Sukhoi PAK-FA / FGFA: Updates,News & Discussions

[sancho]

True ...... but the belly of F35 and YF-23 looks much cleaner when compared to that of T-50 .

Does it?

(X35 and T50 tech demos)

The F35 is far away from having a clean design and has many rounded or protruding areas as well, contrary to other stealth fighter designs. The problem for the T50, is that people see the seperated part between the engines compared to the weapon bays of other fighters and conclude that it is worse, ignoring that even the T50 parts are shaped and not right angled, to divert radar waves. They might be more detectable at certain angles, but still are stealthy shaped. The YF23 also has no flat belly, but is designed with the same aim of increase the lift, just not to such a level as Russian fighter designs:

There are simply way too many misconception, based basically on hearsay about "flat bellys" or "S-Ducts", that makes people fall into conclusions and that although similar designs or tech features are used all over the world, by the most advanced aero companies. Strangely nobody doubts their capabilities, but when it comes to Sukhoi / Russia, it must be bad? That's too simple especially we still don't know so much of this tech demo version, let alone how the production versions, with finished design, propper coatings and materials will look like.

 

[sancho]

article is keen to bring up super maneuverability compared to the F22/35, but can't you counter than with a super maneuverable SR-AAM with the radars/helmets nowadays you only need to look at your target and it slaves the missile seeker or something and boom you got lock on after launch

That works against non stealth fighters, since they are detectable to cue weapons on them, while even an F22 or F35 will find it very hard to detect an enemy stealth fighter, especially not at BVR range, or to cue weapons on them. The F22 will get HMS and HOBS missle now, while it's doubtful that the F35 will be able to carry IR missiles internally at all (at least with meaning full A2G or BVR AAM configs), which makes stealth fighter vs stealth fighter combats likely to be similar to older gen dogfights and when you are neither maneuverable, nor have credible self defence capabilities with SR missiles, you will have a problem.

 

[ejaz007]

Indo-Russian Jet Program Finally Moves Forward

NEW DELHI — India and Russia have finally sorted out all sticky issues that have been holding back an agreement on the Fifth Generational Fighter Aircraft (FGFA) program, a Russian diplomat in India said, ending the opening chapter of a program expected to build 200 jets at a cost of $30 billion.

No Indian Defence Ministry official would confirm that all problems had been resolved, especially those related to workshare between the two countries.

But Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Vladimir Putin discussed the matter during a summit in Brazil in July,a source in the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) said. Both leaders agreed the FGFA deal should move forward, the source added.

In 2010, officials signed a preliminary design agreement between India’s state-owned Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. (HAL) and Russia’s Sukhoi Design Bureau to jointly produce the FGFA for use by both countries. A final accord, which will pave the way for production, has been pending because the Indian Air Force hasn’t approved the design and the manufacturers have not yet ironed out how much work each side does.

India has wanted to boost its workshare from 18 percent to more than 25 percent. Both countries have invested $295 million.

The Russian diplomat said India’s share will steadily increase to 40 percent as the Indian industry matures, especially with respect to incorporating sophisticated technology into the aircraft.

India and Russia will sign a final agreement on the program by year’s end, the MEA source said.

Russia reportedly has also agreed to the Indian Air Force’s demand that the jet be a two-seat design; the prototype is a one-seater.

HAL and Sukhoi Design Bureau have sorted the list of systems and subsystems that each side will supply, a HAL official said. According to the agreement, India and Russia will jointly develop the thrust vectoring system for the plane; HAL will supply the mission software and hardware in addition to the avionics suite of the aircraft.

India’s beyond visual range missile, the Astra, is being developed by India’s Defence Research and Development Organisation, along with Indo-Russian BrahMos supersonic cruise missile, which will be mounted on the FGFA, the Air Force official said.

The Sukhoi Design Bureau and HAL proposal for the jet is a derivative of the Russian T-50 aircraft, which is in the prototype stage.

The Indian Air Force expects to receive the first FGFA prototype by 2016 for user trials, followed by delivery of two more aircraft in 2018 and 2019. The FGFA is scheduled to get into production by 2021, the Air Force official added.

Four prototypes of the Russian T-50 aircraft have performed more than 300 test flights.

