Are there somehow accurate datas regarding top speed, range, climbing speed etc for T-50 ?

2600 km/h top speed 2100 km/h supercruise, which make sense with the characteristics of engine and new high temperature composites.

Information about 117 and Type 30 engine.

http://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/59798/

А ты не путай 117 и 117С, будет легче

Изначально заявлялось, что на первом этапе будут использованы 117, а на втором (с 2019г) — Изделие 30.

117 отличается от 117С прежде всего, материалами, из которых изготовлены лопатки и колеса турбины, стенки ФК. В отличие от остальных двигателей данного семейства (Ал-31 и 117с), которые используют для этого интерметаллидное соединее — алюминид титана (AlTi), 117 использует его же, но с легированием атомами рутения (Ru) в критических узлах кристаллической решетки. Также двигатель имеет значительно лучшие ВСХ (тяга на боевой высоте падает значительно меньше), что позволяет даже с двигателем 117 достигать крейсерской скорости 2100км/ч с оружием в отсеках.

Изделие 30 же, по сообщениям представителей ОДК, имеет композитные металлокерамические лопатки турбины. О материалах стенок ФК и колес турбины пока не сообщалось.

And you do not confuse the 117 and 117C, it will be easier

Initially, stated that the first phase will be used by 117, while the second (from 2019) – 30 product.

117 differs from the 117C mainly materials making up the blades of the turbine wheel and the walls of the photonic crystal. Unlike other engines within the family (Al-31 and 117c), which are used to connect this intermetallic – titanium aluminide (AlTi) 117 uses his own, but the doping atoms of ruthenium (Ru) at critical sites of the crystal lattice. Also, the engine is significantly better WCC (pull on combat altitude drops considerably less), which allows even with the engine 117 to reach cruising speed of 2100km / h with a weapon in the compartments.

The product is 30, according to representatives of the JDC has cermet composite turbine blades. On the wall materials FC and turbine wheels is not yet reported.

УВТ — только приятное дополнение, не более того

Основное боевое качество двигателя — его ВСХ и удельные характеристики, а они у 117 до нельзя высоки для его размеров и массы.

Потому Т-50 летает со скоростями 2600 на форсаже и 2100 без оного (Тут еще гораздо более совершенная и интересная аэродинамика помогает)

UHT – just a nice addition, not more

Main Battle quality engine – WCC and its specific characteristics, and they can not have 117 to high for its size and weight.

Because T-50 flies at speeds of 2600 and 2100 on the afterburner without it (There is still much more advanced and interesting aerodynamics helps)

You don’t need to outperform the F-22 in order to counter it. What you need is sufficient performance to provide a deterrent effect. That is a much more logical approach that d!ck comparisons, especially since there is little chance that a T-50 would encounter an F-22 over US territory.

We don’t have any evidence of anything you have stated above..

Evidence is in aircraft geometry. T-50 is similar weight and size to F-22 and use similar materials but have more wing sweep, variable inlets, smaller stabs and more powerful stage 2 engine than F-22. There are some small things but when combined it add up and indicate more speed and performance. theres no reason to have those features if goal is not better max speed and supercruise than F-22. T-50 is design for pure performance and best fighter aereodynamics.

They wouldn’t have gone for such a complicated solution if it didn’t offer some advantage. The lift/enlarged engine bay argument is logical, but in -my humble- opinion, not enough. I think they may had in mind that the plane would be a good deal faster than the raptor.

Very good statement.

Metz was talking about an aircraft he has flown, flown for many years and was the main test pilot in. He had deep understanding of the program. Kvochur doesn’t have deep understanding of MiG-41 because it isn’t a real project yet. It isn’t anywhere near a design stage yet, yet alone a prototype he could actually fly. Paul Metz has flown F-22 at 1600+mph, Kvochur hasn’t flown a non-existing MiG-41 at Mach 4 because it doesn’t f*cking exist. But this difference will never get through your thick skull.

Metz is LockMart employee so will say whatever they tell him to. If you want to swallow LockMart propaganda fine but don’t try force it on everyone else. You pick what Mikhailov said in 2004, then you don’t believe Zelin and Bondarev more recent statement. Using outdated information is not reliable This is 2015 and new more advance composites have been developed. T-50 have exceeded supercruise requirement with 117 engines and new engine is being developed. there’s no point to developing second engines without going Mach 2 supercruise and faster max speed. F-22 is fatter and draggier and will be outperformed by T-50. PAK-FA is 20 year newer is much more advance design meant to counter F-22. Theres no reason to think F-22 can be faster it also use composites.

