LMFS1950s bombers were not all that different from airliners. Tu-95 was even converted into one. That’s not the case now. I don’t know what the PAK-DA will end up being, but it’s unlikely cheap enough to be used for anti-submarine patrols which eats up airframe hours.
Alternatively they could either base a MPA on existing airliner or design a low altitude aircraft for the purpose. Something like a bigger Kawasaki P-1 with 4X PD-14 engines.
I don’t have a strong opinion in this regard, maybe you are right, I am just pointing out that the plane could be a flexible platform with more missions that just a strategic bomber. That is what Russia is missing now, (i.e. it does not make sense to fly a Tu-160 to bomb ISIS), and if it had two engines (hopefully with high bypass ratio since it will be subsonic) it could be much cheaper to use than current Tu-160 and -22M3. It is supposed to be derived from the NK-32 and is called izd. 80, that is pretty much all we know.
IIRC there is in fact a new patrol plane in the naval development plan to 2030 or 2035, but no details were given. Airliners are not cheap either and normally the ones with range equivalent to Tu-142 (>10,000 km) are quite big and expensive, their great advantage is low fuel consumption and, for smaller militaries, to save the development of a specific plane. They would probably use 2 x PD-35 instead of 4 x PD-14, would it be based on the CR929? So we would close the circle and be accidentally back on-topic 😀
LMFSYak did a model of this STOL (not sure if its STOVL) stealth jet 2 decades ago. Would its design still be useful today? looks a bit too small to have a bay
A LHD-carried STOVL plane would need to be small indeed. LO design beyond basic shaping and bays for a couple of AAMs is not necessary, these planes would not tackle conflicts against advanced militaries. They would just expand the capacities of the LHD a bit.
That’s a bit overkill don’t you think?
Maybe, but what is Tu-142 but a version of strategic bomber Tu-95?
It depends on whether you see the PAK-DA as an ultra-expensive Russian version of the B-2 or something different. By what we have read, it will be cheap and subsonic, so probably they just want to use the flying wing scheme for broadband stealth and high fuel carrying capacity without focusing on exotic properties. Its big persistence and discrete signature would be very useful for long range maritime patrol.
In terms of strategic bombers, Russia no only has but is set to produce new Tu-160 with huge payload and speed, and avionics closely related if not identical to those slated for the PAK-DA, so both are going to operate in parallel quite likely. PAK-DA would be smaller, cheaper and more practical for theatre bombing, ISR, maritime patrol and other roles where persistence and LO are more relevant than turn-around time, where it cannot compete with the -160.
In any case Russia is currently modernizing the Tu-142 too.
LMFSSTVOL plane sounds nice and I think China had thought about it at some point… but where would it be used? their existing carriers can handle conventional jets.
China informed (I think last year) about their expeditionary forces and their intention to develop STOVL planes. They would be used on board of LHDs of course. Russia had talked about STO(V)L planes for the navy, in general, but not as concretely as China as far as I remember. But they have Yakovlev that probably longs for some interesting project like that and has lots of knowledge about the issue. China would support financially and save lots of time, Russia would cash some knowledge China would nevertheless end up acquiring and get some nice plane for their navy and export in the process. Looks fair for both to me.
as for other stuff.. well in the old days its nice to try fund all these companies but in reality is Russia is cash strapped. they just cut a bunch of orders for their new tanks and are opting to just use their older ones.
Ilyushin and Mikey mouse can still exist, just building specialized versions of the FC-31 like HAL does with Flankers.
They need to consolidate their MIC and end the debt trap in which many companies find themselves, that would be a last and well deserved goodbye to the 90’s and all the struggles and pain they created. But other than that, this narrative is getting old and is used disingenuously against Russia. Economy is the art of satisfying infinite needs with limited resources, and in that regard Russia faces the same dilemmas every other country does, from poorest to richest. They simply have opted for not increasing their debt and do just what they have money for. The ones making trillions of debt are not cash-strapped? Why to create liabilities if they have so much money?
