Register here

Author Topic: Sukhoi T-50 Su-50 PAK FA - flight testing and development Part II  (Read 411726 times)

Offline kaiserd

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 451
  • I really should change my personal text
Re: Sukhoi T-50 Su-50 PAK FA - flight testing and development Part II
« Reply #1050 on: July 15, 2018, 01:25:17 am »
The T-50’s development and procurement sits in a wider context.
Russia is not a financial giant to compare with the US, China or (taken collectively) the EU.
Russia’s economic problems have seen significant cuts in defense spending, though not yet clear if this is  going to be a continuing trend.

Unless there is significant but so far undisclosed underlying technical failure it appears unlikely that the T-50 will be outright canceled. However a form of withering on the vine as priorities move elsewhere is possible and would be consistent with what was seen in late Soviet and early Russian Federation aircraft programs.
The apparent lack of export potential may prove significant re: the priority and resources given to the project.

https://www.google.ie/amp/thehill.com/opinion/international/396877-russia-is-an-economic-pipsqueak-trumps-infatuation-is-baffling%3Famp
https://money.cnn.com/2018/05/02/news/russia-defense-spending-plunge/index.html

Offline robunos

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1712
  • You're Mad, You Are.....
Re: Sukhoi T-50 Su-50 PAK FA - flight testing and development Part II
« Reply #1051 on: July 15, 2018, 01:43:47 am »
The Business Insider isn't exactly a reliable source on the subject of military technology.

Which is why I specifically wrote "caveat; it's Business Insider, but if true . . ."
And no, I've not seen any more on this elsewhere, either . . .


cheers,
           Robin.
Where ARE the Daleks when you need them......

Offline GARGEAN

  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • *
  • Posts: 20
Re: Sukhoi T-50 Su-50 PAK FA - flight testing and development Part II
« Reply #1052 on: July 15, 2018, 03:00:33 am »
Russia’s economic problems have seen significant cuts in defense spending, though not yet clear if this is  going to be a continuing trend.
That's myth btw. "Cuts" came from decreasing budget from paying off most loans arms companies obtained for defence orders. Real spending on troops and procurement stayed the same. Albeit some stagnation is there indeed when compared with growth of recent years.

Offline Airplane

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 395
Re: Sukhoi T-50 Su-50 PAK FA - flight testing and development Part II
« Reply #1053 on: July 16, 2018, 05:19:22 am »
Russia’s economic problems have seen significant cuts in defense spending, though not yet clear if this is  going to be a continuing trend.
That's myth btw. "Cuts" came from decreasing budget from paying off most loans arms companies obtained for defence orders. Real spending on troops and procurement stayed the same. Albeit some stagnation is there indeed when compared with growth of recent years.

Amazing. A little dubious blurb in some news website, and people are singing the demise of the SU-57. Wonder why they are still ordering more considering it's cancelled.......

Just because Russian manufacturing is terrible and they cannot old tight GD&T to make stealth on par with the US doesn't mean the 57 isn't still significantly smaller than their migs and other sukhois. The 57 is still advantageous over their current platforms and also over our 15s and 16s that will dominate our inventory for *years* to come thanks to killing the 22.






 
« Last Edit: July 16, 2018, 05:29:47 am by Airplane »
"The test of success is not what you do when your on top. Success is how high you bounce when you hit bottom.”
– General George S. Patton

Offline flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 8480
Re: Sukhoi T-50 Su-50 PAK FA - flight testing and development Part II
« Reply #1054 on: July 17, 2018, 02:58:40 am »
Real spending on troops and procurement stayed the same.
O RLY? I wonder why USC is hesitating then
http://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/5344390
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline GARGEAN

  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • *
  • Posts: 20
Re: Sukhoi T-50 Su-50 PAK FA - flight testing and development Part II
« Reply #1055 on: July 17, 2018, 04:53:23 am »
Real spending on troops and procurement stayed the same.
O RLY? I wonder why USC is hesitating then
http://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/5344390
Cuz, as I said,  spending stagnated instead of expected growth. Thus plans had to be changed.

Offline flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 8480
Re: Sukhoi T-50 Su-50 PAK FA - flight testing and development Part II
« Reply #1056 on: July 17, 2018, 06:05:59 am »
Oh, yes, that famous 'negative growth'.
I prefer to use more common term 'sequester' that USC report use as well.
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline stealthflanker

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 180
Re: Sukhoi T-50 Su-50 PAK FA - flight testing and development Part II
« Reply #1057 on: July 17, 2018, 05:42:52 pm »
So, how far this will effect Su-57 purchase ? Are VKS just going to get 12 then call it done, waiting for more budget ?

Offline kcran567

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 616
Re: Sukhoi T-50 Su-50 PAK FA - flight testing and development Part II
« Reply #1058 on: July 17, 2018, 07:40:24 pm »
sorry deleted...
« Last Edit: July 17, 2018, 07:45:05 pm by kcran567 »

Offline kcran567

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 616
Re: Sukhoi T-50 Su-50 PAK FA - flight testing and development Part II
« Reply #1059 on: July 17, 2018, 07:42:56 pm »
Russia’s economic problems have seen significant cuts in defense spending, though not yet clear if this is  going to be a continuing trend.
That's myth btw. "Cuts" came from decreasing budget from paying off most loans arms companies obtained for defence orders. Real spending on troops and procurement stayed the same. Albeit some stagnation is there indeed when compared with growth of recent years.

