LMFS@KGB: this is probably a missile launch in testing ground and not in Syria, due to the colour of the weapon.
@ActionJackson: I don’t really want to go deep in this controversy but I think your affirmations are a little too far fetched. Very serious, Russian sources that can actually read and interpret the original statements indicate they rather point the PAK-FA detecting the US fighters and not the other way around. Keep in mind:
> Nervous statements from US military regarding the inconvenient presence of Russian AD and fighters in the same area than F-22
> Hysteria surrounding S-400
> Russian side calling “amateurs” those who believe in “aircraft invisibility” against modern IADs
> B-2 renouncing to high-level penetration in Russian air space and being modified for low level flight
> Russian sources pointing to signatures from Syria confirming their simulations about RCS of modern Western fighters
> Visit of PAK-FAs to Syria could have been ongoing for say 1 or 2 weeks before being discovered or leaked and immediately terminated. What those planes did there and how long, probably only Russians know. They could have operated at night, checking their sensors and radio-electric suite, masked with ECM and other aircraft without anybody detecting them simply because they were not expected. This would actually have made some sense unlike the reported two day visit which frankly almost nobody understood.
So, far from my intention to make bold statements since this is an obscure subject but rather trying to balance the discussion a bit. I repeat: Russians do not believe in stealth the way it is discussed in the West, so no point in them trying to clone US fighters in the first place. Maybe their plane looks less “stealth” but they don’t really care, since in tactical reality also the US ones are not stealth enough to escape their IAD, despite much higher costs and aerodynamic compromises. Also consider the huge benefits for the West of having the whole world thinking they posses an unstoppable offensive weapon in the form of stealth planes. This would greatly help understand the S-400 saga, BTW. Let’s have an open mind instead of being confined to think within the narrow parameters of imposed narratives.
LMFSThat Russian guy was talking apparently in the same intervention about characteristics of the Russian 6G planes and talking a lot of other things, like stealth is not relevant (some here did skip that part apparently), cruise speed will be close to 1 M but with AB hypersonic and other nonsense. He IS talking out of his ass very much my friends
So, will we be intelligent enough to close this rather idiotic discussion about whether Su-57 will be cancelled? Please!
LMFSMercurius
Yet another thread has been deleted without explanation, removing not only postings whose signal-to-noise ratio left much to be desired, but also a significant amount of useful information contributed by individual members of the ‘Modern Military Aviation’ forum.
But the future predicted by ActionJackson hardly seems viable. I believe that it is now time for many of us to decide whether we are prepared to carry on gathering and posting items of aerospace-related information that could be deleted without warning, apparently at the whim of one or more anonymous and unaccountable individuals who, in the words of my old colleague Mercurius Edinensis, “come into their chairs…none knows how”.
We do not know what life experience or other training is thought to have qualified them for the role that they serve. Nor are we told the rules (if any) that seem to allow some individual posters to repeatedly post nationalistic or political diatribes that add little to our communal knowledge, but cause threads to eventually be ‘nuked’, permanently erasing the contributions that other more responsible members have made. When a thread vanishes, we are given no explanation as to why potentially useful information has been removed.
The ‘Modern Military Aviation’ forum is a collective work created by its individual members. Without us and our individual contributions, it can serve little purpose. But we seem to have no voice in how it is run, or right of appeal against thread deletions.
Completely agree, this feels like having done something wrong that has annoyed the Gods and not knowing what it was. It is simply ridiculous.
LMFSHunter-B rolled out:
https://bmpd.livejournal.com/3253886.html
Vykatka of the demonstrator of the shock S-70 unmanned aerial vehicle on research of “Okhotnik-B”
As has reported on June 28, 2018 the Interfax agency, the first Russian heavy shock UAV of experimental design bureau “Dry” “Hunter” came to the final stage of ground tests. The informed source has reported about it to Interfax.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]261246[/ATTACH]
“At the Novosibirsk aircraft factory (NAZ, branch of the Sukhoi company – IF) the first vykatka of the shock Hunter UAV has taken place – he passes ground tests in anticipation of the first departure”, – the interlocutor of the agency has told.
“The first flight of “Hunter” is expected in 2019″, – I have noted a source.
The director of directorate of programs of military aircraft of the United Aircraft Corporation (UAC), the ex-commander-in-chief of the Air Force of Russia Vladimir Mikhaylov has reported about the research works on creation of the heavy shock UAV which are conducted in experimental design bureau “Dry” in 2014.
“Now works are conducted, we do work on “Dry”, “Hunter” is called. This car very perspective, goes research work till 2015, with the subsequent transition to developmental works now”, – Mikhaylov on air of Echo of Moscow radio station has told.
Characteristics of the developed UAV don’t reveal now. According to open data, his take-off weight will be 20 tons that will make it the heaviest of the developed devices of this type. It was reported that for the first time he will fly up in 2018, and in 2020 it will be taken advantage.
