“Sukhoi’s FGFA prototype, which is expected to make its first flight within weeks, is a true stealth aircraft, almost invisible to enemy radar. According to a defence ministry official, “It is an amazing looking aircraft. It has a Radar Cross Section (RCS) of just 0.5 square metre as compared to the Su-30MKI’s RCS of about 20 square metres.”

Gimme a call when you see any “frontal” in there.

Well that figure for the Flanker is a frontal RCS, so why should I assume otherwise for the PAK FA?

Being an F35 thread this comment is about the F35…right? ;):diablo:

The F-35 has been tested on a pole by the USAF. It’s engine(the F-135) is developed. It’s EOTS/EODAS/AESA sytems have all been tested. Weapons integration is ongoing. It’s not hardware issues that are the hold up for system maturity on the F-35. How far along are the production representive avionics, sensors, engines, RCS reduction, etc.. is the PAK FA comparitively speaking?

They are not claiming frontal RCS figure of .5m^2, just RCS figure of 0.5m^2.

Source?

So you have it in writing from the Russians that the production version will retain all those things from this first flying prototype that increase RCS?

The final version will most likely be quite different from this first prototype.

Once they have a production example flying, we can comment on that. What’s amusing is seeing people making outrageously optimistic claims based solely on the prototype, prior to many of the systems even being mature(or even developed in the case of the engines).

Do you really believe that the russians will build a brand new a/c with internal weapons and settle for an RCS of 0.5m2, when they already some years ago managed to reduce the Mig-21 to that level?

I am not saying that the T-50 will have a lower RCS than the F-35; I simply don’t know. I am guessing that F-35 will probably have lower RCS since the US has spent such huge resources into RCS reduction that they should be significantly better than the Russians in this field.

However if it’s really true that the eurocanards are in the 0.1-0.5 m2 RCS range then I find it very hard to believe that PAK FA will not be at least one order of magnitude below that. If not it seems like a failure to me; they should have developed the SU-35 a bit further instead then…

I’m merely repeating their claims. If the PAK FA is better than that, I’ll wait to hear it claimed from official sources, rather than folks speculating all sorts of uninformed notions.

er, it was stated on these boards already, the F-35 has a combat radius of ~600 nautical miles clean and ~750 nautical miles with external tanks, similar to the Typhoon, The rafale has a combat radius of over 1000 nautical miles with external tanks, which is over 30% more than the F-35 with external fuel.

F-35:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-35_Lightning_II

Typhoon:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurofighter_Typhoon

Rafale:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dassault_Rafale

now, while it has comparable range as the typhooon when both use external fuel, it doesn’t come clos to the rafale. “Clean” it can’t beat any of these in the range department if the other use external tanks.

Those aren’t accurate numbers for the F-35. With EFTs the F-35s combat radius is ~924nm.

Nope, the T-50 is better from front, side – and in the future, potentially rear angle.

Everywhere else the T-50 is far superior. Except for fancy toys that are good for bombing 3rd world countries with no real fighting capabilities.

This would be based upon what? Youtube comments?:rolleyes:

The Russians are claiming a frontal RCS of .5m^2. Provide a link where they’re claiming a better RCS figure than the F-35.