Agree, the surface finish impression on recent MiGs has benefited from Western-style matte paint which makes them look deceptively smooth – if you look at them closely though they’re still a bit crude and not up to Sukhoi’s (or Western) standards. Sure, better than a 1980s Fulcrum, but that’s not saying much 😉

This is true and it’s also a bit odd. What’s the culprit? Dated construction methods/machinery? Bureau tradition? 😀

There are cold war era fighters that look flusher than the M2/35 (apart from the composite surfaces on the latter, of course). Sukhoi has made incredible improvements in just a decade and the KnAAPO and Irkut facilities are constantly recieving mass deliveries of new computerised precision machinery and impressive new gear for metalworking and composites, the last Soviet-era stuff is being phased out and I guess even further improvements are to be expected. Why would MiG, being part of UAC, not do the same? Or what is this really about?

That said, I stumbled upon this shot. Real sexy:
http://www.1zoom.net/big2/147/309947-Sepik.jpg

This got me quite wondering. If one guy with a “physical optics simulation software” can easily make an in-depth RCS analysis and even exactly identify hot spots and provide their weighing, this all based on photos/drawings published on open source, then why wouldn’t Sukhoi simply do the same?

This. And not to mention the fact that the Russians operate at least two large and capable RCS ranges and several smaller anechoic chambers. They have obviously also spent significant time evaluating the F-117, the B-2 and the F-22 as per standard military intelligence and this includes computer simulations AND live RCS testing with various models. Of course their own designs have been put through the same (and this includes the PAK-FA).

As far as RAM goes they are well acquainted with that as well. Mr. Pogosyan himself has co-authored scientific papers on RCS and RAM, he has some experience in the field. Sukhoi, Tupolev and Mikoyan has had significant success with these things (although very little of this work has been fielded so far, but that’s a different issue).

These are classic images by now but I might as well post them again. Su-27 at RCS range, mounted on a rotating platform for easy access to different angles:
http://vivovoco.rsl.ru/VV/JOURNAL/VRAN/03_10/STELLS10.JPG

Result plot, baseline Su-27 (left) vs. RAM-treated ditto (right):
http://vivovoco.rsl.ru/VV/JOURNAL/VRAN/03_10/STELLS03.GIF

That was more than a decade ago, before the PAK-FA design was finalised. So you people are saying that they just decided to throw all they knew down the bin? I find that very unlikely. :rolleyes:

And I mean, even if one would disregard all of the above… Don’t you see how ridiculous it is to claim that they would be unaware of obvious things like the ones some of you mean they got all wrong? I mean, what we’re doing is essentially OSINT and all these things are readily available to them as well. The difference being that they are likely much better at OSINT than any of us.