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

[Yeti]

Another thread ruined! @Oscar please clean this up we use this thread to post important info for PAK-FA

 

[notsuperstitious]

Madman on the loose. Please ignore his weird offtopic rants guys.

 

[Roybot]

You have a pair of eyes I am assuming. If you take a look at the airframe (close up) and if you have a software that can let you zoom 40X into pixels, you'll see it. It looks low quality.!

May I know the name of this software that you are using? Thanks in advance.

 

[Sergi]

I've heard weird and creepy stories of your countrymen's affection to teen agers here in the US and in the UK. There were actually some news too not too long ago. So I'll let it pass. Second, I do have an issue with you. That is, you guys jump up in down when it comes to you. For example, the other day, I posted a link to where they talked about Hindu terrorism that has killed hundreds of thousands of people WITHIN India. But the terrorist belong to the elite ruling parties like BJP, RSS, Shiv Sena. So...you guys went Up and Down. You guys said EVERYTHING but take the blame and condemn terrorism in ALL shapes and forms. You guys scream out loud when someone does it to you but when it's a Hindu.....you guys do exactly what you are doing here. BUT condemning your countrymen for killing Christians and Muslims in cold blood, raping their women, etc. It's all on youtube and on other sites.
So similarly, here, the FACT is ONE and ONE only. The crap Russia builds for you, is lower quality. PERIOD. If the Su-30 was SUCH a great plane....there wasn't any need for India to spend billions of dollars with France. Spare me the crap about relationships and how you have so much money (after our beloved politicians donated 13 million jobs to you guys, including the ones that would otherwise have gone to servicemen coming home, but that's a different topic). So....the Russian Sh1t and the Chinese stuff is inferior in quality. The WHOLE world knows it. If you want to argue about it like a child with your buddies who can't condemn Hindu terrorism but would troll their lives away.....keep going. Again, the quality is, was and always been inferior. There is no doubt about it. The Quality Controls are also much different. If you have a different opinion about it. Sure, you can have it and troll for next ten years. It doesn't change the facts!

Last, why do I have to leave? Why don't you guys learn how to be in a productive discussion instead of anti Chinese, Pakistani, and Bangladesh rants but when your own people do terrorism and have training camps in India....you turn your eyes and act like you don't know? Condemn it. Anyway. You can write further obsessed posts to this or the mods will clean it up. I don't care. Again, the Russian and Chinese equipment is always inferior from a quality and durability's standpoint. Whoever disagrees to it, is on stuff he shouldn't be smoking. Have fun trolling!

So basically you want to tell me you got that affection form my country men ??? that's cool. You pick up something

Wow somebody was telling Mods to close this thread because of some Offtopic posts. Did you know who that was ??? I need a quality analysis of e Bolded part from him you really are hurt or pissed. Get well soon buddy

The carp Russians build is for them and for India is good for us. Why are you obessed with that ??? Go ask your country men ( if you really are one with that Name ) why they always try to counter Russian planes when they are so inferior.

And about terrorist, you might be a specialist in Muslim terrorism. I don't wana comment on that here. Link me the thread we see that there. By the way you seemed pissed with Hindus. Surely a hindu hating Muslim I guess . keep up the hate. That's you can do

I didn't say you leave. I said if you have problem with something you should just not show any attention to it. But you are posting like its a issue of life and death for you obsession is bad.

Last thing; one of the greatest thinkers of the time said knowledge is waste without politeness. You happen to know the name pal ???
And one more who said the one who underestimate his enemy is always greeted with surprises


Anyways your are proving your "username" a good choice
PS: I am from Maharashtra and we took good care of our "orangzaib". You are welcome to my state

 

[MilSpec]

