Forum: Technology

shep1978 wrote:

primorsky wrote:

Agreed. More likely. At least frontal RCS is supposed to be very low.

With those intakes? You've got to be kdding.

It uses variable intake ram, so there is a movable radar "filter" between opening of intake and turbine blade. This one is all over the net.

I for one also think they coat the first turbine too.

F-16.net Sponsor

Interesting photo (or composite?) supposedly of the chinese "PAK-FENG":

Art render:

[quote="shep1978"]Big deal what the F-117 or aby oither aircraft used to block waves as the point is the T-50 has nothing, yes nothing blocking the waves and all other solutions bar curved inlets will lead to a performance loss.

Shep - your bias is too much.
A diagram of the F-50 made up from the photos - also an actual Photo of the T-50 with lines drawn in that shows how the engines are not in line with the intakes. They also point out that the intakes have to go up and inwards to avoid the wheel wells on the Pak Fa. It probably has curved ducts anyway. Most on other Forums agree.

Diagrams and colorful circles are meaningless. Put about 3 degrees angle of attack on the airplane and those pretty circles line up very well. I'm not saying the design is a poor one, but the circles prove nothing.

johnwill wrote:

Diagrams and colorful circles are meaningless. Put about 3 degrees angle of attack on the airplane and those pretty circles line up very well. I'm not saying the design is a poor one, but the circles prove nothing.

johnwill,

In your professional opinion (see my Growler thread for public apology Embarassed

), does the PAK-FA represent a viable warfighting implement, or is it just another airshow tumbler as I suspect?

Apology accepted, no problem. Cheers

So much of warfighting these days involves avionics, stealth, missiles, etc, that I really can't say how effective it will be. I simply know nothing of those aspects of fighter design. However, as a fighter airplane, I find much to admire about it. It may be just another airshow tumbler, as you suspect. Guess we'll have to just wait and see. Speaking of airshow tumbling, I'm thinking they should try a 360 degree yaw maneuver, putting those all-moving verticals to good use.

Pugachev's Doughnut.

Very Happy

johnwill wrote:

Apology accepted, no problem. Cheers

So much of warfighting these days involves avionics, stealth, missiles, etc, that I really can't say how effective it will be. I simply know nothing of those aspects of fighter design. However, as a fighter airplane, I find much to admire about it. It may be just another airshow tumbler, as you suspect. Guess we'll have to just wait and see. Speaking of airshow tumbling, I'm thinking they should try a 360 degree yaw maneuver, putting those all-moving verticals to good use.

Layman's question. Those verticals seem a little short. Will they lose their grip at high AoA?

My thoughts from the first view. The tails appear to be too short to be effective at high AoA, but being movable, would make the best use of what little airflow there is. One thing might help, the movable flaps forward of the engine inlets. Their deflection could scoop (that's a technical term meaning to divert) more air over the top of the fuselage and provide more air for the tails to use.

Good one, OL. LMAO

I'm new here so disregard me if I'm wrong, but I disagree with your assessments of its yaw control and high alpha yaw stability. Its primary control for low-speed high-alpha yaw control would be the fully rotatable 3D TVC, and the small vertical stabilizer's all-moving capability gives them plenty of grip for yaw control at higher speeds (and thus lower alpha) where they are more effective than the TVC.

Pugachev's Doughnut. LOL

Can I hit a "Like" button for the Pugachev's Doughnut?

Here is interview about Russian engine production capabilities:
http://www.russia-today.ru/tema-nomera/ ... ilcam.html

Quote:

Diagrams and colorful circles are meaningless. Put about 3 degrees angle of attack on the airplane and those pretty circles line up very well. I'm not saying the design is a poor one, but the circles prove nothing.

I thought it proved something - there is a better diagram obviously done by a design engineer or somebody skilled elsewhere on the net showing possible curved ducts - add to that the intake blocker video put out by Sukoi is enough to convince me they have it covered well. Any angle of attack.

Nice video of the T-50 in action at the MAKS airshow in Moscow

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QKj-gX7Q2X8

notice the foreplanes ahead of the intakes, and how much they move.

Also, it has been a year and a half since first flight and we are seeing this kind of demo. It was years before we saw anything like this from the F-22, and hopefuly not for the F-35.

I must have missed something.

Most of what I saw there could have been done on instruments.

(Ripley: "Is there anything I can do?"

Apone: "I don't know. What can you do?")

Very Happy

Forum: Technology

Sukhoi T-50 PAK-FA