• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Current RuAF light fighter projects

T-50

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
366
Reaction score
23
What's the current status of the Russian LMFS fighter program?I know MIG announced that they are working at a light fighter project called E-721 and I believe Suchoi also has a light fighter design (a scaledown version of the Su-57)my question is are these programs still alive? If it is what is 5hese status of these projects
 

LMFS

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Mar 19, 2019
Messages
139
Reaction score
191
For years we just had some vague claims from time to time regarding the next light fighter from MiG, but nothing concrete apart from some apparently signed agreement with the UAE for a joint development. Only recently it was confirmed by UAC that MiG has indeed received a contract to research the aerodynamics of a light, twin-engine fighter until 2025:

 

FighterJock

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 29, 2007
Messages
1,761
Reaction score
535
At last MiG has a contract to research a possible light fighter, let’s hope that this time they get a further contract to build an operational that is based on the research.
 

T-50

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
366
Reaction score
23
That's good news! I'll hope that out of this pre research work a worthy counterpart of the F-35 emerged!
 

Evgeniy

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Mar 30, 2020
Messages
82
Reaction score
99
hat's good news!

At 50 thousand dollars, not much can be done.

I'll hope that out of this pre research work a worthy counterpart of the F-35 emerged!



God forbid. This is with all due respect to the F-35. I doubt very much that an airplane similar to the F-35 can now be integrated into the structure of the Russian Air Force. Well, if only decked. But this is already from the kind of semi-fantasy.
 

Evgeniy

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Mar 30, 2020
Messages
82
Reaction score
99
scale_1200


The picture says:
Research of a search model of a light maneuverable aircraft in a T-103 subsonic wind tunnel.
It is far from a fact that this model is related to the LMFS.
An article by Pyotr Butovsky .... non-intended.
 

Geo

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Apr 21, 2007
Messages
45
Reaction score
51
Right. Probably the only materialized „piece of LMFS project“ – known to the public – is this:
 

Attachments

  • lmfs2.jpg
    lmfs2.jpg
    147.3 KB · Views: 252

ceccherini

In war there is no substitute for victory
Joined
Feb 26, 2015
Messages
107
Reaction score
81
scale_1200


The picture says:
Research of a search model of a light maneuverable aircraft in a T-103 subsonic wind tunnel.
It is far from a fact that this model is related to the LMFS.
An article by Pyotr Butovsky .... non-intended.
Where are the intakes?
 

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
3,369
Reaction score
2,154
Above. The conical shapes that you see in front of the engine nacelles are aerodynamic features to simulate airflow gulped into the engines.
 

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
3,369
Reaction score
2,154
Thank you. I stand corrected. Pretty aggressive placement for inlets.
Where can I find more about this?
 

Evgeniy

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Mar 30, 2020
Messages
82
Reaction score
99
A little more light maneuverable aircraft, but already visible in full form and with front horizontal determination (which is strange):

139-1.jpg


89-0.jpg
 

flateric

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
9,135
Reaction score
1,246
However... these pictures from the wind tunnel (by TSAGI) are not "current".
However what exactly? This is quite old generic in-house TsAGI WT model. It _probably_ has its roots in MiG '602' fighter studies from late 90s.
 

Attachments

  • 602.jpg
    602.jpg
    58.5 KB · Views: 229

Geo

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Apr 21, 2007
Messages
45
Reaction score
51
However... these pictures from the wind tunnel (by TSAGI) are not "current".
However what exactly? This is quite old generic in-house TsAGI WT model. It _probably_ has its roots in MiG '602' fighter studies from late 90s.

Interesting...
Btw is the Butowski’s pic related to current reality in any way?
 

LMFS

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Mar 19, 2019
Messages
139
Reaction score
191
I think the author is also trying to rock the topic but, though he at least is trying to stay reasonably neutral, he is failing in almost all his assessments IMO. Regarding the novelty of the concept, the engine, the avionics, the relationship with Su-57 and Okhotnik, the TsAGI model and even the basic need for such a machine that gives title to the piece. And in the comments the customary condescending tone about Russian engine reliability and desperate need for cash. It is unsurprising that the West fails to predict what Russia will do, since they so intensely cultivate the misrepresentation of their reality and motivations.
 

kcran567

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Aug 15, 2009
Messages
666
Reaction score
19
Is that a Sukhoi's version of Boeing X-32? Nothing wrong with that. Always like the potential and the layout of the X-32.
Hope their "JSF" looks like the X-32. But probably will not.
 

Sundog

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
2,876
Reaction score
364
It's just a standard DSI inlet to the right. The one in the cabinet looks like a Su-57.
 

