b787
Captain
you doubt the engine can not be better, but so you doubted Sukhoi was telling the truth, same the Russian sources
Russian Su-57 Aircraft Thread (PAK-FA and IAF FGFA)
- Thread starter A Bar Brother
- Start date
Yes ... and YES it is my humble opinion based on facts. You in contrast are purely posting "everything" You find and if it fits Your believings of a superiority it's fine, if not it has to be wrong since we are either stupid, the Russians know better or it is secret.
But purely by logic: Explain me how could an engine be superior - that is simply an admitted interim type soon to be replaced by a definitive engine - to two engines with much higher thrust and superior in all details that even more are fully operational since years ??
The final Type-30 engine might be better, but surely not that interim 117
I know You again will tell me that it is a Russian source, that is closely connected to the manufacture and surely that manufacture knows it all ... YES it knows all but it does not tell us everything. Even more not all they tell us has therefore to be correct ...
By the way regarding the T50-5 crash and my claims that it is a de facto write off ... they are not wrong and simply admitted by the manufacturer himself since he cannibalised T-50-6-1 to rebuild no. 5.
I would be interested how much of the original no. 5 they were able to retain.
And with all that in mind You do not want to be treated as a T50-fan-boy ??
Amen! and 787, all I desire is for you, is to up your game? Deino has some great sources and writes articles that are not only peer reviewed and edited? but then published in a highly acclaimed international aviation magazine? and I myself am a pilot, I flew yesterday and a mechanic I did the annual tear down on our old 172 last week, and I have put my hands on and run my eyeballs over those two Mig-29s that are in my avatar. So I am very familiar with the Mig 29, and Russian quality control, or lack of same?
Deino and I have one thing in common a love for aviation, and a quest for the truth? you tell me you are a man of faith?? well show a little good faith between us as brothers, and show a little respect, if not for us, at least for your fellow posters who work hard everyday, and some at great risk? to bring us the very best, and most accurate military forum on the planet.
We both predicted up seeing 5-1 that the center fuse was a total loss, see Deino's post above? you on the other hand are still in denial-get over yourself.
b787
Captain
let us start by this, show me an official not forum based gossip, T-50-5 is a cannibalized aircraft, i know where your comments come from, that is not official, not even TV Zvezda, that by the way is a much better source that any forum, says that, AUC and Rostec do not say that.
You problem is simple, i never said it is superior or inferior, the engine can not be compared unless you have both engines or three engines like they have done with the MiGs or Sukhois in western air forces.
From the historical point of view it is interesting to see what the Eugeny Marchukov says, who is he first? he is the director of "OKB A.Lyulka." Branch of PJSC "Ufa Engine Industrial Association" (UMPO).
why it is worth to be posted, reason he is part of the manufacturers, a person who makes the engines, independently he is right about his assertion, or he is wrong as a Fanboy and i am, i like to hear his comments the guy is making the engines.
If you like his assertions and comments that is your subjective part, if you believe it or not is subjective.
It could be true, it could be not true, however i do not need argue with you because neither me or you have the three engines, we are not in a workshop comparing them, neither we are technicians dissecting each and every engine, thus i see no point to argue about the veracity of his assertions
b787
Captain
denial of what? you still have no source and i mean not a gossip you read in a forum which by the way is like Wikipedia, any one can write whatever they are pleased, when you present me an official or at least an statement by a Russian high official that T-50-5 had structural problem we speak, i have read a Russian source that said it was the engine the source of the problem, but it is not an official source, but you are trying to school me without evidence, and you have been wrong, i read with google translator many, many articles about PAKFA and by the way i know basic aerospace Russian vocabulary, so from time to time i understand videos or articles written on the internet, so there you can not school me, school me with evidence.
I am used to read and by the way i am 45 years old, i have 3 children, so yes i have followed the MiGs and Sukhois for over 3 decades, so i am more than used to statements like yours
b787
Captain
it says an engine problem was the cause of the 10th June 2014 accident, and T-50-6-1 was used to fix it as a donor non flying example, source not official
While the fire very likely started in or near the engine, it was by no means contained with-in the can, it was a very hot fire as evidenced by the hanging strands of carbon fibre, now you are at least acknowledging that 6-1 was indeed cannibalized to rebuild 055. As well if you knew half as much about Russians as you think, you would realize they NEVER acknowledge design or construction issues with aircraft, boats, ships, etc destined for export, it is just not done, and it is culturally "kool" to "oversell", especially if you leave the other character feeling like he took you? then you can get a chuckle later while you are counting out his coin? LOL
Deino on the other hand is a consummate professional, and you probably should offer him a polite apology, as teacher, he is only interested in the facts, and I "KNOW" for a fact that he would NEVER print anything he had doubts about, NEVER!
The phrase "caveat emptor" is a Latin phrase yes? "let the buyer beware", so the Russians are by no means alone as salesmen??
b787
Captain
You are just trying to prove your point and school me, the page i give you any one can write it anyone, do you understand? who are they quoting? who in the project has said that? no one they are not quoting any one.
What you really are trying to do is school me but without your being a teacher, the gossip written in the website originated in some Russian forums, not from Industry insiders or company officials, you are another forum poster peddling your opinion, based upon a very strong biased opinion.
By the way the MiGs you have access in the USA are none Russian models. in few words monkey variants or old Soviet era jets.
Modern Russian aircraft keep high standards, and if you want a fact compare the accident rate of Tu-204 or even IL-96, which are soviet designs and you will discover Russia has good products
Air forces that operate both western and Russian aircraft say there are pros and cons of products of either side
Well actually, I spent 21 years teaching educable Developmentally Disabled adults, and I presently teach Pre-K through 12th grade in my local school district as a substitute, so yes, I am a teacher. I Pastor a Baptist church in a town of 2000, so yes, I am attempting to school you with the facts and evidence that is readily available, and no it is not internet gossip, but NOW, I am done, I give up, as well your brother Deino is also a "real teacher", I pray he hasn't pulled all of his hair out, but that remains to be seen???
Brumby
Major
The engine comments by your Russian source is not simply a case of relegating our views to being a subjective interpretation. There is sufficient cause in calling it as being highly questionable to being false depending on level of conviction. Your argument of the authoritative nature of your Russian source is not exempt from basic logic and the correspondence theory of truth in that the known facts have to relate to reality. There are open source information on the performance specifications of the different engines and what is being said by your Russian source do not correspond to the facts as they are known.
Forums such as this is not a court of law but a court of public opinion and many of us have expressed the questionable nature of the Russian claims since it involves US engines and the Russians are not the authority on US engines. You might like to hear their comments but don't feed us with Russian PR spin and argue that such official news is equivalent to truth.