Sukhoi PAK-FA ?

Hi all,

I found interesting pictures at http://warfare.ru/?catid=255&linkid=2280
Are they really show Sukhoi Pak-FA fighter?

Thank you.
Eugene

Thanks for the link!
In short my answer is no. They are different artist conceptions based off of some of the advanced
LFS/LFI concepts for a light fighter. Interestingly all of them show wings similar to project
"integral" which has produced the shafagh light trainer/combat aircraft in Iran.

I beleive that this wingshape may offer improved subsonic and sustained high angle-of-attack
performance and is probably the most likely for the PAK-FA, following the standard Russian practice
of choosing the perfect wing and building the airplane around it.

It looks like the aircraft will be developed as a joint venture by several of the major firms.
Pictures of the Shafagh can be found at: www.aeronautics.ru

I would also not consider the designation or the performance figures as being serious.
-Jonas Weselake-George

EY wrote in message ...
Hi all,

I found interesting pictures at http://warfare.ru/?catid=255&linkid=2280
Are they really show Sukhoi Pak-FA fighter?

Thank you.
Eugene

Thank you. And does it means that russians will produce 2 types of
future a/c: MFI and LFI .. or they are still looking for the right
choice between two concepts to accept in in RAF then?

"forties" wrote in message
oups.com...
Thank you. And does it means that russians will produce 2 types of
future a/c: MFI and LFI .. or they are still looking for the right
choice between two concepts to accept in in RAF then?

What the Russians are exhibiting interest in and what they can actually
produce are two different things. There is not really much likelihood of
their making any significant purchases of any new fighters for the
foreseeable future, based upon their financial problems (look where the new
Su-30's are going--not their own Air Force, for the most part). They are
having enough difficulty just getting enough money to give a portion of
their existing pilots sufficient flight hours to meet the most minimal of
proficiency standards, are tangling with trying to keep up their end of the
joint program with the Ukraine for the An-70 (which last I heard they are
again claiming they will buy...if they can scratch some funds together),
etc. Can't see any way they would be able to support development of two
major combat systems--the only way they will be able to develop *one* is to
get significant outside funding (i.e., India).

Brooks

Well, what is really strange that Russia has enough money (due to high
oil prices) to spend on military acquisitions..

"forties" wrote in message
ups.com...
Well, what is really strange that Russia has enough money (due to high
oil prices) to spend on military acquisitions..

What acquisitions? They have been buying danged little in the lines of new
equipment over the last ten years or so. In the aircraft sector, their
emphasis has been almost solely on export production; domestic work has
largely been limited to some upgrade work, and they have been having a hard
time paying for even *that*. A 2002 study indicated that Russia was putting
about 7.5% of the funds into aircraft development/production that they had
committed during the Soviet era--that level of funding is not going to
stretch very far.

Where is that second large (by their standards) aircraft carrier they built
going? India. Where are the Su-30's going? India, China, etc. So what are
these "military acquisitions" for domestic use that you speak of?

Brooks

Yes, It is a bit of a change. One can even imagine a joint development project using the Chinese
J-XX.
They will probably for reasons of pride produce several one off prototypes over the next twenty
years or so though.
-JWG
_________________________________________________

Kevin Brooks wrote in message ...

"forties" wrote in message
oups.com...
Thank you. And does it means that russians will produce 2 types of
future a/c: MFI and LFI .. or they are still looking for the right
choice between two concepts to accept in in RAF then?

What the Russians are exhibiting interest in and what they can actually
produce are two different things. There is not really much likelihood of
their making any significant purchases of any new fighters for the
foreseeable future, based upon their financial problems (look where the new
Su-30's are going--not their own Air Force, for the most part). They are
having enough difficulty just getting enough money to give a portion of
their existing pilots sufficient flight hours to meet the most minimal of
proficiency standards, are tangling with trying to keep up their end of the
joint program with the Ukraine for the An-70 (which last I heard they are
again claiming they will buy...if they can scratch some funds together),
etc. Can't see any way they would be able to support development of two
major combat systems--the only way they will be able to develop *one* is to
get significant outside funding (i.e., India).

