing more then 100 million dollars.

i dont think we can make any estimates about the stealthyness of this plane yet.

paralay.com...

A whole bunch of Pak-Fa photos, both painted and unpainted.

It's a sweet bird... I'm just not sold on the engines. I don't see how effective it's stealth can be with the engines being as exposed as they are. The intake is another hang up for me. That's a lot of cross section. I would hope the engineers are addressing some of these issues... ya'll got a badass bird on your hands.
Personally I preferred the black widow over the raptor... I thought it performed better.

Hello there brutalsun,

Originally posted by brutalsunI'm just not sold on the engines. I don't see how effective it's stealth can be with the engines being as exposed as they are.

The engines on the prototype are just there to test the airworthyness of the airframe and the new engines that are intended for the serial PAK FA fighters are going to have a F-35 like feather exhaust pipes to reduce radar signature.

The intake is another hang up for me. That's a lot of cross section. I would hope the engineers are addressing some of these issues...

If you would at what Emile had posted on the page, you will see a possbily solution to make the intake area more stealthy. A flexible duct.

Here is the image:



When those blades are straight, airflow will be maximal and the plane will have optimum performance. When they are rotated/twisted, you get essentialy a S duct system that reduces RCS significantly.

ya'll got a badass bird on your hands.
Personally I preferred the black widow over the raptor... I thought it performed better.

Cant tell about the YF-23's performance but it sure looks nice.

And RussianSoldier, thanks for all those pictures!