Jump to content

Recommended Posts

WHOA!! Is that buried in this thread somewhere? Looks freaking awesome Ken!

Yeah, it was before the coked-up, crayola-toting monkeys and Germans-humpink-furniture, but after the last pot-shot at a Tomcat.

Grrrr......

I know, I know....I too was shocked to see such a talented actor do that with a ukulele.

Edited by Trigger
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Sounds good. Is the PakFA tall enough to carry a Moskit on the center line? i am sure that would defeat any anti radar configuration, but Naval jets are used to take out ships, so a Moskit between the engine naceles would be the correct tool to be carried in a naval confrontation.

Shark

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sounds good. Is the PakFA tall enough to carry a Moskit on the center line? i am sure that would defeat any anti radar configuration, but Naval jets are used to take out ships, so a Moskit between the engine naceles would be the correct tool to be carried in a naval confrontation.

Shark

Do you mean inside the weaponbays, or just between engines? If weaponbays, no. It is huge, around 10 meters iirc. And i am not sure it would be possible to carry Moskit outside between engines, since there is no connection points for launchers there. There is however two under intakes, and four under wings. So, four weaponbays, and six external points. Either way, Moskit is too big for PAK-FA. I am sure they are working with something else... :thumbsup:

Edited by Berkut
Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you mean inside the weaponbays, or just between engines? If weaponbays, no. It is huge, around 10 meters iirc. And i am not sure it would be possible to carry Moskit outside between engines, since there is no connection points for launchers there. There is however two under intakes, and four under wings. So, four weaponbays, and six external points. Either way, Moskit is too big for PAK-FA.

yea i mean outside, like the Su33 does. So the Pak FA has not between engines hard points?

I am sure they are working with something else... :worship:

hey - i don't want to know THAT much! :thumbsup:

Link to post
Share on other sites
So the Pak FA has not between engines hard points?

No. Not currently atleast. I doubt it will have, there is not point really, unless you carry something massive.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Although the Su-33 was fitted with a mockup Moskit at a MAKS airshow many years ago - it was never cleared to carry and launch it.

Ken

Hmm, i always thought that Moskit was a weapon that Su-33 could carry and launch, considering it has the special pylon for it to connect to Su-33... Obviously not very usual load at all (even usual missiles on Su-33 from Kuz is a rare sight)

The logical replacement for Moskit is the joint Russian-Indian BrahMos......

Brahmos is too large for PAK-FA's weaponbays.

Link to post
Share on other sites

HERE is a nice pic

f17f153c.jpg

Yesterday i saw a discussion on the Key Publishing website where people were trying to find the dimensions of the PAK-FA based on the dimensions of its tires:

http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthrea...043&page=15

Well, to add something to this discussion:

There is a lot more parallax than people think on this photo.

You can clearly see the inside of the fins. The angle is more than 3 degrees.

This photo was not taken with a telephoto lens, in fact it was most likely taken with a lens with a focal length of less than 85mm. I would say it was taken with a wide-angle lens given the amount of perspective visible (the inside of the fins being visible, the nose and canopy which appear larger than they should in relation to the rest of the aircraft, the rear fuselage too narrow).

The distance of the photographer to the aircraft looks deceptive too because of the wide angle. I estimate the photo was taken at less than 20 meters from the aircraft, maybe 15. Quite close. Thus, no flat perspective here, definitely a wide-angle lens.

The photographer would have needed at least a 180 or 200mm lens to flatten the perspective, and more distance from the subject.

What we would need to know now to learn the real span for the T-50 is the focal length of the lens of whoever took this photo, and the distance of the photographer from the aircraft.

Also, are the tires for the PAK-FA entirely new tires, or are they the same tires as a previous aicraft ? And if yes, which aircraft, and who have the information about the diameter for those tire ? Did someone measure them on the ground or got the exact info that those belong to aircraft so and so from the manufacturer ? Where is the official tire info ? No guesswork here please, we are using this as the scale for all the other dimensions.

Stephane.

Website: http://www.picturetrail.com/stratospheremodels

Edited by Stratospheremodels
Link to post
Share on other sites

I also saw a discussion where people where trying to guess the RCS for the PAK-FA (i forgot if it was here or on the Key Publishing forum, but here is my little answer:

I will tell you how you find the RCS for the PAK-FA, quite simple:

You build an accurate scale model of it and you stick it on top of an RCS pole in front of a radar. And you also cover you model with RAM (to know what RAM is, just look inside your micro-wave oven. You also find RAM on the sides of buildings in Tokyo. That was used to fight ghost images on analog tv signals).

Stephane Cochin

Statosphere Models

Website: http://www.picturetrail.com/stratospheremodels

Edited by Stratospheremodels
Link to post
Share on other sites
Also, are the tires for the PAK-FA entirely new tires, or are they the same tires as a previous aicraft ? And if yes, which aircraft, and who have the information about the diameter for those tire ? Did someone measure them on the ground or got the exact info that those belong to aircraft so and so from the manufacturer ? Where is the official tire info ? No guesswork here please, we are using this as the scale for all the other dimensions.

Stephane.

Website: http://www.picturetrail.com/stratospheremodels

Tires are completely new. Diameter is 1050. Info comes from an article about the company that makes the tires. Here, in russian:

http://www.aviaport.ru/digest/2010/02/08/190025.html

Link to post
Share on other sites
Tires are completely new. Diameter is 1050. Info comes from an article about the company that makes the tires. Here, in russian:

http://www.aviaport.ru/digest/2010/02/08/190025.html

Hi ! Thank you Berkut, i've asked someone to help me locate the exact page and to traduce it for me.

Edited by Stratospheremodels
Link to post
Share on other sites
Although the Su-33 was fitted with a mockup Moskit at a MAKS airshow many years ago - it was never cleared to carry and launch it.

The logical replacement for Moskit is the joint Russian-Indian

Ken

Very interesting, thank you Mr Flankerman. India is getting MiG29K, am sure those cannot carry this load, what platform are they going to use as an anti-ship role?

Carrier borne planes should be able to have an anti-ship role, i would assume?

And awesome picture Stratospheremodels!

Shark

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have my doubts on how truthful that information is. PAK-FA's radar have a very different shape than the nose cone for Su-27. I expect it to be tested on a LL (flying laboratory) ala Tu-134. That have been done to MiG-29, Su-27, F-35 and F-22. Probably more that i don't remember off. Besides, i have read it won't taste air until the third quarter of the year, and that is optimistic.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I have my doubts on how truthful that information is. PAK-FA's radar have a very different shape than the nose cone for Su-27. I expect it to be tested on a LL (flying laboratory) ala Tu-134. That have been done to MiG-29, Su-27, F-35 and F-22. Probably more that i don't remember off. Besides, i have read it won't taste air until the third quarter of the year, and that is optimistic.

Sounds reasonable, but I don't know what is what really over on the Russian side of things most of the time. Just thought I'd share something I found. Still, its a lovely view of a family model Flanker!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Very interesting, thank you Mr Flankerman. India is getting MiG29K, am sure those cannot carry this load, what platform are they going to use as an anti-ship role?

Carrier borne planes should be able to have an anti-ship role, i would assume?

And awesome picture Stratospheremodels!

Shark

Hi ! Not from me Shark ! I just copied and pasted that one. Though i wish i could see it that close !

Stephane.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I hear you, it would be like a wet dream being that close to one! but thank you for sharing.

the in flight pictures - real then? so the prototype got painted line-bird colors?usually prototypes are unpainted, with orange colored test areas, or so I've observed.

why would they go and paint a prototype then?

Shark

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...