An Air Force official said that is because India entered the program at a late stage of development, which benefits the Russians. The Air Force “wanted to get involved in the FGFA from the drawing board stage and it appears the FGFA project is to finance the Russian FGFA project.”

The MEA official, however, said both countries benefit, adding that Putin and Modi reaffirmed that the project must move quickly as technical issues are sorted out between HAL and Sukhoi Design Bureau. ■

Email: vraghuvanshi@defensenews.com.

Indo-Russian Jet Program Finally Moves Forward | Defense News | defensenews.com

 

[trident2010]

I thought that now IAF was going for single seat T-50. I don't think we can have a prototype of 2 seat FGFA by 2016.

 

[Water Car Engineer]

 

[Harisudan]

Irrespective of the situation, the Relationship status quo and other critical parameters that pushes this deal forward, the bitter truth is that, India was added into the project to merely share the cost of funding the project only..This is what the Russians kept in house for us right from the beginning..
T-50 Project started way ahead of Indian Intervention into it and it all came down to this level now where the IAF wanted a decent amount of workshare in it right form the drawing board stage just as it entered into the project when the first prototype was already ready for taxi trials with all specs according to the Russian requirement and threat perception..
There is no such thing called as FGFA here..May be a T-50 Indian version with twin seat and few Indian Avionics and Mission computer..Just like the MKI deal, that is the bitter truth...
Where the IAF made themselves a bigger fools of them is that, Atleast for the MKI deal, we just bought the planes and upgraded it here with lower cost incurring, we never funded for building the Technology, failures in it, Trial runs etc, but with the FGFA deal the Russians made us do all that and yet they share close to 18% of workshare in the project but 50% cost share..??
I would like to share something here which I have came across somewhere,
Quote:
...
"New Delhi is particularly miffed with the fact that despite being an equal partner in the FGFA project in terms of financial contribution, Moscow is not keen to share technical details about its next generation stealth fighter PAK-FA, on which the Indian version of the combat jet will be based.

...
But much to the surprise of an Indian team present at the site, they were not allowed anywhere near the aircraft. India wanted to know the reasons for the fire but details were never shared, said sources. India has paid $295 million (Rs.1,785.19 crore) for the preliminary design, which was finalised last year, and it is only logical that Indian officials feel concerned about the status of the PAK-FA programme. The Indian side was not satisfied with the preliminary design and raised questions about maintenance issues, the engine, stealth features, weapon carriage system, safety and reliability. Sources said there could not be any progress until these issues were resolved.

But the queries remain unanswered even after a round of discussions between the two sides this month. The Russian side's common response to New Delhi's concerns has been: "Don't get emotional." Any further push on these issues results in talk of price escalation, sources said. For instance, the Indian Air Force had made it clear last year that it was not satisfied with the engine of the new fighter, which was based on the power plant for the Sukhoi-30. A change has been promised at an additional cost.

No Indian expert or pilot has had a long hard look at the PAK-FA jet to date. The Russians are not allowing Indian pilots to fly the aircraft, claiming foreign pilots are barred from flying in their airspace.."

Now I don't know whether to laugh or cry looking at the history of Mistakes committed By IAF be it LCA, be it MARUT, be it MMRCA, be it Mirage 2000 Upgrade, be it FGFA..
I'm speechless on looking at how these central auditing bodies such as CAG are letting go of this useless organisation called IAF...
I'm out of here.......

 

[halupridol]

Irrespective of the situation, the Relationship status quo and other critical parameters that pushes this deal forward, the bitter truth is that, India was added into the project to merely share the cost of funding the project only..This is what the Russians kept in house for us right from the beginning..
T-50 Project started way ahead of Indian Intervention into it and it all came down to this level now where the IAF wanted a decent amount of workshare in it right form the drawing board stage just as it entered into the project when the first prototype was already ready for taxi trials with all specs according to the Russian requirement and threat perception..
There is no such thing called as FGFA here..May be a T-50 Indian version with twin seat and few Indian Avionics and Mission computer..Just like the MKI deal, that is the bitter truth...
Where the IAF made themselves a bigger fools of them is that, Atleast for the MKI deal, we just bought the planes and upgraded it here with lower cost incurring, we never funded for building the Technology, failures in it, Trial runs etc, but with the FGFA deal the Russians made us do all that and yet they share close to 18% of workshare in the project but 50% cost share..??
I would like to share something here which I have came across somewhere,
Quote:
...
"New Delhi is particularly miffed with the fact that despite being an equal partner in the FGFA project in terms of financial contribution, Moscow is not keen to share technical details about its next generation stealth fighter PAK-FA, on which the Indian version of the combat jet will be based.