In 2017 the photo of “Hunter” which is cut out from the presentation of the Russian Defense Ministry judging by which, the device is developed according to the scheme of “the flying wing” with the three-rack-mount chassis has been distributed in the Internet.
Earlier informed interlocutor of Interfax has reported about tests of the heavy shock Altius-O UAV weighing more than 7,5 tons developed by the Kazan experimental design bureau of Simonov.
The Deputy CEO of Tekhmash (enters into Rostec) Alexander Kochkin in March, 2018 has told Interfax that the concern has begun development of fighting loading for UAVs – it can be both means of infighting, and an air bomb.
The chief designer – the vice-president of OAK for innovations Sergey Korotkov in December, 2017 has reported to Interfax that in Russia work on creation of shock UAVs which will be able to be organized in groups and to be coordinated among themselves via secure channels of communication.
Development of the heavy UAV was announced at a forum “Army-2017” by the CEO of RAC MiG Ilya Tarasenko. In November of the same year the representative of the company has noted that they in study have UAVs weight from ton to 15 tons.
The Russian President Vladimir Putin said on board of the Russian Defense Ministry at the end of 2017 that at implementation of the new state program of arms the particular emphasis on equipment of troops will be placed by precision weapons, pilotless shock complexes and also the newest systems of investigation, communication and radio-electronic fight.
The Minister of Defence of the Russian Federation Sergey Shoygu reported about plans of equipment of the Russian Armed forces shock UAVs in October, 2017. “In the nearest future on equipment of Armed forces complexes with the multipurpose unmanned aerial vehicles capable to solve not only prospecting, but also shock tasks will begin to arrive”, – Shoygu has said.
From bmpd we will remind that as reported our blog with reference to the publication of the Air&Cosmos magazine a year ago, within research “Hunter” is conducted creation of the hardly noticeable S-70 unmanned aerial vehicle. Works on research “Hunter” are carried out by PJSC Sukhoi Company within the contract of the Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation given on October 14, 2011. The purpose of research is creation of pilotless prospecting and shock system which would have the high speed and autonomy. BLA S-70 on the subject “Hunter” is characterized as “the unmanned aerial vehicle of the sixth generation”.
It was reported that the demonstrator of BLA S-70 has been made at the Novosibirsk aircraft factory of V.P. Chkalov – PJSC Sukhoi Company branch, and the first flight of the demonstrator has been planned for 2018 earlier. The mass of BLA is in range of 10-20 tons, and the maximum speed is estimated at 1000 km/h.
LMFS@Dr.Snufflebug:
Totally agree. Those planes were designed by companies and scientific institutions of the USSR, many if not most of them in present Russia (didn’t knew that bit about the lead designer being from Moscow, thanks) therefore the know-how to maintain, build and modify the plane is for sure available even when it will be needed to gather and put all the pieces together. The big issue is the legal aspect, since for instance Volga-Dnieper was lifting cargo for NATO and all the Western-related contracts will surely be threatened if they take planes built by Russia against the will of Ukraine. Apparently they are establishing a company in Germany, the rumours are that this would allow to circumvent Antonov’s denial to cooperate with Russia to keep the planes flightworthy, but may also be useful in case Russia restarts the production under a different name (old, Russian-operated An-124 could be sold to this company and maintained by Antonov while the VTA and Volga-Dnieper proper can buy newly produced units)
Regarding the engines, the gas-generator from the improved NK-32 for the Tu-160M2 has been mentioned several times as the basis of a new high-bypass engine for the An-124. This should be the famous PD-30, do you have any information about its state of development? The PD-35 is IMO too far in the future.
LMFSSad news, RIP
LMFSWhy do you assume that the range of ~2000 km cannot be established by non-ballistic trajectory ? I don’t think they would have achieved a speed of Mach 10+ from Mach 6 which is a claimed speed of Iskander without using Solid Propellent of high Isp and if that is the case that would impact even its trajectory
I am assuming that 2000 km is the maximum range and that would imply optimal trajectory, being that the ballistic one (I meant at least when no more thrust is applied, which would be the longest part of the flight). I am not an expert in rocketry, maybe you could explain why the specific impulse of the propellent would affect the trajectory?
Thanks
LMFSparalay , the Kinzal like Iskander does not fly a pure ballistic trajectory as your diagram shows its incorrect , It does not fly a quasi-ballistic trajectory ( there is no such thing as quasi-ballastic trajectory its media creation ) , They follow a tailored dynamic trajectory based on multiple factors.
This is based on interview with Iskander system maker who mentioned that even he does not know how the missile will fly next since it is not pre-programed to fly a tailored trajectory but it flies based on its on-board system that will make it fly , change direction and its trajectory depending on rage and target it flies too and other factors , It has on board ESM system that would alert to it getting targetted and would change it flight profile accordingly …..this is not your BM or so called quasi ballistic missile.
