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

[Air Force Brat]

The only air forces that do not hold supermaneuverability in high regard are the ones who do not have it yet. The USAF and IAF are the only two air forces with operational TVC and the USAF version is quite limited in most respects. The Russians are still putting their TVC aircraft through the paces.

Technically, only IAF has true operational TVC aircraft, and the IAF is the only air force with requirements for TVC in all future jets as well, the AMCA comes to mind. The ones who nay-say it are ones with no experience on TVC except for watching air shows. Anyway, technicians here say TVC goes far beyond air shows and leans into the actual realm of warfighting. How do they do it, only the IAF knows. The others will come around after they actually decide to get it.

The Raptor has been in development since 1986, the PAK-FA has been designed because the MK-1 is no match for the Raptor, however the Russians themselves have stated for the record that they compromised stealth in order to match the supermaneuverability of the the Raptor.
In addition although the Raptor is to date far superior to any other operational aircraft, and most likely IMHO, to all of the current crop of wannabes, no doubt due to TVC as well as advanced aerodynamics, the F-35 is perfectly capable of meeting any of the current or projected challenges, so no after having to deal with TVC and its associated ills, the US has decided to pursue aerodynamic and stealth, as well as electronic measures to achieve air-superiority.
Here again you are making a statement that is NOT accurate, the Russians, as well as the United States are the leaders in developing and deploying OVT/TVC. There are no firm plans to develop a US aircraft with TVC as of tonight, it may well be included on the sixth gen designs that are on the drawing board tonight, and that may be likely given that a tailless design is being considered by the Navy and the USAF.

 

[b787]

The Flankers are brand new. It takes time to make everything operational. It takes years to become a warfighter. TVC on Harriers is not used for warfighting, it is used for landing and take-off, so it's actual use is different.

Harrier has VIFFing, in fact the Harrier was the first aircraft using TVC in combat.

Russia builds the Su-30MKI, HAL only license it, they have taken all the information IAF says to Sukhoi, the first Su-35S were received in 2010 and now they are operational, the Su-30MS also are operational, your statement is wrong.
Russia had since 1997 Sukhoi aircraft with TVC

 

[b787]

The Raptor has been in development since 1986, the PAK-FA has been designed because the MK-1 is no match for the Raptor, however the Russians themselves have stated for the record that they compromised stealth in order to match the super-maneuverability of the the Raptor.
.

The Russian do not say that air force brat
The Russians say PAKFA is superior to the F-22 in super-maneuverability, they even say the engines in PAKFA are farther from the longitudinal axis to increase the yaw movement.

They say it does not concede in stealth, western analysts did say PAKFA concedes in stealth and they compromised in stealth, in 2010, however KRET says the advances in smart skin and composites makes PAKFA much more modern, you can believe it or not but that is what they say, you can say is a marketing ploy, but unless the west can get a PAKFA like they did with MiG-25 in 1976, you can not say for sure they are just boasting.

In fact what the russians say is

PAKFA is superior in speed, range, super-maneuverability, weaponry, ceiling (they say F-22 can not fly at high altitude due to the fact F-22 has problems with the oxygen system) and does not conced in stealth

Military expert and editor of the website "Bulletin of defense" Said Aminov compared the capabilities of the two fifth-generation fighter, the Russian T-50 PAK FA and the American F-22 Raptor. American fighter became the world's first production aircraft fifth generation fighter. Russian PAK FA T-50 has yet to state tests. The first manned aircraft parts they appear in Russia in 2020. But now, according to experts, we can say on what parameters Russian aircraft will surpass its predecessor.

"American F-22 was created, following the ideology of the far missile combat. Due to its low visibility and driving the radar, together with medium-range missiles, he provided the interception of air targets at ranges of acceptable and does not require tying-in air combat, "- said the expert.

However, according to Aminova, the Russian fighter different philosophy - it combines the use of "Stealth" technology with high maneuverability.

"Opportunities for Russian fighter in him supermaneuverability provide significant benefit and advantage. We will soon make those or other maneuvers, certain elements of the air battle, "- said the expert. According to him, the PAK FA exceeds the F-22 in size, that allows you to place more fuel. And last but not least, a Russian fighter jet and a half times higher than for American range.

According Aminova have no external Raptor Suspension arms (the latest anti-radar missiles can not be placed on board), while the weapons for the T-50 is designed so that the newest models of weapons will be placed in the inner compartments of the aircraft.

It is also expected that the new engine for the T-50 will make the plane more maneuverable, and subtle (reduced emissivity in the infrared range). Modern weapons and do not leave the F-22 chance in a dogfight against the T-50.

