Dear b787
… I think You are mixing a few things and that adds much to this overall strange situation.
As such let me set a few things straight.
1. Concerning SDF in comparison to other forums:
This is a forum, forums are clubs, basically like Facebook, there is nothing different from Key forum, why? simple all forum are the same.
In general You might be correct, but not at all: Key has a fan forum for enthusiasts and IMO most of them are either young, very much enthusiastic and often blinded by prejudice, nationalism or simply since they don’t know better. As such, the tone is often rude, dominated by ignorance and again the result that many honorable members don’t want to be bashed by these trolls; a situation that is not eased by the more or less “nothing-doing” moderators.
Here the percentage of professionals or educated ones is much higher, we have certain members with an – IMO at least – higher education, the ability and will to learn, do argue and discuss and probably even to review their own opinion. Again that is assisted by a much more stringent team of moderators …
2. Concerning the problem with Russian “sources”
I want to ask you what do you want tell. no pictures. obviously you get upset, no Russian articles, you get upset,, what is right? only your comments about how crap are the Russian reports?
How good are your sources ?
…
Do you think this forum has industry insider`s about PAKFA? let me laugh, no no one here is an industry insider, the closest industry insider is TV Zvesda or Channel one Russia because they have direct access to the workshop, so in my opinion you can rename it, i can keep it, i can tell you this thread is only a carbon copy of what is written in Russian forums which makes it more or less a good translation for people who do not read Russian.
To be an industry insider you need to be directly involved like Andrei Fomin who has direct interviews with Russian company official of Sukhoi and lives in Moscow and has Written books under direct support from Sukhoi and even he is not special,.
Sorry to say so, but the situation is similar to the Chinese one: There are only few official confirmed information and the number of “sources” in different forums is probably much more confusing.
As such one has to carefully read between the lines, read a lot and has to compare who said what, when and even more did it come true !? In mind of these Chinese “sources” this is only possible if You are an active member in several groups, if You are willing to learn and listen carefully … and only then after that long, long time You are probably able to identify and differ the “more often reliable” ones from the “fan boys” and / or even trolls.
Concerning Russia the problem is even more complicated since there is an active, politically baked media around, closely connected to the industry and military and the least thing they want is 1. To tell the true secrets (due to the secret nature of these programs and 2. To let them look “weak” to the media, the West and most of all the always-chest-bumping-crowd.
As such, to think all they tell, simply since they are closer to … is plain naïve, stupid or to say mildly, exactly what they want to achieve … and so we are soon up to the main issue: no. 055
Final point: Russian media …. I’m sure Andrei Fomin is fine and even if I rate Piotr Butowski much higher especially due to his direct access to all Russian industrial complexes and the truly important persons, I would be very, very careful to call TV Zvesda or Channel one Russia or Prawda or RIAN or whatever a reliable source. They are in fact all state-controlled or linked, they all have a political ambition as explained above … but if You believe them … o.k.
3. Concerning T50-5:
Do not try to play the game, you simply are trying to hide your mistakes.
You said in page 18 of this thread, your sources were better than TV Zvezda, Sukhoi, in fact you said T-50-5 was never going to fly, that it was going to be a miracle if it flew ever again.
…
Again, I am correct and given my sources all agree on that. No. 055 is dead, it died a painful death on the runway on that tragic day long, long ago. Period and that can’t be denied.
The other side – and now it’s the old question like “is the glass of wine is half-full or half-empty?” – is that UAC/Sukhoi very much understandable was not willing to accept this loss as a loss. They decided to use whatever parts reusable and to mate them on a new airframe (in fact no. T50-6-1) …. If this was done to hide the loss, to make the best out of this crash by showing the ability to rebuild and repair such a sophisticated aircraft and to gain additional expertise ??? I don’t know and most likely it is a mix of all reasons.
However – and here come’s Your question – all You ask, all, who have experience in aircraft design, material strength and damage repair … all reliable members in certain forums be they pro-Russia or against … ALL tell You that after such an accident the major structure of this particular aircraft, all load and stress-bearing structures made of metal and even more composites are damaged beyond repair. Period.
As such all Sukhoi was left to do – and that’s again being confirmed – they used the partially completed airframe of T50-6-1 and added all was left usable from T50-5. But honestly that could not be the center section, that could not be the engine compartment and engines … also not the wings, since these are an integral part for the center section due to stress and load bearings … so what remains to be taken over ? At least not much and surely a minor percentage in comparison to T50-6-1.
So who is right ? If You think it is in fact a “repaired 055” regardless if it now features the complete center-fuselage + wing section of T50-6-1, then You are correct … but for me it is de facto nothing more than no. 056 finished with a few parts cannibalized from no. 055 and the old bort number ‘055’ added.
4. Concerning T50 in general….
I said show me source that says PAKFA has structural problems from ROSTEC AUC or Sukhoi or any VVS official admitting it.
You are funny … above You say it is sooooo much secret that nothing comes out and now Your want a source from me. What about logic, what about reading, listening and learning from what others – and here surely not me – are telling and deducting from images, a deep observation of the development and timeline especially in comparison to the original scheduled and promised events … several of them did not came true even today.
Just simply look at the images at different dates of the individual prototypes, look, when they flew, when additions were noticed – like additional stripes of materials to improve stiffness or strength on the wings, the tails and so on ?? Look, when additional prototypes flew which later gained similar add-ons ---- surely only for cosmetic reasons.
And if You then put all this in contex of reports from Piotr about strength issues, that the airframe had to be modified … even the next prototype T50-6-2 – the first of batch 02 – will be so much different structurally to the batch 01 aircraft so far that they are de facto comparable to the revised J-20 ‘201x’ prototypes developed after the tests of the ‘200x’ types.
If everything would be fine, if there were no issues … why then such a long break in flight testing or the appearance of new prototypes ? I do not want to open a new can of worms now, but for the J-20 in comparison some are already hinting problems if not a new aircraft is seen within half a year … and for the J-20 we know surely even less … so what here on the T50 ?
Did You ever looked back how often any of Your beloved and trusted media-members, military or UAC/Sukhoi officials promised that the T50 will be in service already, will be mass-produced from date xxxx on … will be purchased in large numbers, wil,l have super-duper-hyper modern missiles, will also feature a super-duper radar, avionics, and propulsion system much, much, much, much more advanced than anything else be it operational or under test … and what all of these promises became true or if, when did they become fact?
Don’t get me wrong, I do not want to bash the Russian aviation industry, Sukhoi and especially not the T50. It is a fine design, a remarkable type with certain technical solutions worth to be more than proud …. But if some Russians – including the manufacture – wants to play with the “big guys”, they must accept to be measured by or against the current yard-stick and that’s the F-22; an aircraft already in service since 11 years. So IMO the T50 should be treated and judged rather by a rational and not emotional standpoint and from this it still has a long way ahead to be comparable with the “big guys”.
As such – even if You might deep me arrogant – You surely can pots whatever You want, but to be taken seriously You should look not to be a UAC-PR-spokesman but a valuable member of this forum…
All the best,
Deino
