CIAM did her job to do R&D to mature this tech to a certain level and provided solutions for Design bureau to pick up and make a choice.

Actually, no. FGUP TsIAM (ФГУП ЦИАМ), FGUP VIAM (ФГУП ВИАМ), NPP ‘Motor’ (ОАО «НПП «Мотор»), PD-14 producer OAO Aviadvigatel (ОАО “Авиадвигатель”/ ОАО «Пермский моторный завод») OAO NIAT (OAO НИАТ) and others all have (or have had) independent, in-house polymer composite fan blade programmes for some years. The first serious effort was for the D-18 (ЗМКБ “Прогресс”/ EMKB ‘Progress’) engine during Soviet times. TsIAM’s current project completion is the culmination of 11 years’ work in this field.

NPP Motor’s project (co-developed with UGATU, and which I believe is destined for the ‘Type 30’) began active development following a government commission award in 2006, and was slated for completion in 2012- as IPR documents were being signed off. They are also developing the engine’s CFRP IGV, their pedigree speaks for itself being LP compressor specialists for every major Russian fighter engine, the most recent being the original AL-41F, 117S & 117*.

Jo, R&D ‘Perspektiva’ is intended solely for civil aircraft engines.
SU in highlighted text means Sulovye Ustanovki =Powerplants, not Su in Sukhoi

Correction noted -and much appreciated, Old Chum :).

Although previous civilian projects utilising polymer composites (such as the GE90) could not yield the required torsion, shear and thermal/dynamic tolerances required by a fighter LP compressor fan blade operating @ much higher rpm, it is as yet unclear if the new generation of nano-modified polymer matrix composites would meet the requirements.

‘NPP Motor’s’ MMC development has successfully addressed this issue. A weight saving of over 50% vis-a-vis the standard titanium blade is claimed (compared to 63% for the civil PMC blade, see above). Having said that, mechanical properties permitting, I still wouldn’t rule out a PMC rival blade for the ‘Type 30’ from TsIAM as a programme risk mitigation measure -they will definitely be collaborating with NPP ‘Motor’ as development consultants for verification of the product’s final test stages.

A sneak peek @ the mathematical/FEA model © ФГБОУ ВПО «Уфимский государственный авиационный технический университет» & ОАО «НПП «Мотор», г.Уфа:

[ATTACH]213183[/ATTACH] [ATTACH]213184[/ATTACH]

To give a definition of the structure, in the 1st paragraph below in bold, replace Aluminium with Magnesium.
It is referred to as the “High-strength voluminous blade -for installation in aircraft gas turbine engine compressor”- a similar description was given for the PAK-FA fan blade at the UMPO meeting (see post above). NPP Motor is also co-developing ‘inter-metallic’ titanium turbine blades, (see link *).

Композиты с алюминиевой матрицей. Возможными армирующими средствами в этом классе материалов могут быть волокна бора и углеволокна, нано-углеволокна и углеродные нанотрубки. Технологии переработки алюминиевых сплавов и армированных частицами композитов новыми технологическими методами, приводящими к формированию в изделиях из традиционных многофазных сплавов нетрадиционной структуры, характерной для волокнистых композитов.

Композиты с титановой и титан-алюминидной матрицами для лопатки компрессора высокого давления. Возможность получения квази-пластичных композитов путём армирования хрупкого интерметаллида оксидными волокнами специальной структуры.

Aluminium matrix composites. The possible reinforcing means in this class of materials can be boron, carbon fibres, nano-carbon fibre and carbon nanotubes. Technology for the processing of aluminium alloys and composites reinforced with particles, new technological methods- leading to the formation of products from traditional multiphase alloys of an unconventional structure, are typical of fibrous CF composites.

Composites with titanium and titanium aluminide matrices are for high-pressure compressor blades. There is the possibility of fabricating quasi-plastic composites reinforced by brittle inter-metallic oxide fibre of a special structure.

http://www.tpmtm.ru/en/kompetencii/26-kompoziti.html

Irrespective of the civil or military developments, we now know of at least 3 companies with the technology capable of manufacturing CNT modified PMC and the reinforcing component (and hence the ‘special purpose’ medium) for the more exotic MMC compressor fan blades today: FGUP TsIAM, NPP ‘Motor’ and OAO ‘MMEZ-KT’ (ОАО «ММЭЗ–KT»**) in conjunction with TsAGI.

