New video of PAK-FA
Thread Starter
New video of PAK-FA
Comrades,
thought you might be interested in this
Putin?s vaunted new fighter jet
New shots, among other types, of the F-22-ski.
thought you might be interested in this
Putin?s vaunted new fighter jet
New shots, among other types, of the F-22-ski.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here's an interesting tidbit from that article:
It’s primary asset is an X-band multimode AESA radar, supplemented by L-band radars said to be capable of bouncing signals off opposing stealth aircraft.
Such a radar would give a general indication of where the ‘enemy’ is. The T-50s pilot would then fall back on infra-red and optical sensors to pick it out of the sky.
Problem is, a passive ESM system is going to detect the active system's emissions way before the active system will pick up any returns. That will give the stealthy aircraft (presumably F-35) a big advantage assuming it has a long range internal carriage missile. Is AMRAAM long range enough? Or will F-35 have to wait till the Meteor is fielded? Even if F-35 will be dependent on Meteor, it seems highly likely that Meteor will get fielded well before T-50 gets fielded. Which would seem to indicate AMRAAM will be long range enough for some time.
It’s primary asset is an X-band multimode AESA radar, supplemented by L-band radars said to be capable of bouncing signals off opposing stealth aircraft.
Such a radar would give a general indication of where the ‘enemy’ is. The T-50s pilot would then fall back on infra-red and optical sensors to pick it out of the sky.
Problem is, a passive ESM system is going to detect the active system's emissions way before the active system will pick up any returns. That will give the stealthy aircraft (presumably F-35) a big advantage assuming it has a long range internal carriage missile. Is AMRAAM long range enough? Or will F-35 have to wait till the Meteor is fielded? Even if F-35 will be dependent on Meteor, it seems highly likely that Meteor will get fielded well before T-50 gets fielded. Which would seem to indicate AMRAAM will be long range enough for some time.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The vertical fins are all moving, so maybe they don't need to be as big. Further, with two-axis thrust vectoring smaller fins would seem to be able to do the job of yaw control. The F-22's thrust vectoring is in pitch plane only. F-35 has no thrust vectoring at all except for B model for VTOL operation only.
Not long. 
(I'm cheating quite a a bit there - that scheme isn't an aggressor scheme reflecting the Russian colours at all, but is a commemorative scheme for 100 years of US Naval Aviation and was chosen to acknowledge the digital pattern on modern uniforms.)
(I'm cheating quite a a bit there - that scheme isn't an aggressor scheme reflecting the Russian colours at all, but is a commemorative scheme for 100 years of US Naval Aviation and was chosen to acknowledge the digital pattern on modern uniforms.)
That last one looks a nicer colour scheme!
The name 'PAK-FA' does seem to infer the beastie hasn't much payload though. It reminds me of a few years back, when the Russians came up with the 'Multi-role Fighter Interceptor', or MFI for short. Roger Bacon, who penned the Straight and Level column in Flight, suggested NATO should call it 'Flat Pack'.
The name 'PAK-FA' does seem to infer the beastie hasn't much payload though. It reminds me of a few years back, when the Russians came up with the 'Multi-role Fighter Interceptor', or MFI for short. Roger Bacon, who penned the Straight and Level column in Flight, suggested NATO should call it 'Flat Pack'.
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Moscow region
Age: 65
Posts: 567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Strange that this meaningless abbreviation - PAK FA - is used so often. Without going into Russian wording, it is just an abbreviated name of the whole project, like e.g. JSF.
Better call it Т-50, as for now.
When the test period is over, it will be given a "traditional " index, Su-xx (TBD).
Better call it Т-50, as for now.
When the test period is over, it will be given a "traditional " index, Su-xx (TBD).
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Moscow region
Age: 65
Posts: 567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hunterboy,
There is no such a tradition/habit in Russia to give nick names like e.g. "Flanker", "Fulcrum" etc. Even if somebody "invents" a name like e.g. "White Swan" for Tu-160 or "Alligator" for Ка-52 (helicopter) they are not used in everyday life. Rather trivial derivatives from the numerical indicies are in use commonly. No pathos, at all.
Conversely, sometimes ironic names are given, like e.g. "comb" for Su-25 (if one takes a front look to a fully armed Su-25, it indeed looks like a comb).
There is no such a tradition/habit in Russia to give nick names like e.g. "Flanker", "Fulcrum" etc. Even if somebody "invents" a name like e.g. "White Swan" for Tu-160 or "Alligator" for Ка-52 (helicopter) they are not used in everyday life. Rather trivial derivatives from the numerical indicies are in use commonly. No pathos, at all.
Conversely, sometimes ironic names are given, like e.g. "comb" for Su-25 (if one takes a front look to a fully armed Su-25, it indeed looks like a comb).
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wasn't the Tu-22 "Awl"??? based on its shape I guess
The normal code names "Blinder" "Fulcrum" are NATO codes - because in the old days little or no serious info was given out by the USSR
The normal code names "Blinder" "Fulcrum" are NATO codes - because in the old days little or no serious info was given out by the USSR
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Blackjack, Blinder, Bear, Flanker, Fulcrum, Fencer, Frogfoot, Comb, Condor, Cub, Hind, Halo, Hip, Hokum, etc etc are all NATO code/reporting names.
Alligator is Kamov's name for it's attack helo. It probably was given a name largely because it was intended at the outset to be an export product, and the export market is accustomed to have names assigned to products.
Tu-22 NATO code was Blinder. Soviet crews called it "shilo" which translates to "awl" because of its shape.
Perhaps one of the reasons for the lack of names is the somewhat unique design/development process used by the old Soviet system. A "design bureau" designs the basic product and (usually) an entirely different entity (sometimes more than one entity) builds and sustains it. The production entity has its own internal "design bureau" with the authority to make changes to the basic design to improve manufacturability or assembly, or to facilitate the incorporation of new material and/or processes as they became available and/or to improve the product itself. The production center has different motivations (and funding) than the design bureau and with the authority to make significant design changes, is why there are so many significantly different variants of Soviet/Russian aircraft.
For example, the Mi-8/17 helo is built in both Kazan and Ulan-Ude. Each production center competes with the other and is why each has its own quite different version(s) of the Mi-8/17.
Alligator is Kamov's name for it's attack helo. It probably was given a name largely because it was intended at the outset to be an export product, and the export market is accustomed to have names assigned to products.
Tu-22 NATO code was Blinder. Soviet crews called it "shilo" which translates to "awl" because of its shape.
Perhaps one of the reasons for the lack of names is the somewhat unique design/development process used by the old Soviet system. A "design bureau" designs the basic product and (usually) an entirely different entity (sometimes more than one entity) builds and sustains it. The production entity has its own internal "design bureau" with the authority to make changes to the basic design to improve manufacturability or assembly, or to facilitate the incorporation of new material and/or processes as they became available and/or to improve the product itself. The production center has different motivations (and funding) than the design bureau and with the authority to make significant design changes, is why there are so many significantly different variants of Soviet/Russian aircraft.
For example, the Mi-8/17 helo is built in both Kazan and Ulan-Ude. Each production center competes with the other and is why each has its own quite different version(s) of the Mi-8/17.