Sukhoi T-50 Su-50 PAK FA - flight testing and development Part II

Stargazer2006

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,243
Reaction score
51
Several online sources now refer to the T-50 as being also the "Su-50". I thought it was a mistake but now I can see that the designation is also in the title of this topic. Has it been made into an official designation? And since when?
 

overscan

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
11,254
Reaction score
399
It is anticipated to be the service designation when it enters service. T-50 is the Sukhoi internal designation only.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,630
Reaction score
124
Where are all the Su-4xs?
 

SOC

I look at pictures all day
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2006
Messages
1,171
Reaction score
0
sferrin said:
Where are all the Su-4xs?
Not to mention the fact that fighters have historically been odd numbers, although that doesn't explain Su-25 or Su-30.
 

Sea Skimmer

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jul 13, 2008
Messages
394
Reaction score
11
They also had Su-20 and Su-22 for export, and all four of these aircraft are oriented towards ground attack which might have been the reason for even numbers; though Su-22 might also just have been to avoid having a MiG-21 and Su-21 side by side.
 

flateric

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
8,739
Reaction score
147
sferrin said:
Where are all the Su-4xs?
Su-47 given to S-37. Su-49 is a trainer
even numbers traditionally go for export versions
 

Stargazer2006

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,243
Reaction score
51
flateric said:
even numbers traditionally go for export versions
... which contradicts the notion that the T-50 (or at least the Russian version) would be the Su-50!
 

flateric

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
8,739
Reaction score
147
Zvezda kit, licensed by Sukhoi, has Su-50 on it along with T-50

number 50 was chosen to mark 5th gen aircraft

 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,630
Reaction score
124
flateric said:
Zvezda kit, licensed by Sukhoi, has Su-50 on it along with T-50

number 50 was chosen to mark 5th gen aircraft

Makes more sense than the F-35's. ;D
 

flateric

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
8,739
Reaction score
147
50-2 flew the same day as 50-3 has started taxi trials at LII - 15/06/12
http://russianplanes.net/id79620
 

Deino

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
2,475
Reaction score
34
Finally .... ;)

http://russianplanes.net/id79821

Deino
 

fightingirish

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2006
Messages
2,114
Reaction score
70
http://russianplanes.net/id79836
http://www.take-off.ru/news/117-news01-02-2012/670-t50-3-06-2012
 

LowObservable

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
2,163
Reaction score
18
"And by the way, let's stop painting the Bort number on the tail, or anything else removable."
 
R

Radical

Guest
Well, now that we have lots of high-resolution pictures of the T-50 airframe, what are some educated predictions on its aerodynamic performance? How good is it on the area rule? Assuming that the T-50 has the hypothetical engines that match the F119's performance, how does its aerodynamics compare to the F-22's at various speeds and altitudes? Maybe engineers like Sundog can provide some insight?
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,630
Reaction score
124
Radical said:
Assuming that the T-50 has the hypothetical engines that match the F119's performance,
Why would one assume that?
 

flanker

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
830
Reaction score
4
sferrin said:
Radical said:
Assuming that the T-50 has the hypothetical engines that match the F119's performance,
Why would one assume that?
117 don't, but do you have any reason for why Phase II wont?
 

saintkatanalegacy

Little Miss Whiffologist
Joined
Mar 31, 2009
Messages
718
Reaction score
0
Radical said:
Well, now that we have lots of high-resolution pictures of the T-50 airframe, what are some educated predictions on its aerodynamic performance? How good is it on the area rule? Assuming that the T-50 has the hypothetical engines that match the F119's performance, how does its aerodynamics compare to the F-22's at various speeds and altitudes? Maybe engineers like Sundog can provide some insight?
By looking at the patent, the front section of the fuselage is trapezoidal as it blends with the body instead of tapering. They paid great attention to area rule by making the transition of cross sections as "smooth" as possible so it won't be draggy. So the result is a flat plane. The downside, however, is that it can be structurally risky at the rear section.

The "competing design team" claimed that it was too flimsy and will break if it went supersonic. Of course, we know that the claim was blown out of proportion.

As for the max speed, they somehow reduced the requirement.
 

