I have a few questions regarding Russian missiles and their designations. Correct me if I’m wrong, but as I understand, the R-77 (AA-12 Adder) and its variants have the following designations.

R-77 (izdeliye 170, export variant is RVV-AE)
R-77-1 (izdeliye 170-1, export variant is the RVV-SD)
K-77M (izdeliye 180) main MRAAM of the PAK FA with conventional rear fins and AESA seeker
K-77ME (I think this is the ramjet model of the K-77M, but development may have stopped due to funding)

Also, I think the following are the R-73/74 missile designations.

R-73 (export variant is R-73E)
R-74 (izdeliye 740, export variant is RVV-MD)
K-74M1 (izdeliye 750)
K-74M2 (izdeliye 760) I think this is the SRAAM for the PAK FA and has reduced cross section

Russian missile designations are confusing.

Even if it is primarily an aerodynamic feature it could still serve different secondary functions for different aircraft, e.g. housing a SRAAM on T-50.

Those protrusions are specifically for SRAAM. They seem small because the missile that will be carried in there has reduced cross section compared to the regular R-73/74

LowObservable, I still don’t get how you can so accurately eyeball the F-35’s center of gravity and center of lift. Also, according to Jon Beesley, the feed tank of the F-35 is in the front. If that’s the case, then shouldn’t the F-35 get more stable as it burns fuel, not less?

You’re bagging about the negative effects of internal weapons. Can you suggest how you achieve stealth otherwise then? And what about the Russians and the Chinese, who’s PAK FA and J-20 also use internal weapon bays?

I’m really not sure that CNT will guarantee a stealthy compressor. Reduce its signature? Definitely. But making it stealthy and on par with S-shaped inlets or blockers seem rather unlikely, since the material has to withstand high temperature and loads from rotation. Not only that, I’m not sure if materials can fully substitute shaping in the near future, since blade geometry design for good engine performance may not be optimized for low radar return.

As an aside, I’m rather curious about the relationship between the F-22’s AN/AAR-56 MLD and the F-35’s DAS. Some say that the DAS builds upon the F-22’s MLD, but they’re made by different companies, LM in the case of the F-22’s MLD and NG in the case of the DAS.

f-16.net certainly is too pro-US, but as a regular on that forum, I’ve been able to filter out the truly knowledgeable people (johnwill, That_Engine_Guy, etc.) from the “America Strong!’ simpletons. I think the one-sided nature of f-16.net has to do with the moderators. That’s why a few of the JSR-like Russia patriotic posters got banned pretty quickly there, but that also means that even making rational statements in support of Russia tends to be viewed skeptically. Whereas here, as several other posters have mentioned, nationalists from every country post their patriotic garbage, and moderators don’t seem to get rid of anything unless it’s obviously and repeatedly offensive/racist/political. It does allow for a greater variety of viewpoints, though unfortunately that also means that idiots like JSR, Tu 160 and Scooter are still around. It looks like you can’t have your cake and eat it too.

In other news, some rather strange info here.

http://en.itar-tass.com/economy/748667

MOSCOW, September 08, /ITAR-TASS/. Russia’s Air Force does not depend on foreign components, United Aircraft Corporation CEO Mikhail Pogosyan said on Monday.
“Clearly, our military aviation must not depend on foreign supplies, and we are pursuing this policy now,” he said.
In civil aviation, the share of domestically-made components is 50% “This figure is higher when aircraft are upgraded. This [growth] happens faster now,” Pogosyan said.
UAC is planning to increase production by 30% this year, he said.
The Russian Defence Ministry has worked out a detailed plan up to 2020 for re-equipping the country’s Air Force.
“In 2016 we will start receiving the first T-50 planes,” the Air Force Commander, Lieutenant General Viktor Bondarev, adding that everything was going according to plan and the flight personnel of the 929th Chkalov flight test centre retrained for the T-50 aircraft also known as the Prospective Airborne Complexes of Frontline Aviation (PAK FA).
According to Bondarev, the pilots have already started flights on one plane, and the second one is being readied.
The first PAK FA aircraft will perform its first flight in 2019.
“In 2019, the plane is to perform the first flight, and in 2023 its tests will be completed and delivery to the troops will be carried out,” Bondarev said.
PAK FA (T-50) is Russia’s multipurpose fifth-generation fighter jet, created by the Sukhoi design bureau. The plane performed its first flight in 2010. It is a missile-carrying strategic bomber of a new generation, designed by the Tupolev company. The plane will not be a deeply modernised version of Tu-160, but will become a principally new aircraft. In the future, PAK FA is to replace the Tu-95 and Tu-160 planes of long-range (strategic) aviation that are in service in the Russian Air Force.
Russia is also upgrading its strategic Tu-160 and Tu-95 aircraft to almost double their performance.
“These planes meet all modern requirements, in principle, but they are being seriously upgraded now in order to almost double their combat performance,” he said.

I’m assuming that they mistook the PAK FA for the PAK DA.

Why do they need Long Range Interceptor ? Cant they just buy more PAK-FA with stage 2 engine to do the job and money spent on interceptor is better spent to develop light fighter

The PAK FA can’t match the MiG-31’s speed performance even with stage 2 engines. The T-50’s original RFP is Mach 2.35 max speed, and has since been reduced to Mach 2 due to composite materials. The main mission of the PAK FA is air superiority and strike, so maximum dash speed isn’t important anyways.