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

[Deino]

compare these 2 pictures around just behind the canopy area
@Deino what do you think is that goldenish quadilateral just behind the canopy

before alleged damage

after alleged damage

To admit even if the second image is indeed taken after the cracks I don't think that these golden parts / changes behind are related to the cracks. IMO it is a change in design of the vents behind on the canopy ... why they were changed I don't know however, maybe for RCS-modifications.

As far as I know 052 has been spotted with this new canopy before that mishap. ... posted by "Berkut" ( a very reliable member !!!) already on 28. March.

Deino

 

[Air Force Brat]

compare these 2 pictures around just behind the canopy area
@Deino what do you think is that goldenish quadilateral just behind the canopy

before alleged damage

after alleged damage

Not necessarily a big deal, just a concern, and that it did not fail but only cracked, would cause some flight restrictions until replaced? It is a fairly simple shape, but would require the lower and aft edge fairings/trim to be drilled off, by drilling out the rivets, the windshield is likely bonded to a frame around the cockpit, then the fairings are riveted on over the edges, also sealed with the bonding material which is likely a type of silicone sealer??

 

[RadDisconnect]

bad news

russian radio says

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

seems T50-2 was damaged ,looks like cockpit canopy

a google translate of a russian comment in another forum

Cracks in the fixed part of the glazing. Which "increases". kosyachok sir, yes ... SchA will pick silicate technology lantern ... Something went wrong there. I wonder whether this is not the board, who went to high Mahi? if he did right then done that stopped him at M = 2.6 ... Overall, I think the project will not be affected. Well, maybe initially impose speed restrictions until sorted out with the technology.

Who is the guy that said Mach 2.6? I like to know, because that runs counter to what many other sources are saying.

Also, I don't see this as a big deal. The plane is still in testing, so better for these problems to come up now than later when operational units are using the aircraft.

 

[Air Force Brat]

Who is the guy that said Mach 2.6? I like to know, because that runs counter to what many other sources are saying.

Also, I don't see this as a big deal. The plane is still in testing, so better for these problems to come up now than later when operational units are using the aircraft.

They are very likely pushing this aircraft into its operating envelope, and as we have already realized, things break, crack, stretch, and yes even catch on fire??? crazy huh?? that's why they call it "flight test" and that's why its best to do the majority of your testing before you begin actual production, the F-35 is also opening up its envelope as well?? That aluminum bulkhead on the F-35B is extremely problematic, so they will likely do a redesign or at least a work around? I believe its the bulkhead where the rear spar attaches. So these things are part and parcel of development flight testing, a cracked screen is likely to be one of the lesser concerns on this aircraft??? they may even have "blown" a couple of spares???

 

[kwaigonegin]

Who is the guy that said Mach 2.6? I like to know, because that runs counter to what many other sources are saying.

Also, I don't see this as a big deal. The plane is still in testing, so better for these problems to come up now than later when operational units are using the aircraft.

I think in very ideal control conditions the PAK-FA can certainly reach a high mach like that for testing purposes.

Not too different than my mazda which can probably reach 160 mph with a strong a tail wind and on a runway and gutting most things out.. You'll never see those numbers on the manual or any official publication though LOL

 

[aksha]

strange news here

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

India is currently negotiating a contract with Russia for 127 Fifth Generation Fighting Aircraft (FGFA), an aircraft designed on the Russian PAK FA 5th generation multirole fighter aircraft. The contract is evaluated at more than $25 billion Euros.

The news comes at a good time since the Russian Armed Forces dramatically decreased its PAK FA order due to economical issues. The original order was 52 T-50 but was reduced to 12. Russia will instead concentrate on 4++ generation fighters such as the Sukhoi Su-30 and the Su-35.

Russia would deliver its first FGFA in 36 months instead of the previous estimation of 94 months. After the first batch built in Russia, Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) will takeover the production under transfer of technology.

The FGFA will be a two-seater fighter instead of a one-seater for the T-50. The FGFA will also be armed with Indian-made Astra, a beyond-visual-range missile (BVR). An additional 43 improvements such as stealth, supercruise, sensors, networking and combat avionics will be applied to the FGFA.

India was considering buying 126 French Rafale but only 36 will join the Indian Air Force. Modi and Putin met last December and spoke about the non-delivery of the Mistral LHD due to the ongoing Ukrainian conflict. India could have turned its back—mainly due to Russian influence—on France due to the failed delivery of the Mistral LHDs to Russia. That said, India also has concerns on the future delivery of Rafale parts based on the possibility of having the United States putting pressure on France to limits its exportation to India.

We can say Putin got his revenge on France’s decision to not deliver the Mistral.

Russia is also the oldest and most important military partner of India. Both countries have cooperated on many military projects, including the FGFA. The Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi told Russian President Vladimir Putin that India would keep Russia has its primary partner in defence materiel.

