Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Should there be a RCS thread somewhere on ARCforums? where all of those who wants to debate about speculative info about RCS could ! ...without bothering too much those who avidely waits for new pics or significant informations on their favorite thread!

considering what sukhoi's engeneers have done with the flanker family planes, all thoses variants and upgrades, through all thoses years...

with so little funds... i'm pretty sure the PAK-FA will evolve again before serial production.

wouldn't it be nice if somebody who wants to speculate... speculate about what would look the two seater version of PAK-FA!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Should there be a RCS thread somewhere on ARCforums? where all of those who wants to debate about speculative info about RCS could ! ...without bothering too much those who avidely waits for new pics or significant informations on their favorite thread!

considering what sukhoi's engeneers have done with the flanker family planes, all thoses variants and upgrades, through all thoses years...

with so little funds... i'm pretty sure the PAK-FA will evolve again before serial production.

wouldn't it be nice if somebody who wants to speculate... speculate about what would look the two seater version of PAK-FA!

Dont worry, when new pics come, we will post them. Meanwhile, I would love to hear authoritative, professional analysis of PAK FA fundamental stealth flaws from someone who is fluent in the subject matter and not just asshattery.

Edited by Zmey Smirnoff
Link to post
Share on other sites
I've just seen (and saved) those - it looks like it may be smaller than first thought :thumbsup:

Ken

Looks like that to me too. I thought it was bigger...

I didn't think it was a monster in size. Figured it is around the size of the F-22, F-18E etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I didn't think it was a monster in size. Figured it is around the size of the F-22, F-18E etc.

I'm revising my opinion about size - or at least wingspan.

If the latest assessments are correct - and they look pretty good - then the PAK FA wingspan at 14.7m is EXACTLY the same as a Su-27 :boohoo:

http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthrea...043&page=15 (see post #439) and others

It is probably its 'compactness' that makes it look smaller.

Anyway my model has a scale span of 14.9m - so I am quite happy with that......

Pak%20fa%20028.jpg

Ken

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Waco,

First of all, I was agreeing with Zmey and still do, that none of us here in the west have seen this jet close up so we wouldn't have a clue whether the panel lines are in planform alignment or not so none of us are really qualified to comment on that subject matter and like Berkut I also have some reservations about its IR signature, but to quote what seems to be one of Mark's favourite sayings, "you don't know what you don't know." There was speculation in this forum that the engines had no cooling means, before it was even revealed what engines would be fitted to the PAK-FA let alone production jets. Come on, let's get real shall we? It's as Sebastijan just said, there are still a lot of prejudices let over from the Cold War days when both sides kept having to go one up in their propaganda. I know because during that era I was firmly to the right of the propanganda war and I believed everything that was put before me by that side of politics without question, both the truth and the lies. Now I look analytically at what's being put before me in all areas of life, not just politics or the technical side of life.

Until any of us here in this forum have a chance to examine the jet up close for ourselves (and I can't see that happening before MAKS 2011, if then,) I have to agree with Zmey that the criticism is far fetched. As I've said in earlier discussion of this aircraft it is yet a prototype and very few aircraft have ever gone into production looking exactly like the prototype did at the time of its first flight. Perhaps the Russian engineers will find a way of masking the IR signature between here and production. Perhaps they already have and need it include physical masking cowls as on the F-22?

Secondly if a post of mine, as I have had to say said in this forum numerous times, has emoticons, which most do, I am using them to help express what I think because the printed media and the internet in particular is not exactly the best means of communication. I thought we all had that one down pat, obviously I'm wrong on that one. If I'm being absolutely dead serious in a post it has no emoticons, not even a post icon. :cheers:

Thirdly, every western forum has its F-22 fanboy club, this forum in particular has a very strong F-22 fanboy club that seems very able to find any point to bash the Sukhoi jet on, whether there is evidence for the bashing or not. From my smattering of self taught Russian and a little help from some Russian friends here I've been able to work out that there are those on Russian forums that are strong supporters of the F-22 who are able to support the F-22 without bashing the PAK-FA.

Fourthly, have I ever criticized the F-22 here on this forum? Not that I remember I haven't, at least not seriously, I may have jokingly poked a bit of fun at it but that all it was; a bit of fun, if I have ever done even that. Don't get me wrong I believe the F-22 is an awsome bird and I've never had a reason to criticize it. In fact, I wish we could buy 100 or 200 of them, but I'm also practical enough to know that cost and politics will pretty well forever prohibit such a purchase, just like we did with another twin engined twin tailed Lockheed type over 65 years ago, albeit they were the recon models and we only used 3 of them.

