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

[A Bar Brother]

Neither of these conditions is even close to the claim you described.

Flying 180 degrees out of sync...sideways...at 600 kmh is nothing like moving in reverse at 200 kmh, or near zero speeds at high angle of attack.

At 180 degrees and 600 kmh, the aircraft would have zero lift and fall from the sky...but that would probably happen after the aircraft suffered what would probably be massive structural failure in any case as it got to that position.

Okay. Although I don't know the physics behind it either. Take it as false until a video is available.

Anyway, related to the topic.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Paul Metz: What is not widely known is that thrust-vectoring plays a big role in high speed, supersonic maneuvering. All aircraft experience a loss of control effectiveness at supersonic speeds. To generate the same maneuver supersonically as subsonically, the controls must be deflected further. This, in turn, results in a big increase in supersonic trim drag and a subsequent loss in acceleration and turn performance. The F-22 offsets this trim drag, not with the horizontal tails, which is the classic approach, but with the thrust vectoring. With a negligible change in forward thrust, the F-22 continues to have relatively low drag at supersonic maneuvering speed. . But drag is only part of the advantage gained from thrust vectoring. By using the thrust vector for pitch control during maneuvers the horizontal tails are free to be used to roll the airplane during the slow speed fight. This significantly increases roll performance and, in turn, point-and-shoot capability. This is one of the areas that really jumps out to us when we fly with the F-16 and F-15. The turn capability of the F-22 at high altitudes and high speeds is markedly superior to these older generation aircraft. I would hate to face a Raptor in a dogfight under these conditions.

Thanks to TVC, the F-22 enjoys a major advantage in high speed, high altitude engagements.

Also, this quote.

By using the thrust vector for pitch control during maneuvers the horizontal tails are free to be used to roll the airplane during the slow speed fight.

Interestingly, the advantage for the MKI/PAKFA is even greater since the TVC allows roll control along with pitch control.

Another advantage for TVC

We formalized the desired handling qualities of the F-22 with the engineers early in the design process by defining 'carefree abandon' flying qualities. This meant that the pilot could do anything with the stick and rudder as well as the throttles with the assurance that he would never overstress the structure and break it; that he would never lose control of the airplane, or that he would never have his engines 'backfire'. Many hundreds of simulator and engine wind tunnel tests resulted in an airplane that today meets those expectations. The importance of 'carefree abandon' flying qualities is that it makes flying second nature and frees the pilot to concentrate on being the wiley tactician that the human being is so adept at.

Although, carefree abandon is not used anymore because of other risks involved. Both MKI and F-22 have faced an instance of FBW failure.

 

[Brumby]

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.

Normally there should be loss of energy when making a turn, however TVC with powerful engines eliminates the losses to a certain extent, enough to maintain energy to continue the fight. The Russians/Indians probably mean the loss in energy isn't drastic. There could be differences based on the amount of fuel carried too.

Anyway, the MKI is designed to also fly "tail-forward," up to 200 Kmph. I don't know how the physics works though

You have been carting to us an incredible amount of cow manure, in fact by the truckload. I don't even have to rebutt your claims because you are contradicting your own self in the process by the sheer amount of your own manure.

In your first quote, you claim that Indian pilots can perform 360 degrees turn travelling at 600 kmh using TVC without loss of speed. Your second quote is modifying your position from "no loss" to "no drastic loss". Presumably you do understand the difference in meaning of just one word just like between being dead and not dead and that you rather be in the latter.

Your third quote talks of MKI are designed to fly "tail-forward" up to 200 kmh. You do understand that 360 degrees does include tail forward and the difference between 200 kmh and 600 kmh. Either Indian pilots are incredibly stupid, have suicidal tendencies or you just don't know where the truth of your claims start and end.

 

[Jeff Head]

Okay. Although I don't know the physics behind it either. Take it as false until a video is available.

As a design engineer myself, who ealier in my career worked on combat aircraft...until shown that the material sciences and the design of such an aircraft were of such a nature as to allow this phenomenal claim...I would consider any such video as a PS and fake.

ABB, this claim has just been ridiculous from the start.

