Quote:[/url][url="http://igorrgroup.blogspot.com/2010/01/pak-fa-first-flight.html"]PAK FA first flight[/url]



[url="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_mDvQ8xYRdSI/S2QDM-CrWRI/AAAAAAAAA4A/pCbKacQ3d1s/s1600-h/pak-fa+28.08.2009.jpg"][/url]The new 5[sup]th[/sup] generation fighter prototype T-50-1 ('izdelie 701'), developed within the framework of the Indo-Russian PAKFA/FGFA program, has made its [url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S67zfmEqGxQ&feature=player_embedded"]first flight[/url] at Jan. 29 in Komsomolsk-on-Amur. It was 47 min on the air. Despite the wrap of secrecy, the look of the fighter appeared very close to that, previously [url="http://igorrgroup.blogspot.com/2009/10/outlines-of-pak-fa.html"]described[/url] in the most reliable Russian publications. So, everybody can now compare what was said about the PAK FA specs before, and what exists actually.

Now it is clear, that in its airframe design the fighter is closer related to American F-23 prototype, than F-22 or JSF, but with bigger internal payload bay. However, it has unrepeatable impress of Sukhoi design house, clearly looking as a thoroughbred Su-linage. [color="#2e8b57"]According to the most reliable estimations, T-50 has 10 internal and 2 additional external hardpoints[/color] on the wings (the 'mystery' triangle thickening under the wings). With this great payload capability and much space for the fuel T-50 can became a true military 'workhorse' of the future battlefield! <a name="more">

From relatively unexpected moments [color="#2e8b57"]the controlled LCA-like LERX must be noted[/color][color="#2e8b57"]. It demonstrates the designers' assertiveness (if not hardball) in field of the super-maneuverability.[/color] With currently installed 14.5 t thrust 'izdelie 117' and futuristic 17,2 t thrust Al-41F engine the plane can take off from a 300-400 m horizontal airfield or even a highway. Also, the multiplicity of controlled aerodynamic surfaces, which make precision landing easier, is an indication about intention to use the plane in the future as a carrier-based platform . However, the capability of the aircraft to land on Vikramaditya-size carrier (40 kt) is not yet clear.

The nozzles was designed round, as expected, which provoked speculations about problem in IR and radar stealthness from rear hemisphere. However, the program chief has explained early, that IR and radar observability reduction was achieved not worse than on American 5[sup]th[/sup] gen. fighters, but in different way. The 1[sup]st[/sup] prototype has no TVSs but it's certainly formulated as a part of the program and already developed by 'Klimov'.

The triangle form of the wings is optimized for supersonic maneurability, and[color="#2e8b57"] indirectly confirms the supercruise capability [/color]of the aircraft. On other hand the cross-section of the nose-cone is not so flattened, as was predicted according to flattened AESA form.

As Putin's deputy has officially declared, the prototype already has an installed data link which allows it the battlefield communication. According to him the new 5[sup]th[/sup] gen. avionics, the 'electronic pilot', allow to pilot concentrate its efforts on the battle instead of the piloting. However, Russian PM Putin itself [url="http://premier.gov.ru/events/news/9193/"]said[/url] after the fly, that the designers 'have much to work' on the fighter's weapon and engine. The program is described by the cabinet as the 'first priority military program', and its 100% financing will continue despite the world financial turmoil.

A somewhere disappointing is the old fashion look of the cockpit, but this can relatively easy be improved till entering serial production. The information about the tender for a frame-less cockpit is already [url="http://zakupki.gov.ru/Notification.aspx?PurchaseId=403793"]published[/url].

The production is planned to be started till 2013. Then, according to the PM's publicly announced decision, the first batch of fighters has to come to the practice center in 2013, and in 2015 the fighters have to be on service.

The former Sukhoi's chief (now working with 'MiG' in UAC directorate) and the 'father' of PAK FA program Mikhail Pogosyan said after the flight, that the United Air-building Corporation (UAC) will follow to work with the Indian counterparts on this program and he is sure, that this product will catch the world market too.

I personally estimate the fighter (in single and two-sitter configuration) jointly produced in Russia and India can be [color="#2e8b57"]exported to Russian and Indian friendly countries around the world.[/color] The list of the countries who can afford T-50, includes in the first place those, who already use Soviet/Russian fighters in AF and want generation upgrade. It could be Belorussia, Kazakhstan, Venezuela, Algeria, Malaysia, Libya and in some circumstances – Iran. The second line, if economically improved, the follow states could become T-50's customers too: Myanmar, Indonesia, Syria, Serbia and even Ukraine (if more realistic president will be elected). However, I think, China has zero chance to be allowed for T-50 import for obvious reasons.