Geo

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Apr 21, 2007
Messages
45
Reaction score
51
Hmm?? Looks like a Su-27 met Monica! ;) :D

A few findings:


- the model is directly on the Borisov’s table, which means that it is a current project for presentation at high-level negotiations (Borisov is the Deputy Prime Minister…);

- the canopy is identical to that used on the Su-57, so it is possible that the design is a technological derivative of PAK FA, which means accelerating development, reducing development costs, reducing the unit price;

- it is probably „a single-engine light to medium weight strike aircraft“ developed by Rostec; Chemezov recently spoke about this project;

- the use of a single engine is evident, probably a izdeliye 30 with a thrust of around 176 kN; empty weight can be in the the range of 10 - 11 tons;

- for „joint development with another country“ (see Chemezov’s statement) and possible ToT is expected the use of some technologies developed primarily for export (avionics suite of last export modification of MiG-35?);

- can be a good successor to the line Su-17/20/22 (Babak’s fingers?);

- can have huge export potential;

- can have its place in the VKS (theoretically).
 

Evgeniy

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Mar 30, 2020
Messages
82
Reaction score
99
- can be a good successor to the line Su-17/20/22 (Babak’s fingers?);
Very controversial.
A light interceptor, while retaining its strike capabilities, albeit not at the level of the JSF, is more relevant than the new generation Su-17.
And of course a carrier-based aircraft in perspective.
 

Geo

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Apr 21, 2007
Messages
45
Reaction score
51
- can be a good successor to the line Su-17/20/22 (Babak’s fingers?);
Very controversial.
A light interceptor, while retaining its strike capabilities, albeit not at the level of the JSF, is more relevant than the new generation Su-17.
And of course a carrier-based aircraft in perspective.

There is no controversy, Evgeniy:
The first attempt to develop a replacement of Fitter line - canard delta "S-37" - was project of single-engine fully multirole strike fighter.
 

Evgeniy

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Mar 30, 2020
Messages
82
Reaction score
99
The first attempt to develop a replacement of Fitter line - canard delta "S-37" - was project of single-engine fully multirole strike fighter.

Well, that was when ...
Now is not the time.
 

Ainen

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Aug 25, 2011
Messages
38
Reaction score
6
A light interceptor, while retaining its strike capabilities, albeit not at the level of the JSF, is more relevant than the new generation Su-17.
What's the point? Soviet VVS frontal fighter-interceptor doctrine is long gone even in Russian VKS.
If the market needs anything, that's a cheap multirole non-American 5th gen(sounds a bit like a unicorn).
 

Evgeniy

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Mar 30, 2020
Messages
82
Reaction score
99
What's the point? Soviet VVS frontal fighter-interceptor doctrine is long gone even in Russian VKS.
Well, with the Russian Air Force, things are a little more complicated. What's the point? And in the fact that such an aircraft will cover a secondary direction during a possible major conflict, it can be a means of building up potential, while covering heavy fighters at their bases. And of course a carrier-based aircraft.

Of course, such an aircraft should also have the ability to strike the ground.
 

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
3,369
Reaction score
2,154
If the market needs anything, that's a cheap multirole non-American 5th gen(sounds a bit like a unicorn).

Well I am not sure. Market plebiscited the massive Flankers despite its size since the price was right.

If it's good enough, fits the use and has the right price, it will meet customer's expectations. Sadly, for this project, it would be hard to match the need sandwiched b/w a low cost, still formidable Flanker and a priced down simplified Felon.
 

AGS-1787

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Sep 4, 2020
Messages
51
Reaction score
37
It would be nice if they could reproduce the success of the mig-21 with a single-engine economical stealth aircraft. The f-16 is a modern mig-21 in my opinion, but it is getting expensive.
 

stealthflanker

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Messages
747
Reaction score
440
It would be nice if they could reproduce the success of the mig-21 with a single-engine economical stealth aircraft. The f-16 is a modern mig-21 in my opinion, but it is getting expensive.

Maybe, tho i would assume Klimov would have to step up their game as the existing RD-33 may not necessarily provide the T/W ratio of 1. One may ask why not just Saturn or Salyut... Well the way Soviet and now Russia keep things going are to provide niche for design bureaus e.g Phazotron handles MiG Radars while NIIP Handles Sukhoi flankers. NPK-SPP/ NIIPP Handles Su-35 optronics while UOMZ Handles Su-57 and legacy flankers optronics.
 

FighterJock

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 29, 2007
Messages
1,761
Reaction score
535
It would be nice if they could reproduce the success of the mig-21 with a single-engine economical stealth aircraft. The f-16 is a modern mig-21 in my opinion, but it is getting expensive.

I thought that both MiG and Sukhoi stopped designing single engined fighters for safety, because having twin engines mean that if the fighter has problems with one engine then the pilot can shut down that engine and safely make it back to base on the other good engine. But in single engined fighter any problems with the engine the pilot has no option but to eject.
 

stealthflanker

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Messages
747
Reaction score
440
Except in this time and age, nobody seem to want a twin engined light fighter, which considered more expensive in both price maintenance, if they do want twin engine they would go all out to Sukhois or F-15's.
 

Similar threads

Top