SPECS of PAK-FA?

[DOkTORspin]

i mean what is the supposed specs of this mythical plane.is it single engined or dual?will it be stealth ?i am real confused about this plane.google didnt help much.so if anyone has any definate info or pics plz post it.enlighten me......

[SOC]

Twin engine. Stealth. FLANKER-sized. Apparently somebody thought it would be amusing to contract Yakolev to develop V/STOL systems for a few of them. Maybe they wanted to have a few laughs trying to watch them make something the size of an Su-27 hover at 500 feet? :D

[matt]

Originally posted by SOC
Twin engine. Stealth. FLANKER-sized. Apparently somebody thought it would be amusing to contract Yakolev to develop V/STOL systems for a few of them. Maybe they wanted to have a few laughs trying to watch them make something the size of an Su-27 hover at 500 feet? :D

lol


oh weight just thought technically does the Su-27 not hover for a few seconds when it does the tail slide ?? or even coming out of the Cobra?

[Rammstein]

the Pak-Fa is pretty much a reality as is the J-13 project....

its supposedly based as an advanced version of the berkut S-37

notice the "01" on the side???

http://www.maks.ru/2001/images/1/277.jpg

the yellow one is an Su-30 MKK2

[Rammstein]

i doubt the veracity of the "hover" part...

seeing as the mki is 30 odd tons....

[J33Nelson]

Wouldn't the S-37 be a lot more stealthier if she got rid of her two tails. I think an advanced tailess S-37 would be a great bird for India.

[matt]

Originally posted by J33Nelson
Wouldn't the S-37 be a lot more stealthier if she got rid of her two tails. I think an advanced tailess S-37 would be a great bird for India.

also a b$t$ if it ever got a hole through its wing or something..

would be better if they worked on a forward swept blended body approach its more sound structurally..

[SOC]

#503 above is the third Su-30MKK prototype, not an Su-30MKK-2 (although it could have been modified to support that program).

[GarryB]

"Maybe they wanted to have a few laughs trying to watch them make something the size of an Su-27 hover at 500 feet?"

The Yak-43 experiemental (paper) aircraft was to use a vectored thrust variant of the NK-321s used in the Blackjack and Backfire M3s. A twin engine version would have Backfire M3 levels of power... ie fully comparable to the thrust of a B-1B... 50 ton class. That would get a Flanker up I think.

(Lets face it, with the manoverability of modern missiles and quality seekers then the manouverability of an aircraft is much less relevant in the evasion of missiles. Things like stealth, directed countermeasure systems and powerful jamming systems become more important... and for all these things (except stealth) size means bigger is better... ie more room, more weapons, more fuel.)

If it is to have an allround radar then that is going to influence weight and size too.

[Vympel]

I have doubts as to the JDW information presented last year- I remember a fellow on the forum being quite skeptical about it- *shrug*

[SOC]

Whatever the case we'll know soon enough. Since the article actually quoted Russian defense officials, I'll give it the benefit of the doubt until they roll out an entirely different aircraft.

[Vympel]

Originally posted by SOC
Whatever the case we'll know soon enough. Since the article actually quoted Russian defense officials, I'll give it the benefit of the doubt until they roll out an entirely different aircraft.


Well- it is vague enough and it is sufficiently early days (Russian media reporting that Sukhoi will conduct the 'defense' of their design in 2004) that if they roll out a twin engine fighter in the same weight class, the article is largely vindicated.

[ogami musashi]

JDW article is completly speculation.

The design shown is aerodynamicaly very very weird.


For example the author tries to make us believe that with a 15,5 meter span and a leading edge sweep of ~30°(just the same than the F35 wings...strange) the plane would go at mach 2.35!
Considering the same fixed inlet than the S-37 that was limited to mach 1.6....
The root extensions usefullness is also very low-probability-of-interest as aft swept wings deviates flows outwards...what is the use of the aft portion of those extensions thereforce?



Knowing the author's past fakes i'm pretty sceptical about this design moreover talking with a sukhoi design bureau enginer i learned they were themselves not ready for sketch design...




We'll see how it develops and i'm happy about the fact both sukhoi and migs will develop their own fighters(this time for mig with a completly original design not like mig-29).

[SOC]

With fixed intakes you aren't getting much past Mach 2.

[ogami musashi]

that's one of the several reason i'm sceptical about this JDW piotr butowski design..

[Pete_sj]

Originally posted by SOC
With fixed intakes you aren't getting much past Mach 2.
The F-104 has fixed intakes and it can achieve mach 2.2. The X-7A had fixed intakes and it did mach 4.3.

http://www.alt-accel.com/pogo/pogapndc.htm

[ogami musashi]

You're right;but a fixed inlet has a fixed mach design performance.

and the inlet of S-37 was limited to Mach 1.6-1.7