Russian Su-57 Aircraft Thread (PAK-FA and IAF FGFA)

[Deino]

@b787

I really do not want to be unfair but the issue I have with You to admit is, that You are not even willing to accept these rumours or reports as facts - albeit unconfirmed ones - simply since they are from unofficial sources or since they don't fit your opinion.

That's something I can't understand and that indeed annoys probably not only me, since it right away adds some certain wrong viewpoint ending in the end in a completely wrong "image":

1. You seem to assume only official things as fact ... what they are surely not; just look at the propaganda all manufactures (Eurofighter, LM, Boeing, Airbus ...) report to make their products look good. That include a wide range of often simply "false" things from simply omitted issues but also far exaggerated "facts".

2. You seem to assume in return all unofficial things as false reports, negative propaganda ... ... what they are surely not since certain members of certain forums are indeed deeper involved within such a program or closer to the Industry. They have closer access to true facts that are not reported, but not allowed to report by the original source due to different reasons ... if they then report such things they surely do this unofficially but that does not make such things wrong. Most of the Chinese news and things we know functions this way ...


Again, I do not claim that my rumours are true and UAC/Sukhoi hide and lie, but to get the most unbiased knowing of the facts You can't simply ignore them and stick to one side only. IMO Your strict "black-and-white view" thus automatically leads ultimately to a wrong overall result of view ... or why has the A.400M since months that Airbus only gradually admits ? Why are there still issues with the F-35 and just now with the KC-46 problems that are still denied by official sources ... become these issues only a fact after the manufacturer admits it?

Deino

 

[Jura The idiot]

5Gen enthusiasts are just amazing LOL!

B-787, the Scriptures in 1 Peter 5:5 states ...

...
Proverbs 27:2Contemporary English Version (CEV)
...
Proverbs 27:6King James Version (KJV)
...

in this Bible Thread, let me quote my favorite:

23 Jesus said to them, “Surely you will quote this proverb to Me: ‘Physician heal yourself! Do here in Your hometown what we have heard that You did in Capernaum.’”

24 Then He added, “Truly I tell you, no prophet is accepted in his hometown.

(I took it from

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

)

 

[Air Force Brat]

Okay tell me each and every change and later tell me technically why is the change done, the structure has not have any relevant change except the tail stings, if you compare the Su-27 T-10 original prototype and the T-10S you will see they really changed the aircraft structurally.

PAKFA only possible structural problem is the weapons bays since the weapons bay doors will open, this could potentially mean weakness, so the aircraft needs a strong longitudinal back and spine and aft fuselage fairing, such changes are not visible, if the aircraft has had changes are internal and not visible, the back of an aircraft that opens its rear door such a C-5 or An-124 requires a strong roof at the top of the fuselage and the same are the weapons bays of the T-50.

If the T-50 has a trouble the weapons are the likely cause since there is a empty area that open its bay doors, the solution will be change the structure and architecture of the aircraft entirely and integrate potentially new and stronger materials, in few words the bulkheads will be needed to re-modified and re-design and that will change most likely the external physical appearance, such changes are not seen in PAKGA, regardless you believe the forum posters of LTD key aviation
I leave you these picture so you can visualize what i am saying

Oh brother! whats truly hilarious is the image u used to illustrate that the skin is not a stressed member, is the very first image that google uses to illustrate "Monocoque" construction. You can clearly see that the skin is riveted to the bulkheads/formers, and their are NO stringers or longitudinal bracing, illustrating that the skin is the longitudinal bracing rather than a stringer!

you better read the whole article on monocoque construction, before you drive us all "batty"!

5Gen enthusiasts are just amazing LOL!


in this Bible Thread, let me quote my favorite:
(I took it from

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

)

Thank You Mr. Jura, as you well know, I give deference to fellow posters who are obviously more knowledgeable than myself on a given subject?? such as yourself for Naval history, and even knowledge of WW II weapons, battles, etc. because of your integrity and demonstrated accuracy?

My area of expertise is limited to aircraft, design, construction, maintenance, and operation, I really don't care much about avionics or even weapons other than a perfunctory observation about detection and employment.

B-787 is a very smart guy about lots of stuff, but he fails to show proper respect at times for his elders and those who actually know what they are talking about. Deino has some excellent and very reliable sources, as well as an almost uncanny ability to discern details from photographs, and take a body of knowledge, and wrap it up in a very succinct and accurate article, which is both inciteful and accurate.

 

[taxiya]

A rumor is not a fact

So why do you also bring up the "rumor"? You do realize that what you said in your post is the same that I brought up before?

 

[Air Force Brat]

So why do you also bring up the "rumor"? You do realize that what you said in your post is the same that I brought up before?

Right!, Using the word "rumor" at least partially implies untruth, the more appropriate phrase in English to describe Deino's information would be an "un-official source", or un-accredited source, as the word "rumor" implies that the information will be discredited when the truth comes out.

An unofficial source is often someone telling you the truth off the record, that someone may well speak with 100% accuracy, but for whatever reason the company or MOD is not ready to make a formal announcement, so that source is "OFF the RECORD". Most Defense information in the US is released in this manor, and I can say with certainty that as of today, there are NO 6 Gen Assets sitting in some hangar in the desert, that project is so large that there must be significant MONEY to even get the ball rolling! and that much money doesn't get "loose" with significant knowledge also being let "loose".

 

[b787]

@b787

I really do not want to be unfair but the issue I have with You to admit is, that You are not even willing to accept these rumours or reports as facts - albeit unconfirmed ones - simply since they are from unofficial sources or since they don't fit your opinion.


Deino

Deino, i do not know if you consider, all leaks are intentionally done, PAKFA is a secretive classified program, any person involved in the program, who leaks information without have been allowed goes to jail.
Do you think there are many Russian engineers working in the PAKFA program willing to go to jail? what about the people in the air bases it flies?
So is not i do not believe forums, it is a reality classified program, as such "forum leaks" most of the time are crap, the J-20 pictures we see online were leaked by the Chinese government, same the flight by the T-50, they released the pictures they want, when they want.

The Russians have venues like take.off.ru and many other websites like Rostec or KRET, when something is true, there is confirmation by them.

Do they hide things? yes they do, but after many years you find the information, you can get even flight manuals for MiG-21 or MiG-23 online nowadays, 40 years ago any person in Russia leaking the manuals was going to go jail for that, now they do not go, the jets are not classified any more.

one of the latest pictures

 

[b787]

Oh brother! whats truly hilarious is the image u used to illustrate that the skin is not a stressed member, is the very first image that google uses to illustrate "Monocoque" construction. You can clearly see that the skin is riveted to the bulkheads/formers, and their are NO stringers or longitudinal bracing, illustrating that the skin is the longitudinal bracing rather than a stringer!

you better read the whole article on monocoque construction, before you drive us all "batty"!

the skin itself needs the monocoque structure to add strength to it self. does it need some degree of strength to bear some structural loads, of course it does, as a muscle or skin in a human bear some loads, but the bones are like the bulkheads, formers, longerons and stringers bearing most of the loads the aircraft is exposed to

these vertical and horizontal structures bear more of the loads the fuselage is exposed to
one of the latest pictures

 

[b787]

PAKFA at aviadarts June 2016

 

[b787]

More of VVS at Aviadarts in June 2016 and some T-50 footage included

 

[b787]

maybe not a new picture but at least it is for me