What's new

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

Of course, but within enemy airspace the enemy don't have only fighter radars an not only a single fighter. Even if you are behind the fighter, opening the weapon bays makes you detectable for any ground radar or AWACS. So closing in, reducing the time to launch a weapon is preferable for a stealth fighter, than using long range weapons.
Again...Only if said radar, air or ground, is looking at the opened bay. Further, you know that the physical and EM frontal profiles of any aircraft is the lowest. Same for a weapons bay door. If the seeking radar is looking at the edge of said opened door, he will not see the opened bay but only that edge.

When a stealth fighter closes in and try to get a radar lock on the 4ht gen fighter, didn't the 4th gen fighter will get alerted while it is being tracked?
If his RWR has sufficient sophistication to distinguish out low probability of intercept (LPI) transmissions.
 
@gambit

Sir is there any chance F-22 Raptor could recieve a modified version of EODAS in a future MLU?

It would be great if it gets all-round IR/EO sensors.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
@gambit

Sir is there any chance F-22 Raptor could recieve a modified version of EODAS in a future MLU?

It would be great if it gets all-round IR/EO sensors.
Absolutely. The -22 is much more modular than people think. Upgrades to sub-systems are definitely technically feasible.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Head NPO Saturn, Yevgeny Martchkov, states the Stage 2 engine/type 30 will be ready by 2017.
«Начаты и успешно продолжаются опытно-конструкторские работы по двигателю второго этапа. Машина будет готова к 2017 году», - уточнил Марчуков. В то же время он предпочел не раскрывать технические и технологические детали этой перспективной отечественной разработки, передает ИТАР-ТАСС.

"[NPO Saturn] has initiated and successfully continued development work on the second stage engine. It will be ready by the year 2017, "said Martchkov. At the same time, he declined to disclose the technical and technological details of the future development, as reported by ITAR-TASS News Agency.

*
 
25zmsk9.jpg


yS2kh.jpg


wCnWf.jpg


Y9XNL.jpg


15r1t20.jpg


3lw83.jpg


k2k0bd.jpg
Pretty good
 
@Oscar that is some nice work!


+ you forget to add thrust vectoring nozzles!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
IAF FGFA, 3rd Squadron "Cobras" 2018

Nice work as usual, but I think you have placed the IR sensors on the side of the cockpit too low:

7yetiemh.jpg



Can you also do a version with these nozzles and modifications:

fgfa4490.jpg


7wiy5ol4.jpg




@Oscar

What site did you get these from?

His own mods:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/indian-defence/4347-mrca-news-discussions-548.html#post2951967

http://www.defence.pk/forums/indian-defence/4347-mrca-news-discussions-550.html#post2956414
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well the Mod is someone else's.. but it was half baked.. so I tweaked it to fly.. Wish I could record a video.. really got TVC working as it should.
Im currently trying to see if I can get it to lug around Astras and Brahmos.. on the wings.. I suppose they should be strong enough to carry it.
But I think I can get a fleet going for a nice pose..
MKI, Mig-29 UPG, M2K,Rafale and this.. all flying in nice formation.
 
I hope they aren't using the wrong tool set to open up the panels. That'll definitely hinder the RCS. This is probably a trial plane. Lack of Quality Assurance is usually seen in Russian and Chinese weapon systems. The US manufacturers wouldn't have brought the plane in this shape for flight tests. They would do further work to avoid any risk during flight. I can see some aluminum and silicon conductor and composite panels that aren't done correctly or can produce drag, etc during flight. I am sure that will change when they finalize the jet but it'll be considered a flight risk had this been in the US.

Plus, this is a modified-angular version of the Flanker family airframe. This will produce a low RCS jet not a 'new' 'all aspect' wholly entirely 'stealthy' plane like the F-22. It's visible from the design, geometry and a million pictures and drawings that I've seen and reviewed on different places. Not trying to discredit this, it will be leaps ahead of the current jets due to the RCS control and advanced EM and Super Cruise, etc. But, this isn't a direct competition to the F-22 or the F-35. I will credit this airframe for extreme speed, agility and maneuvers.

