FrancisDeAssisithe concept posted by rajkhalsa is UGLY
Look carefully below the picture. The named credited is ‘Piotr Butowski’.
If there is someone credible and independent who knows what the T-50 would look like, that would be him.
FrancisDeAssisiFrankly speaking and to be really honest I don’t see the VSTOL happening in the Sukhoi T-50. It is just too damn big for such an exercise or adventure.
Something smaller like the LFI stands a better chance to see a Yakovlev inspired lift-fan. Probably this is where MiG corp comes into the picture. But people here have appraised strong funding apprehensions to undertake two seperate 5th gen projects and I probably just might share some of their reservations.
But one can always guess the incremental expenditure involved in something like the VSTOL MiG-LFI which shares majorly with almost all of the SuKhoi T-50 components.
FrancisDeAssisiI really do not think Russia is going to any big problems in designing, developing, and codifying for chips. It has partnered India, who is the leading designer for chips in INtel, Sun, Motorola etc and both INdia and Russia have excellent relations with Israel who has the maximum number of really high-tech foundaries per square-inch of territory in Tel-Aviv.
Both Russia and their chief strategic partner for the Pak-fa project viz India have excellent codifying capabilities and if they share the work, the time needed to develop the necessary software for driving those chips can lessen by half.
People tend to also forget that it is India that has developed the fastest Parallel super-computer in Asia outside of Japan.
And for such a project even a briefcaseful of chips could translate into a lot many of those 5th generationers.
FrancisDeAssisiI doubt that Russia is rolling in the money. Maybe the criminals but looking at the military forces they are happy to sell anything.
Well the bigger question is whether Russia can implement a 5th generation fighter by itself. I think the answer is yes, because it has all the infrastructure required to undertake that level of a project. But there will be a few Chinks in the armor, a few niggles that would require time and funding to sort out. And it is exactly in that department that some strategic alliances could sort out much like the JSF.
The Pak-Fa needs to be an outstanding and highly versatile platform equally as it needs to be an outstanding fighter. And I think the Russians recognize that fact. And my opinion is that they are upto making such a platform.
p.s. And guys plz keep this thread to the ‘T-50 Project’ discussions only.
FrancisDeAssisiNow we will see how far cripled Russian economy can go.
With oil priced at above 40$ in the international market ?? HELL NO !
Russia is rolling in money today. 😀
FrancisDeAssisiWell Mr. Hamburger, I have to say, as unexpected as this is for me, I actually agree with you – it does look horrible. I will add, though, that this is only a potential outline of the final aircraft – nobody on here knows what it will look like.
well going by the yankee maxim, “bigger is better”.
The Sukhoi T-50 is definitely bigger than the Raptor.
As to how much better….well …. gotta wait.
FrancisDeAssisiT-50 ?
It’s a beautiful plane.
Awesome….simply awesome.
Supercruise@mach 1.7 and 4000 km range with Internal Fuel. 😉
FrancisDeAssisiVladimir Putin praises Russia-India Agreements on space
Source:From same link above.
President Vladimir Putin praised the signing of a new framework inter-governmental agreement on cooperation in the field of outer space research and use for peaceful purposes.
Speaking at a press conference in New Delhi after the end of the negotiations, the Russian President said the following: “Actually, a real mechanism of effective interaction between our states in outer space has been created, including the implementation of large-scale programs and projects.”
In his opinion, this work progresses rhythmically and consistently from year to year.
Within the framework of the Russian President’s visit to India, the parties also signed an agreement in the field of joint development and operation of the GLONASS Russian global navigation satellite system.
As head of Russia’s Federal Space Agency Anatoly Perminov told RIA Novosti and some leading Indian mass media sources, “this is very important for us because the space sector of this navigation system is in its uncompleted form in Russia and is missing in India,” Mr. Perminov stressed.
“We agreed both to restore this system by joint efforts and organize its transition to new GLONASS-M and GLONASS-K space devices,” the head of Russia’s space agency specified.
As Anatoly Perminov told RIA Novosti, by 2007 Russia intended to increase, with the participation of India, the grouping of GLONASS global navigation system to 18 satellites. Today 11 GLONASS satellites are operational in orbits.
Both Russian and Indian boosters will deliver GLONASS global system navigation satellites into outer space. “We shall launch these space devices both from Russian space centers and from the Indian space center with the use of Indian boosters,” he said. For this purpose, we shall have to create jointly a ground component,” the head of Russia’s space agency added.