Other problem is the unfair competition, sometimes accompanied by huge kickbacks. The natural competitors of Indo-Russian T-50 on the world market is JSF and the 4+ gen eurojets. If aggressive marketing of those planes succeeds, the prospects of PAKFA/FGFA program may be worse for simple reason of fund devastation. I'm not sure, how this fact is reflected in political consciousness in two countries. Methinks both countries must concentrate maximum efforts on their most advanced fighter program instead supporting third part foreign competitors by massive purchases. Posted by Igor Djadan at [url="http://igorrgroup.blogspot.com/2010/01/pak-fa-first-flight.html"]12:02 PM[/url]

1. Two L-band AESA radar on the wing slats is less-use / useless because it will have no beam firming capability in elevation (vertical) plane. Such limited capabelity is of little use in a flighter while at the same time transmitting a Rf beams with no elevation control is inviting trouble in LO radar.[/quote]
   
   
   
   Arun , one of the idea proposed is to use L band T/R module on wings and Tail
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   Check this link for more details Assessing the Tikhomirov NIIP L-Band Active Electronically Steered Array
   
   
   
   I think the same can be applied for PAK-FA depending what gold plated version of PAK-FA one is building

Quote:Andrey Lagarjkov, Director General of the United Institute of High Temperatures of the Russian Academy of Sciences (and an Associate Member of the Academy), talks about Russian stealth technology in the following interview with the Russia/CIS Observer.



Until recently, all Russian developments in the field of stealth technologies were strictly classified. There weren't any reports made concerning research institutes dealing with these issues. The veil was raised somewhat last year when it was announced for the first time that the United Institute of High Temperatures of the Russian Academy of Sciences was carrying out research in the domain of reduced aircraft visibility. The information was rather sketchy. It was reported that the institute is specialized in creating materials with new properties, in particular with ferromagnetics and so-called artificial magnetics. It was pointed out that technologies developed by the institute were used in designing and manufacturing the Sukhoi Su-27M and Su-37 (Su-47). Director General Lagarjkov, who hasn't spoken about such matters in public before, told Sergey Sokut about work of his institute in greater detail.



How does Russia's way of making aircraft stealthy differ from the American technology?



- The Americans have two approaches. The first, and earliest one, was used for the F-117 and B-2. The low radar cross-section (RCS) was achieved through the shape of the aircraft and the use of radar-absorbing materials to cover the airframe. In this application, the principle of minimal level of visibility was a cornerstone - and other characteristics had to be sacrificed. For example, both aircraft are subsonic. Later the Americans tried another approach: modern radar absorbing materials are applied to F-16 and F-18, as well as to 5th generation F-22 and JSF combat aircraft, which have a traditional shape. The low level of visibility is achieved through different techniques, which Mikhail Pogosyan, director of Sukhoi, and I are going to reveal in the near future. We and the Americans are close to each other in this type of technology. Russia possesses the technology for upgrading in-service aircraft with modern stealth characteristics, and moreover, this technology is demanded by foreign operators of Russian aircraft. We, together with Sukhoi, have achieved world-class results in this area, which are confirmed by tests of real aircraft. We also can optimize the shape of the aircraft to lower the level of visibility, but I still wouldn't like to speak about the use of our techniques for 5th generation aircraft.



When would it be possible to speak about achieved results?



- Some discussion is possible today. The exact results of radar cross-section reduction will never be disclosed, neither here in Russia nor abroad. But sometime ago it was announced that the RCS of a MiG-21 fighter after its treatment by our institute is approximately 0.25 sq m. This corresponds to the characteristics of a cruise missile.



How far is it possible to go in reducing visibility of the 4th generation aircraft, and what additional improvements can be achieved in the next generation?



- My MiG-21 example demonstrates that the RCS of upgraded/modernized aircraft can be reduced 12-15 times. If we speak about new designed models, I wouldn't want to discuss the numbers publically.



In the press, information has been published about exotic technologies for providing low visibility, for example, plasma. How effective is it?



- We use plasma in solving the problems of RCS of an aircraft's nosecone. In general, plasma technologies are very useful at flight altitudes of more than 25 km. At low altitudes it is impossible to use them, because there is not enough power on board.



What is the share of stealth technologies in the total aircraft cost?



- If stringent, but reasonable requirements for visibility are implemented in the project from the very beginning, it won't be too large. I'd like to point out here that at my institue, we have carried out advanced work in fundamental research. I also want to stress here that we had to do this without governmental support - funding our research from out-of-budget sources during the last 10-15 years.



It is known that you cooperate closely with Sukhoi. What about the institute's work with other design bureaus?



- Recently, we have started cooperating intensively with the others as well.



If we compare achievements of different countries in the reduction of aircraft visibility, who would the leaders be? Obviously, the Americans would hit the top, wouldn't they?



- The Americans are no. 1 because of the application of stealth to a large volume of real products. But considering the understanding of the whole problem in general - and the potential - I don't think the Americans are better than we are. We are able to achieve, and already have achieved, the same - and even in some areas, we have had somewhat better results. Another plus for the Americans is their broader application of stealth. In particular, they are entering the world market with the stealthy aircraft. Similar developments are being made in Europe, but the level of these countries is not so high. The French are tackling this problem as well. They have very good research equipment - anechoic chambers, for example. Their Rafale fighter is advertised as an aircraft with a low radar cross-section.

Quote:stealth is better handed by structural shape and interface design.

Quote:They have mentioned ability to carry some internal weapons side ways ( 2 small AAM ) near the wings but thats highly doubtful L-band





What is your opinion on the structural shape of PAK-FA , are they capable of all aspect stealth which takes care of most band i.e. L,S,X and VHF ?