Ross.

ps. There's a lot more I'd like to say, but I'd be getting much deeper into the realm of the P-word so I won't go there in the forum.

Edited for typos.

Edited by ross blackford
Link to post
Share on other sites
HERE is a nice pic

b59d3686.jpg

NICE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

i saw someplace a line drawing of one with wing tips folded in as an F18/A8/etc. naval yets.

are there any plans on making this beauty carrier borne?

would hate to see my beloved Su33 go, but would be interesting to see this one on a carrier. but i guess the upkeeping of the stealth surfaces on a ship, in a naval environment would be quite hard.

Shark, MiG29A Fan boy

Link to post
Share on other sites
NICE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

i saw someplace a line drawing of one with wing tips folded in as an F18/A8/etc. naval yets.

are there any plans on making this beauty carrier borne?

would hate to see my beloved Su33 go, but would be interesting to see this one on a carrier. but i guess the upkeeping of the stealth surfaces on a ship, in a naval environment would be quite hard.

Shark, MiG29A Fan boy

Well, it hasn't been officially announced, but i guess some time in the future we will see it on carriers. The lg is really strong as you might have noticed. And russians will soon (next year is the deadline iirc) realize the final look of their future carrier. So, it is all possible.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm revising my opinion about size - or at least wingspan.

If the latest assessments are correct - and they look pretty good - then the PAK FA wingspan at 14.7m is EXACTLY the same as a Su-27 :whistle:

http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthrea...043&page=15 (see post #439) and others

It is probably its 'compactness' that makes it look smaller.

Ken

Will be interesting to see what actual dimensions are. Your model is looking good bud :wasntme:

I like "Tomkeus post #431" grids idea in on that forum. There are a few things he could of tried to get angles right tho. Like trying to go off a few things that kind of are known. For instance the buildings siding at the water-table line and window sills/sides etc.

Find as many things that one can find that have a sort of know level and squareness to them one could get a pretty good estimation of angle/perspective.

The one from above, he could of worked out the angle by using the center-line of both aircraft. You can see the pitots on both A/C and the center of the tail.

Link to post
Share on other sites
And still neither you or Mark have actually pointed out the non stealthy areas, other mentioning the size of the intakes. Funny enough, i wouldn't be surprised that if you tilt them 90 degrees, so they "stand up", the result will be around F-22 intakes size. Slightly larger probably, but not by much.

Frankly I do not see how size of a Intake or panel line has any relevance on stealth. Now a gap around a door yes, but not a panel line. You can tape a panel line, dope a panel line etc. I do not see the relevance.

Edited by Wayne S
Link to post
Share on other sites

that would be very interresting to see some drawings of what could-should be done-corrected, to conform pak-fa to 5th gen. stealth-as-we-know... maybe that could help to turn the discussion in an other way? at least this could help me to appreciate more the stealth debate... (i'm kind of VISUAL guy...)

ah... and.. by the way, KEN, your work is awsome! (at least this bring some new Pak-fa pics! :rolleyes: )

Edited by mingwin
Link to post
Share on other sites
that would be very interresting to see some drawings of what could-should be done-corrected, to conform pak-fa to 5th gen. stealth-as-we-know... maybe that could help to turn the discussion in an other way? at least this could help me to appreciate more the stealth debate... (i'm kind of VISUAL guy...)

Not really, it'd just be guesswork. Look at the differences between the YF-22 and F-22A and the X-35 and F-35. There's no way anyone here can predict what the production Su-X will look like.

Link to post
Share on other sites

:thumbsup: Hi again Waco,

Let's have a look at the shape of the intakes and their trunks to the compressor faces. May I ask you a few questions please, if the answers aren't classified. Are the F-22's intakes a straight duct or do they curve around a bit then lead to the compressor faces?. And if they do, how much RCS reduction is achieved by the curves masking the compressor faces? I notice in pics of the PAK-FA that the mainwheel wells impinge on the intake trunks which would mean that the trunks have to curve at least around those wells. I also think the mainwheel wells and missile bays of the F-22 would impinge on the intake trunks causing a curvature. Would that be correct?

