Russia's New fighter on airfield near Moscow for tests

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/29887a5f263a.jpg[/atsimg]
Article:

Russia’s Sukhoi aircraft makers have brought their latest fifth-generation jet to an airfield near Zhukovski southeast of Moscow for further tests

The plane is a computerized fighter bomber boasting cutting-edge radar and fly-by-wire systems and remarkable stealth capabilities.

Other related stories: Russian fifth-generation fighter: high hopes (good video-in English): english.ruvr.ru...
english.ruvr.ru... (many photos)
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/3c4d6ff0b002.jpg[/atsimg]

Just a matter of time...... tic tic tic....

More interestingly is that Sukhoi is preparing a second prototype T-50 for flight.

Originally posted by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
More interestingly is that Sukhoi is preparing a second prototype T-50 for flight.

I have been informed that there will be six prototype and preproduction aircraft will be built, with the last 4 being remanufactured to production standard after the type enters service.

Prototype 1 (the one currently flying) will validate the aerodynamic basics, flight controls and certain avionics systems, life support systems and maintenance basics.

Prototype 2 will validate the new engines, stealth and sensory systems.

The preproduction aircraft will integrate weapon systems and validate combat abilities.

People made a big thing about how the weapons bays on the first T-50 were 'fake', and how there were visible construction components visible (screws et al) and on the basis of that, the T-50 was already dismissed as a capable aircraft. You guys should have seen the first F-22s (not the YF-22 but the actual F-22) that were flown - those were in much the same state.

reply to post by RichardPrice


You seem to be in the know about Russia aircraft. I posted nurerous things about Russia/Military/Influense peddling. One story I linked indicated India was going to start producing Mig-29's . I thought that was odd then but I see know-the Mig 29 must be considered old school now.

Am I correct-do you know?

Link to the post I referenced (FYI): www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 4/10/2010 by anon72]

No, there is no production line planned as far as I know - India already has the majority of the type that it intends to purchase, with ongoing acquisitions simply being top up orders.

[edit on 10/4/2010 by RichardPrice]

Originally posted by RichardPrice

Originally posted by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
More interestingly is that Sukhoi is preparing a second prototype T-50 for flight.

I have been informed that there will be six prototype and preproduction aircraft will be built, with the last 4 being remanufactured to production standard after the type enters service.

Prototype 1 (the one currently flying) will validate the aerodynamic basics, flight controls and certain avionics systems, life support systems and maintenance basics.

Prototype 2 will validate the new engines, stealth and sensory systems.

The preproduction aircraft will integrate weapon systems and validate combat abilities.

People made a big thing about how the weapons bays on the first T-50 were 'fake', and how there were visible construction components visible (screws et al) and on the basis of that, the T-50 was already dismissed as a capable aircraft. You guys should have seen the first F-22s (not the YF-22 but the actual F-22) that were flown - those were in much the same state.

T-50 / Project 701 / PAK FA with video of the T-50(fifth generation) on it's first flight, Russia's answer to the F-22. The production line is trying for one third of the market, operational in three years Russian and Indian Air Forces.

1. The PAK FA is generally similar in appearance to the American F-22, though there are so many differences in detail that it is clearly an original design rather than a knock-off copy. A direct comparison with the F-22 is probably not meaningful on an unclassified basis, but Russian marketers will probably sell it as roughly equivalent in combat potential. While the F-35 is also a fifth generation stealth fighter, the low observable characteristics of this attack aircraft are said to be markedly inferior to the all-around stealth of the F-22 air supremacy fighter.

Zelong.

[edit on 11/4/10 by Zelong]

reply to post by Zelong


I don't understand the relevance of your post in relation to quoting my post.

They say that stealth is one of this new planes strong suits and yet it does not have the same degree of facets and chines as say the F117 maybe there is a trade off with aerodynamics and the need for speed at least that seems logical to me.

Originally posted by sherpa

They say that stealth is one of this new planes strong suits and yet it does not have the same degree of facets and chines as say the F117 maybe there is a trade off with aerodynamics and the need for speed at least that seems logical to me.

The F-117 was old-style stealth - it was faceted in the way it was because there was not enough computer power around at the time it was designed to calculate radar returns from curved surfaces - this changed when the B-2 was developed, and ever since then the entire F-117 stealth was obsolete.

