A lot of contradictory statements in that regard………..Which, is not surprising!
The prospective PAK-FA engine is the Type-30, which will blow away the 117S and 117.
Other than the source that has officially dubbed the F-35 as basically useless, who magically dreamed up that the PAK-FA is fitted with Su-35S engines, where else is this “contradiction?”
Time to step out of your tiny little comfort zone, Scoot, and learn to use real sources for information about the PAK-FA – which are in Russian (and can be translated easily these days or may have already been translated by forum members).
Clearly, a respected source………
http://www.ainonline.com/about-ain-publications
About AIN Publications
Ehehehe… ZERO of those awards are for anything to do with their reporting on Russian equipment. ZERO.
On top of that, the “policy and good faith” (crap) list does not mean anything. Policies are nice. Doesn’t mean they are followed, nor does it mean that the “industry experts” that talk to them follow any such “policies.”
Again my point is if you have an issue with the Author and his Article. Then contact him and ask him to clarify………..You both may learn something!
The Author and his Article. Hahahaha… nice… you really have something for this Guy and his Article eh? Capitalized both … must be some odd subconscious bias coming through. I digress…
My issue is you are polluting this thread with articles full of antiquated and incorrect information, from sources really far away from the (actual) sources – which are in Russia.
I understand you have some serious Russophobia issues.. and that most people here will remember that you said crap like the Su-35S was supposed to get scrapped, the PAK-FA was supposed to be cancelled (or something along those lines), but the amount of times you’ve been right about anything is dwarfed 10 times over by the amount of times you’ve been wrong.
Oh… and don’t even try to pull the “difference of opinion” malarkey on anyone here, there’s nothing remotely factual about anything you say or think about Russian aviation or military related matters. Let that sink in.
YOU HAVE THE SOURCE AND THE LINK!
I didn’t write the article I just posted it. You have the source information and author. So, maybe you should contact him and ask him to explain anything you take issue with? I for one would enjoy to read his response!
No noo noo noooooo nooooooo…….. I want *his* sources for that BS.
I mean the guy doesn’t even know the correct designation for the T-50 radar, forget the fact that he missed the memo on the 117 being installed on all of the prototypes.
But hey, he spoke with some “US Industry experts” (supposedly), who offered him some MK1 Eyeball RCS analysis. Impressive no doubt, if the author’s aim was to write a complete piece of trash of an article.
Russia has it’s own troubles………(and needs India IMO)
Various Obstacles Confront Russia’s T-50 Project
AIN Defense Perspective » September 20, 2013
by Reuben Johnson
There is no shortage of uncertainty about the future of Russia’s Sukhoi Perspektivniy Aviatsonnoi Kompleks-Frontovoi Aviatsii (PAK-FA)/T-50 fifth-generation fighter project. These doubts are driven by problems with major subsystems, delays with the aircraft’s introduction into service, and plans to defray some of the R&D cost by making India a developmental partner on the aircraft.
Russia’s NIIP radar design bureau, the traditional supplier for Sukhoi-design aircraft, has developed prototype models of the N050 active electronically scanning array (AESA) radar set. “The results of the flight-test of the radar installed in one of the four T-50 flight-test aircraft are very impressive,” according to a Russian aerospace analyst familiar with the program. However, the N050 is a hand-assembled product and “currently the industrial base capacity to series produce the N050 does not exist,” said the same analyst. Furthermore, “the PPMs [transmit/receive modules] are produced at the Istok military electronics enterprise on a limited scale, which has made the radar’s cost prohibitive.”
In the same vein, the T-50’s composite panels are also handmade using the same basic technology as the well known Sukhoi range of all-composite aerobatic sports aircraft.
The fifth-generation engine that is to power later versions of the T-50 is still mostly on paper, say Russian industry experts. The flight-test aircraft are powered by the same Saturn 117S engine that is installed in the Su-35, and this will also be the engine for the initial production batches of the T-50.