About Ilyushin turning into kit assembler… better don’t tell any Russian 😀
They both need a new long range MPA. The Bears are getting old and China needs something more than Y-8 based platforms.
PAK-DA would make for a nice patrol aircraft if they manage to make it cheap and economic to operate. In fact it makes more sense for that kind of role that as strategic bomber, if you ask me…
LMFSWE just witnessed history as Russian and Chinese military aircraft freely flew into South Korean airspace together and challenged them with impunity.
Wait, what? Russia has vehemently denied that. There is a long story of complains between Korea and Russia due to the air identification areas that the former want to impose and the second doesn’t recognize, since they are not internationally accepted.
The planes flew for thousands of km respecting scrupulously the international airspace (not easy in that region of the world due to the many islands and proximity between Japan and Korea) and then decide to brazenly fly over two rocks disputed between Japan and Korea… for what exactly? They claim them too?
There are several sides in this story, each one with their own version, you cannot declare one side the right one without conclusive evidence
pretty soon we will see this expand to joint military projects. Already they’re developing civilian airliners together. the next step is to go into military stuff since aviation is getting more expensive and complicated.. and most countries are now partnering with others now.. France and Germany, UK and Sweden, and etc..
How can Russia and China collaborate to meet each other needs? IMHO.
They are already cooperating in those aspects that make sense for them, but developing critical military hardware together is more complicated and they are both pursuing total independence already in their current HW generation. Russia has little to take from China (maybe electronics and IT), China has each time less to learn from Russia.
The new agreement will get them cooperating militarily, sharing infrastructure and improving their coordination, but still I have not seen it is about joint military development.
Chinese Y-20 can replace Russian Il-76s and other transports
No, Russia is busy developing Ilyushin again. They will not give up on their transport aviation competences, why would they?
Chinese FC-31 to replace Russian MiG-29s
They desperately need to give MiG some business. And they don’t need FC-31 at all.
Russian Ka-50s and Mi-28s for China, they don’t have anything in that range
Kamov developed the Z-10 for them
Chinese Blackhawks for Russian army
No way, even Afghanistan prefers their Mils
A STOVL plane would maybe make sense to be developed between China and Russia, since it would be a too expensive project for the units one single country would buy. And performance-wise it would not be so critical as an air superiority fighter for instance.
LMFSShouldn’t be surprised if it turns out to be an optimised 11435 design.
Check this out.
https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/6593379
It would be also a semicatamaran with CONAG propulsion, springboard + catapults and capacity for 100 planes in 76 kT. Impossible to reach such capacity with a conventional hull, so it is not a modification of the Kuznetsov, though I assume it could have broadly similar lines due to the springboard.
The amphibious model displayed above the carrier showcased similar layout among recent Russian designs.
The Lavina had some sort of tunnel between side hulls, but it is not exactly as the patent for the semicatamaran is described. There the transition between the monohull at the bow and catamaran at the stern is more progressive. But maybe similar benefits are obtained, I have not read anything about that particular hull design.
To be honest this is the best design that have come out. A medium sized carrier with absolutely no “shortcomings” that was attributed to the Russian STOBAR designs like – lack of simultaneous t/o and trap, lack of deck space for aircrafts etc. It shows what a properly optimised 40-45k t carrier would look like. Its much much better than the Cavour based IAC-I, Charles DeGaulle, current 11435/Kuznetsov design and rival the newer QE class carrier.
The guys from Krylov define it explicitly as a light carrier, other than that I agree it has obvious advantages due to the huge flight deck.
Now imagine that layout with almost a 50% more displacement and nuclear propulsion…. that would be a serious deal.
It would be good if Russian Navy build few of them (after all they had 4 x 1143) and I would surely love to see this design for Indian Navy. Other potential customer could be Brazil among others.
In fact it would be a great design for export, true. Cannot wrap my head around India dealing with UK for the design of a third carrier when this wonder is available for co-development.
Basing a new design on 11437 is not at all bad.
