Russian Su-57 Aircraft Thread (PAK-FA and IAF FGFA)

Air Force Brat

Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Super Moderator
Deino said:
Sorry, and when was that posted !??? Right a few hours after that mishap
... and what have they reported in the meantime ? Nothing.

If it was so easy in fact to repair that heavily burned airframe - look at all the damage on the underside, holes in the structure and molten composites as well as loosely hanging fabrics of the parts - ... it would be a miracle if this airframe will ever fly again.[/QUOTE}

That's precisely my point, and the word that I heard was that -01 was no longer airworthy, that could well be wrong, but as to -05 the may very well pop the forward fuselage, wings, gear etc, the hard parts that survived the fire and fly them again on a new center section/main fuselage, but that is

Deino
Click to expand...
b787 said:
that is your opinion, only that.
Click to expand...

But, it is our "considered" opinion, from looking at 05 that she is heavily damaged, most specifically along her center section and spine, where a great deal of structure precludes an easy fix. She is heavily damaged where the engines, wings, and systems all come together, and if she got hot, what may appear, NOT So BAD??? has probably lost its temper or the ability to take stress. While metal appears to not bend, metal must have a proper ability to absorb deformation without taking a "permanent" set. If you read my previous post, it is much easier/cheaper to remove good hardware and build another airframe to bolt all those goodies up to. Wiring harnesses etc, etc, are very dicey after a heat????
 
b787

b787

Captain
Air Force Brat said:
But, it is our "considered" opinion, from looking at 05 that she is heavily damaged, most specifically along her center section and spine, where a great deal of structure precludes an easy fix. She is heavily damaged where the engines, wings, and systems all come together, and if she got hot, what may appear, NOT So BAD??? has probably lost its temper or the ability to take stress. While metal appears to not bend, metal must have a proper ability to absorb deformation without taking a "permanent" set. If you read my previous post, it is much easier/cheaper to remove good hardware and build another airframe to bolt all those goodies up to. Wiring harnesses etc, etc, are very dicey after a heat????
Click to expand...
You can keep your opinion, you have a right to do it, but this video has interviews with Sukhoi personnel and video footage of 005 :

Your collective opinion is not official information, just your collective opinion, but the video was made by Channel one Russia and has direct Sukhoi input, you have not such input just your opinion, keep it no problem, that is your right, but do not present it as the last word, because it is not
 
A

A Bar Brother

Junior Member
The loss of T-50-5 is not confirmed. As far as the story goes, the aircraft is being rebuilt.

Anyway, it has not put the IOC behind schedule. All fighter programs can accept the loss of a prototype aircraft.
 
A

A Bar Brother

Junior Member
Brumby said:
In other words, the Preliminary contract negotiations (blueprint) which started in Dec 2010 is still ongoing. Until a final contract is inked, which means a final design is locked in, the recent report is just another step towards a final design.
Click to expand...

The negotiations for the preliminary design was completed in 2010. This was the $590 Million deal with both countries pitching half the amount. The designs would have included both the single and the two-seaters. This stage was officially completed in April 2013. Of course, things must have changed since then, with the IAF negotiating for a better configuration, so there must have been changes after April 2013.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

“The preliminary design contract (PDC) for the Russian-Indian fifth generation aircraft has been executed,” Russia’s Sukhoi aircraft company announced on Wednesday.
Click to expand...

The negotiations happening now are for the engineering phase. This will be worth $5.5 Billion (*2).
 
A

A Bar Brother

Junior Member
thunderchief said:
No prototypes have been lost, one engine exploded, there is no need for redesign of critical structures . Engines are still troublesome, but I'm willing to take the bet they would resolve that to filed first series with AL-41F1 in time. What could potentially delay the project is lack of internally carried weapons as yet (RVV-SD and RVV-MD )
Click to expand...

Internally carried weapons were developed long ago. You are forgetting about the Su-47 program which had internal weapons bays.

Old photos of missiles with foldable fins.
Kh-38ME (from 2007)
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


R-77
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


PAKFA Porn
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
P

paintgun

Senior Member
Air Force Brat said:
But, it is our "considered" opinion, from looking at 05 that she is heavily damaged, most specifically along her center section and spine, where a great deal of structure precludes an easy fix. She is heavily damaged where the engines, wings, and systems all come together, and if she got hot, what may appear, NOT So BAD??? has probably lost its temper or the ability to take stress. While metal appears to not bend, metal must have a proper ability to absorb deformation without taking a "permanent" set. If you read my previous post, it is much easier/cheaper to remove good hardware and build another airframe to bolt all those goodies up to. Wiring harnesses etc, etc, are very dicey after a heat????
Click to expand...

b787 said:
You can keep your opinion, you have a right to do it, but this video has interviews with Sukhoi personnel and video footage of 005 :

Your collective opinion is not official information, just your collective opinion, but the video was made by Channel one Russia and has direct Sukhoi input, you have not such input just your opinion, keep it no problem, that is your right, but do not present it as the last word, because it is not
Click to expand...

The collective opinion of experts like Deino and you sir AFBrat are not important, of course everyone is entitled to their own :D
Let's just ignore the structural changes caused by heat damage both to metal and composite parts of their airframes.
 
A

A Bar Brother

Junior Member
paintgun said:
The collective opinion of experts like Deino and you sir AFBrat are not important, of course everyone is entitled to their own :D
Let's just ignore the structural changes caused by heat damage both to metal and composite parts of their airframes.
Click to expand...

Structural damage can be fixed, no matter how expensive. Production variants are sometimes written off, but prototypes generally are fixed. They have spent a lot on the prototype, so they won't just write it off for want of a few millions. It is more expensive to build a new prototype to replace it.

As far as general opinion is concerned, it goes both ways by analysts and experts, one saying it will be written off, and another saying it will be rebuilt. As far as official news is concerned it "will" be rebuilt, but we don't know if it "can" be rebuilt.

Opinions are just opinions.
 
b787

b787

Captain
paintgun said:
The collective opinion of experts like Deino and you sir AFBrat are not important, of course everyone is entitled to their own :D
Let's just ignore the structural changes caused by heat damage both to metal and composite parts of their airframes.
Click to expand...
the experts in T-50 are:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
they make it they know what can be fixed and what can not be fixed they make it
Bogdan is another expert on Sukhoi T-50 he flies it
 
Last edited:
Brumby

Brumby

Major
SampanViking said:
The T-50 is a warplane and a feature of warplanes is that they can take knocks and damage and be repaired again in a reasonable time for a return to combat. Damage is a part of the design brief.

Why do people suppose the T-50 is different?
Click to expand...

Precisely the point. If the premise is that the damaged plane can be reconstituted, then the logical conclusion is once sufficient time has elapsed there should be physical evidence of its re-entry into service. Logic also dictates that if sufficient time has elapsed and there is no evidence of its re-entry back into service, the evidence will then start to shift to the alternate conclusion and that is damage was too severe for a reconstitution.

As Sherlock Holmes used to say “Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.”
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top