😎
1 generation: working off of the concept of the plane (1882 – 1905)
2 generation: scouts (1905 – 1914)
3 generation: occurrence of fighters and bombers (1914 – 1930)
4 generation: cleaned chassis, aerodynamics working off (1930 – 1940)
5 generation: the ideal aerodynamics, the closed lanterns (1940 – 1945)
6 generation: working off of the concept of the jet plane (1940 – 1950)
7 generation: serial jet, a wing – an arrow (1950 – 1955)
8 generation: supersonic М=1.5, guided missiles, a radar (1955 – 1960)
9 generation: supersonic М=2, a triangular wing (1960 – 1965)
10 generation: М=3, a wing of changeable geometry (1965 – 1970)
11 generation: an operational overload 9 g (1970 – 1990)
12 generation: technology “stealth”, supercruise (1990 – 2015)
13 generation: pilotless aircraft (2015 – 2020)
14 generation: hypersound aircraft.

Why at Russian deck planes fly up from a springboard, and at Americans from a catapult? 🙂

Approximately one year ago one high-ranking official has noticed, “Sukhoi” likes to do the new plane on two times… (so was with Su-27)
There is an assumption, that Su-50 will differ from T-50 as Hindus have given on it money.

Are constructed: one 1.44 and two “tanks-compartments” 1.42. The building berth for a wing 1.42 is made

1. Section of two constructed fuselages
2. Possible development

…With all due respect to paralay, his method can hardly be considered scientific and the results will be correspondingly useless. At the risk of repeating myself, the only “source” we have for the 0.5m² figure is an Indian newspaper quoting an Indian MoD official (unnamed, no less) citing some anonymous Russian who may or may not exist. I call BS.

“Main designer T-50 Alexandr Dawidenko… Has added, that application of composites has allowed to lower radar-tracking visibility of the plane essentially.
It has reminded, that planes of the fourth generation – Russian Су-27 or American F-15 – have the factor of the reflected surface characterising radar-tracking visibility of the plane, within 12 square metres.
“At plane F-22 – 0,3-0,4 sq.m. At us similar requirements to visibility”.

From where this equation comes from?, please answer Paralay, I’m not challenging you, is pure interest and curiosity, i would like to know from where comes the 1/2, 1/6 factors, this seems to be a rough equation, and where is the source from this equation…

Source of this equation – paralay 🙂
I have approached calculation to known data:
RCS Su-27 5 sq. m without the weapon / 15 sq. m with the weapon.
RCS a modern fighter of the fifth generation – 0.3 sq. m
RCS an cruise missile – 0.2 sq. m

Technique of definition RCS «on a photo» 🙂

(The front view area / 2) * (quantity of aerodynamic elements / 6) * effect of absorbing materials * effect of the form of a glider * effect of plasma

The front view area undertakes under the drawing, in square metres.
The quantity of aerodynamic elements is compared to glider Су-27, these are wings, кили, stabilizers, forward horizontal plumage, and so on.
Effect of absorbing materials: 0.5
Effect of the form of a glider: 0.2 – 0.25
Effect of plasma: 0.5

Calculation RCS F-22:
Two wings, two stabilizers, two ??? – 6 consoles. The front view area – 9.25 square metres, effect of absorbing materials – 0.5, effect of the form of a glider – 0.2, effect of plasma – 1.
Minimum RCS – 0.3 square metres.
Maximum RCS – 4.3 square metres. The quantity of external knots – 4, minimum RSC and factor 0.5 is considered.

Calculation RCS for other planes can be looked here: http://paralay.com/paralay_tab.xls