Updated & revised rendition based on Mr. Paralay’s new drawing (link below):
[ATTACH]183548[/ATTACH]
http://paralay.iboards.ru/download/file.php?style=12&id=10226&mode=view
There’s nothing new per se in the March issue, but it is an excellent run down of the programme to date. Slightly more comprehensive than ‘Air International’s’ feature and hence impractical to abridge here- but it’s nothing that hasn’t been already reported/relayed from recent reliable sources.
Anyways, here’s some new points:
Both the T-50-0 & T-50-1 (KNS) will be moved to Zhukovskii shortly.
In 2010, 1 more flying prototype will join the flight test programme.
In 2011, 2 more flying examples will join the programme, these will feature full avionics & weapons systems (i.e. AESA etc.)
Length: ~20m
Wingspan: ~14.2m
Height: 4.8m
Normal take-off weight: 22T
Max. speed: Mach 2
Cruising speed: Mach 1.5
Max. loading (:confused:) 9
Here’s my favourite bit (page 23):
In order to lower the RCS [was realised by] the entire removal of the weapons to internal bays, shielding of the first stage of the engines’ compressors by means of ‘S’- shaped ‘channels’ of the air intakes, and also the widespread use of composite materials in the aircraft’s construction.
This was communicated to a meeting with journalists on the 1st of March by the General Designer [of the T-50] Alexander Davidenko.
I think they may be going for a r-blocker/semi-duct combo. See what the April issue has in store.
The new 3-view is the best yet. But I’m a law-abiding citizen and will not breach 
.
What I said was there was NOT an s-duct as some were trying so hard to convince everyone was there..
One doesn’t have to try very hard. Full ‘S’ duct, half ‘S’ duct or whatever, the engines are certainly not straight-thru, line-of-sight “as some were trying so hard to convince everyone…”
…Oh, I’m sorry. I forgot you’re the same guy who set up that de facto ‘Anti PAK-FA’ thread that got you infracticulated & banned. In which case you can totally ignore this post.
I found this recently updated pic on Paralay’s website @ the PAK-FA page.
Is it the 117? (Mr. Paralay?)
…Otaku and others, what is the problem?
I have no problem whatsoever with radar blockers. I just made the reasonable assertion using (non-fabricated) photos, that the 117 engine is not a 9m long banana, therefore that device is not the compressor face- is that OK?
For example if we use the LEVCON depth @ midpoint as a ref. point (~1m wheel measurement, from the underside pic), double it to account for MER- then it coincides nicely with the ‘viewing angle’ pic above (red line). Hence, that device is ~2m inside from the lower intake lip. Savvy?
IIrc, ~50% of the X-32’s comp.face was shielded anyways. My assertion is that the T-50’s is closer to 90% especially considering that inner curvature goes all the way round (in green, below). In conjunction with a device similar to that YT 3D rendition- I believe it will be a very effective engine RCS management solution.
The PAK-FA will be moved to Zhukovskii shortly and there should be a steady flow of high-quality pictures for us to ponder. Until then I won’t mention the c.face/blocker topic again……and will refrain from being baited by ICFTs.
B. Sweetman gets up to speed:
Red line= line-of-sight of camera (accurately accounting for elevation & downward deflected LEVCON, and hence all that will be visible beneath it);
Blue line= central axis of engine compartment (photo c/o Franc):
Yellow line= central axis of engine compartment (lateral)
[ATTACH]183309[/ATTACH]
……Oops!!
Even more ‘S’ ducts!!! 😮 don’t look krapedani……..(not that you’ll see anyways).
This is a really interesting picture in that the pic of the Su-27 compressor was taken with the camera positioned directly in the intake mouth. The T-50 pic was evidently taken further away- but which of the two appears larger & closer? The T-50’s ‘device’ or the Su-27’s c-face?
Let’s play matching pairs shall we?
There is nothing for me to learn from an intellectually compromised & fraudulent troll.
I’ve never seen a compressor face with a non-metallic long vane offset by a short vane.
Moving on (for the rest of us)- Re: link below: if you look at the MLG bay door on the right, it appears to start & finish before the intake.
The picture is worthless for depth perception:
http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/3811/rata16.14/0_822af_60835cc4_orig
Wowsers :eek:, look at the smooth contours and fine finish on that S-37!! (and they didn’t even use the Mitsubishi Heavy Industries fabs, as utilised on the PAK-FA……..and the 787).
Sign In