I've heard weird and creepy stories of your countrymen's affection to teen agers here in the US and in the UK. There were actually some news too not too long ago. So I'll let it pass. Second, I do have an issue with you. That is, you guys jump up in down when it comes to you. For example, the other day, I posted a link to where they talked about Hindu terrorism that has killed hundreds of thousands of people WITHIN India. But the terrorist belong to the elite ruling parties like BJP, RSS, Shiv Sena. So...you guys went Up and Down. You guys said EVERYTHING but take the blame and condemn terrorism in ALL shapes and forms. You guys scream out loud when someone does it to you but when it's a Hindu.....you guys do exactly what you are doing here. BUT condemning your countrymen for killing Christians and Muslims in cold blood, raping their women, etc. It's all on youtube and on other sites.
So similarly, here, the FACT is ONE and ONE only. The crap Russia builds for you, is lower quality. PERIOD. If the Su-30 was SUCH a great plane....there wasn't any need for India to spend billions of dollars with France. Spare me the crap about relationships and how you have so much money (after our beloved politicians donated 13 million jobs to you guys, including the ones that would otherwise have gone to servicemen coming home, but that's a different topic). So....the Russian Sh1t and the Chinese stuff is inferior in quality. The WHOLE world knows it. If you want to argue about it like a child with your buddies who can't condemn Hindu terrorism but would troll their lives away.....keep going. Again, the quality is, was and always been inferior. There is no doubt about it. The Quality Controls are also much different. If you have a different opinion about it. Sure, you can have it and troll for next ten years. It doesn't change the facts!

Last, why do I have to leave? Why don't you guys learn how to be in a productive discussion instead of anti Chinese, Pakistani, and Bangladesh rants but when your own people do terrorism and have training camps in India....you turn your eyes and act like you don't know? Condemn it. Anyway. You can write further obsessed posts to this or the mods will clean it up. I don't care. Again, the Russian and Chinese equipment is always inferior from a quality and durability's standpoint. Whoever disagrees to it, is on stuff he shouldn't be smoking. Have fun trolling!

^^^ On a Pakfa thread?? @Aeronaut saheb dekhiye zarra

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Apparently I made a mistake by calling out the obvious as it was an INDIAN product. So of course, it had to be nothing but perfect. And now the whole India hates me. My man, once, I had the privilege to work with a structural engineer when I was in college. He looked at a structure from about 100 yards away and 50 feet below it. Looked again, then put his glasses on and told me, there are two 'hairline cracks' at 11'o clock. This structure will fail the inspection and and it should be deemed grounded.
I was looking and looking and looking....no where could I see the 'hairline crack' that he could see. And he had glasses and was about 40 years older than me, had served in Vietnam, etc. Anyway, I begged to differ as I couldn't see what he saw. I had to go up the ladder and go pretty much next to the structure to see it. And I had 20-20 vision. We left. Two days later....it was moved to structural integrity testing and then....bam, the repairs were requested....... tells me about visual inspection!!!
And yes, I can have a discussion with a used car salesman just as well as with the executives from companies like Shell and GE, etc and just as well with a doctor, the store manager and with a Scientist working with Genetics!!!
In my prior life, I've done many thing. This is the beauty of America. We don't always follow one line to be a doctor or engineer or a pilot. We start when we are 16 on our own and we end up with anything we wanted to achieve during our life's journey. Or some, just end up enjoying life. There are no weird socio-economic-cultural forces preventing us from doing what we want to do!!! That is why the US IS the land of opportunity and will always be the land of opportunity!!

Thank you for that long story. North America is the land of opportunities. And a land of unparalleled success. There is no doubt about it. And it utilises the best talent from all over the world. Including from countries like Viet Nam and India. Which is why I earn my green-backs here. So that is not new to anybody. Anybody with some felicity with words can write about that.
Including used-car salesmen.

Now apart from that and other generalities what else is there to be said- that there are supermen in North America?
Even that Structural Engineer that you mentioned has to fall back on Lab Tests to KNOW that something is wrong. There is a difference between ESTIMATION and VERIFICATION. All scientific processes have to be completed by VERIFICATION.
Otherwise your Structural Engineer friend would have put all structural testing Labs out of business; which has not happened! And he would've been known as "god's gift to engineering"!
That has not happened yet either, I'm sure.

 

[arbit]

Guys orangzaib has trolled you all! Its better not to reply and provoke him, else he will keep on unloading crap by the bucket.. and you will fall to his considerable charms.Lol
And by charms i mean verbal diarrhea.
Peace.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

I had the privilege to work with a structural engineer when I was in college. He looked at a structure from about 100 yards away and 50 feet below it. Looked again, then put his glasses on and told me, there are two 'hairline cracks' at 11'o clock. This structure will fail the inspection and and it should be deemed grounded.
I was looking and looking and looking....no where could I see the 'hairline crack' that he could see. And he had glasses and was about 40 years older than me, had served in Vietnam, etc. Anyway, I begged to differ as I couldn't see what he saw. I had to go up the ladder and go pretty much next to the structure to see it. And I had 20-20 vision. We left. Two days later....it was moved to structural integrity testing and then....bam, the repairs were requested....... tells me about visual inspection!!!

