Sukhoi T-50 PAK FA

[2495]

However, in the process of tests American designers encountered the problem of combinability in the aircraft of low observability, supersonic cruising speed and high maneuverability. This did not make it possible to accept aircraft for the armament.

I just about sh1t the bed laughing when I got to that part. The F-22 is supersonic, highly manouverable and well armed.

This is just a joke if they are saying the F-22 failed and the PAK-FA will 'solve' these problems.

[-Julik- 4.GdKp]

Another article from indian Business Standard

http://www.business-standard.com/ind...ighter/381786/

[eATS]

Years ago, at the time when "plasma stealth" was famous, I was working in a plasma laboratory and we did some experiments on "plasma stealth". I can reveal that it works in a broad band of frequencies. It absorbed everything.
The problem - in the case of a fighter - is how to place a 500-1000kvolts power supply necessary to cover the entire fighter. Our experiment was a very small scale one - a small table - and we needed a 30kvolts power supply. This introduced another problem. Our measurement equipment - all electronic - needed to be at a considerable distance and inside of a Faraday cage. Also, no intense glow as many claimed that it would have had. In fact we needed a black room and CCD cameras to measure some plasma parameters. It was barely visible by the human eye.

I'm not breaking any secret. The experiment was just for fun and lasted a couple of days. My work at that time was closer to human medicine than military.

how does airspeed/friction effect plasma?

iv'e read B-2 could possibly have leading edge plama on certain leading edges on the fuselage.

[2495]

how does airspeed/friction effect plasma?

iv'e read B-2 could possibly have leading edge plama on certain leading edges on the fuselage.

An aircraft travelling fast inside an artificial plasma field would have to generate them at an amazing rate, otherwise the actual high speed airflow would have them behind the aircraft almost immediately. Slow and high, maybe, but fast? only if your generators were extremely powerful.

Next question is manoeuvering - if your cloaked up, cruising along, and a sensor caught you, sent a missile your way, would that actual plasma field stay attached to your airframe? or would it be destroyed by the very forces that keep you in the air? high, slow and gentle seems the answer.

To answer about the B-2. If it indeed does have this system, the internals would have to be shielded in some type of cage to prevent interference to its systems, and most important, if a plasma system is used on an airframe, it would as the plasma ions neutralise, they will give off light, and thus cold or hot plasma, you will create a detectable field for sensors.

[eATS]

An aircraft travelling fast inside an artificial plasma field would have to generate them at an amazing rate, otherwise the actual high speed airflow would have them behind the aircraft almost immediately. Slow and high, maybe, but fast? only if your generators were extremely powerful.

Next question is manoeuvering - if your cloaked up, cruising along, and a sensor caught you, sent a missile your way, would that actual plasma field stay attached to your airframe? or would it be destroyed by the very forces that keep you in the air? high, slow and gentle seems the answer.

To answer about the B-2. If it indeed does have this system, the internals would have to be shielded in some type of cage to prevent interference to its systems, and most important, if a plasma system is used on an airframe, it would as the plasma ions neutralise, they will give off light, and thus cold or hot plasma, you will create a detectable field for sensors.

i read a really good article years ago explaining this, pulsating it can regulate tempature. it would have to be calculated a along with enviormental conditions and airspeed in real time.

plus it can be pulsated in disruptive patterns.

it also said the thickness was spread out to almost nothing. but this is 80's article .

[vad_tfk]

i've got the question, maybe somebody will explain it for me:
as i see from russian forums PAK FA will be in some type of camo...
the question is: what's the reason of the camo using for stealth aircraft? all US types (F117, 35, 22 and B2 bombers) are black (natural colour of coating)...

[riverman83]

i've got the question, maybe somebody will explain it for me:
as i see from russian forums PAK FA will be in some type of camo...
the question is: what's the reason of the camo using for stealth aircraft? all US types (F117, 35, 22 and B2 bombers) are black (natural colour of coating)...

Maybe becouse stealth doesnt make the plane invisble to the eye, just the radar. Camo makes it harder to see I gess, atleast at daytime.

[Breakfast in Vegas]

i've got the question, maybe somebody will explain it for me:
as i see from russian forums PAK FA will be in some type of camo...
the question is: what's the reason of the camo using for stealth aircraft? all US types (F117, 35, 22 and B2 bombers) are black (natural colour of coating)...

As presumably no one here or on the forums has seen the PAK-FA, there is no reason to conclude whether it will be camouflaged or not.

Moreover, the majority of F-22s are in standard USAF colors, not black.

[riverman83]

Moreover, the majority of F-22s are in standard USAF colors, not black.

Not F-35 either i presume

[Dalmatian28]

I just about sh1t the bed laughing when I got to that part. The F-22 is supersonic, highly manouverable and well armed.

This is just a joke if they are saying the F-22 failed and the PAK-FA will 'solve' these problems.

They can avoid the biggest issues that F-22 has....weapon capacity!
PAK-FA is designed as a much bigger airplane so it might be able to carry much more internal weapons! That make it more useful and cost officiant!
They could add trust vectoring engines that can move their nozzles in all four side and that could ad to airplane maneuverability. F-22 can move their nozzles only up and down, if PAK-FA is able to add side movements it will allow it to preform some moves that are hard or impossible to do on the airplane without that type of vectoring.
Most importantly, they can learn from F-22 high maintenance cost and design airplane that is much cheaper to maintain! Nothing is perfect...there will always be room for improvement no matter what we are talking about.

[vad_tfk]

As presumably no one here or on the forums has seen the PAK-FA, there is no reason to conclude whether it will be camouflaged or not.

Moreover, the majority of F-22s are in standard USAF colors, not black.

hope we'll see very soon...
but if PAK'll get same camo like 35-37s it will be surprise for me...
...and you're right...i've checked...F-15 has same colours like f-22...
117s and Spirits - are black because they're mostly for the night operations...
thank you for the answers!

[metberkut]

F-15 has same colours like f-22...

No, look harder. They are not same colors. At all.

[vad_tfk]

Maybe becouse stealth doesnt make the plane invisble to the eye, just the radar. Camo makes it harder to see I gess, atleast at daytime.

iif i'm not mistaken,stealth ,first of all - low thermal(IR) and radar signature...
close combat cannon dogfighting stealth - that's awesome...generation 4+++fighters are 100% better in close combat with their maneuverability...
maneuverability of the F-22 and PAK - that's compromise between the aerodinamics and stealth properties

[artjomh]

If anyone gets close enough to PAK-FA (or F-22, for that matter) to enjoy looking at its camouflage pattern, then PAK-FA/F-22 has undoubtedly failed its mission.

Isn't the whole point of 5th generation fighters to be able to outshoot anything it can spot from BVR.... and outrun everything that they cannot shoot down. Dogfighting isn't really necessary or desired here. Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think that OLS/EOTS cares about camo patterns all that much.

Outrageous digital camo on the latest T-10 models is, IMHO, motivated by commercial concerns (i.e. making it pimpin' enough to sell really well to easily-impressed 3rd world countries). If you notice, by comparison, the Russian serial Su-27s sport a very conservative, toned-down, simple 3-color blue/gray pattern.


One of the T-10 prototypes from 1982


Current RuAF Su-27SM mainline version.

Crazy camos seem to be restricted mainly to export planes and special-purpose machines (like the Russian Knights aerobatic team).

[vad_tfk]

Berkut was black, hope T-50 will be in the same colour...