FrancisDeAssisiRUSSIA TO LAUNCH GLONASS SATELLITES FREE OF CHARGE
KRASNOYARSK, December 4: A few Russian GLONASS (Global Navigation Satellite System) satellites are to be put in orbit free of charge by Indian carrier rockets launched from an Indian space port, Viktor Kosenko, head of the design and planning department of the Reshetnev Applied Mechanics Research and Production Association, told RIA Novosti on the sidelines of the ongoing 3rd Siberian International Aerospace Show SAKS-2004 in Krasnoyarsk.
“Indian carrier rockets will launch Russian GLONASS navigation satellites free of charge; we are only going to bear costs pertaining to delivery of the satellites to India and exercise of ground support operations,” he said.
With reference to the number of GLONASS satellites to be placed in orbit by Indian launch vehicles, Mr. Kosenko said, “We are planning to put two or three GLONASS satellites in orbit to expand our group of navigation spacecraft on duty.”
Earlier, head of Rosaviakosmos Anatoly Perminov told RIA Novosti that Russian GLONASS satellites would be placed in orbit with the aid of both Russian and Indian launch vehicles.
“These spacecraft will be put in orbit not only by Russian carrier rockets launched from Russian space launch complexes but also by Indian launch vehicles lifting off from an Indian space port, he said. “We will have to jointly set up appropriate ground facilities for that,” the head of Rosaviakosmos added.
He also pointed out that by 2007 Russia, with India’s collaboration, plans to expand its overall group of GLONASS satellites in orbit to 18 spacecraft.
“By 2007 we plan to expand, with India’s collaboration, our group of GLONASS satellites in orbit to the minimum level of 18 spacecraft. Eventually, the number of satellites in the group may increase further, but a decision on that will have to be made at a later stage,” Mr. Perminov said.
“At present, we have 11 GLONASS satellites in orbit, but to ensure optimal coverage of the Russian and Indian territory, the system must consist of at least 18 such spacecraft,” the head of Rosaviakosmos pointed out. “In the future, we plan to enhance the system’s accuracy of positioning objects on the Earth’s surface to as little as 1 meter,” he added.
According to him, India has lately become a major space power. “At present, in terms of funding, India has reached Russia’s level of space investment. The next five years may see India coming ahead of Russia in terms of investment in civilian space programs,” Anatoly Perminov said. That is why we should do our best to encourage space cooperation with India, he stressed.
FrancisDeAssisiEarth to people…the Yak-141 did not have a lift fan, it used two lift jets. Big difference.
And the X-35 has a lift fan and generated a lift jet through the TV nozzles if I am not mistaken, thus creating two downward forces instead of one, definitely inspired by the Yak-141.
FrancisDeAssisiThe APG-79 isn’t even here yet.
And can you point me to where it says (or statistics) that the APG-73 is better than the Zhuk-ME?
Apart from the Super Hornet, which other platforms could be customised to carry the APG-79 ??
FrancisDeAssisiSean,
They should seriously do something about that to reduce the forward crosss-section.
About the ‘Droopy Nose’ look !
Does it have any advantages in terms of performance, visibility or manouvrability ?? :confused:
My feeling is that it should have some since that must be one of the reasons it was incorporated into the Flankers in the first place.
The Russians already have some experience in reducing the so-called ‘forward cross-section’ through changes made in the MiG29-M2.
FrancisDeAssisiI won’t say that China can never do ‘it’. But it can be said with some certainty that accessing ‘top-of-the-line’ military technology will always be a challenge for China.
China would have to finish the ‘loop’ of development of such technologies all by itself. EUropean help would have reduced the time-period for development. But I do not think you can blame people for doubting if any such help would be forthcoming on the scale that would contribute positively to such an effort.
FrancisDeAssisiNothing could be more concrete than sales of 81 planes by Airbus to around 20 by Boeing. Not to mention Gallileo and the Double Star project.
I might understand your enthusiasm. But plz pardon me if I ask what’s airbus and boeing civilian a/c’s got to do with Modern Military Aviation. 😮
As far as Galileo goes China ain’t gettin the military Signals. And the ‘sole superpower’ has already stated that it would block any Chinese Signals in Galileo esp if used in any conflict with Taiwan. And Double Star has nothing of significance yet beyond civilian and scientific applications.
It would be more prudent to discuss when the Americans, in the future, would give permission to Europe to co-operate more closely with the Chinese. And even if they do, it would be a ‘zero-sum’ game as far as they are concerned. I just cannot for the life of it see Europe and China being allowed to co-operate in military projects in a decisive fashion.
FrancisDeAssisiThere’s nothing concrete in that report to suggest that anything has changed.
Except for China wishing more fervently to diversify its defence relationsnips and including EUropeans in it’s defence horizon.
It is not as if Europe does not wish to build closer relations with China, but don’t we all know that as long as the ‘sole superpower’ is up and around there is not even a remote possibility of such happening.
Sign In