No muy amigo; that says nothing at all about visual inspection!
Your Structural Inspector on the basis of "good eye-sight and experience (probably)" ESTIMATED that there is a problem. When you climbed up that ladder and took a closer look, you confirmed his observation about "a hairline crack".

Then as you said:"Two days later....it was moved to structural integrity testing "
That is where the VERIFICATION of an observation took place.

Then as you again said:" the repairs were requested".
That is where the VERIFICATION led to RECTIFICATION.

Did the Structural Engineer's initial observation (i.e. ESTIMATION) directly lead to the repairs (i.e. RECTIFICATION) ??
So that speaks for the merits/limitations of VISUAL INSPECTION.
Those rules apply anywhere, whether in USA, Canada, Russia, China, India, Singapore, Egypt or anywhere else.
Without Deviations.
VERIFICATION is the very basis of QAQC. Or any Scientific Method/Process.

 

[DARKY]

Number 52 showing its TVC controls.

52 is being used for testing the engine and maneuverability.... 51 and 53 for Radar and other electronics.

 

[Viper0011.]

Even that Structural Engineer that you mentioned has to fall back on Lab Tests to KNOW that something is wrong. There is a difference between ESTIMATION and VERIFICATION. All scientific processes have to be completed by VERIFICATION.
Otherwise your Structural Engineer friend would have put all structural testing Labs out of business; which has not happened! And he would've been known as "god's gift to engineering"!
That has not happened yet either, I'm sure.

So.....what exactly are you and your cousins who are just trying to troll life to silliness...trying to say exactly? I don't get it. With regards to my post where this saga stated from. My point, and I reiterate is that the Quality Control in the US made products for the military is much higher than other countries......SECOND: the US wouldn't allow planes to fly if there is ANY possibility (even remote possibility) or a flight risk or the surface getting heated up and causing any threats to the pilots life or a possibility of losing a plane, etc. Just take a look at the maintenance costs of jets like SU-30, Mig-29, etc vs. the F-16, F-18, etc.

Instead of writing posts JUST to respond and troll.....try to provide me with proof as to why do you think what I said above is incorrect. Show me the Russian, Chinese and the US process engineering, QC protocols, etc that are either superior to the US or are below standards (what I am saying). There is really no third option. If you can show me the Russian and the Chinese have better process engineering, computing and military hardware. I'll respectfully apologies and move on.
You can't just write essays as a community service and try to 'get even' for a different thread where you guys can't speak due to the lack of facts. I've written a lot of stuff about Hindu terrorism and the their training camps in India. In those threads, you guys don't speak because I am giving you facts and you don't like those. On this thread, you are jumping up and down as a community because you think this is a place to get even. Not stupid bro. Just answer my questions above with FACTS and one of us will back down!

 

[sancho]

China is a technological peer to Russia in 'stealth'. May be give a few months short ? Were we somewhat surprised at the Chinese? Yes. But the Russians were outright shocked senseless.

More than debatable, especially when you see that nothing that China developed wrt RCS is really based on their developments, but on Russian and US designs.
The Russians on the other side, came up with something that nobody expected. A stealth fighter design, based on their experience with the lift body design (Flankers and Mig 29s), so a further evolution of their own capabilities!

The only reason that the Russians have to catch up is, that they lost the cold war in the economical and political sense. They couldn't keep up the spending like the US could, lost their partners in the Soviet Union and had to completely refine themselfs. That's what they do now with India help on the one side, but also by opening to western countries and their technical capabilities on the other side (Europe, Israel).
Their scientists on the other side wasn't worse or less capable than US once at all, neither are Europeans less capable than US counterparts (which Americans often falsely believe), but the simple fact that no other single country is speding so much on defence developments and arms gives you the lead so far.
However, that is where China comes in to play, because they are technologically far behind the US, western countries and even Russia so far, but are the only one that can compete with the US in spending. That's why they are catching up in all areas so fast, that's why they are the only threat to the US as a superpower and that's why not even the US can't handle them alone (new Asian area, new Asian partners, increased interest in India...).

