A close relative of this has been confirmed for the Type 30:

And, what is your point? I posted the one above because it included the engine, yours didnt. I am fully aware of that and this patent;

http://www.findpatent.ru/patent/246/2460892.html

Why not post this? Doesnt fit your narrative?

From where did you regurgitate that drawing? – A 2009 patent concerned with a cigar-shaped body of high aspect ratio (Sears-Haack aerodynamics):

http://www.freepatent.ru/patents/2400402

…much more relevant than a more recent patent entirely devoted to the intake…….when the topic of discussion is…the intake.

Also, a reminder…

http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?135806-The-PAK-FA-News-Pics-amp-Debate-Thread-XXV/page19

I’m glad you reminded me! Thanks!

Now google-translate the Tupolev link, try to understand the concepts, compare to T-50-7’s duct pics and ask yourself whether the Tupolev notes may as well have been written for the T-50?

Failing that, good luck *mapping* your 10m long banana-shaped 117S onto this:

http://www.knaapo.ru/media/rus/gallery/aircrafts/combat/t-50-5/t-50-5_05_hires.jpg

Yes but my point was that in the T-50 it seems to sit further ahead. I mean I know one shouldn’t judge distances on,photos but the photo Jo in particular posted seems to be way more forward than the face of the LPC. I mean how long can the 117s be?

And my question was wouldn’t the air flow be upset by moving the IGV so much forward?

Thank you Mr. FalconDude, that’s precisely the impartial observation I was looking for.

To answer your question (imho), there are two IGV installations. The first (the subject of that infamous pic and also depicted in the two KnAAPO pics) is fixed and lies upstream of the engine.

It’s specific function (imho) is described in post #1902 above – the T-50 would not be able to fly without it.
It also forms the basis of ‘Device 9’.

The second IGV is variable and is attached to the front of the engine’s compressor, as is standard.

Anyone NOT seeing:

short blades set at a large angle of attack (короткие лопатки, установленные под большим углом атаки)

please stand up:

None of this has anything to do with the PAK-FA, or this thread.

Apologies, but I think we clarified the F-135’s T/Wr as sub double-digit.

Having said that, it must deliver tremendous dry/military power coz the launches off USS GW last month were all on dry power and the ‘Cs’ looked mighty impressive indeed!

Commercially available carbonfibre, multi-walled carbon nanotube (MWCNT) RAM – BKP-5-12 (БКП-5-12):

http://www.carbon-bcp.ru/index.php?vm=24
http://www.carbon-bcp.ru/index.php?vm=35

Tested and verified by ITAE (Institute of Theoretical and Applied Electrodynamics/Институт теоретической и прикладной электродинамики*РАН) – the same institute developing the RAM for the T-50.

Russian government certification standard:

http://www.gost.ru/wps/portal/pages/news/detail?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/gost/gostru/press-center/news/5d2ba4004875965eabc8fb56779c92ad

Still no translation. Disappointing – though not entirely unexpected.

Not sure why I should have been there and see anything. If you want to track, VIAM-developed ligtning-protection stuff for VaARTM processed panels are being called ВЭП-1 and ВЭП-2.
*Hint: both are not used at MS-21.

Anyways, perhaps you’re far too busy to waste time on us mere mortals. Maybe you could be a sweetie and simply verify my translation below (it’ll only take 2 seconds and I would be grateful indeed):

Дополнительная информация [TAB]

Гуняева А.Г., Чурсова Л.В., Черфас Л.В., Комарова О.А. Молниестойкие углепластики, модифицированные углеродными наночастицами, изготовленные способом инфузионного формования//Все материалы.2015

Additional information:

Gunyaeva A.G, Chursova L.V, Cherfas L.V, Komarov O.A*. Lightning-resistant carbon plastics, modified by [COLOR=”#FF0000″]carbon nanoparticles, produced by the method of infusion molding // All materials.2015][/COLOR]

http://catalog.viam.ru/catalog/vep_1/elektroprovodyashchee-pokrytie-vep-1/

Дополнительная информация [TAB]

Гуняева А.Г., Чурсова Л.В., Черфас Л.В., Комарова О.А. Молниестойкие углепластики, модифицированные углеродными наночастицами, изготовленные способом инфузионного формования//Все материалы. 2015.

Additional information:

Gunyaeva A.G, Chursova L.V, Cherfas L.V, Komarov O.A*. Lightning-resistant carbon plastics, modified by [COLOR=”#FF0000″]carbon nanoparticles, produced by the method of infusion molding // All materials.2015][/COLOR]

http://catalog.viam.ru/catalog/vep_2/elektroprovodyashchee-pokrytie-vep-2/

…*Hint: both are not used at MS-21.

Yes, I know. Can you guess why?…*Hint: the translations in this post.

…but hey!! Look on the bright side! If they’re using VaRTM for “carbon nanoparticle modification” without simultaneous heating, then they must be well honed on the technique – coz population & dispersion has always been tricky.

Sure. Where I see VKU-18 being mentioned just once at the sidebar, you probably see it dozen times.

Well, given the last few pages in general (and your last post in particular) – I’ll leave it to the readers to decide which of us has shockingly bad understanding & judgement.

Try to find any mention of KMU-18 (or VKU-18tr) after 2011 in relation to PAK-FA. Or at least any other mention if it except that VIAM has added it to their catalogue.

And since I believe as well that F-35 will get a laser gun, too. I saw articles on that in in-house journals.

I found this 2015 VIAM technical paper which states KMU/BKM-18 as developed (page 25):

https://www.google.co.jp/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.niiin.ru/upload/medialibrary/197/197f4a760cee5434a4dd801b7d384900.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwiE9Mba7-vOAhUpB8AKHVt-AhMQFgguMAc&usg=AFQjCNGLWBDNYzwUm7enfYpjCLDKyO-IOw&sig2=hjNFDaS0LxnecuLnPciRTA

Interestingly, it also shows their successful testing of additive fullerenes C60 and C70 the very same type used by NPO Saturn and others in their CNT RAM patents from a few years ago.

Being “in-house”, did you see a thin metal mesh being inserted into the CFRP wing of the MS-21 during fabrication?