RR did know enough of such nozzles way before R-79.
This picture, R-79-300 really fly : Р
This Yak-201, the figure was published in the journal. Project nineties.
Yak-141 and advanced Yak vs F-35B
[ATTACH=CONFIG]223347[/ATTACH]
Paralay please make a comparison with overlapping side profile of the Yak141 and F35B or F35A to show the very similar design profile and shape of the 2 planes.
: Круто:
[ATTACH=CONFIG]223345[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]223348[/ATTACH]
it could tear your ass off the ground? : D
The original R179-300 was developed for the Yak-41 and was considerably weaker than this. The improved variant proposed for the S-32 had a specified reheat thrust of 20000 kg or so, but there is no proof that this engine ever made it beyond the concept stage. For the eventuel S-37 Sukhoi opted for the same AL-41F engine as used by/proposed for the MiG MFI. This was the only new engine that progressed to the prototype stage. At the end only the 1.44 and flying testbeds were fitted with this engine. To cut it short a paper project isn’t of relevance here.
Yak-141, R79-300 power 15500 kg
Yak-41M, R79M-300, power 17500 kg
S-37 and T-60S bomber / “izd.54S” R179-300 power 21000 kg.
WK-21 for easy supersonic passenger aircraft, without afterburner, power 12000 kg.
WK – 21 Conversion engine version R179 – 300 without afterburner. Power – 12000 kgs. Bypass ratio m = 0,81. Is almost identical consumption on two types of cruising flight regimes – subsonic and supersonic. Promising for use on supersonic passenger aircraft, a new generation with a takeoff weight of 40 to 110 tons.
WC-21 and R-179-300 showed one or two times in the show “Motor” in Moscow. No other information.
On the contrary, I am not dwelling on the “russkies can’t make s@£%t” motto.
I firmly believe they can and that’s why I ask these questions. Look at it a different way…
Can and did it … 🙂
R-179-300 for S-37 “Berkut”, power 21000 kg


Has anything happened with the LMFS? Feels like all the focus is on Sukhoi.
The first sample of the UAV, weighing 20 tons, is being developed by “Sukhoy”, will appear in 2018
http://armstrade.org/includes/periodics/news/2013/1003/103520598/detail.shtml
[ATTACH=CONFIG]222783[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=CONFIG]222273[/ATTACH]
MiG-31 does not fly with external tanks. This circus we see only in war 😉
[ATTACH=CONFIG]222265[/ATTACH]
In close air combat one on one, the F-35 has the advantage of – 2.15. Three MiG-21SMT can defeat the F-35.
Long-range air combat the MiG-21SMT is not supported.
Ehm, How do you calculate this?
The total production of the T-50 can not exceed 303 – 311 pieces, of which no more than 127 pieces. Russian Air Force. (Provided that you create a new Multi-Interceptor)
Production of the F-35: 355 pieces – worst-case scenario, 1106 units – an optimistic scenario. 3000 + – fevered imagination of the mind.
That just seems overly simplistic. The shock cone is 3D, so simply using side profile isn’t going to cut it. Also, despite the F-16’s sharper nose, its max speed is lower than the F-15’s.
I agree, F-16 (40 grad) – 2350 km/h. The only comment from the F-16 fighter air intake is not adjusted. In the F-15 – adjustable.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]221339[/ATTACH]
The angle of the nose cone depends on the maximum speed of the aircraft. Obtain the F-35 – 1800 km / h, the F-22 – 2000 km / h, the MiG-31 – 3000 km / h, T-50 – 2700 km / h
[ATTACH=CONFIG]221312[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]221313[/ATTACH]