dark light

flateric

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 256 through 270 (of 692 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Pak-Fa Thread episode 19 #2323744
    flateric
    Participant

    Hmm, i was thinking …would this “alternative” to Davidenko’s T-50 be the project with Raptor style bays ( ie two side, one centre)?
    http://paralay.com/pakfa/t50%20%2871%29.JPG

    hardly think so as Davidenko’s project family shapes are readily seen here
    oppositioners were talking of ‘aerodynamics better than that of T-50 and F-22’ (I guess they were addressing novel aerodynamic shapes of Boeing-released early NGAD concept) and ability to carry even two Kh-55Ms(!) in weapon bays (no more, no less – ‘and here we have PAK DA’ was a citation) with unrefueled range of 5800 km (that was the moment when I started to rise eyebrows, previous time it was when I read that they tried to push project to POTR via Zhirinovsky – you hardly can find worse way to put credibility in your enterprise)
    I’ve asked some guys from industry about the case, but all I get are humble smiles

    in reply to: Pak-Fa Thread episode 19 #2324008
    flateric
    Participant

    Yak seems to be the only one that actually has a 5th gen design outside of Sukhoi too!

    this is old crap from 90s

    in reply to: Pak-Fa Thread episode 19 #2324012
    flateric
    Participant

    Hi, these abilities compared to Boeing’s NGAD/F-X…they refers to the “current T-50” or to the “alternative PAK FA”?
    Regards

    alternative one of course

    in reply to: Pak-Fa Thread episode 19 #2325221
    flateric
    Participant

    seems that the same MiG guys have reached Mr.Rogozin recently
    there was also PAK FA alternative developed at Sukhoi in 2005 that was thrown off in favor of Davidenko’s T-50
    in summer of 2010 its author together with ‘alternative T-50 mafia’ have tried to push it again through Zhirinovsky that reportedly had forwarded their letter to Medvedev
    they blamed existing T-50 as big mistake having structural problems due to rear weapons bay placement and downgraded specifications compared to Raptor and alternative PAK FA
    last project, they say, has ‘right aerodynamics’ and abilities compared to Boeing’s NGAD/F-X

    in reply to: Pak-Fa Thread episode 19 #2327276
    flateric
    Participant

    it was not posted by Ostrov, but yes, this is section of radar blocker. one need not to be Yoda-level in RCS reduction features to understand how thing traps waves

    in reply to: Pak-Fa Thread episode 19 #2329256
    flateric
    Participant

    I’ve never seen any evidence of such advanced materials like that from Russia hence why I asked.

    RAM and RAS doesn’t represent something out-of-this world tech, you know. take a look at Indian MiG-29K for example which is covered with ‘Special Coatings’ stencils – and this is export tech level.

    in reply to: Pak-Fa Thread episode 19 #2346244
    flateric
    Participant

    LMFS was cancelled a while ago
    no sign of it in GPV 2020

    in reply to: Pak-Fa Thread episode 19 #2352918
    flateric
    Participant

    Imho, the intake design serves two functions, partial LOS blockage of the compressor and EM scattering.

    it serves LOS blockage no more than any inlet with moving ramp serves this purpose on any teen fighter series. well, inner walls have some visible faceting but don’t think they help much

    no mention of intake internal features that serve to lower RCS, or purposely build S-ducts anywhere in patent text. well, you one of those who saw more than others yourself if you remember

    of course, toeing engines in in plan projection for better control in case of one engine loss, moving intake ramp on certain flight regimes helps a little for RCS reduction (you should take into account constant positive angle of attack at cruise that not helps in the case) but its only secondary effect, radar blocker is a main trick here

    in reply to: Pak-Fa Thread episode 19 #2353558
    flateric
    Participant

    Marchukov is chief designer of Lyulka Engineering Center per se
    I just don’t see any connection between PDE engines and T-50
    thus we would start to discuss Saturn gas turbines for naval vessels and condensed natural gas transport here

    in reply to: Pak-Fa Thread episode 19 #2353666
    flateric
    Participant

    Hope to see some surprises in the near future.-

    what connection do you see between Saturn PDE tests and PAK FA program?

    in reply to: Pak-Fa Thread episode 19 #2354460
    flateric
    Participant

    sorry. not ramp, but ‘inlet entries’

    in reply to: Pak-Fa Thread episode 19 #2354495
    flateric
    Participant

    Thanks for your recent plethora of information, including unequivocal and official confirmation of the existence of the so-called ‘banana ducts’.

    not. phrase says of inlet ramp being tilted in both dimensions as stealth measure

    in reply to: Pak-Fa Thread episode 19 #2354496
    flateric
    Participant

    The Russian text posted talks about the engine inlet being curved in two dimensions (vertical longitudinal and transverse planes) in order to prevent reflection of EM waves.

    this part of text in patent says of reference invention (this one being Lockheed’s F-22), not T-50 itself

    in reply to: Pak-Fa Thread episode 19 #2355197
    flateric
    Participant

    Are Sukhoi spooked by the engine sensor glitches and hence decided not to take T-50-3 into the air until these are resolved ?

    three flights at KnAAPO is a standard practice for aircraft delivery to EMD team. 50-3 will have some additional stuff installed at LII – hence the delays
    regarding ‘resolved’ – somehow they not concerned to fly 50-2 again soon after that recent glitch
    50-1 should return to flight soon as unprecedented resources and will put into this

    in reply to: Pak-Fa Thread episode 19 #2360475
    flateric
    Participant

    according to Bogdan, that’s true

Viewing 15 posts - 256 through 270 (of 692 total)