Saturday, November 22, 2008

Forum :: Other :: Phantom Fighter beats JSF!

Page 1 of 1 Phantom Fighter beats JSF!
Author	Oldest to Newest
Nimrod1001 Joined: 04 February 2005 Posts in this thread: 4	Posted on 05 March 2005 4:51 AM I wanted to post this the other day when the poll about the best of the fifth generation fighters was on the front page, but I had a few issues posting. Anyhow, it struck me as funny that the near mythical PAK FA was a vote ahead of the quite advanced JSF. Do people have data on the new Russian fighter? I have seen no hard evidence of it's capabilities or even what it looks like. Who's hoarding their data? C'mon. Share with the rest of us :) Post Reply
Andromeda1002 Joined: 20 March 2005 Posts in this thread: 2	Posted on 20 March 2005 9:22 PM What russian fighter are you talking about, SU35? Post Reply
Nimrod1001 Joined: 04 February 2005 Posts in this thread: 4	Posted on 21 March 2005 4:35 AM No. Check the polls section of the website :) The PAK FA is a real Russian next generation fighter program, but little or no detail exists publicly about it. What little does exist seems to consist of data about the state of the program from several years ago, and apart from recent interviews where various Russian engineers and comentators have simply said "Its really good", I have not seen any thing recent. I wasn't really expecting anyone to have new info, it was more a gentle laugh at why people would pick PAK FA over the JSF. Post Reply
Andromeda1002 Joined: 20 March 2005 Posts in this thread: 2	Posted on 23 March 2005 8:37 PM waht do u you think of russian jets in general? SU&Migs Post Reply

Nimrod1001 Joined: 04 February 2005 Posts in this thread: 4	Posted on 24 March 2005 4:43 AM Russian jets in general? Great airframes hobbled by heavy avionics and thirsy engines. The SU-27 and it's cousins are a case in point. It's got great range and unmatched maneuverability for such a big aircraft, but the original versions had simple radars and bad ECM. The current crop are better, with modern ECM and much better radars, but Russia can't afford to buy very many of them! As for migs, the only one I ever really got exited over was the Mig-31.It had a passive phased aray years before anyone else, but even with a radar package that weighed about 1000kg, the AWG-9 radar got close to the same performance from a conventional antenna and for half the weight. The airframe made it a top notch interceptor because it's high speed intercepts gave it's missiles a big boost at launch. This disparity between the obvious cleverness of Russian designers and their slightly lower level of technology leads me to think PAKFA might not be the world beater everyone hopes it is. If the french are involved in the project (Engines and Avionics) as internet rumor would have it, then it might be very interesting. Post Reply
Zulu1002 Joined: 06 April 2005 Posts in this thread: 1	Posted on 06 April 2005 5:44 PM Nimrod, their weapons also create a LOT of drag, therein the reason their engines are so powerful & so fuel hungry. Post Reply
Nimrod1001 Joined: 04 February 2005 Posts in this thread: 4	Posted on 06 April 2005 9:20 PM I think older missiles like the R-40 acrid had a lot of wing area, so you'd expect thenm to have more drag, but the Mig-25 that carried them could still do mach 2.5+ while carying these. I always thought Russian/Soviet engines were more thirsty because the russian materials science lagged behind, leading to cooler, lower pressure engines. The Al41 engines for th PAK-FA are described by their designers as 'revolutionary' so we can hope that they are better than some of the older ones. Post Reply
1

Copyright © 2003 - 2008 deagel.com. All Rights Reserved.