But for maximum range the missile must fly roughly a ballistic trajectory, is that not established? I mean, the exact deviations around the ballistic path can be maybe random or based on the missiles sensing threats, but as long as you want to maximize the range you should stay as close as possible to the ballistic trajectory. When 2000 km maximum range are stated, this would logically relate to a non-manoeuvring, purely ballistic launch.
I can imagine the developer not wanting to describe exactly how the missile dodges threats and also that its path is not 100% determined before launching, but in the end trajectory for maximum range is just physics. Of course, if range is not an issue, I agree the missile’s path may abandon any resemblance with ballistic trajectory
LMFSWhat is RV?
I mean reentry vehicle, warhead. Not sure if this is the most adequate term for a ballistic missile with a trajectory’s apogee of 200 km, now that I think more about it.
The parameters of the flight of a ballistic missile are very simple to calculate. There is a free program “Sputnik”
Cool program! But I meant, the manoeuvring, if done through aerodynamic surfaces, is going to detract from the kinetic energy of the warhead and therefore affect its range / speed at the point of impact, it would be nice to know how extensively it will be manoeuvring and what method is used to modify its trajectory (aerodynamic surfaces or propulsive devices). This feature is probably similar to the one on Iskander but it is not clear to me if it impacts significantly on range / speed
LMFSTomahawks wouldn’t remain intact even if they lost power and fell to earth by themselves. They disintegrate mostly on impact.
Yes, I guess 100% intact makes no sense, only that the missile somehow did not explode, this should allow to preserve many of the components and quite probably the ICs. We have no proof whatsoever that this has in fact happened but I tend to believe that many missiles did not reach their targets (100 missiles for 3 small, non-hardened targets seems simply insane to me), either because of interception, jamming or simply failure. Some estimates point to only 7 missiles hitting their targets and 71 out of 103 being intercepted, that would leave 25 left, some of which may have not exploded
LMFSThe diagram shows the shooting at the maximum range. The scale is observed.
1. climb, speed subsonic, flight time 8 minutes, distance 125 km
2. Supersonic flight, speed 2300 km / h, flight altitude 15000 meters, flight time 15 minutes, a distance of 575 km
3. rocket launch, angle of attack 10 degrees
4. flight on the ballistic trajectory, the engine running time is 57 seconds
5. altitude 100 km, speed M = 10, inclusion of the homing head. The search area from this height is 285 x 160 km.
6. Destruction of the target with a speed M = 3.8 / 4650 km / h
Wow Paralay, it seems you have done some research… 😎
You consider 700 km combat radius for that mission, do you think this is possible with such big missile? (Wikipedia states 720 km combat radius at 2,35 M and 18000 m for the MiG-31 but no load is specified). It is very interesting that you also consider the 2000 km range would include the stretch when it is carried by the MiG-31, this looks realistic to me.
Would be very interesting to know what manoeuvrability the RV has and how it affects the range
All in all, this means capacity to cripple an strategic target at 2000 km from an airborne (and therefore unpredictable) carrier in some 30 minutes. That is very impressive (in fact a pocket version of the infamous “global prompt strike” or better said a “theater prompt strike”) and probably extremely difficult to counter.
I wonder how you got this data or how you came to those estimations but this is very cool, thanks!
LMFSThere’s lots being made in the media about reports that Russia captured some intact Tomahawk cruise missiles in Syria. I’m sure Russia would like to have a look but its not like they don’t have cruise missiles every bit as capable in their arsenal today.
Is it Tomahawk what they captured or the newer, stealth missile that was delivered by the B-1s? That would be a nice war booty…
LMFSMiG-31 and Dagger
Any guess, what the range and max. speed of the MiG-31 would be when loaded with the Kinzhal?
LMFSI think they are thinking kinematics/weapons of the F-22 combined with the avionics of the F-35.
I would add weapons bays capable for air to ground ordnance on the F-22. The concept would make much sense, but floating this idea now and offering it to Japan is quite strange don’t you think? Fundamentally this would be a new fighter and require years in testing and billions in development, and, even more importantly, would end up with Japan having a potentially better aircraft that the US has…
I think this is a rather disingenuous suggestion to the US to improve on both the F-22 and F-35. Leaving the arguably less developed avionics aside, the PAK-FA platform offers a deep understanding of what a true multirole aircraft means and can be developed into a potentially dangerous rival. And while avionics can be improved at a later point, limitations of the platform remain, leaving US with a less than optimal fleet for the future. PCA will take ages to be completed, what Lockheed proposes here would be much cheaper, faster and safer.
LMFSLockheed Martin to Offer Japan Stealthy F-22 and F-35 Hybrid Jet (excerpt)
What should this mean at all?? An F-22 with ground attack capabilities and updated avionics??? How is Japan supposed to pay for that plane and its development? What should this mean in regards to the alleged capabilities of the F-35?
Weirdest defence news I have seen in a long time…
Sign In