* http://technopark-at.ufa-rb.ru/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=34&Itemid=27 (English)

** http://mempct.ru/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=29&Itemid=20

Redux

There is evidence that FGUP ‘TsIAM’ (ФГУП “ЦИАМ”) is collaborating with NPP ‘Motor’ (“НПП “Мотор”) & UGATU (УГАТУ) in developing the 1st stage (and possibly stator) polymer composite (PCM) fan blade for the ‘Type 30’ engine. This is probably in parallel with their in-house PD-14 polymer composite blade development as a rival to OAO ‘Aviadvigatel’s’ wide-chord, titanium alloy (VT-6/8-1)blade and apparently ear-marked for the later PD-14M.

The pic (below left) shows a scientific- technical advisory meeting that took place @ the engine series production manufacturers UMPO (УМПО) nearly two years ago. It’s primary concern was with the fan blades (NOT engines) of the PD-14 and ‘Type 30’, and the associated capital tooling upgrades at the facility for their manufacture.

Interestingly,’Aviadvigatel’ were not reported present, and I doubt FGUP ‘TsIAM’ would be there to discuss their rival’s winning tender, although they are development consultants for ‘Aviadvigatel’s’ LP turbine *. Note the presentation projection pic.

Основной темой обсуждения стал вопрос о реализации совместного проекта ОАО “УМПО” и УГАТУ – “Создание технологий и промышленного производства узлов и лопаток газотурбинных двигателей с облегченными высокопрочными конструкциями для авиационных двигателей новых поколений”, который в 2010 году получил субсидию Министерства образования и науки РФ.

The main theme of discussion was the question of realising the joint project between OAO “UMPO” and UGATU – “Development of technologies and industrial production capacity for components and fan blades of gas turbine engines with lightweight, high strength structure for the new generation of aircraft engines “, who in 2010 received a grant from the Ministry of Education and Sciences of the Russian Federation.

Проект подразумевает освоение: The project involves the development of:

•линейной сварки трением, linear friction welding,
•изотермической штамповки, isothermal forging,
•сверхпластичного формования, superplastic forming,
•диффузионной сварки. Diffusion welding.

С использованием этих технологий станет возможным изготовление полых широкохордных лопаток для двигателя ПД-14 российского лайнера МС-21, высокопрочных лопаток для двигателя перспективного авиационного комплекса фронтовой авиации (ПАК ФА) и др.

The utilisation of these technologies will facilitate the manufacture of hollow, wide-chord blades of the PD-14 engine for the Russian MS-21 airliner, high-strength blades for the PAK-FA’s engineetc.

Also, from a recent ‘TsIAM’ publication (below right, click to enlarge) entitled ‘The main results of the [R&D] efforts under the programme NIR ‘Perspectives’:
[ATTACH]213146[/ATTACH][ATTACH]213145[/ATTACH]
The highlighted text for 2013 reads:

• Results of experimental calculations of the research and prototype models, for developing the key technologies to be used on future aircraft [of the company] Su (OKB Sukhoi)based on a gas turbine engine gearing scheme (experimental gears, 7-stage compressor,fan blade [of the first stage compressor] made of PCM [polymer composite materials] etc.)

The timeline is certainly consistent with ‘Type 30’, as are the specific components under development by TsIAM. I’m not aware of any other current engine development destined for “future Su[khoi] aircraft” (apart from a UCAV engine- but that’s some way off and it’s certainly not for the SaM146!), hence synergy with their PCM PD-14 blade is obvious and reliably reported on several occasions.

Testing of FGUP TsIAM’s polymer matrix composite substitute blade for the PD-14 (placard above middle, click to enlarge), is well advanced**, with the last stage (6) namely FOD impact testing probably completed by the time it was presented to PM Medvedev 5 weeks ago***.

A weight saving of 38% is claimed over the hollow, titanium alloy (63% over the regular blade), along with greater mass flow. The CFRP structure is confirmed as nanomodified (i.e. MWNT****) and hence has the ‘special qualities’ inherent for such a material -especially relevant for the ‘Type 30’s 1st stage compressor:

* http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/aviadvigatel-revises-pd-14-turbofan-architecture-382698/
** http://engine.aviaport.ru/issues/78/pics/pg02pc22big.jpg Spectral analysis of 2 variants of the polymer composite blade (note dates);
*** http://forum.keypublishing.com/showpost.php?p=2002932&postcount=333 ;
**** http://www.findpatent.ru/patent/237/2379387.html ;
http://www.findpatent.ru/patent/240/2408531.html .

