This should give a good idea of how they plan to deal with the engine back end RCS (NPP Motor is lead developer for the front end):

НПО «Сатурн» и «Курчатовский институт» реализуют совместную программу внедрения нанотехнологий в создание новых образцов газотурбинной техники и специализированного инструмента с целью:..

Снижения радиолокационной заметности самолета

NPO Saturn and the Kurchatovskii Institute (Moscow) have implemented a joint programme to introduce nanotechnology for the creation of new examples of gas turbine components and specialised instruments for the purpose of:…

Lowering the RCS of the aircraft.

http://www.npo-saturn.ru/index_b7.php?sat=26

You’re such a tease ‘IGV’!

http://russianplanes.net/id96523

http://sukhoi.org/eng/news/company/?id=5067

A radar with unlimited processing power can use much more sensitive receivers. So its not only a CPU based race, the spinoff is that more CPU enables collecting weaker signals + background noise for filtering…

We will probably not end up with moores law for radar ranges but we will se huge leaps in the next decades.

Amdahl’s and Gustafson’s laws may have more relevance than Moore’s law in the context of future radar systems and the associated raw computing power of their processors. I doubt Intel’s newly released crop of MIC coprocessors would struggle with any current or future task(s) you could throw at them, they have in excess of 60 cores after all*. This may be particularly true of upcoming UCAVs and their plethora of [conformal] radar & coms arrays.

Ultimately, it will be the uptake of new technologies by the civilian sectors namely 4G (and later this decade 5G) wireless LANs, cellular PAs etc. that will dictate the economic viability of new radar systems for military applications- GaN WiMAX applications is a good example.

This has been the case since the mobile phone went mainstream and is especially relevant in this coming austere decade for defence industries.

http://www.ece.ucsd.edu/news#top
http://www.sedi.co.jp/e/products/newproducts/gan_hemt-radar.html
http://www.toshiba.com/taec/news/press_releases/2012/mwrf_12_637.jsp
*http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/xeon/xeon-phi-architecture-for-discovery-video.html

What’s up with that? Why isn’t Russia pushing gear at Iran?

Two days ago, Russian President Vladimir Putin arrived in Israel for a visit in which pressing defense issues were discussed extensively, including the Iranian threat and the Syrian civil war.

It now seems that the cooperation between Israel and Russia is expected to expand in the defense field. Knowledgeable sources say that both countries are expected to develop at least one kind of UAV – one that will suit Russia’s operational needs.

Two years ago, Russia signed a deal for the acquisition of UAVs at a scope of $400 million from Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI). The deal included the Searcher-2 and Bird Eye 400 UAV models, as well as the construction of an assembly and production line in Russia.

Now the possibility of expanding cooperation is on the agenda again. Russia’s Deputy Prime Minister, Dimitry Rogozin, recently expressed his satisfaction with the Israeli-Russian cooperation in the field of UAVs, and sources close to the issue have said that the forming cooperation is part of a greater “strategic understanding,” that serves both sides on a variety of issues. According to foreign sources, one example of this is Russia’s decision not to sell several variants of antiaircraft missiles to Iran.

The planned cooperation will also include the transfer of technologies pertaining to UAV production.

http://www.israeldefense.com/?CategoryID=472&ArticleID=1436

Watch for a possible deal related to targetting pods also.

AMCA is better placed simply because of the ever increasing number of joint ventures, R&D collaborations and partnerships with top western defence firms and technology enterprises clamouring for a share of the huge Indian defence pie:

http://www.frost.com/prod/servlet/cio/256530837

It will be an interesting AeroIndia 2013. Don’t rule out the Russkies joining the AMCA party in the form of MiG and Klimov (yet).

Also, given that HAL will be involved in next to zero design effort on the FGFA, what’s with all the rapid prototyping and wind-tunnel testing?* Could it be that the relatively major concessions from the Indian side [on the FGFA]are being offset by Russian training of engineers and access to facilities that would be of immense value for this baby?

Pic c/o Twinblade.

*http://forum.keypublishing.com/showpost.php?p=1984458&postcount=694

First press showing of ‘Gamma-S’ IADS base in central Russia (Tverskaya region):

http://www.vesti.ru/only_video.html?vid=482509

BAE Systems’ 1.8 Gigapixel ARGUS-IS UAV surveillance pod:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGxNyaXfJsA&feature=player_embedded

Well, that’s substantial init?

Yeah, and on the underside of the wing also:

Original:
http://www.knaapo.ru/rus/popup-100×100.wbp?picpath=/media/rus/gallery/aircrafts/combat/t-50-4_1st_flight/t-50-4_16_hires.jpg

As far as I can tell they’ve not had to employ additional aerodynamic devices to inhibit boundary flow separation to address the transonic buffeting problem. If you recall ’51’ was repaired on-site @ Zhukovskii, and some journos did claim the cracks were so severe ’51’ would never fly again.

T-50-4’s first flight was 13 months after ’53’, so I guess the problems were serious but not severe (and certainly not insurmountable). Roll on T-50-5 and FGFA01!

A heavy reworking at this stage is going to drive the price up.

I’d think weight gain and alteration of Cg would be more pressing concerns. Cost escalations, element redesign/testing and time slippages are part & parcel of a programme of this size and complexity.

Besides, I’m sure VSMPO Avisma gave them a good deal- probably @ cost ;).

Su-30 “Super Flanker” for India $ 92.5 million apiece.

The number you’re quoting ($4bn/42) is wrong because it’s inclusive of 71 Mi-17 V5 helos ordered as part of the deal signed by VladP. In New Delhi last month.

Unit cost for Su-30MKIs are notoriously difficult to come by. Bloomberg, Vedomosti, RIA, BBC etc. have underestimated the cost @ around $35m. This is patently false because the first Su-30MKM contract was ~$900m (for 18 aircraft equates to a unit cost of $50m).

DID claims the contract signed last month is for 42 ‘Super-30’s coming in @ $71.5m each (a more realistic figure), even though the report itself is littered with errors. HAL is understandably coy on the subject.

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/india-ordering-modernizing-su-30mkis-05852/
http://hal-india.com/SU-30_MKI_Contract_24-12-12.asp

We may have to wait for Parliamentary minutes post Finance Ministry submission for the true figures to emerge, if they release them to the public.