AFAIK , radar for PAK-FA is the one in the left in picture below, with 1552 T/R modules according to public information
where does that figure came from ?
when are the magazine pictures taken for T-50 radar as radar was unvieled before the fighter and it has other applications in mind.
http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/defense/2012-08-31/sukhoi-t-50-moves-radar-flight-refueling-tests
NIIP unveiled a full-scale prototype of the AESA radar for the PAK FA at the Moscow Airshow (MAKS) in 2009. This unit uses locally produced components, including solid-state transceivers, based on “nanohetero structures.” It is built on module principles and with other applications in mind, including aircraft that are already in service and anti-aircraft defense systems
T-50 is long flat nose. the biggest one. i am expecting 3000 T/R modules in final version.
Russia is only interested in maintaining its bases in Syria.
It is not discriminating between military and civilian targets, like hospitals.
this hospital thing is nonsense. Saudi arabia and middleast works on imported doctors and nurses. which doctor and nurse in right mind works in Syria. Most technical people are already fleeing Turkey. you can look at there so many indigenoous weopon projects falling behind schedule. Tuaf practically disapeared from Syria. the harder Ruaf bombs Syria the more discredited is the narrative of those who want to help syrian.
advance techical solutions are applied in the field.
i think Airdefence coverage will be improved with time.
https://sputniknews.com/military/201704221052882248-russia-syria-air-defense/
Russia Ready to Prioritize Air Defense Systems Deliveries to Syria
You ought to heed your own advice.
i am always accurate.
So the RuAF variant will need a longer runway?
It could be as heavy militarized version will be alot heavier than Civilian version.
It’s also worth mentioning that the take-off distance specs Ilyushin quote on their homepage are very optimistic (they credit the Il-96 with a run of 2000m, rather than the more realistic 2700m), so 1300m is almost certainly not at MTOW and definitely not from an unpaved field.
optimitic? 1300m is from the paved runway for the newer model Civilian version and its full load.
Paying attention to the specs, short take-off for the An-70 means an unpaved run of 700m or less – from a (paved) runway of more than 1300m, the An-70 will be able to take-off almost at MTOW and therefore achieve most of its range potential.
Minimum distance is over 1500m for MTOW on paved runway for An-70. on unpaved runway An-70 range is practically worthless.
Why would it need to? For AEW and refueling an option better than *both* the An-70 and Il-476 is available. Using a platform for tasks to which it is poorly suited is precisely the problem!
pay attention. Chinese use 50 years old D-30 engines on its cargo and AWACS fleet and not the so called efficient engines of An-70.
IL-476 is high speed long range frieghter. that is the most suitable for Air refueller and AWACS.
Sign In