...
But much to the surprise of an Indian team present at the site, they were not allowed anywhere near the aircraft. India wanted to know the reasons for the fire but details were never shared, said sources. India has paid $295 million (Rs.1,785.19 crore) for the preliminary design, which was finalised last year, and it is only logical that Indian officials feel concerned about the status of the PAK-FA programme. The Indian side was not satisfied with the preliminary design and raised questions about maintenance issues, the engine, stealth features, weapon carriage system, safety and reliability. Sources said there could not be any progress until these issues were resolved.

But the queries remain unanswered even after a round of discussions between the two sides this month. The Russian side's common response to New Delhi's concerns has been: "Don't get emotional." Any further push on these issues results in talk of price escalation, sources said. For instance, the Indian Air Force had made it clear last year that it was not satisfied with the engine of the new fighter, which was based on the power plant for the Sukhoi-30. A change has been promised at an additional cost.

No Indian expert or pilot has had a long hard look at the PAK-FA jet to date. The Russians are not allowing Indian pilots to fly the aircraft, claiming foreign pilots are barred from flying in their airspace.."

Now I don't know whether to laugh or cry looking at the history of Mistakes committed By IAF be it LCA, be it MARUT, be it MMRCA, be it Mirage 2000 Upgrade, be it FGFA..
I'm speechless on looking at how these central auditing bodies such as CAG are letting go of this useless organisation called IAF...
I'm out of here.......

bro, how is IAF to be blamed for the above? they dont negotiate deals.
if anyone is to be blamed,thn its our MoD.
n about MKI,,,what d hell HAL learnt,,let me guess,how to use a screw driver.
ps-making mki's in home doesnt neccesarily mean that cost were lowered,I think it was the otherway around,,,,@sancho can u plz shed some light on d matter.

 

[Harisudan]

n about MKI,,,what d hell HAL learnt,,let me guess,how to use a screw driver.
ps-making mki's in home doesnt neccesarily mean that cost were lowered,I think it was the otherway around,,,

Halu pridol,
No, MKIs manufactured at home are somewhat cheaper..I din mean to say a whole lot cheaper but considerably cheaper by atleast 3 to 4 Million per aircraft if not more than that, comparing the terms such as freight, raw material cost differences inflation etc in India as well as Russia ..But also the quality of equipement we got is far better than the one procured form Russia..
Though we had to pay for each and every change that we made in the aircraft and also a premium charge of atleast 50% of the aircraft take away cost for every aircraft manufactured inside India excluding the Raw materials, but still it worked out to be far better for IAF and HAL..

how is IAF to be blamed for the above? they dont negotiate deals.
if anyone is to be blamed,thn its our MoD.

IAF is to be blamed because, they were not holding on to our own Defence PSUs when they needed it the most, like Navy stood..Now look at navy, they can manufacture almost every naval asset including Subs in India, with or without foreign assistance that is what mattered the most..
Navy had to go for krivak class frigate just because of all our shipyards running on overtime due to huge orders, not because Krivak class are a class apart from our Shivalik class frigates..
Navy involved itself in the project during every stages of development, it fought with them, it disagreed with them and took them on a toss but finally it was with them and got the things it wanted..
Now we all know IAC 1 and 2 are at different stages of developments in our Shipyards, IAC 1 is definitely incorporating many foreign systems than IAC 2 and the navy made it that way..It didn't ask for 100% Indegenous ships in all aspects..It just wanted something that could do the job which could be built in our country when we wanted..Thats it..When DRDO and other PSU shipyards told them that, they can do the transmission in house for IAC 1, Navy immediately said, no thanks, lets go for assistance from experienced people such as Fincentiarari(I hope I din misspell it) that way they could sort out the problem in six months and move on to the next critical area..
What did the airforce do??I remember an Airmarshal's comment about HAL and IAF relationsship during Mid 2005 that "We hardly meet once in two years" I think It was Airmarshal Madeswaran stating it..
When a force couldn't involve itself in the development of a project in each and every stage of it but yet go for humongous deals with foreign aircraft companies just for upgrading 50 odd Used up Fighters, when the same fighters which are comparatively newer planes are available cheaper than the upgrades..