"We are able to limit the range not only detect targets and take them to support and to open fire even before the F-22 with its missile can strike back. Our missile strike allows for a range of over 150 km, and according to other sources, and more, and the Americans launch range of 120 km, "- says the expert.

He also recalled that one of the F-22 aircraft crashed during landing - the fact that the system of control of the aircraft was laid incorrect code which led to oscillate rudders, and the fighter went into self-oscillation, the approach. According to experts, the US recklessly rely on electronics and machine solutions to complex problems, which are often unavailable computer. In Russia, even in the fifth-generation fighter, equipped with the latest electronic technology, the key decisions pilot.

Modern weapons do not leave the F-22 chance in a direct dogfight against the T-50, concluded Said Amin.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Air Force Brat]

So IAF wants TVC on FGFA as well as AMCA for "fun?" The IAF has accepted greater weight on the engines along with more complexity in the FBW, with lesser availability for the sake of TVC, the nozzles require overhaul every 500 hours compared to 1000 hours for the enginem while also having paid extra for the full development and certification of TVC from their own pockets. That choice doesn't come easy.

And yes, IAF is currently the only air force that operates an all-round TVC aircraft at full capacity, no other air force. The Raptor's TVC is pitch only, unlike the MKI's which controls pitch, yaw and roll. So IAF is the only one equipped with enough knowledge to say whether TVC works or not. Considering they want TVC on AMCA too, it means TVC is going to be an important part of the fleet. If TVC doesn't work, it wouldn't be required on the AMCA at all.

The grapes are sour.

Does secrecy only belong to the US? Why would IAF show-off technologies the others do not yet have in an operational capacity? The tactics they employ while using TVC is theirs alone, not the Russians or anybody else. It is logical to expect such tactics will be closely guarded. The IAF has a 15-year lead on employing TVC, the IAF is not going to give that up by talking about it. And it is obvious they want more out of TVC.

An aircraft that's able to turn in the horizontal plane to 180deg at 600 Kmph is not something to be scoffed at. Oh, and it can return to forward flight without losing speed. This is one of the maneuvers which is not a secret. Not possible on the Raptor. Basically a 360 deg turn without losing speed.

Here again , more nonsense, the IAF does NOT have a lead of any kind in employing OVT/TVC, it is simply a story you are making up, the US and the Russians employed TVC long before India, and India is flying a license built Russian aircraft???

As to your very grandiose statement that the MK-1 will out turn a Raptor again you are very sadly mistaken, the Raptor will sustain a 6G turn at 50,000 ft, this according to Ret. General Norton Schwartz, former Air Force Chief of Staff, you sadly have no idea what that means???
The MK-1 might do that at 15,000ft, maybe even 20,000, PAK-FA should do a little better than that with its F-117s and their additional thrust and what are no doubt excellent aerodynamics, but it too has a significant thrust deficit to the Raptor.
No doubt PAK-FA is a very fine aircraft, but if you want to talk about war fighting, the Raptor has a very significant edge in the real world as well as on "paper"!

as to your claim that the PAK-FAs structural issues were with the Wing, please post a link or reference that we may look at to confirm that. My information was very clear the cracking was in the aft fuselage, and possibly some issues with the horizontal stabilizers as well???

 

[Air Force Brat]

The Russian do not say that air force brat
The Russians say PAKFA is superior to the F-22 in super-maneuverability, they even say the engines in PAKFA are farther from the longitudinal axis to increase the yaw movement.

They say it does not concede in stealth, western analysts did say PAKFA concedes in stealth and they compromised in stealth, in 2010, however KRET says the advances in smart skin and composites makes PAKFA much more modern, you can believe it or not but that is what they say, you can say is a marketing ploy, but unless the west can get a PAKFA like they did with MiG-25 in 1976, you can not say for sure they are just boasting.

In fact what the russians say is

PAKFA is superior in speed, range, super-maneuverability, weaponry, ceiling (they say F-22 can not fly at high altitude due to the fact F-22 has problems with the oxygen system) and does not conced in stealth

Actually they did initially state that, the F-22 does NOT have a problem with its oxygen system, and its much superior thrust will give it a much better ceiling as well as performance at altitude. The F-22 will sustain 6Gs positive at 50,000ft, nothing else will do that, including PAK-FA, now the PAK-FA will turn very well, possibly even besting the Raptor at low to medium altitudes. Those in the know have no doubt that the PAK-FA is less stealthy in real life than the F-22, J-20, and F-35, and that my friend will be obvious once PAK-FA makes its first combat air-patrol, but don't hold your breath, that will likely be a while, or maybe the Russians will put this bird out there in 2016?? I really hope they do, we'll all know that much sooner who has been telling the truth, and who has been spinning a tail of "fairydust"??? I can't wait, if I were wrong, I will tell the truth and apologize, I have yet to witness anyone on the other team make an apology, but I have made a few, and no doubt will again?