I have tried to be patient with you and explain why...but frankly, to even have to explain such basics physics and dynamics is a very low threshold for SD indeed.

Please consider that this experience and event really tarnishes other claims you may make.

So...here's some advise. Just slow down. Take more time in considering what you are posting here.

Ask other SD members with a LOT of expertise in this area some very basic questions via PMs or other means in the future before making such outlandish pronouncments and claims. Which is now a claim that you yourself...after numerous posts...are willing to say, "Take it as false."

We want to avoid having to go through all of this in the future so that SD's good name and the respect for the forum can be maintained. Some of us have devoted a decade and more to this forum in getting it to where it is.

Thanks for understanding.

PS: As to this:

Anyway, the MKI is designed to also fly "tail-forward," up to 200 Kmph

Another claim of a similar ilk.

Flying backward may be structurally possible once it got there...but it is, at best, a gimmick, acrobatic maneuver and not a combat maneuver. Since the engines are pointing forward at that point...it will not be able to have any thrust at all and it will be losing air speed rapidly.

And, as I say, it will also be falling from the sky. And as it rotated through 90 degrees out of sync, it would probably break apart.

 

[Air Force Brat]

As a design engineer myself, who ealier in my career worked on combat aircraft...until shown that the material sciences and the design of such an aircraft were of such a nature as to allow this phenomenal claim...I would consider any such video as a PS and fake.

ABB, this claim has just been ridiculous from the start.

I have tried to be patient with you and explain why...but frankly, to even have to explain such basics physics and dynamics is a very low threshold for SD indeed.

Please consider that this experience and event really tarnishes other claims you may make.

So...here's some advise. Just slow down. Take more time in considering what you are posting here.

Ask other SD members with a LOT of expertise in this area some very basic questions via PMs or other means in the future before making such outlandish pronouncments and claims. Which is now a claim that you yourself...after numerous posts...are willing to say, "Take it as false."

We want to avoid having to go through all of this in the future so that SD's good name and the respect for the forum can be maintained. Some of us have devoted a decade and more to this forum in getting it to where it is.

Thanks for understanding.

PS: As to this:



Another claim of a similar ilk.

Flying backward may be structurally possible once it got there...but it is, at best, a gimmick, acrobatic maneuver and not a combat maneuver. Since the engines are pointing forward at that point...it will not be able to have any thrust at all and it will be losing air speed rapidly.

And, as I say, it will also be falling from the sky. And as it rotated through 90 degrees out of sync, it would probably break apart.

I've never read a more ridiculous bunch of tripe on SDF, as well this does without doubt explain the aft fuselage, horizontal stabs, vertical stabs, and wing cracking, its rather obvious the PAK-FA FCS does NOT protect the airframe from breaking, as the Raptors FCS does, as explained by Paul Metz.
Also that nonsense about a 600 kph turn about the vertical axis is complete "Horse Puckey" ABB, and you should be smart enough to know that. What the Russians do is slow the aircraft to a near standstill and the rudder and thrust vectoring at "full boot", pivot around the vertical axis of the aircraft, and as Jeff has artfully explained the aircraft is falling at a very high rate of sink, as the nose is lowered with the TVC, it resumes flying, the sink rate is at least in the four figures, and possibly five...
Your complete lack of understanding of aerodynamics/fluid dynamics even at a layman's level, is beyond pathetic, and your continued argument with those who are pilots, engineers, or at the very least students of that very fascinating science, reveals that you are completely unaware of aerodynamics, and are only repeating hear-say.
Also quoting Russian ad copy is just not bright, as they almost invariably mess up the translation of the capability they are trying to boast of? and often contradict the very capability they are trying to "showcase"?

 

[b787]

How many of them have been flying TVC aircraft operationally for the last 12 years? IAF has at least 8 pilots with 12 years of experience on a TVC aircraft, the maximum possible.

What tactics will Bogdan create by flying solo anyway?