 

[halupridol]

Halu pridol,
No, MKIs manufactured at home are somewhat cheaper..I din mean to say a whole lot cheaper but considerably cheaper by atleast 3 to 4 Million per aircraft if not more than that, comparing the terms such as freight, raw material cost differences inflation etc in India as well as Russia ..But also the quality of equipement we got is far better than the one procured form Russia..
Though we had to pay for each and every change that we made in the aircraft and also a premium charge of atleast 50% of the aircraft take away cost for every aircraft manufactured inside India excluding the Raw materials, but still it worked out to be far better for IAF and HAL..
..

I dont think manufacturing MKI's domesticaly was aimed to bring down cost in the first place,,,its main aim was to help build industrial base n know how which in turn was supposed to contribute in developing an indigenous fighter.
now lets see d results,,,after making hundreds of MKIs,which is a top 4+ gen. fighter,,,,what do they have to show for it?
tejas??sitara??,,,I mean wth?in contrast look at our northern neighbours..

IAF is to be because, they were not holding on to our own Defence PSUs when they needed it the most, like Navy stood..Now look at navy, they can manufacture almost every naval asset including Subs in India, with or without foreign assistance that is what mattered the most..
Navy had to go for krivak class frigate just because of all our shipyards running on overtime due to huge orders, not because Krivak class are a class apart from our Shivalik class frigates..
Navy involved itself in the project during every stages of development, it fought with them, it disagreed with them and took them on a toss but finally it was with them and got the things it wanted..
Now we all know IAC 1 and 2 are at different stages of developments in our Shipyards, IAC 1 is definitely incorporating many foreign systems than IAC 2 and the navy made it that way..It didn't ask for 100% Indegenous ships in all aspects..It just wanted something that could do the job which could be built in our country when we wanted..Thats it..When DRDO and other PSU shipyards told them that, they can do the transmission in house for IAC 1, Navy immediately said, no thanks, lets go for assistance from experienced people such as Fincentiarari(I hope I din misspell it) that way they could sort out the problem in six months and move on to the next critical area..
What did the airforce do??I remember an Airmarshal's comment about HAL and IAF relationsship during Mid 2005 that "We hardly meet once in two years" I think It was Airmarshal Madeswaran stating it..
When a force couldn't involve itself in the development of a project in each and every stage of it but yet go for humongous deals with foreign aircraft companies just for upgrading 50 odd Used up Fighters, when the same fighters which are comparatively newer planes are available cheaper than the upgrades..

here I agree with u,,,,there is a disconnect between the intended end user n hal....
IAF shud have emulated the IN,which they didnt or cudnt(hal themselves seem reluctant of for such agreement).

 

[Harisudan]

I dont think manufacturing MKI's domesticaly was aimed to bring down cost in the first place,,,its main aim was to help build industrial base n know how which in turn was supposed to contribute in developing an indigenous fighter.
now lets see d results,,,after making hundreds of MKIs,which is a top 4+ gen. fighter,,,,what do they have to show for it?
tejas??sitara??,,,I mean wth?in contrast look at our northern neighbours..

The main intention was not to bring down cost but as you said to create a manufacturing line in India and to familiarise on incorporating Indian made equipments in substitute to that of Russian ones..
They were also not inteneded to be taken as a Tech know how transfer or some case like that..
MKI's sole purpose indianisation is to make sure that the spares are available and there are no cost over runs during times of crisis and also to make the upgrades easier and customisation easier..