Above all, without changes to the aircraft it is questionable whether or not the T-50 will actually be a low-observable design. Several aspects of the aircraft as currently configured will produce unacceptably high RCS, as well as IR, signatures, according to U.S. industry experts who spoke to AIN.
Another factor is that the T-50 program was considered to be economically viable only if India stepped up to purchase at least 250 of the aircraft, and also would share in the R&D effort. But India is planning to procure only around half that number of fifth-generation fighter aircraft. Sources in the Indian MoD state they cannot afford both the T-50 and the Dassault Rafale that was selected as the winner in the MRCA competition. If the situation becomes an “either or” proposition the T-50 may be jettisoned in favor of the French fighter so India does not place all of its eggs in the Russian basket.
Scooter.. here’s a *very* slow clap for you…. clap clap clap
I challenge you to find an article that is riddled with more errors.. seriously.
Can’t wait to see the sources for that crap above.. LOL.
With all do respect I am not sure Russia can afford the PAK-FA without India!
Scooter
Hey Sparky – based on what exactly? Russia isn’t the country going through a debt crisis or in danger of default. :rolleyes:
Dionis, nein!! nein!! 9!! I’ve long said the laws of Bernoulli and Navier-Stokes preclude the use of a blocker, just see the separate patent for the T-50’s intake and duct. Instead, a beautifully elegant solution.
Bro.. bro! What about that blocker patent that was filed?
So it’s ultimately going to be a combination of inlet geometry, blocker and stealthified compressor?
———–
I’ve been meaning to ask for a while: what was the story behind the Su-37 engines? (Yes, the ones with the 3D TVC). Why were they never put into any kind of serial application?
[QUOTE=Scooter;2075875]
LOL Maybe we should go back and look at your 1,836 posts. My guess is your likely Pro/Russian and even more Pro/PAK-FA. Which, in my opinion is fine. As we all have a bias to one degree or the other. Yet, you don’t hear me telling you to hit the bricks PAL.
Funny, Phantom II just talked about being respectful and cutting out the drama…….Yet, at every turn you see comments like this!
So, Dionis I don’t hate you or people like you. I hate what I’ve become because of you…….
The irony is that I’m not pro-anything. I’m just anti-BS, which generally means dismissing the baseless claims of “US-can-do-no-wrong” lackeys such as yourself.
http://vpk.name/news/91573_pogosyan_dvigatel_dlya_istrebitelya_pyatogo_pokoleniya_t50_sozdan.html <– Translate this.
1st stage engine = Al-41F-1 (117) = 117
2nd stage engine = in development, 2014 bench trials expected AFAIK
If the chief of Sukhoi / UAC isn’t good enough of a source, then I can’t help you catch up on 3 years of PAK-FA news.
Scooter.. hit the bricks pal, looking back at your 11,000 posts would only show how you have nothing to show other than an aptitude for being precisely wrong all too often.
I mean for crying out loud, the PAK-FA has 117S engines? After this gem, you should never speak about the PAK-FA ever again! EVER! [Hint.. pay close attention: http://www.google.com/translate —> translate “Pogosyan PAK-FA 117 engine” and put it into http://www.yandex.ru to search —> click any of the links and copy/paste Russian text into a translator; that should be plenty of reading]
A) Original poster forgot his/her medication.
B) Original poster should stay off the MDMA.
Could a two-seater like the Su-30SM be reliably used in combat with just 1 pilot? Does the front seat retain everything that a single seater would have?
Is there going to be static display of one of the T-50s?
Blackypuss or even Duckface might actually be better than Hellduck..
Fullback is a hell of a lot better than Hellduck, NATO or not. Might as well stick with some Russian nickname for it.
Have the pilots nicknamed them yet? Like “Grach” for Su-25, “Shilo” for Tu-22, “Troika” for the Tu-22M3, etc… ?
Hellduck sounds like something out of a goddamn cartoon, seriously. :stupid:
That plane deserves a better nickname, even if its just for this forum..