Re: Russian fifth generation fighter
Sorry Roger but I find myself disagreeing with almost every point. I'm no expert so I'm just guessing like the rest of us, but here's my take.
It's not particularly Flanker like. The tail is nothing like YF-23's.
It's designed for air-defence not long ranged interdiction.
It's agile, in fact logically more-so than any of the planes you list. It's agile like Su-30MKI, more-so than F-22 because it has 3D TVC and wider mounted engines. Eurofighter anf J-10 are very agile, but not in same league as either T-50 or F-22.
J-10B avionics comparable???? No idea why you'd think that. T-50 consistently reported to have L-Band and X-Band radars, plus a rear-facing radar in that large tail boom. It'll probably get AESA to go with the super-long-ranged AAMs.
2020... pretty much agree.
It's not likely called the Su-50. Su-27 was called T-10 not T-27... and fighters traditionally get odd numbers. Su-41 is my guess.
From the rear it is relatively stealthy, tho agree that it appears to have compromised Stealth relative to F-22 and F-35.
I do not think F-22 or T-50 (you're right it's probably going to be an odd number like Su-41 or Su-51) are more maneuverable or agile than J-10, much less in a different league. So I stand by my claim in this area T-50 should be comparable to J-10, Eurofighter and F-22.
Sure it has widely spaced engine, and innovative control surfaces. It will probably get 3D TVC at some point. But at the end of the day this fighter is extremely heavy -- heavier than any other fighter out there. In WVR, a Eurofighter (or a J-10) will not be outclassed.
In terms of avionics, I am unconvinced by Russian claims. Is T-50 really supposed to have radars in its wings? And the beaver tail? Where is the cooling system going to go? What is going to supply all that power? How heavy is this going to make the aircraft? How would this additional weight affect flight performance? Does the additional bulk affect space for fuel?
China has more advanced avionics than Russia. AESA fighter radars are ready to go next year on J-10B. J-10B has AESA, satcom, IRST and MAWS. Russia has had endless problems actually implementing all of those things. So I stand by my claim that J-10B will have comparable avionics to T-50 (at least in the short term).
In terms of the role, my impression is that defensive fighters are usually single-engined, shorter ranged and light. F-16A and J-10 are good examples. Heavy, long-ranged platforms are usually offensive.
But then again, you might be right: When you're talking about a country as big as Russia, maybe you do need extremely long range just to do defense. In addition, the emphasis on frontal RCS reduction (pacman style) is consistent with defense, not airspace penetration.
Looking at the underside and the rear of the T-50. I would not mistake it for a stealth fighter if I wasn't told so!