Money rules the world and you will see US developments going slower in the coming years, since you are close to where the Soviet Union came during the cold war, while China is still on the fast track.

 

[MilSpec]

So.....what exactly are you and your cousins who are just trying to troll life to silliness...trying to say exactly? I don't get it. With regards to my post where this saga stated from. My point, and I reiterate is that the Quality Control in the US made products for the military is much higher than other countries......SECOND: the US wouldn't allow planes to fly if there is ANY possibility (even remote possibility) or a flight risk or the surface getting heated up and causing any threats to the pilots life or a possibility of losing a plane, etc. Just take a look at the maintenance costs of jets like SU-30, Mig-29, etc vs. the F-16, F-18, etc.

Instead of writing posts JUST to respond and troll.....try to provide me with proof as to why do you think what I said above is incorrect. Show me the Russian, Chinese and the US process engineering, QC protocols, etc that are either superior to the US or are below standards (what I am saying). There is really no third option. If you can show me the Russian and the Chinese have better process engineering, computing and military hardware. I'll respectfully apologies and move on.
You can't just write essays as a community service and try to 'get even' for a different thread where you guys can't speak due to the lack of facts. I've written a lot of stuff about Hindu terrorism and the their training camps in India. In those threads, you guys don't speak because I am giving you facts and you don't like those. On this thread, you are jumping up and down as a community because you think this is a place to get even. Not stupid bro. Just answer my questions above with FACTS and one of us will back down!

Two of the positions you took in your earlier posts were pretty clear:

1. You claimed poor quality in composites and AL structures based on a picture

> When I asked you to tell me how did you determine "poor quality in composite panes"/ AL panels, you did not answer with any observations that show any quality related parameters of the structure.

2.Next you claimed this structure to be a flight risk which would never be allowed to fly in Boeing or LM.

> The above claim implies that you are aware of TRV process for either LM or Boeing, hence I asked you specifically about the regulation on flight testing of prototypes. My follow up question was how did you deem that these are flight risks.
>>Your answer gave no specifics of TRV guidelines for LM/boeing, your blanket generalized statement was to harp on superior QA process employed by US. (which wasn't the point of contention), apart from that you claim that US firms would not fly an aircraft with "alleged metal patch work".

To be factual :
>Identify the "alleged low quality" composites, Specifying the flaw that you have identified in composite panels and AL panels from the picture of the aircraft as you have claimed. And If you do identify any flaws especially in composites, please enlighten us on the process of this breakthrough technology that you have employed.

>Please specify the TRV flight parameters for manned flights employed by LM/Boeing that you are aware of

> Please identify how the prototype T50, is a flight risk, explain how" metal surfaces that fully exposed" can take upto mach 3 speeds have become flight risks. Also please help us understand how you have evaluated the thermal properties composites and alloys on the t50 from the image to deem it a flight risk.

Please be civil and specific, without mentioning shiv sena, rss, 18 yr old teenagers, kashmir, gujrat if you can...


Addendum
Images of F 35 without complete surface treatment on test flight.

Images of f22 raptor without complete surface treatment on test flight in 2009.

 

[gambit]

More than debatable, especially when you see that nothing that China developed wrt RCS is really based on their developments, but on Russian and US designs.

The Chinese does not care.

The Chinese members here will take great offense at the argument that the J-20 is based off the MIG 1.44, but that is the fact and truth. Yes, Chinese designers and engineers are well learned and trained enough, but so far, China have made no conceptual/theoretical and engineering breakthroughs in aviation in general, let alone military aviation. If you take a cube and smooth out the sharp corners and edges, you will get a lower RCS. But you will STILL have a cube as the foundation.

It is not like comparing the conceptual/theoretical and engineering differences between an F-15 and the B-2. For a flight controls engineer, he has the vertical stab to work with on %99.999 of aircraft designs. But the flying wing will throw him for a loop. How is he going keep the aircraft stable and make coordinated turns? He must still give the pilot rudder pedals. But where are the rudders to start? The pilot will know that he is flying an aircraft that have no yaw axis stabilization surface, but he still need a method to turn the aircraft. So does the flight control computer. Both do not care if there is a yaw axis stabilization device or not. They just want something there.

THAT is what I am talking about.