 

[PARIKRAMA]

Certainly the esteemed members had pointed things correctly but there needs to be few delicate things clear. the MKI program initially is like assembling from SKD kits(sumthing similar to assembling an imported car). it was good as we got first hand experience of complex war machines and tried to do some localisation which reduces dependency for spares abroad. its a very slow process as lots of know and assimilation of tech know how and knowledge versus industrial capability coming up is never linear.
on the other hand, this process meant when it comes to crucial tech like Engines we are still more on beginner tech level. A conformation for this is the fact that kaveri engine even though is good for UAVs but is still not capable enough for any aircrafts even LCAs.

I do think India should have just followed the MKI route for FGFA and invested the money for more sophisticated LCA MKIII may be fully stealth version or may be an AMCA project. We may not accept but fact is our industry is still not mature enough to handle say 50% work share for a behemoth project like FGFA.. suppose we had say a full fledged capability like say engine design, development, testing and production with live usage in our own jets then it wud have made sense for us to ask for such a work share. Even if we insist that we should get work share since we "paid"for it, we will only see more delays and missing of targeted deadlines as we will need first the industrial capability to execute such a work share. the capability does not come from HAL alone but rather a complex industrial zone which can provide HAL with all its requirements in a timely manner.

WE can always say russians squeezed us, but we have to first accept that we were not adequate to begin with.if we were then we would have accepted a proper JVs with say snecma long back for engines. just my thots really.. btw the snail pace with which our decision making goes, we cant even do 15% workshare leave 50%.

 

[sancho]

I dont think manufacturing MKI's domesticaly was aimed to bring down cost in the first place,,,its main aim was to help build industrial base n know how which in turn was supposed to contribute in developing an indigenous fighter.
now lets see d results,,,after making hundreds of MKIs,which is a top 4+ gen. fighter,,,,what do they have to show for it?
tejas??sitara??,,,I mean wth?in contrast look at our northern neighbours..

here I agree with u,,,,there is a disconnect between the intended end user n hal....
IAF shud have emulated the IN,which they didnt or cudnt(hal themselves seem reluctant of for such agreement).

Licence production only means, you learn how to use certain techs and materials, not how to develop them, that's why the licence production of fighters at HAL, doesn't make them automatically able to develop fighters too or engines too. It also is important to keep in mind what kind of techs will be transfered, which in MKIs case was pretty basic and mainly for airframe and engine parts. M-MRCA is aimed to not only increase the ToT of MKI, but also to get more critical techs. However, these are licence productions, while FGFA is a joint development in the same manner as the Brahmos development!

- Brahmos / FGFA are co-owned and joined developments
- Brahmos / FGFA are based on Russian airframe and propulsion, with minor Indian contribution in the early stages
- Brahmos / FGFA will jointly be marketed for exports
- Brahmos / FGFA gives India the chance to get Russian high techs and modify them according to our needs (anti ship, land attack, land based, sub and air launched varients), with increasing Indian contribution during the project
- Brahmos / FGFA will set the base for further developments (Brahmos1 => Brahmos M => Hypersonic Brahmos, FGFA early version => twin seat FGFA => 6th gen fighter???)
- Brahmos / FGFA offer India techs and systems that we can't develop on our own for several years


Btw, HAL is not the developer of LCA, they are only the manufacturer. DRDO is the developer and ADA the designer of HAL, so problems in the design and development can't be blamed at HAL!
The disconnect between the operator and the developer are often criticized by the IAF and IN, because that's not what they want but mainly what DRDO wants. Be it LCA, AMCA, or AWACS India, DRDO doesn't ask IAF if they want these developments, only what specs such a project should have and if they got the specs, they don't even include the forces in the development, but provide the "developed" product to them only for certification. That's also why IN badly criticized DRDO for the N-LCA development, but when you have a organisation that has a monopoly in nearly every field of defence developments in India, without taking them accountable for their work, it's not that surprising that they act on their own accord and interests.

 

[kaykay]

Russia's fifth-generation fighter receives first sets of new electronic warfare system | Russia & India Report

 

[RKO]

Sure im not going see this aircraft in india, not in this decade.. For amca should i say 2040

 

[Krate M]

In December Putin is visiting India and their ambassador has started to make kind of statements which imply a lot of defense deals are going to be on the table. Till then best approach is wait and watch.