"OH BROTHER!",,,,, yep you definitely need a bigger glass for your "KOOL-AID"!
go ahead, keep believing and posting this nonsense, and you will likely contribute to WW III, really theres NO WAY you could possibly believe this is there???
Russian Su-57 Aircraft Thread (PAK-FA and IAF FGFA)
- Thread starter A Bar Brother
- Start date
"OH BROTHER!",,,,, yep you definitely need a bigger glass for your "KOOL-AID"!
go ahead, keep believing and posting this nonsense, and you will likely contribute to WW III, really theres NO WAY you could possibly believe this is there???
I don' t think engines/air intakes etc... are positionned in a Su-27 style under the fuselage and in more this fighter is very flattened so no room.
Much more easy if engines/air intakes are on the side.
It is not a flaw a choice a new fighter more easy to build based on the proven Su-27.
The big problem is that the reactor blades produce a lot of radar echoes so even half hidden is it a weakness as J-20 with canards, the F-35 have a very big engine few discret from rear but with F-22 nozzles are better masked.
Remains for IR signature two engines are better.
Last edited:
The shapes for hide for J-20... the US use same design mask with a derivation horizontal PAK-Fa is vertical US much more simple.
Jeff's model
For 1/ you sure is the good definitive ? coz i see others but for all reactor is only partialy hidden
Last edited:
Yep, you're getting there,,, if you see the F-35 up close and personal, it is as slik as a baby's butt, no sharp edges anywhere. Reminds me of a "combat melt" on a 1911, all the sharp edges that will "hang up" are gone. The J-20 follows a similar model, and is likely rather stealthy particularly from the frontal aspect.
PAK-FA is angular, and edgy, the fuse is not "blended", the engines hang out the back end like fins on a 58 Impala, the tail sting, well it hangs out like a stinger. It no doubt has a lower RCS than the Flanker, but, its simply NOT in same league in shaping as the other three? LockMart has a LOCK on L/O, everybody else is taking their design cues and trying to make them their own..
Hyperwarp
Captain
Inlet geometry itself is not enough to hide the engine face. Thats why a blocker will be used. Red area is where the blocker will be. I think the Inlet-Guide-Vanes are connected or integrated to the blocker?? flateric,can you give some input here?
For F-22 sorry !
b787
Captain
every thing has advantages and disadvantages, designers weigh what is the best solution upon some tactical strategies, PAKFA is not s sloppy design, the engine nacelles are lower drag than the F-22's flattened conventional design of buried within the fuselage engines nacelles with S intake ducts.
PAKFA prioritizes high speed, higher agility than F-22, it likely uses a radar blocker like X-32 or the F-18E, in general terms is not worse than other fighters, it has S-ducts, but in a more subtle way.
compared to F-14 well it has not a very optimal rear end lift, drag integral blended fuselage/wing design, the weapons bay, make it look like a pregnant Tomcat. but it reduces frontal area drag and its widely spaced engines also aid thrust vectoring in ways F-22 can not do.
In a head on attack both fighters have similar frontal area RCS, which means the one with better radar and weapons will win.
in a tail on chase, the best aircraft with higher speed and better IRST will win.
yes PAKFA has worse over all stealth, but it has not not worse aerodynamics.
in few words Pakfa, relies more in speed, agility, electronic masking and radar than the F-22's design philosophy, its stealth is not affecting its aerodynamic features as much as in other stealth fighters.
if Sukhoi and the VVS aka Russian air force design philosophy is wrong time will tell, the bet for Lockheed is how much is worth degrading aerodynamics in favor of stealth in spite the fact anti stealth technologies are improving faster than stealth and at lower price in purchasing power and maintanance?
First i don' t means PAK-FA is bad for stealth but less good than F-22/35 it is completely different...
F-22 also and the blocker removes air not good for reactor ?
Also the tunnel between the reactors is not excellent for stealth marginale but it is a break that can constitute a " brilliant point " for a radar.
Why with PAK-FA Russia have build a fighter using Su-27 style ( especialy part under the fuselage ) a solution more simple for build a fighter based on one existing ?
Last edited:
b787
Captain
up to what i know, PAKFA did not use S ducts for one simple reason:weight
the S ducts adds weight, the podded nacelles reduce drag, the semi ventral intakes are good for high AoA and nose side slips.
PAKFA's design is based upon probably the most advanced former generation aerodynamic design, the Su-30SM, it is possible they could be making a mistake, but basically its designers thought Pakfa has lower weight and lower drag with podded nacelles than with buried within the fuselage engines and S ducts; the radar blocker will be considered of lower weight penalty, than, the S ducts
Last edited: