OMG!!

I have no doubt that the Pak Fa will be a successful program considering it’s history. But, you have to take a historical perspective when judging where this program is heading.

The US has a HUGE lead in time and operational experience in the areas of AESA radars, RCS shaping, LO treatments, integrated avionics, weapons, naval operations, etc.

I just do not believe that anyone, not just Russia, can overcome that kind of lead on their first try.

You are right in that I should not have said “Never”. How about extremely unlikely?

How about if I say they have a chance if they are accompanied by a squadron of Sus’s flying in formation?

Believe what you want, you are grossly underestimating the Russian aviation industry. When was an 8G rather, highly maneuverable, high-tech radar equipped aircraft generation started? The 1970s in the US. Come the early 1980s, half a decade later, the USSR had its own designs.

Now, instead of flying the PAK-FA is the late 1990s, it’s been done 10 years later. This is plenty of time to play “catch up”.

AESA radars: Russia has operated PESA for 2+ decades, ground and airborne. AESA is not a far stretch, and known tech specs show the Zhuk-AE to be APG-79 capable (via T/R model count), and the NIIP AESA will have a few things no other AESA has – as per the rumors / news.

RCS Shaping: A Russian scientist invented this, basically. While not directly relevant, Russia has access to this know-how (and I’d bet you even more, unreleased info). The US made 2 flying bricks (the B-2 and F-117), and has finally been able to make 1 truly maneuverable fighter (the F-22) – and the less-so F-35. RCS shaping isn’t a secret. It’s computer trial-error for 21st century tech.

LO treatments: Recent news point to new RAM materials that are unseen in the West.

Integrated avionics: This is a sick joke from you, right? :rolleyes:

Weapons: Same as above.

Naval operations: Same as above.

Hi Spudman, I used the word “ushering” 🙂

Also, the jet flew in January, not Feb. 😉

2.5 times more units, is sweet. But even more important. How fast can this T-50 take to do a “turn a round”(getting ready for the next mission).
And operational %?

Thanks

In an interview it was said that it was a requirement of the PAK-FA to be more “combat ready” and for the cost of operation to be reduced well below that of the Su-27.

Yes. Too small to room an Archer. Looks like a temporary attachment to house test instruments.

Well, rumor is, the new IR A2A Izdeliye will be ultra-slim.

GSh-30-2 (as used in Su-27 and MiG-29 series) has two barrels.

The Su-27 and MiG-29 use the Gsh-30-1.

Good to see we finally got a good view of those inlets. Definitely fixed inlets.
:diablo:

What’s the highlight of fixed vs. variable? How do you tell by looking?

Supersonic / subsonic preference?

I’m surprised nobody has mentioned it yet.

Bulava has failed a test launch yet again:

http://www.globalsecuritynewswire.org/gsn/nw_20091030_3645.php

http://www.ng.ru/nvo/2009-10-30/1_bulava.html?mthree=9

Also interesting to read that the development of Bulava may consume up to half of all Russian defence purchasing.

No, it didn’t fail anything. This is pure sh1t journalism. The Donskoi went out to test Bulava systems as part of pre-launch protocol. There was no launch.

As per this:

MOSCOW, October 28 (RIA Novosti) – Russia’s Dmitry Donskoy strategic nuclear-powered submarine returned on Wednesday from a short sea test run to prepare for upcoming test launches of the troubled Bulava missile.

“The sub left the base in Severodvinsk on Monday to test the readiness of the equipment for future launches of the Bulava missile,” a Severodvinsk administration official said, without specifying the date for the next test of the missile.

The Typhoon-class submarine, based at a naval facility in northern Russia’s Severodvinsk, is the only vessel in service with the Russian Navy capable of testing the new Bulava submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM).

The Russian military expects the Bulava, along with Topol-M land-based ballistic missiles, to become the core of Russia’s nuclear triad.

However, the Bulava’s development has been dogged by a series of setbacks, which has officially suffered six failures in 11 tests.

The latest Bulava failure during the launch from Dmitry Donskoy in the North Sea on July 15 was caused by a defective steering system in its first stage, a defense industry source said on Monday.

The future development of the Bulava has been questioned by some lawmakers and defense industry officials, who have suggested that all efforts should be focused on the existing Sineva SLBM.

But the Russian military has insisted that there is no alternative to the Bulava and pledged to continue testing the missile until it is ready to be put in service with the Navy.

The Bulava (SS-NX-30) SLBM carries up to 10 MIRV warheads and has a range of over 8,000 kilometers (5,000 miles). The three-stage solid-propellant ballistic missile is designed for deployment on Borey-class nuclear-powered submarines.

And you seriously bought that Bulava costs over $25 billion per year? LOL!