Got to disagree with you here (for once ;))

A few points…

I agree with every word you’ve written, Old Chum.

But I will say this:

[Ramjets] are not a panacea.

😉

Sorry, Mr. Jonesy, maybe I should’ve been clearer. A tooled-up Su-35S is going to have a much lower RCS than a tooled-up Su-27 (because a clean Su-35S has an RCS between 1-2m^2 and a vanilla Su-27 has an RCS of 10-12m^2).
Russkies may have even RCS treated the RVV-SDs, they have demonstrated the technique on the R-27 series.

Either way, the Su-35S is still going to spot the ‘dirty’ (RCS compromised) Rafale @ ~300km, which will give the former valuable time to impart kinematic performance to its RVV-SDs. They will have developed tactics specifically for the Eurocanards/Meteor combo, hence I would highly doubt the Su-35S driver will ‘switch on his jammers and pray for the best’.

It appears both the Russians & Americans have discontinued meaningful developments of ramjet motors for future incarnations of R-VV and AIM-120, they probably feel the advantages are marginal.

I don’t doubt that the MBDA ‘Meteor’ is a formidable weapon, but if the PLAAF doubled their Su-35S order and deployed them near the Indian border, you may find the IAF’s confidence in it’s newest acquisition, shaken (particularly for strike). Sweaty palms for sure!- if not brown trousers (yet).

Looking at this one the old axiom that ‘better bullets win’ seems relevant. The mantra, simplistically, being first-look, first-shot, first-kill, plugging these types in it seems hard to get round the Rafale/Meteor combination getting first shot in any plausible merge.

Is there a Russian air-air weapon that offsets the French fighters BVRAAM edge?

That’s where the current problem lies. Su-35S would get first look- the Rafale would be in a whole heap of trouble out to a range of 300km, but the Rafale would get the first shot with ‘Meteor’ (at least until the next gen. Russian missiles reach service), so what does it do until bit can get within launch range? Keep banging away with it’s radar? Or employ EW?

There are claims that the ‘Irbis-E’ doesn’t have LPI, but I find this difficult to believe since Tikhomirov’s own info emphasises the “ability to operate over enemy airspace”. Also, bear in mind that if it’s to stand half a chance against 5G fighters it would have to have a capable EW suite. If the example of conformal AESA arrays is anything to go by (albeit for IFF -but still a World first), and remember those disappearing ‘hockey sick’ antennas- then I think it’s a safe assumption the Su-35S isn’t lacking in the EW department.

Dr.S. most likely those are embedded U/VHF coms/nav antennas. The X-band ‘cheek arrays’ are likely to be where the ’54’ stencilling is. It’s likely to have those L-band IFF AESAs in approximately the same location as the Su-35S……and 3 ‘danger radiation’ signs on the tailboom :diablo:- what a machine!

That’s exactly the point ! When the last huge arms deals were signed between Russia & China, then thi shappened usually durong top-meetings of the leaders … and these deals were soon thereafter officially confirmed. This time – strangely after these rumours were repeated over and over again Russian sources – they were this time only reported by Western ones and as usually one again and agin with exatctly or nearly exactly the same words (= copy & paste) ! As such I’m still very sceptical and thsi one seems t prove my daubts:

http://www.defensenews.com/article/20130325/DEFREG03/303250014/Russia-No-Deal-Sale-Fighters-Subs-China?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE

Is CCTV4 (or is it not) Chinese state TV? How official do you want it? This report is the source of the international media flurry in the last 24 hrs. Here it is again in case you missed it first time round:

http://mil.news.sina.com.cn/2013-03-25/0936719576.html

Stop digging yourself into a hole, the Russian denial is that no such deal was discussed during President Xi’s visit (because the deal was done immediately before his arrival in Moscow). Chinese state media is now speculating on a sizeable follow-on order for the 117S and at the same time seeking to sooth the nervous media reaction of China’s neighbours.

I don’t like to say I told you so- but I did tell you so, as long ago as last December if memory serves.