T-50 need to operate at 2600 km/h at 24000m+ altitude to break envelope of Patriot PAC3 MIM-104F altitude 79500 feet (24200 m).

http://fightercountry.org/news/air-force-news/sukhoi-t-50-5th-generation-fighter/71265

Performance:
Much of the performance analysis is unreliable as the actual power-plant is unknown. However, it should be in the range of a max speed of 2.5 Mach, service ceiling of 20,000 m and rate of climb greater than 350 m/second.

Basic Aerodynamics:
The wings on the PAK FA are large and well-swept, optimized for supersonic flight and for high(er) altitudes. In comparison to the F-22, given even remotely comparable engines, the PAK FA should be able to fly faster, for longer and supercruise more effectively (with lower fuel consumption and greater speed).
The all-wing shape of the PAK FA follows the same principles that was so successful with the Su-27 FLANKER and the MiG-29 FULCRUM and not only provides lift, but also provides ample space (along with the large wings) for massive fuel and/or weapons bays. Reducing drag, increasing range and payload and creating lift and stands in good light compared to the F-22s design.

Air Intakes:
CARET inlets of the air intakes are useful for �wave riding�, generating increased lift for the airframe. This allows lower RCS and increased airflow. With the long length of its horizontal wedged edge (of the inlet) additionally helps lift.
Large, moveable Leading Edge Root Extensions (LERX) over the inlets are highly innovative and perhaps plays a role in making the PAK FA super-maneuverable. It is not a flap-like structure but perhaps more like an aileron and behaves in someways perhaps like a canard.
This is an interesting innovation and also provides a solution for the PAK FA in managing air-flow over the wing and onto the slanted stabilizers, solving problems of a twin-tailed delta configuration.

http://english.pravda.ru/russia/economics/18-06-2010/113908-fifth_generation-0/

PAK FA’s speed limit is 2600 km/h, the maximum non-afterburning speed – 2100 km/h. The practical range – 4300 km. For comparison, F-22 Raptor’s speed limit makes up 2410 km.h, the maximum non-afterburning speed – 1963 km/h, and the practical range – 3219 km.

Also this statement from radioscanners.

Так на испытаниях этой весной при полной загрузке топливом и массагабаритными макетами вооружений 4й борт взлетел с 310 метров, достиг крейсерской скорости 2135кмч и максимальной 2610кмч, при этом был еще потенциал по разгону, а так же забрался на 24300 метров – дальше не пустили.

This spring fully loaded with fuel and dummy weapons 4th board took off from the 310 meters, has reached cruising speed of 2135 km/h and maximum speed of 2610km/h, there were also potential for more, and also climbed to 24,300 meters – wasn’t allowed higher.

T-50 is 20 years newer than F-22 so more advanced more aerodynamic. thinner and faster than F-22 based on multiple sources. Info on engine performance show better manuverbility and performance.

Hah. So you can claim *you* know the answer that T-50’s top speed is Mach 2.6 based on a statement that says that its top speed is more than Mach 2. Why Mach 2.6? Why not 2.59? Or 2.61? No, you are the one with the ridiculous statements not grounded in reality but purely in wish thinking.

This has been discussed many times already and all the good evidence we have for T-50’s top speed points to it being in Mach 2 area.

1600mph was basically him lowballing it. It is even faster than that.

F-22 can’t go 1600 mph that is just speculation by one pilot not confirmed at all. No good source ever say more than Mach 2 unlike T-50.

T-50 is much more aerodynamic than F-22. Simple fact T-50 got more advanced inlet and greater sweep.

http://www.interfax.com/newsinf.asp?id=595193

Trials of Russia’s 5th-generation fighter jet ‘in full swing’ – Air Force commander

ASHULUK, Astrakhan region. May 28 (Interfax-AVN) – Russia’s T-50 fifth-generation fighter jet will outperform similar U.S. airplanes on all parameters, Russian Air Force Commander Col. Gen. Viktor Bondarev told reporters on Thursday.

“It will be in no way worse than similar American planes such as F-22 and F-35. Rather, it will outperform them in almost all parameters,” he said.

Trials of the new Russian fighter jet are “in full swing” today, Bondarev said.

“The airplane is demonstrating excellent performance. It has an excellent system of weapons against both land and air [targets]. The plane is practically invisible to radar,” the commander said.

Cutting-edge technologies were used to design this aircraft, he said.

“The features given to it by its designers allow it to outperform all similar planes that already exist or will soon appear abroad,” Bondarev said.

The new fighter jet has a maximum speed of more than Mach 2, the commander said.

“But it is not very important today. What counts most is its invisibility to radar, weapons and maneuverability,” the commander said.

Max speed more than Mach 2, around 2.6 likely.