But ultimately, the Chinese designers and engineers do not care on how much behind they are compare to American aviation. The 1.44's design served them well as the foundation for an indigenous 'stealth' fighter and they succeeded. Just like the rounded cube, they smoothed out the 1.44's basic design and with their own sub-systems, they can rightly claim the J-20 to be indigenous and in many respects, they are correct.

The Russians on the other side, came up with something that nobody expected. A stealth fighter design, based on their experience with the lift body design (Flankers and Mig 29s), so a further evolution of their own capabilities!

Those are evolutionary designs while the F-117 is a revolutionary design. But because the Russians did not have a -117 equivalent to study the 'before' and 'after' effects of one method of RCS control -- angled faceting, the PAK is really similar to the J-20 in that both are evolutionary from existing designs.

The only reason that the Russians have to catch up is, that they lost the cold war in the economical and political sense. They couldn't keep up the spending like the US could, lost their partners in the Soviet Union and had to completely refine themselfs. That's what they do now with India help on the one side, but also by opening to western countries and their technical capabilities on the other side (Europe, Israel).
Their scientists on the other side wasn't worse or less capable than US once at all, neither are Europeans less capable than US counterparts (which Americans often falsely believe), but the simple fact that no other single country is speding so much on defence developments and arms gives you the lead so far.

You are not saying anything new regarding money. Wealth allows leisure and eventually creativity and I am not going to feel ashamed at how much we spends on R/D, military or else. Scientists works the conceptual/theoretical but it is the engineers who must balance real world realities and limitations with concepts and theories that often posits the best scenarios, such as 'perfect electrical conductor' (PEC), which we know does not exist. Significant to the real world is financial constraints. If we have more money to pay more engineers and that gave US the lead, to the world I say: tough sh!t.

 

[conworldus]

Kindly enlighten me what similarities are there between the 1.44 and 20 except they are both twin engine planes and have canards.

The Chinese does not care.

The Chinese members here will take great offense at the argument that the J-20 is based off the MIG 1.44, but that is the fact and truth. Yes, Chinese designers and engineers are well learned and trained enough, but so far, China have made no conceptual/theoretical and engineering breakthroughs in aviation in general, let alone military aviation. If you take a cube and smooth out the sharp corners and edges, you will get a lower RCS. But you will STILL have a cube as the foundation.

It is not like comparing the conceptual/theoretical and engineering differences between an F-15 and the B-2. For a flight controls engineer, he has the vertical stab to work with on %99.999 of aircraft designs. But the flying wing will throw him for a loop. How is he going keep the aircraft stable and make coordinated turns? He must still give the pilot rudder pedals. But where are the rudders to start? The pilot will know that he is flying an aircraft that have no yaw axis stabilization surface, but he still need a method to turn the aircraft. So does the flight control computer. Both do not care if there is a yaw axis stabilization device or not. They just want something there.

THAT is what I am talking about.

But ultimately, the Chinese designers and engineers do not care on how much behind they are compare to American aviation. The 1.44's design served them well as the foundation for an indigenous 'stealth' fighter and they succeeded. Just like the rounded cube, they smoothed out the 1.44's basic design and with their own sub-systems, they can rightly claim the J-20 to be indigenous and in many respects, they are correct.


Those are evolutionary designs while the F-117 is a revolutionary design. But because the Russians did not have a -117 equivalent to study the 'before' and 'after' effects of one method of RCS control -- angled faceting, the PAK is really similar to the J-20 in that both are evolutionary from existing designs.


You are not saying anything new regarding money. Wealth allows leisure and eventually creativity and I am not going to feel ashamed at how much we spends on R/D, military or else. Scientists works the conceptual/theoretical but it is the engineers who must balance real world realities and limitations with concepts and theories that often posits the best scenarios, such as 'perfect electrical conductor' (PEC), which we know does not exist. Significant to the real world is financial constraints. If we have more money to pay more engineers and that gave US the lead, to the world I say: tough sh!t.

 

[gambit]

Kindly enlighten me what similarities are there between the 1.44 and 20 except they are both twin engine planes and have canards.

That is like saying the F-15 is no different than the Dornier Do335 because both have twin engines, wings, and a cockpit.

We are talking about the overall shape of both aircrafts. Just like how the A-5 led to the MIG-25 and the F-15, not how the MIG-25 led to the F-15, like most erroneously believes. The J-20 is essentially a superior refinement of the 1.44.