Meeh, is this your idea of trolling?

Take one quick look at the Pak-Fa design. For which role do you think it is designed for? Close airfield Cap, aka old Mig-29A role.. well think again.

The Layout have more internal fuel vs F-22. It most likely have a better T/W ratio, atleast when the final engines are completed.

It has a fairly decent fuel consumption compaired to the F119 engines.
It has more lift area.
It has a layout that suggest even sleeker and less drag vs F-22.
It has a big nose for a powerfull AESA.

So on the sole account on numbers of AMRAAM internaly, you can conclude that this is not an Air superiority fighter.. Nice try!:rolleyes:

If you think that everyone who disagrees with a particular notion is trolling, that is fine by me.

I don’t disagree with a single one of your points in that list there.

However the point remains. All the above you listed are of little use when the plane has no more ammo to fire at the enemy and hence complete its mission.

Rather than trying to find witches to burn, perhaps you should consider the point I am trying to make.

The F-15 is an air superiority fighter because aside from the required avionics and loiter time, it has the ammo storage to engage multiple times.

Each F-15 will fire 6 BVR missiles at least before it has to knife it out.
A pair of F-15s 12 BVR missiles before they have to knife it out.

Taking into account that the F-15 is capable of launching similar quality missiles as the T-50, there is an engagement area where a pair of F-15s has
33% more ammo and hence the corresponding higher probability for a kill associated with that extra ammo.

Flateric asked someone in the forum a while ago, if there is some magic that will bring new missiles that fit 3 abreast in the T-50 bay.

I am asking you now, is there some magic that has brought 100% kill ratio missiles to the T-50 and we are not aware about ?

Are you expecting the BVR missiles the T-50 fires to hit with 100% success against a moving jamming/flaring/evading target ?

What is the no escape zone one can dream about even the next generation of missiles?

For a long time the debate was that Su-XX could use classical cranking to avoid the F-22 shots and then get in for the knife fight.

So can someone facing the T-50.

Are you also forgetting that when facing a well equipped opponent you may want to give your pilots the ability to have “spoiler” missiles. The ones you fire to shake the enemy off his lock or guidance to his missiles phase!

If you start taking these things into account you see why having even two missiles extra on board can mean a lot.

several lighter and cheaper aircrafts with less weapons onboard are better than a few aircrafts with massive weapons load
you can loose missile carrier before it will have all weapon load fired

ok I see the point now, but you think/know this logic applies to the T-50?

Your examples are grossly simplyfied.
If it boild down to a BVR shoot out, then the T-50 are teamed up with Su-35S and Mig-31BM.
So it does not matter if the T-50 have four AMRAAMskie.

And you’ll never see SH or Su-35S configurated with more then six AMRAAMS eighter way. Those 8-10# configuration looks a lot better on paper then in reality.

You have Drag/range/energy loss and RCS issues to account for..

I beg to differ. I think my examples are spot on.

but please, do tell me why you think they are grossly simplified.

Well…

If you did that you would eliminate the possibility of carrying an oversized load* – like Lancaster + Grand Slam.

*In what would be quite a drag efficient manner (possibly even quite radar reflection efficient too).

If we are to accept that the least LO part of T-50 is its rear, then the GA loadouts become a contradiction.

All aspect LO is very important when it comes to penetration or deep strike missions.

From what I have seen so far, the T-50 design seems (to me and to me only) as a design oriented at delaying a good track and lock on from the front quarter for LO enemy’s BVR missiles until it gets within the range of its own sensor suit (IRST etc) where it is likely to have the upper hand due to aerodynamic performance. A design intended to close the gap between detection and launch ranges if you will, which was greatly changed with the introduction of the F-22.

Strike missions do not seem to favour its profile. Am I completely off?

Smug? Seriously? YOU are the one that is “waiting for the link”. Now stop being smug yourself and do some research + common sense. It is easy if you trail a few sites and make conclusions based on open source information.

Am i working for you or something?

That is exactly opposite what i mean. 😀

Regarding missiles, according to UVKU-50L leaflet: 180, 180PD, 270, 191C, K047. I think K047 is a bomb tho? (can’t find the doc where it was mentioned)

Nothing official, and i doubt we will see it soon. Su-47 dimensions are still secret i think. It is supposedly 13.95m, but that is not “official”. However, it sounds very reasonable if you compare to Flanker. From 13.95, one can work out the length roughly basing on the official patent drawing…

It is possible i have it in high res, i will take a look. If not, i know how to contact him if you want it.

Arrogant? Seriously, what is up with calling people “smug” and “arrogant” that actually help you out? And in case you wonder, my smug reply wasn’t aimed for you.

No you are not working for me obviously nor am I waiting for a link per se. I only mentioned that when you clearly smacked me for not …well looking for it. And you still do. So in the future, perhaps I should ask nothing since it is highly likely it has been covered. I’ll just use search and common sense, right ? ..right.

And the point of calling people smug or arrogant, is because -as you may know- the most common behaviour old members have to new members in fora is that of “we’ve discussed that, search and you’ll find it!” . Fora are supposed to be open and helpful. Besides as I said, for the time you personally took to make a critical comment, you could have answered. Why didn’t you? ever wondered that?

I don’t know if calling people smug and arrogant helps me, that is not the intention, the intention is to make people get off their high horse sometimes.

If you feel offended by my post, that is fine. I would say, read yours again,see how you find it.. No matter who it was aimed at, I stand by my “smug” comment.

I won’t say anything else on the matter. I don’t want to derail the thread because of this.

you can imagine a load of potatoes there too
but it will also have nothing common with reality

why do you think UVKU-50/50L manual spokes of ‘right and left launchers being interchangeable?’

gosh, these ‘how many missiles’ ‘S-ducts’ ‘exposed fan blades’ ‘rivets’ stuff started in January 2010 and continues till now when new rows of slowpokes or trolls arrive

all questions were answered literally hundreds, no – thousand times everywhere

I thank you for the info you provided, it pays however not to be arrogant.

What do you expect people to do ? monitor answers from day one ? or quietly
retrace the god knows how many pages on this PAK FA story so far so they can get the answers when you or someone else can just post it in 10 seconds!

Arrogance is not our friend.

since I didn’t know that 4 is the final number of hardpoints in the bays, I have to say that my 2c is that it is a bit on the low side.

Legacy fighters like the F-15 (6+2) and the F-18 (6+2, or even 8) and the EF2000 and the Rafale.

Isn’t a large weapons’ loadout considered an advantage?

Number of AA missiles inside weaponbays has been discussed one million times already. And the true answer to that has been known for a while as well. But of course, anyone can continue with truthiness* if they want to.

Meanwhile, here is some PAK FA guts for you:

*truthiness = Total disregard of using logic, brain and facts, but going soley on “the gut” 🙂

I have searched for “true answer” as a keyword and I had no luck.

Instead of being a smug you could point me to the true answer via means of a link.

I bet it would be easier and shorter in time than actually writing all you wrote and posted.

….
I’ll be waiting for the link.

in the meantime any comment on the gap between the weapon bay doors ? ** I got a comment for this, thanks**