I think I will go as far as to say that the Chinese J-20 and J-31 may be a closer competitor to the Raptor and the F-35 compared to the TU models. The Chinese have stolen some US technology and they've known to work on advanced surfaces, stealth designs and miniaturized supercomputers for jets and high profile EM-Avionics suite.

You are talking rubbish. Just take a look at some US prototypes on there first flight. Not painted and rivets also everywhere. It was not until the 3rd Prototype they actually put the composite nose cone on the Pak Fa to test the new Radar from memory.

Also in one of your other posts you claim the US has led since WW2. On fighters - they did not lead during WW2. Britain and Germany led. Britain had the Spitfire in production in 1936. The first world class US fighter was the P51 in terms of airframe in 1941. No good with its US engine. Finally in 1943 re-engined with a British Merlin it became effective in 1943. By then of course Britain had the Mosquito. Probably a more effective fighter and light bomber than the P51. German reports say pilots were more afraid of the Mosquito than the P51. [Yes the P51 was good but not until 1943.] The USSR Yaks were good also by then. The P51 was pitiful to start with and the British only used it for recon etc until then.
Mig15 V F86 - Korea. Very hard to tell how they went against the 36 Russian Migs there. US figures have been proved to be about 5 times too high since all Russian Squadron records were released. Example: The US Ace? who claimed 4 Russian Migs on days when no Russian Migs were in the air.
Overall balanced people accept the Mig15 was superior in terms of airframe. More agile - better ceiling - better climb rate - better cannon etc. Maybe not as comfortable but living I imagine comes before comfort.
What did balance up the contest was the superior Gun sight on the F86. Overall if there were equal numbers of Mig15's and F86's and they were all flown by experienced WW2 Pilots like most US F86's the Mig15 would probably have won the Air War.

Next - The Mig17 in production in 1953 - basically an improved Mig15 - all the bugs fixed etc. The US F100 put in production in 1954 with reservations on the part of the USAF. It had problems that were never really fully overcome. It had a terrible attrition rate. They had to do something with the Mig17 coming off the production line. The F86 would have had no chance against the Mig17. The F100 tried to incorporate all the good airframe features of the Mig15 - the swept wing etc.

Vietnam- the USAF admits they lost the initial part of the air war there 9-1. They went home and created better tactics and in effect came back with an Aircraft that skipped a few other models. The Phantom. Against a new Air-force that only started with about 75 aircraft - the mainstay was 36 Mig17's the USSR gave N-Vietnam. The USSR had the Mig21 [In production 1959-1985] which Vietnam only saw a few of towards the end. USAF pilots who flew a captured one for 100 sorties considered it equal to the Phantom in the Air to Air role. The Mig23 was the Russian counter to the Phantom [about 1973]. If the F100 was so good why didn't the USAF send then up against the Mig17's in Vietnam - the US equivalent aircraft. There can only be one reason - guess! The US had thousands of them and 100's in Vietnam but all they did was ground support. By 1972 Russia had the Mig25. Sure only an 800 hour engine life but you can fly lots of combat missions in 400 hours. Change the engine in about 1.5 hours if necessary - designed to be done in the field. As was proven in Israel when the Russians flew Recon missions over Israel nothing Israel had could touch them. Some "US types" claim a Phantom got close to it once. In a book I read about the conflict a Jewish South African pilot flying a Mirage for the IAF says it was the Mirages only that had a chance of l
getting close enough to launch a Missile? It does not matter - they could not shoot one down anyway. Sure one Russian crew cooked there motors escaping a missile but I imagine there orders were to take no chances. Better a few cooked motors than a lost aircraft over Israeli territory. Especially if it came down in one piece.

Just where are all these superior US Aircraft since WW2. I have not even gone into European Aircraft of the time.

It simply did not happen until the F15 went into production about 1976.
All of its kills also have tended to be against downgraded 3rd Gen or very early downgraded Mig29's of lesser Airforces etc. Just how it would have gone against USSR or Russian T-10's with a good experienced pilot on equal terms is still unknown.
Throw in some Mig25's and Mig31's and it would be interesting.
Hollywood does not always tell the truth.
 
Back
Top Bottom