The first FGFA are planned to be operational in 2016.

India is currently spending more than $40 billion on defence annually (1.84% of its GDP) and holds the 9th rank when it comes to military spending. India is also the world’s largest weapon’s importer.

The $25 billion Euros deal will likely bolster an already solid relationship between India and Russia.

 

[Air Force Brat]

strange news here

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

LOL, don't hold your breath??? but I did predict this as Russia's economy goes south??? I believe that the Russians will likely deliver the 2nd development of the PAK-FA, and I rather doubt it will be two seat??? at least not initially??? I am glad to see India make a commitment on the 36, and I'm not gonna count the French out of this deal yet???

 

[aksha]

 

[Air Force Brat]

Aksha, when you make these types of posts, please give us a caption, or the thought of what is behind the publication of these "wind tunnel images"??
especially since you wear the "top poster" crown, I'm of the opinion that we need more "collegial" conversations, the pictures are wonderful, but just posting to be posting misses the point of having a forum?? IMHO
please, I'm not trying to be offensive, but instructive, and I always appreciate your candor and accuracy when you give us your take

1. and 2. most obviously we see the computer generated vortex off of each LERX device with that LERX in a fixed position???? yes they do produce a vortice, but the deflected slats/flaps do not???

2. we see a computer generated "clean air flow" pattern projected off the aircraft in steady state flight, with no LERX or Slat deflection??? this is as we would expect

3.I have no clue what these other images are supposed to project, but while I have longed to see "blue smoke" off the J-20 in the wind tunnel, and certainly enjoy the computer images of the T-50, and would love to see it in the wind tunnel, these computer generated images are neither??? they are what from where, and when?


in short a fourth grader could have produced them on his lap-top?? and prolly did?? LOL

So forgive me for my humor, and in the first picture we see the Levcon vortice does not attaché to the general airflow above the wing, but at the 20 to 25 degree angle of attack projected the vortice like a tornado is aboving the wing sucking air molecules off the low pressure area on top of that wing, further lowering the pressure on top of the wing and creating more lift?? no doubt that much is also simple, it also is likely causing the verts to buffet, one of the reasons for their extremely small size in addition to adding to low-observability.
If we continue to increase the angle of attack, we will begin to have separation or departure at the trailing edge of the wing and it will progressively move forward and into and disrupt the low air pressure flow above the wing causing the wing to loss lift or "stall"?

 

[Air Force Brat]

Aksha, when you make these types of posts, please give us a caption, or the thought of what is behind the publication of these "wind tunnel images"??
especially since you wear the "top poster" crown, I'm of the opinion that we need more "collegial" conversations, the pictures are wonderful, but just posting to be posting misses the point of having a forum?? IMHO
please, I'm not trying to be offensive, but instructive, and I always appreciate your candor and accuracy when you give us your take

1. and 2. most obviously we see the computer generated vortex off of each LERX device with that LERX in a fixed position???? yes they do produce a vortice, but the deflected slats/flaps do not???

2. we see a computer generated "clean air flow" pattern projected off the aircraft in steady state flight, with no LERX or Slat deflection??? this is as we would expect

3.I have no clue what these other images are supposed to project, but while I have longed to see "blue smoke" off the J-20 in the wind tunnel, and certainly enjoy the computer images of the T-50, and would love to see it in the wind tunnel, these computer generated images are neither??? they are what from where, and when?


in short a fourth grader could have produced them on his lap-top?? and prolly did?? LOL

So forgive me for my humor, and in the first picture we see the Levcon vortice does not attaché to the general airflow above the wing, but at the 20 to 25 degree angle of attack projected the vortice like a tornado is aboving the wing sucking air molecules off the low pressure area on top of that wing, further lowering the pressure on top of the wing and creating more lift?? no doubt that much is also simple, it also is likely causing the verts to buffet, one of the reasons for their extremely small size in addition to adding to low-observability.
If we continue to increase the angle of attack, we will begin to have separation or departure at the trailing edge of the wing and it will progressively move forward and into and disrupt the low air pressure flow above the wing causing the wing to loss lift or "stall"?

I would add that these are very similar aero's to what we might expect initially from the close coupled or even distant coupled canards, as the angle of attack increases and the trailing edge flow detaches, the vortices off the levcon will continue to be tornadic and suck in low pressure air??? it may also server to keep the airflow on the wing up to a point and delay departure???? this is all extremely fascinating and I'm very happy you posted these images.. what we are not seeing are all the vortices, one on either side of the forward fuselage lifting body, near the inboard leading edge of the LERX, wingtip vortices, both from the main wings and horizontal stabs as well as one each off the tip of the verts, they are simply turbulent flow induced by these "protrusions" into the airstream, still very fascinating, and yes I would love to see the actual blow smoke in the wind tunnel, particularly at very high angles of attack.