Is it not possible that there are other curves in the PAK-FA'a intake trunks ahead of the compressors? There is a drawing around (albeit speculative) that shows further curves in the trunks between the mainwheel wells and the compressors, possibly to fit the trunks around the missile bays in the production aircraft and to me that drawing makes some sense because the engines appear to be further inboard than the intake lips themselves than pics I've seen of the F-22 and also appear to be at a higher level within the airframe than the intake lips as does the F-22. Is it possible that these bends in the intakes, if they make it onto the production jet would, with the help of RAM or some other RCS reducing material prevent signals from bouncing back out of the intake lips?

Is it possible to make the intake lips and trunks for the production jets from some form of RAM or RCS reducing composite material that we don't know of yet or that is still being developed in Russia? Or maybe we are familiar with it and the Russians have just worked out new ways of using it. After all, the original theory and algorythms for stealth aeroplanes were thought up in the USSR well before the concept had been thought of much in the west and only for the fact that the Soviet military "saw no technical merit" (how many times have I seen and heard those words written and spoken, an example being the flight recorder which was an early 1950s Australian invention in which neither the Department of Civil Aiviation nor the RAAF "saw any technical merit" leaving the inventor to sell the rights overseas and make a pittance from the royalties) in this theory and dumped it leaving the scientist who came up with them free to publish them on the open market so to speak, the Russians would have had stealth aircraft years before the west and could have been onto 5th generation aircraft long ago. It was really only a lucky break that gave America that knowledge and technology when you guys did get it. I'm sure that if they have worked out some new material they won't be silly enough to give it away for nothing this time.

:rolleyes:,

Ross.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Not really, it'd just be guesswork. Look at the differences between the YF-22 and F-22A and the X-35 and F-35. There's no way anyone here can predict what the production Su-X will look like.

guesswork, speculations... isn't that just the exact same thing??? to me, it is!!! (one with drawings.. the other with a lot of words...)

and since most informations about pak-fa are classified, the only constructive thing that could happen by now is new pics!

THANKS A MILLION TIME FOR ALL OF THOSE WHO POSTED PICS!!!

i'm in canada, and my russian skills are too limited to go on russian forums (even if i spend some time there, trying hard, just to read cyrilic...)

so you guys in russia are very precious to me!

Edited by mingwin
Link to post
Share on other sites
guesswork, speculations... isn't that just the exact same thing??? to me, it is!!! (one with drawings.. the other with a lot of words...)

Yeah, I was trying to be formal since levity isn't allowed here.

What I really wanted to say was "A drawing of a production variant of the T-50? You'd have just as much luck giving crayons to a monkey on a coke bender than asking anyone here to come up with an accurate drawing."

--- break ---

Turns out it's not just the Russians who steal.

. With panache! Edited by Trigger
Link to post
Share on other sites

*Thread edited to remove pointless, stupid back and forth Wimbledon-level bickering

Okay, you guys owe me 15 minutes of my modelling time back!

That's enough bickering about the PAK-FA, ok?

It's not 100 feet tall.

It's a prototype, with fairly classified information, and frankly, the back and forth arguing is done, thank you. Nobody, I repeat NOBODY has ever, in the entire history of the Intraweb, ever ever ever convinced the other guy he was wrong. Ever. I googled it.

So, here's the drill.

Knock it the hell off, ok?

When Tamiya and Kinetic and Hasegawa come out with their 1/24 scale kits of the plane, all of you can gather around what is left of you bank accounts and scream in your wheezy geriatric voices how each one is horribly wrong and should be considered the WORST...MODEL...EVER! Hopefully, by then, I will have died from the stress of raising a teenaged daughter.

Until then, you WILL behave, or I will replace all the pictures in this thread with "Hello Kitty" handbags, and your avatars with pictures of large, simple looking icons that spell out bad words in Lithuanian. Ok?

Oh, and just to give eveyone a little cooling off time, the thread is freaking LOCKED...for a while. Until I bloody well feel like unlocking it, and not until then.

Al P.

Edited by Alvis 3.1
Link to post
Share on other sites

We now return to your regularly scheduled postings. Any return of the bickering, and the responsible...strike that..the involved parties (IE: I don't care who started what) will be reassigned to the Al P. Rehab School of Modelling Etitique and Play Doh Mixing.

Al P.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...