I’ve noticed that for the most part these articles on the PAK-FA only advertise aspects like engine and aerodynamic performance: not much mention is made of its stealth features. Not too seem like Kapedani, but this may an indication that the Russians don’t expect the T-50 to beat the F-35 in stealth.

Probably you are not very wise thinking you can evaluate the progress of a program with press releases…

Anyway, is obvious that Sukhoi is not doing a great festival with the Pakfa , no laser shows, no smoke machines and great presentations, not great hosters with great discourses from the Sukhoi representatives, as you can see in the JSF-F-35/F-22 showing and presentations with ‘endure freedom’ slogans and that kind of crap, for many this probably is great…for a few is quite hilarious.

The russians are not doing this, they are just performing some nice loops and turning to tell everybody that can understand a bit on this industry that they are doing well, this pakfa program is not managed to search for attention of the public and enthusiasts, because the funding is already done, and the government is supporting the program, no need for dumb stealth tales.

Thank you Vympel, i did not know the story of this ship, I must say, i have nothing against this new missile, is not my concern either way…is not like I’m russian..

But sometimes , sometimes, very good promising programs are halted or killed because political interests, I’m reading about this Bulava/Bark issue, and it seems the bark-M was killed too early, and the slbm program was given to the house that designed and built the Topol missile, some people speculate that this action was done with a clear political favoritism..same story for Mig/Sukhoi, and probably many other companies/industries.

Anyways, a Bark-M mounted on a Borei hull was something promising, for nowadays requirements and future ones.

Said that, the Bulava is a 35TM missile with a range of a TridentD5 (55TM) with full warhead load (8000-7000km), must say this is a real challenge, and this performance is probably achieved in such lighter missile using hybrid propulsion (solid stage, liquid stage), again the solid stage is the one giving problems.

But either way…I’m sure the russian navy will regret the early killing of the Bark-M, the US is planning a new generation of SBNNs with new missiles, that most likely will outperform the Borei class, because will probably get bigger launchers.

The bulava is nice and interesting , and will do fine, most likely, but the launcher is the problem.

All this technological effort is quite ephemeral, IMO.

This is an interesting thread, i can’t tell you exactly all the details, but low frequency sound can travel very long distances, sound propagation is highly dependent of the medium, so things like temperature and dept have some influence for it propagation.

LF sonar is effective but only if the sonar itself is at certain dept, i think deeper, better LF reception.

I’m not sure if this applies for the medium frequency range.

Low frequency can be highly receptive, but, it does carry a vey high uncertainly, so sometimes the receiver can hear, but can’t locate the target, just know that there is something out there.

Medium frequency has shorter range, but is more accurate.

Pasive sonar for navigation and tracking is one of the most unrealiable sensors out there, leading many accidents between submarines and subs/surface ships.

3). Can sonar detect and track multiple targets that are not in the same area?

I think this is the deal for modern sonar arrays, they are (seems) to be based on many modules of piezoelectric receivers, since some recivers will get more intensity than others in the reception this lead you to discriminate information for tracking multiple targets, this is not possible for a single big receiver.

Well according to Livefist flyaway cost will be the most important one — which suddenly turns Mig-35 into the hottest favorite, if it meets the requirements of course.

suddenly

Haha! you must be kidding right?

Me too, i really want to see the source of that data, is showing a very, very bad performance, if is true, then this A400 deserves a halting in it program, and probably a cancellation…

With a empty weight of 75 TM, only capable of a 32 TM payload, i think is not news that something went wrong, what was the original empty weight goal?

This will follow the C-17 path, that plane is overweighty as well, 125 TM of empty weight for a 70 TM payload, although it has a better ratio (

Although, regarding fatty planes , nothing beats the F-22..yet 😀

Never underestimate the danger of ‘technological miracles’ (composites)

Serious? Really?

If you do not know how a pole model is useful then why are you making any comments?

Tell me

What would be more important for the RCS confirmation

1-A lab test with a static model?
2-A real flying test with the real plane?

What kind of test is being done in the F-35? right now, at this moment.

Lasers will be useless, no matter if they are diode based, chemical based, X-matter based..IR lasers are useless as weapons, they can’t deliver enough power per area of ‘eye’

Unless lasers move to UV frequencies every laser system will be impractical.