Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • 1 month later...

The new "Shark" paint scheme looks fabulous!!! :worship:/>/> :worship:/>/> :worship:/>/>

50-5 was delivered to Zhukovsky (20th November) for test trials and will join the rest of the fleet. The first phase of the state acceptance program should be finished by 2015 and the scheduled delivery of the first production T-50's is for 2016.

The 50-5 is the final model which incorporates all the developments, corrections and is considered to be a full representation of what the T-50 production model will have inside and look like.

This scheme is far better than the splinter one they had on the earlier versions. :thumbsup:/>/> :thumbsup:/>/> :thumbsup:/>/> It looks to good (to be the true) and question is if the hardline will let it live on.

Best regards

Gabor

Edited by ya-gabor
Link to post
Share on other sites

indeed the camo makes it look smaller from the top side

reminds me a bit of this concept drawing

view_1_out.jpgd6273050-4550-4703-8844-69ba8cf954f9Larger.jpg

gabor, wasn't there a plan to build a 6th prototype which will be a non-flying static tests example, while the 7th (flying) protoype should have some radical changes incorporated into its design?

Link to post
Share on other sites

T-50-5 is certainly not full representation of what serial T-50 will look like. It lacks a lot of sensors for one, even compared to T-50-4. The airframe improvements are obviously also not refined. It lacks wide use of tooth panels and so on so on.

Next frames are following:

T-50-6-1

T-50-6-2

T-50-7

Yes, odd designations on both -6 prototypes, both are flying frames. It is very possible one of them, either 6-1 or 6-2 will go to india as previously reported. 7 will be static.

There was some information regarding -6 being static and -7 being flying, and in same post information about -5 was posted. It smelled fishy to say the least then, and now it is 100 % certain it was complete malarky, every bit of it. Bottom line, -7 is static, 6-1 and 6-2, flying.

Edited by Berkut
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is just a quick translation of what Mr. Aleksandr Davidenko the Chief Designer of the T-50 said in the interview. I cannot argue with him. There was no word about any further T-50 airframes nor that this is infact a production version, only that incorporates all the latest developments and corrections and the premier in a first preproduction batch of aircraft and can be said to be a fully capable fighter aircraft.

I am sure that at Suhoy they will not sit back and the KnAAZ production of airframes will continue, the state acceptance trials will most probably result in some changes of the design but for the moment this is the closest representation of what the production aircraft will be and it is far from the prototype T-50-1.

Best regards

Gabor

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr. chief constructor is a little bit optimistic regarding date of serial production. We will see. In times of Soviet Union there were a lot more funding and a lot more involved resources across SU. Now they have posibilities they have expirience we will see and funding. Everyone knows how long Flanker is developed. I am only talking about technical side.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know you translated him Gabor, i hope it didn't came across as i was arguing with you. :)/> There is certainly lots of new on T-50-4, but most of it doesn't meet the eye.

Yeep, I only translated it, there is no argument about this. What is certain the 50-5 looks fantastic in the new "Shark" paint scheme! Time will tell what the future is for this fighter.

Best regards

Gabor

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...

I've been politely questioning the accuracy of your claim about what parts are metal and composite because they don't make sense, but apparently was too subtle.

It was. And what do you base you skepticism on?

I place my claims on pictures and footage, and statements made. (like 70/25 claim) In other words, not "gut feeling" or what i think is wrong or right, but proof. ;)

There plenty of footage of panel production of T-50 by babushka's and many big elements are "accounted" for in that sense. Heck, several elements has been also been displayed at MAKS. There has yet to be a grey panel to be proven to be anything else than a composite panel. For instance, all these are accounted for + few others since then like around engine area and "roots" for vertical stabs:

panels.png

Which is already by far more than i have seen of lets say YF-23 or F-22.

Feel free to ask proof for every single one of those (or do research, fairly easy to find them) as i am otherwise too lazy to upload them.

A bit old new by now, but T-50-5 has made first flight from Zhuk:

http://nickras.livejournal.com/22472.html

http://michaeldec.livejournal.com/33943.html

T-50-2 climb, 8500m -> 12000m:

Y9x5jMN.jpg

Fun maneuvering:

wKHAAMR.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Intersting article on the different philosophies and approaches between the T-50 and the F-22. Some very valid points raised. What does happen when (and it will) radar technology catches up with stealth? Link

Manufacturer propaganda under disguise.

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...