 

[b787]

As to your very grandiose statement that the MK-1 will out turn a Raptor again you are very sadly mistaken, the Raptor will sustain a 6G turn at 50,000 ft, this according to Ret. General Norton Schwartz, former Air Force Chief of Staff, you sadly have no idea what that means???
The MK-1 might do that at 15,000ft, maybe even 20,000,

Air force brat

To know that information is not easy, when the Indians flew or fly their Su-30MKIs in red flag they do not show everything they have, plus the F-22, is not light, the Rafale and Eurofighters have shown the F-22 can not beat them easily in fact Rafale was almost on Par, to claim the F-22 is superior is kind of boastful, it might be, but i doubt if it does is by a big Margin, because in air to air combat mock up, the Su-30MKI is more or less as good as Eurofighter or Rafale.

In my opinion F-22 only big advantage in performance is supercruise and Stealth, i am positively sure Su-35S will have no troubles handling a F-22, with this i do not mean F-22 is a pretty easy pray, just that Su-30MKI is not as it has been portraited by those who dislike TVC.,

 

[b787]

Actually they did initially state that, the F-22 does NOT have a problem with its oxygen system, and its much superior thrust will give it a much better ceiling as well as performance at altitude. The F-22 will sustain 6Gs positive at 50,000ft, nothing else will do that, including PAK-FA, now the PAK-FA will turn very well, possibly even besting the Raptor at low to medium altitudes. Those in the know have no doubt that the PAK-FA is less stealthy in real life than the F-22, J-20, and F-35, and that my friend will be obvious once PAK-FA makes its first combat air-patrol, but don't hold your breath, that will likely be a while, or maybe the Russians will put this bird out there in 2016?? I really hope they do, we'll all know that much sooner who has been telling the truth, and who has been spinning a tail of "fairydust"??? I can't wait, if I were wrong, I will tell the truth and apologize, I have yet to witness anyone on the other team make an apology, but I have made a few, and no doubt will again?

i have this experience in my 44 years of life, the West hides its weaknesses, in the 1980s F-14 was portraited as as a super fighter, in when in reality it conceded to MiG-29, F-15 has been portraited as a super fighter too, hiding the fact it won`t out turn a MiG-29 except at speed higher than 0.9 Mach.

You won`t hear people in the west saying the weaknesses of F-22 until it passes many decades in the same way today every body knows MiG-21 was much more agile than F-4 and the same applies to Russia it was relatively recently that they admitted the F-5 bested the MiG-21 and MiG-23 or MiG-23 was totally outclassed by the F-15.

Let us acknowledge in air combat is the pilot, airplane and tactics what matter, Erik Hartman the greatest ace of all time flew Me-109s which theoretically were inferior to P-51s and at the end the Luftwaffe was beaten despite having Me-262 and Ar-234s

 

[kwaigonegin]

Maybe i'm behind the times but the only 'aircraft' I've seen making a complete 360 w/o bleeding a single oz of energy is the Millienium Falcon!

 

[Air Force Brat]

Maybe i'm behind the times but the only 'aircraft' I've seen making a complete 360 w/o bleeding a single oz of energy is the Millienium Falcon!

You are sooo right kwai, as soon as you start hauling back on that stick the energy is gonna go bye bye, if and only IF??? you have a significant amount of "excess" thrust, you will go into full burne! The most impressive aircraft I ever saw in an airshow was the BIG TOMKAT. FULL BURNER, About 300ft and at least an 80 degree bank, leveled out and accelerated, then a hard pull to about 60 degrees now up, and rolling through a low hanging Cumulus, blew that cloud apart with the vortices! so stinking KOOL!

 

[A Bar Brother]

I am simply re-stating what you have just said and that is India's MKI can do a horizontal 360 degrees turn at 600 kmph without losing speed. Do you have evidence to your claim?

Unfortunately it is only by word of mouth. We also know that the ITR of the MKI is 35deg/sec with automated TVC while activating TVC manually provides the aircraft an ITR of 52deg/sec (apparently revealed by the Malaysians. IAF values ITR over STR.