F-16.net

which plane is better for you and why?To my mind F-22 is more "invisible" but N036 Belka should be more effective than APG-77,also as i know RUssia developing new missiles for PaK Fa ,and of course new type-30 engines.

N036 more effective than AN/APG-77? How exactly?
By using Russian phantom (non-existent) GaN T/R modules?

I'd say there is currently no comparison as F-22 is fully in service and is a very mature system. PAK FA will need to get those type-30 engines and all the avionics to operational capabilities before there is any comparison. This seems to be taking a long time and it will likely take at least 10 years from now and I think that's fairly optimistic in any case. PAK FA looks way less stealthy than F-22 and I'm sure the difference is big in that area.

There is no way than N036 is more effective or better than AN/APG-77. Russian semiconductor industry is far smaller and technologically far behind US one and it's very unlikely they can make similar or better components for their radars. N036 also has lower T/R module count which makes that even less likely as they'd have to make significantly better modules to equal or surpass AN/APG-77 in capability.

sukhoi35 wrote:which plane is better for you and why?To my mind F-22 is more "invisible" but N036 Belka should be more effective than APG-77,also as i know RUssia developing new missiles for PaK Fa ,and of course new type-30 engines.

How is the type 30 engine development going? Significantly delayed again!!!! Nooooooooooooo

Just asking out of curiosity and because I am do not know much with naming nomenclature.

We are used to reading Russian aircraft with names like Tu-22, MIG 25, Mig 15, Su 27, Su 35 and so on and so forth
So it is like the design bureau name with a model number after. Does the Pak FA have a designation like
this? Since the Plane is made by Sukhoi, shouldn't it have a name like Su-xx where xx is like a model number?
Why is it still called the Pak-FA?

Thanks in advance.

sdkf251 wrote:Just asking out of curiosity and because I am do not know much with naming nomenclature.

We are used to reading Russian aircraft with names like Tu-22, MIG 25, Mig 15, Su 27, Su 35 and so on and so forth
So it is like the design bureau name with a model number after. Does the Pak FA have a designation like
this? Since the Plane is made by Sukhoi, shouldn't it have a name like Su-xx where xx is like a model number?
Why is it still called the Pak-FA?

Thanks in advance.

PAK FA is DefMin acronym for a program, it is not a plane. Just like ATF or JSF etc. It stands for "перспективный авиационный комрлекс фронтовой авиации" - "future (promising) aircraft for frontline (tactical fighter) aviation". T-50 is Sukhoi's in-house name for the prototype, same as T-10 is various Flanker models and T-6 was prototype for the Fencer. It will become Su-## when it gets accepted into service.

Also, please use proper names for Russian/Soviet aircraft, it bothers me more than it should. Su-## (Su is short for Sukhoi, a surname; not SU) an MiG-## (stands for Mikoyan i Gurevich/Mikoyan and Gurevich, also surnames, not MIG and not Mig).

sukhoi35 wrote:but N036 Belka should be more effective than APG-77

Of course.

hornetfinn wrote:N036 also has lower T/R module count which makes that even less likely as they'd have to make significantly better modules to equal or surpass AN/APG-77 in capability.

I find this pretty weird also, N036 main radiator has merely 1500 T/R modules, even less than APG-81. Is PAK-FA nose cone that small?

eloise wrote:

hornetfinn wrote:N036 also has lower T/R module count which makes that even less likely as they'd have to make significantly better modules to equal or surpass AN/APG-77 in capability.

I find this pretty weird also, N036 main radiator has merely 1500 T/R modules, even less than APG-81. Is PAK-FA nose cone that small?

It has more to do with T/R density.

wrightwing wrote:It has more to do with T/R density.

Destiny won't be too different i think, as element spacing has their limit

"

PAK FA is DefMin acronym for a program, it is not a plane. Just like ATF or JSF etc. It stands for "перспективный авиационный комрлекс фронтовой авиации" - "future (promising) aircraft for frontline (tactical fighter) aviation". T-50 is Sukhoi's in-house name for the prototype, same as T-10 is various Flanker models and T-6 was prototype for the Fencer. It will become Su-## when it gets accepted into service.

Also, please use proper names for Russian/Soviet aircraft, it bothers me more than it should. Su-## (Su is short for Sukhoi, a surname; not SU) an MiG-## (stands for Mikoyan i Gurevich/Mikoyan and Gurevich, also surnames, not MIG and not Mig)"

Many thanks for the reply! Now at least I know why they have no Su designation yet.

eloise wrote:

wrightwing wrote:It has more to do with T/R density.

Destiny won't be too different i think, as element spacing has their limit

Element spacing limits how tightly you can pack them, but not the other way around. The limitations for the Russians is packaging the modules small enough to fit as many as US manufacturers can.

arian wrote:
Element spacing limits how tightly you can pack them, but not the other way around. The limitations for the Russians is packaging the modules small enough to fit as many as US manufacturers can.

Actually there is also limits to how far apart you can pack them

F-22 will win in any realistic engagement. Russia is lacking in advanced Air-air missiles often times you see Sukohis using R-27s. The amount of missiles they can afford is not numerous to gain any form of air dominance. The Surface-to-Air Missile will be their primary weapon with fighters supporting that.

On paper, the F-22 is likely to be a bit more stealthy, a bit faster, and better avionics.

eloise wrote:Is PAK-FA nose cone that small?

As far as i know PAK-FA's nose is smaller than Flanker series