With the advent of more powerful computers, stealthy aircraft no longer need to look strange, and this is a huge benefit because it means that total stealth no longer means huge trade offs (the F-117 had huge aerodynamic and payload trade offs because it was designed as a stealth platform first, everything else second - the F-22 and F-35 were designed as weapons platforms first, with stealth being built in to the design from the start).

The T-50 does make some stealth sacrifices however - its primarily a front 180 degree stealth platform, and sacrifices stealthy engine exhausts for speed and manoeuvrability. Personally, I don't see this as much of a sacrifice, a highly agile aircraft combined with speed and a significantly low radar cross section is usable in more conflicts than an all out stealth platform such as the F-22, and is lower cost as well so the procurement issues that the F-22 ran into should not be a factor in the T-50.

reply to post by anon72


MiG 29s are old school.. just like F-16s.. But countries still operate them (F-16s) in various versions. and may continue to do so for a couple of decades.

India has around 70 MiG 29s bought in the early 90s.
These are under an upgrade program that will give them Gen 4 capabilties (BVR missile range and radar sight, upgraded engines etc.) The program is worth approx 1billion USD and most of the a/c are to be upgraded in India under Russian supervision. It is planned to be completed by 2013.


In addition, the Indian Navy has purchased the naval version of the MiG-29.. MiG-29K which is a Gen 4 a/c that is intended for carrier operations from 2-3 carriers. Initially 16 were purchased of which 4 have already been delivered, and another 29 have been ordered.

reply to post by RichardPrice


I guess that makes sense emulation software and microprocessors have a lot to answer for however using the B2 as a later generation example makes me raise an eyebrow purely from the point of view that they new the low radar profile characteristics of a flying wing back in the 1950's with the Northrop designs.

Originally posted by sherpa
reply to post by RichardPrice

 

I guess that makes sense emulation software and microprocessors have a lot to answer for however using the B2 as a later generation example makes me raise an eyebrow purely from the point of view that they new the low radar profile characteristics of a flying wing back in the 1950's with the Northrop designs.

Sure, the low observability characteristics were known from WW2, but they pale in comparison to what Northrop achieved with the B-2. And that was down to the numbercrunching done by their design department specifically for stealth.

reply to post by RichardPrice


Then do you not find it interesting that their number crunching came up with a shape already proven by application so many years before, kinda like re-inventing the wheel, I know I do.

Originally posted by sherpa
reply to post by RichardPrice

 

Then do you not find it interesting that their number crunching came up with a shape already proven by application so many years before, kinda like re-inventing the wheel, I know I do.

You misunderstand - the computers didn't come up with the flying wing shape, as that had already been chosen as the start point by both Northrop and Lockheed for their aircraft. The computers lowered the radar cross section by several hundred orders of magnitude.

The flying wing was chosen because it is aerodynamically efficient, not because its a ready made stealth shape - without the application of the stealth package, it would still be well within the detection capabilities of modern radar.

Interesting looooong article regarding the PAK-FA.

www.flightglobal.com...

Your article can not be open.

It works fine here, on multiple computers, in IE, Firefox and Safari.

I adore how people get a hard on when they see new Russian or Chinese weaponry! I realize after saying this that most of you already realize this but I still find it funny.

A half dozen of these new "Stealth Fighters", couldn't go toe to toe with a single F-22 or F-35 of any platform. As far as I'm concerned Russia can have our 1980's and early 1990's technology. It will for sure help with troop morale for the Russians!

To see what these eyes see everyday and you would understand. To go along with policy and code I can inform you that I work on a project that no longer requires clearance but once did. (V-22 Osprey MV/CV Configurations).

I also work on other items which can not be discussed. Call me a phony or a fraud. It doesn't really bother me. I still draw a paycheck and would like to continue to do so!

*Shout out to Bentoulis in IT!* Woot Woot!

reply to post by sherpa


Re-inventing the wheel. I could not have said it better myself. When will the Russians and Chinese learn. All of this has been done. Look back at Duxford and Lakenheath Air Shows in the Early 90's... Bust out the Google kiddies!

Originally posted by RichardPrice
The computers lowered the radar cross section by several hundred orders of magnitude.

An order of magnitude in science means a power of ten. If you are saying that they decreased the x-section by ten to power of -200, this can't possibly be true

You likely misspoke.