Look i will put it simple, your pilots went to Russia to be trained on how to fly Su-30MKIs, your engineers, went to Russia to learn how to make it, people like Pilot Vyacheslav Aver'yanov and WSO Vladimir Shendrik trained them to how to use it, see this will remind you who developed the manuals of your Su-30MKI

 

[b787]

The Su-37 does nothing of what I mentioned. I'm talking about spinning on the horizontal plane, not vertical. It's a turn done without banking or pitching. The PAKFA shows that in the video I posted to demonstrate what I was talking about.

you lack ample knowledge of history of aviation but this will show you that PAKFAs controlled flat spin is not new, the F-16MATV did it long time ago

and the aircraft loses speed doing those flat spins, it is basic physics

give it a read, this will enlighten you up

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Deino]

Guys ... can we came back to the topic !??

Again there is a discussion going on on TVC, the pr and cons and most of all opinion-changing and bashing ...

Deino

 

[aksha]

something that will hopefully bring things back on track

OCR engine to create the second stage for the PAK FA fighter will be completed in 2020
.
Development activities (R & D) to create a full-time fifth-generation engine (the engine of the second stage) for the fighter PAK FA will be completed in 2020.

On this, as the "RIA Novosti" reported at the air show Aero India 2015 Head "United Engine Corporation" Vladislav Masalov.


"Creating the first prototype engine of the second stage we plan to complete in 2016, and in 2017 to ensure its installation on a flying laboratory.OCD on the engine should be completed in 2020 "- quoted by" RIA Novosti "V.Masalova.


While prototypes of the PAK FA equipped with an engine of the first stage - "Article 117", which has already put into production.


According V.Masalova, "the second phase of the engine fuel efficiency and specific impulse will be significantly greater than the engine of the first stage," Article 117 ", and on structural and technological performance and level settings will be fully achieved, world-class engine fifth-generation" - said agency.


This year will be carried out as a bench test sites, and the gas generator, said V.Masalov.


The engine of the second stage for the PAK FA is created in cooperation of all design offices UEC, the head developer is OKB A.M.Lyulki.The chief designer of the project - Yevhen Marchuk.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[aksha]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

from

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[A Bar Brother]

As a design engineer myself, who ealier in my career worked on combat aircraft...until shown that the material sciences and the design of such an aircraft were of such a nature as to allow this phenomenal claim...I would consider any such video as a PS and fake.

ABB, this claim has just been ridiculous from the start.

I have tried to be patient with you and explain why...but frankly, to even have to explain such basics physics and dynamics is a very low threshold for SD indeed.

Please consider that this experience and event really tarnishes other claims you may make.

So...here's some advise. Just slow down. Take more time in considering what you are posting here.

Ask other SD members with a LOT of expertise in this area some very basic questions via PMs or other means in the future before making such outlandish pronouncments and claims. Which is now a claim that you yourself...after numerous posts...are willing to say, "Take it as false."

We want to avoid having to go through all of this in the future so that SD's good name and the respect for the forum can be maintained. Some of us have devoted a decade and more to this forum in getting it to where it is.

Thanks for understanding.

I don't get the point of this. When I said "Take it as false," I did not mean I agree it is false, I meant let's stop the discussion since I can't prove it.

I have made numerous claims which were rejected outright even though I provided very reliable proof, including about Rafale's sensor fusion, which is verified information by many air forces. Now that I cannot provide proof for one of my claims, I don't understand how it affects other claims.

I have no intention of tarnishing SD's name. However accepting only pro-American views isn't how it should be. All this while the onus has been on me to prove a claim, regardless of whether it is pro-American or anti-American, which I have, until now.

Flying backward may be structurally possible once it got there...but it is, at best, a gimmick, acrobatic maneuver and not a combat maneuver. Since the engines are pointing forward at that point...it will not be able to have any thrust at all and it will be losing air speed rapidly.

And, as I say, it will also be falling from the sky. And as it rotated through 90 degrees out of sync, it would probably break apart.

I never said it is a combat maneuver. Just pointed out that the aircraft continues flying even though the air flow over the wings and control surfaces are reversed. And they say it is sustained air speed, although they don't mention how long.

I presented a video with the PAKFA turning way more than 90 deg out of sync, literally flying like a saucer. However I do not know at what speed the structural integrity is compromised. So,let's leave it at that.