Its parameters have been thoroughly surpassed by Krylov´s proposals. But the real issue here is that we are not talking about a new design based on a 11437, but the very 11437 with a new superstructure, taken directly from another past proposal. They did not even bother tweaking the model a bit to avoid insulting the public. I mean, it has the same soviet era anti-ship missile wells, old CIWS systems etc etc. Literally the same 30 or 40 years old model from the Ulyanovsk and hence nothing to see as far as a “new design” is concerned.
LMFSIndia is planning to upgrade its su-30MKI in Russia
According to the chief air Marshal of the Indian air force, the aircraft was operated without the modernization of about 20 years.
In the Indian air force has told about the readiness to modernize its fleet of su-30MKI fighter in the Russian Federation. This was announced by the chief of staff of the Indian air force air chief Marshal Birender Singh Dhanoa.
[INDENT] “We have requested from the Russian side the proposals for modernization in accordance with current needs,” he said.
[/INDENT] The commander also noted that the Indian side is satisfied with the upgrade program of the MiG-21, MiG-27 and MiG-29. According to the results of the military exercises, the Indian air force was satisfied with the result.
[INDENT] “There is therefore now considering the possibility of modernization of the su-30, which operated about 20 years. Accordingly, their avionics and weapons systems also require modernization,” – said the Marshal.
[/INDENT]
tvzvezda.ru/news/forces/content/201971913-KaK9v.html
LMFSLet’s observe the categorical dismissal of the Su-57 by the chief of staff of the IAF 😉 [INDENT]
“If you mean the fifth generation aircraft, the question not yet considered. When it’s delivered to you on the arms – only then will we be able to decide for yourself. We are ready to consider it for a purchase after you see him in action, and it will be provided to us for review – evaluation”, – he said. [/INDENT]
tvzvezda.ru/news/opk/content/201971921-RSgkM.html
Still waiting for an official who actually exists to say something negative about the engines, stealth and rest of qualities of the Su-57, as reported by the media.
So it seems the Indians got real and will update the Su-30s and find the money for a localization project of the Su-57 instead of talking big about co-developing heavy 5G planes, I celebrate that.
LMFSThey created a powered pod hardpoint to mount a camera which wouldn’t be able to see the weapons drops from the internal bays?
How about this is how the Su-57 looks in air to ground mode when it needs to target anything but fixed targets?
I know it is much better to use the occasion to trash the Su-57, but it wasn’t that difficult to search a bit. This is how the targetting pod that we know (101KS-N) looks like. The pod posted above definitely looks different and seems to be meant for looking sideways. The hardpoint where it is attached to is an already known one.
It may or may not be a targetting pod, but among all possibilities you invariably choose the one which is worse for the reputation of the plane, even when it is the less likely.
[ATTACH=JSON]{“data-align”:”none”,”data-size”:”full”,”title”:”MAKS_Airshow_2013_%28Ramenskoye_Airport%2C_Russia%29_%28523-45%29.jpg”,”data-attachmentid”:3868199}[/ATTACH]
LMFSYes. But most of its apertures – DAS – are smaller. And the EOTS is underneath a facetted canopy – which will allow for a more controlled directivity from the part of the wavefront that is reflected (until Mie scattering happens). The F-35 also probably has the cleanest cockpit interior. That said, the USAF freely admits the RCS of their designs experiences a step change for the worse at lower frequencies. And, if they didn’t, any EE with a background in RF would know they are lying.
Ok I see. The only additional apertures I know are the ones for the DIRCM turrets, probably that is what you are referring to. The MAWS apertures are similarly small. I guess we would need to know what happens to the wave front once it goes through those surfaces (what are the properties of the materials behind) and what kinds of other RCS reduction methods can be used (maybe destructive interference can be used around certain, specially relevant frequencies).
But I get the basics, that many of the most RCS relevant design elements are simply not visible.