Brooks

Yes, I believe that it is likely that the PAK-FA will try to fill both roles.

Russia still has a requirement for a heavy interceptor and given the decisions so far it seems
likely funding will someday be reserved for it. It will be ten or twenty years before there is
enough funding for it and it will have to compete with S-400 family SAMS. Russia needs such
interceptors for defending such a large frontier but they cost money. The Mig-31 weighs as much as
four unloaded Mig-29s and the fuel bills for it are shocking.

It will have to have very long range and will most likely (I am guessing here) could take two forms
either that of a low speed, extremely high altitude missile platform or a more costly fighter with
sprint speeds in combat of over mach 3.5! It is slightly possible that such a project could be based
off of the medium and heavy bombers (think T-60 and T-4MS) which will replace the Su-24 and Su-34.

Run a search on the mig project 7.01 to see the next stage above MFI!
-Jonas Weselake-George

forties wrote in message
oups.com...
Thank you. And does it means that russians will produce 2 types of
future a/c: MFI and LFI .. or they are still looking for the right
choice between two concepts to accept in in RAF then?

Barry George wrote in message ...
Yes, I believe that it is likely that the PAK-FA will try to fill both
roles.

Russia still has a requirement for a heavy interceptor and given the
decisions so far it seems
likely funding will someday be reserved for it. It will be ten or twenty
years before there is
enough funding for it and it will have to compete with S-400 family SAMS.
Russia needs such
interceptors for defending such a large frontier but they cost money. The
Mig-31 weighs as much as
four unloaded Mig-29s and the fuel bills for it are shocking.

Soviet Fulcrum-A's or C's with their 1980-vintage equipment are more a match
to F-16A's (that's the SMT upgrade is for, but there is no money). About the
MiG-31 fuel bills-well, T-6 is not JP-7 (if it is T-6 at all), and MiG-31's
replaced Tu-128's, the lagest fighters/interceptors ever used in operational
service! Maintenance is the problem, not fuel. I haven't herd about the
latest BM conversions.


It will have to have very long range and will most likely (I am guessing
here) could take two forms
either that of a low speed, extremely high altitude missile platform or a
more costly fighter with
sprint speeds in combat of over mach 3.5! It is slightly possible that such
a project could be based
off of the medium and heavy bombers (think T-60 and T-4MS) which will
replace the Su-24 and Su-34.

Su-24/32FN are not medium nor heavy bombers (Tu-22M3/4 and Tu-160 are).
According to Samoilovytch, related drawings went to Tupolev that supposedly
trashed them, and MS projects never went further than the model phase
(Tu-160 is the resulting aircraft, although T-4MS allegedly got the
contest). T-4 (prototype) and T-4MS (proposal) are as much different as
XB-70 and B-1 (actually, MS is some combination of those).


Run a search on the mig project 7.01 to see the next stage above MFI!
-Jonas Weselake-George

Sukhoi already got MFI project go-ahead, and MIG is struggling. There is
nothing much wrong with MAPO-MIG, except that Sukhoi had Simonov-and he is
much better salesman than Belyakov. According to Samoilovytch, there was
some funny equipment that was designed by "Sukhoi" when Simonov came there!

Nele

NULLA ROSA SINE SPINA

Soviet Fulcrum-A's or C's with their 1980-vintage equipment are more a
match
to F-16A's (that's the SMT upgrade is for, but there is no money).

And Fulcrums are superior than F-16* in all modifications by all
factors- be honest.

About the
MiG-31 fuel bills-well, T-6 is not JP-7 (if it is T-6 at all), and
MiG-31's
replaced Tu-128's, the lagest fighters/interceptors ever used in
operational
service!

Mig-31 replaced Mig-25.. Mig-31/Tu-128 replacement - is profanation..
like b-2 replaced b-29 largest US bomber..

Maintenance is the problem, not fuel. I haven't herd about the
latest BM conversions.

Maintanance of SR-71 is also a problem.. as well as for any a/c reaches
M3+. Agree?

-E