Avimimus

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Dec 16, 2007
Messages
1,897
Reaction score
7
sferrin said:
Radical said:
Assuming that the T-50 has the hypothetical engines that match the F119's performance,
Why would one assume that?
In order to compare the relative aerodynamic efficiency of the designs (eg. at the same thrust - how much drag do they produce)?

saintkatanalegacy said:
The "competing design team" claimed that it was too flimsy and will break if it went supersonic. Of course, we know that the claim was blown out of proportion.

As for the max speed, they somehow reduced the requirement.
I hadn't heard about this claim! Any other additional information? I'm curious about the competing designs...

Such a claim may not be blown out of proportion (just mistranslated). One of the requirements of the PAK-FA was sustained supersonic maneuverability (to aid in kinetically defeating surface to air missiles). So, any structural flaw could lead to fatiguing of the airplane.

The maximum speed requirement was reportedly relaxed in order to meet payload requirements while using existing engines.
 

flanker

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
830
Reaction score
4
There was a long winded interview with "competitors". Apparently, according to them, PAK FA has huge buffeting problem making it impossible to break sound barrier and travel above 600 km/h (iirc). That turned out to be nice pile of BS, as T-50-1 broke soundbarrier for first time 10'th March 2011.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,630
Reaction score
124
flanker said:
There was a long winded interview with "competitors". Apparently, according to them, PAK FA has huge buffeting problem making it impossible to break sound barrier and travel above 600 km/h (iirc). That turned out to be nice pile of BS, as T-50-1 broke soundbarrier for first time 10'th March 2011.
Any pics of competing design(s)?
 

flanker

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
830
Reaction score
4
Not til you dont dodge my question. ;D And after that, no.
 
R

Radical

Guest
sferrin said:
Radical said:
Assuming that the T-50 has the hypothetical engines that match the F119's performance,
Why would one assume that?
I'm curious about the aerodynamic performance of the PAK-FA's airframe and shape and how it compares to other aircraft like the F-22. I want to remove other variables such as engine thrust.
 

flateric

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
8,739
Reaction score
147
MiG E-721 and alternative Sukhoi designs were not 'raptorski's'
 

Avimimus

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Dec 16, 2007
Messages
1,897
Reaction score
7
flateric said:
MiG E-721 and alternative Sukhoi designs were not 'raptorski's'
Any estimate for how many years I have to wait until I can prove that with my own eyes?
 

flateric

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
8,739
Reaction score
147
we yet to see 1.42, T-12, T-60S - you continue the list...
 

fightingirish

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2006
Messages
2,114
Reaction score
70
Real or CGI/PS-ed :-\


Found at the German Flugzeugforum.de
 

Attachments

flanker

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
830
Reaction score
4
Jesus christ, of course it is CGI and it is old. Really old.
 

chuck4

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 17, 2011
Messages
803
Reaction score
0
The more important question is "is it accurate?"


I thought the weapon bays had 4 hard points each.
 

Geo

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Apr 21, 2007
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
flateric said:
MiG E-721 and alternative Sukhoi designs were not 'raptorski's'
Flateric, did you see the E-721 sketch?
 

saintkatanalegacy

Little Miss Whiffologist
Joined
Mar 31, 2009
Messages
718
Reaction score
0
chuck4 said:
The more important question is "is it accurate?"


I thought the weapon bays had 4 hard points each.
2 missiles per main bay.

of course, some will argue they could have easily fitted 3. but requirements are requirements
 
R

Radical

Guest
saintkatanalegacy said:
Radical said:
Well, now that we have lots of high-resolution pictures of the T-50 airframe, what are some educated predictions on its aerodynamic performance? How good is it on the area rule? Assuming that the T-50 has the hypothetical engines that match the F119's performance, how does its aerodynamics compare to the F-22's at various speeds and altitudes? Maybe engineers like Sundog can provide some insight?
By looking at the patent, the front section of the fuselage is trapezoidal as it blends with the body instead of tapering. They paid great attention to area rule by making the transition of cross sections as "smooth" as possible so it won't be draggy. So the result is a flat plane. The downside, however, is that it can be structurally risky at the rear section.

The "competing design team" claimed that it was too flimsy and will break if it went supersonic. Of course, we know that the claim was blown out of proportion.

As for the max speed, they somehow reduced the requirement.
It appears that the T-50 shares a lot of features with the YF-23. Lets see if the T-50 can live up to the YF-23's incredible performance in speed.

Also, judging how wide the T-50 is, it looks like it can generate a whole lot of lift. Really wonder what the turn rate is. It might far exceed the F-22.
 
Top