Some ideas floated around over recent years for the sixth generation fighter concept were smart skins and a pilotless platform. If you didn’t have the canopy then that eliminates a large part of the canopy effect (you can sink the surface currents deeper with composite structures), and if you could shrink your apertures sufficiently and spread them out across the surface that would take care of most of the rest. No current 6th gen concept does this. The technology for it does not yet appear to exist.[/SIZE][/FONT][/COLOR][/LEFT]
The DAS technology could be used when mature enough to have the pilot shown a virtual image of the exterior, I think there was a British concept like this going around some time ago. But by then maybe the AI on the plane is enough to get rid of the pilot altogether
Thanks for the discussion in any case. I still need to research quite a bit to properly understand the topic but this helps a lot.
LMFSThis range is considering serious internal A2G load. In order to get the value which is closer to the data available for Russian planes (maximum range on internal fuel), we would need to find the lightest internal load possible. The best value we have is the one we are talking about from the Israeli presentation and the range increase compared to the values you mention is serious so the load must have a big influence.
LMFSIn recent times GE had the YF120 developed for the ATF, it was used as a base for the RTA-1 which was meant to work like a ramjet at high speeds and reach M = 4.1.
Interestingly this is roughly the same speed touted for the speculative MiG-41, so it is quite possible that such concepts are being entertained in Russia too.
LMFSThe Su-57 – with its many thin, transparent surfaces – will have a very pronounced canopy effect. This is why they had to build Okhotnik. The Su-57 isn’t as suited for deep penetration tasks as the F-35 or J-20 is because it is particularly vulnerable to detection at low frequencies.
Great post. I wonder what is the difference in your opinion between the surfaces on the Su-57 and those on the F-35 / J-20. The F-35 at least has also several EO apertures, wouldn’t they be also rendered transparent by lower frequencies?
LMFSThe F-35 carries a huge amount of fuel, 8+ tonnes, at a big fuel fraction. The Su-57 will carry over 3 tonnes more than the F-35 but is a much bigger aircraft (with two engines) so fuel consumption will be higher. I doubt if there is much difference in either aircraft’s range, combat radius. The J-31 may have a similar fuel fraction, who knows?
A small correction:
You are assuming Su-57 will have 3 tonnes more fuel than F-35, that would be 11.4 tonnes taking USAF data (8390 kg) as reference for the F-35A. From IDF we know that represents ca. 1400 km radius on A2A load, for a max range on internal fuel (the kind of data Russia provides for their planes) of 2800 km. The Su-35, a slightly bigger plane than the Su-57, carries 11.3 tonnes of fuel and has a official range on internal fuel of 3600 km.
BTW I would agree with your estimation of the Su-57 internal fuel as a rather safe bet. Would think the range on internal fuel would be also ca. 3500 km.
Consider that the F-35 is a “light” single engine fighter that weights more than a F-15C in the lightest version and with a cross sectional area close to that of a heavy fighter, so it will have a fuel consumption accordingly high
LMFSSome eye candy stuff from IMDS 2019
Storm-KM multirole carrier (displacement 44,000 tons) — Somewhat my fav among the three.
But the intermediate carrier has not been shown… the one with 76 kT that was expected on Army, then on IMDS. In the meantime, media has gone silent about it…
This is exactly how project 1143 optimised as a true aircraft carrier would have looked like, Its like a wish come true. Almost as I visualized for a 45,000 tonne carrier,
The design retained the two deck elevators, in addition to an additional deck edge stern elevator. The design even have a sort of well deck for docking is available at stern.
Thanks for the picture of the hull, the best one I have seen until now of the semicatamaran layout. A breakthrough in shipbuilding.
The carrier has a bigger flight deck than Kuznetsov with 70% of the displacement. But the conventional propulsion and somewhat limited air wing are the downsides. VMF wants a bigger vessel, with more aircraft and nuclear propulsion. This was the intermediate carrier mentioned above and in your article, but it has not been shown. This would be the one that is most promising IMHO.
BTW the “well deck” is just the space for the stern elevator, as far as I see
As to the Manatee, it is nothing but a hack. The same old Ulyanovsk model with names changed and the superstructure of project 23000E from 2015… embarrassing.
LMFSAs said, it seems Russia wants to restart the discussions about the 5G fighter with the Indians:
Sign In