Amazing. A little dubious blurb in some news website, and people are singing the demise of the SU-57. Wonder why they are still ordering more considering it's cancelled.......

Just because Russian manufacturing is terrible and they cannot old tight GD&T to make stealth on par with the US doesn't mean the 57 isn't still significantly smaller than their migs and other sukhois. The 57 is still advantageous over their current platforms and also over our 15s and 16s that will dominate our inventory for *years* to come thanks to killing the 22.

Just clarifying what you said,
did you mean: cannot (H)old tight tolerances...in their stealth
And,
When you say significantly smaller than other Migs and Sukhois are you referring to their RCS?
Just asking to clarify, thanks.

Because I always thought that made sense. The Russian philosophy to know stealth is necessary, but not to sacrifice cost and performance of the aircraft (not to mention ease of manufacture and maintenance, and real world combat realities). Lower the RCS compared to Mig-29s and Sukhoi 27-35 would seem to be pragmatic and cost effective approach on the part of Russia.

How much farther in RCS reduction would you roughly estimate an SU-57 is compared to a Mig-29.

Offline GARGEAN

  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • *
  • Posts: 20
Re: Sukhoi T-50 Su-50 PAK FA - flight testing and development Part II
« Reply #1060 on: August 07, 2018, 08:57:48 am »
Another "RCS by photo"? Eh...

Offline Steven

  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • *
  • Posts: 67
    • AIAA at UCLA
Re: Sukhoi T-50 Su-50 PAK FA - flight testing and development Part II
« Reply #1061 on: August 21, 2018, 01:42:38 am »
I found this posted over at Key Publishing forums.

Seriously? External targeting pod? Just...why?

As far as I can tell, there is no less than three IR sensors on the Su-57: IRST, targeting pod, and landing FLIR. Why this level of separation? You'd think that they should at least be able to consolidate the landing FLIR with this targeting pod. I can perhaps understand if the IRST and FLIR are operating at different wavelengths, but even this is getting more difficult to justify especially with the development of newer dual band sensors. Frankly, I would think that the F-35's configuration of an EOTS and DAS should be able to handle all of these tasks.
« Last Edit: August 21, 2018, 09:20:35 am by Steven »
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Offline TomcatViP

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 361
  • Hellcat
Re: Sukhoi T-50 Su-50 PAK FA - flight testing and development Part II
« Reply #1062 on: August 21, 2018, 05:11:58 am »
I do think that the Landing thingy is just a pepper gun (that nobody goes search deeper).

Offline GARGEAN

  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • *
  • Posts: 20
Re: Sukhoi T-50 Su-50 PAK FA - flight testing and development Part II
« Reply #1063 on: August 21, 2018, 06:58:08 am »
I found this posted over at Key Publishing forums.

Seriously? External targeting pod? Just...why?

As far as I can tell, there is no less than three IR sensors on the Su-57: IRST, targeting pod, and landing FLIR. Why this level of separation? You'd think that they should at least be able to consolidate the landing FLIR with this targeting pod. I can perhaps understand if the IRST and FLIR are operating at different wavelengths, but even this is getting more difficult to justify especially with the development of newer dual band sensors. Frankly, I would think that the F-35's configuration of an EOTS should be able to handle all of these tasks.
Aside from IRST not being optimised to work on ground and landing system having MUCH less resolution, magnification and working angles, there is also one extremely simple thing: illumination.

Offline Steven

  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • *
  • Posts: 67
    • AIAA at UCLA
Re: Sukhoi T-50 Su-50 PAK FA - flight testing and development Part II
« Reply #1064 on: August 21, 2018, 11:07:23 am »
I found this posted over at Key Publishing forums.

Seriously? External targeting pod? Just...why?

As far as I can tell, there is no less than three IR sensors on the Su-57: IRST, targeting pod, and landing FLIR. Why this level of separation? You'd think that they should at least be able to consolidate the landing FLIR with this targeting pod. I can perhaps understand if the IRST and FLIR are operating at different wavelengths, but even this is getting more difficult to justify especially with the development of newer dual band sensors. Frankly, I would think that the F-35's configuration of an EOTS should be able to handle all of these tasks.
Aside from IRST not being optimised to work on ground and landing system having MUCH less resolution, magnification and working angles, there is also one extremely simple thing: illumination.

Huh? Both IRST and targeting pod should have narrow FOV. I recall that the Su-35's IRST is a mid-wave sensor, so unless the Su-57's IRST operates at a different wavelength, I don't see a good reason for not consolidating it with a ground targeting system. In fact, that's exactly what the F-35's EOTS does. I'll concede that a landing camera would need a considerably wider FOV.

I can perhaps understand that this degree of separation may be due to the lack of a DAS-like that provides full spherical IR coverage. Even so, I'm not very convinced about the approach of the Su-57's electro-optical sensor configuration.
« Last Edit: August 22, 2018, 01:28:29 pm by Steven »
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.