Military Review

The fourth T-50 took off

72
Recently there have been few News about perhaps the most ambitious project of domestic aviation industry - Advanced Aviation Complex of Frontline Aviation (PAK FA). During this informational “lull”, employees of the Komsomolsk-on-Amur Aviation Production Association managed to complete the assembly of another flight prototype of a promising fighter with the T-50-4 symbol. On December 12, it was announced that this prototype made its first flight and is joining the general flight test program. Under the control of the honored test pilot, Hero of Russia S. Bogdan, the new aircraft spent about forty minutes in the air. According to the pilot, the fourth T-50 during the flight behaved normally, obeyed the controls and did not have any problems with engines or electronic equipment.



Admittedly, the new prototype took to the air with a noticeable lag from the previously announced test schedule. Last year, at the MAKS-2011 air show, representatives of the United Aircraft Building Corporation and the Sukhoi company said that the third and fourth flight prototypes of the PAK FA will join the tests before the end of 2011. Only the third aircraft, which took off in November-month of last year, met the deadlines. The fourth prototype, in turn, managed to fly only until the end of the next year, 2012. However, such delays have certain reasons. Earlier it was reported that the first three prototypes are designed for testing the aerodynamic nuances of the design and the initial verification of electronic systems. Thus, it is possible to draw some conclusions about some design flaws, the correction of which took several months.

However, the T-50-4 is built and is already flying, which indicates the absence or correction of any serious problems of a constructive nature. It is noteworthy that according to the existing photos of the new aircraft, it is impossible to accurately determine not only the nature of the changes, but also the fact of their presence. All noticeable changes compared with previous experienced machines relate to small parts, such as various antennas, etc. knots. For example, on the left side of the car, a little panel with some details, the purpose of which has not yet been announced, appeared slightly below the moving part of the lamp. In general, the T-50-4 looks almost completely similar to the previous third prototype. There are some doubts about the power plant of the new aircraft. Most likely, these are AL-41F-1A turbojet twin-circuit engines, however, some unofficial sources mention the possibility of installing updated so-called engines on T-50-4. second stage. Official sources are still silent.



However, the greatest interest is not external changes or engines of the fourth flight of the instance, and its electronic equipment. It is possible that the ground tuning of the equipment turned out to be the very factor that slowed the start of flights of the new T-50-4. Such delays can be considered more than justified: the complex of onboard avionics equipment of a promising fighter is quite complex and the majority of the existing problems must be corrected before installation on the aircraft. In this context, it is necessary to recall the prototype T-50-3, on which, as stated, a radar with an active phased antenna array was installed. At the same time there is information on changing the composition of the equipment T-50-4 in the direction of its increase. It is quite possible that the fourth prototype of the PAK FA program is equipped not only with the nose radar, but also with the side or even wing, which at one time caused a lot of talk and enthusiasm. Also, it is worth expecting the availability of a full-fledged optical-radar station and an infrared sensor tracking the upper hemisphere on the T-50-4. The previous T-50 prototypes were fitted with the BINS-SP-2 inertial navigation system developed at the Moscow Institute of Electromechanics and Automation, and satellite navigation equipment using the GLONASS and GPS systems. According to reports, the navigation equipment T-50-4 is not different from the aggregates of the previous aircraft. Perhaps in the future, the fourth prototype will receive an updated inertial system BINS-SP-2M. As for the weapons control system, there is almost no information about it. Fragmentary information suggests that T-50-4 has ready-made on-board computers that have a multiprocessor architecture.

The fourth T-50 took off


It should be noted that the fourth prototype may not have a full-fledged computing complex. Before the start of mass production of the T-50 fighter, two more prototypes are planned to be built, on which the “running in” of the onboard equipment will continue: radar stations, computing systems, weapons control equipment, etc. Thus, the tests of the aircraft of the PAK FA project entered a kind of transitional stage between purely prototypes designed for the first test flights, as well as working out the nuances of the airframe design and powerplant, and full-fledged pre-production machines that will be used to develop the finished combat aircraft.

At the moment, about two hundred flights have been conducted during the PAK FA program. It is quite clear that the purpose of all these sorties was to check and test the various systems of the aircraft that provided the flight, as well as the first tests of the onboard radar station. Now, the T-50-4, received a greater number of different electronics can easily begin and test weapons systems. Over the coming months, one of the experienced T-50 must make its first flight to the landfill to begin testing of a set of weapons. Just one such flight will be a significant step in stories program PAK FA, approaching the moment of adoption of the new aircraft in service of the Russian Air Force.

On the materials of the sites:
http://sukhoi.org/
http://uacrussia.ru/
http://bmpd.livejournal.com/
http://militaryrussia.ru/
http://airwar.ru/
Author:
72 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Sakhalininsk
    Sakhalininsk 17 December 2012 08: 21
    +17
    Good news. It would be faster if the plane really got on the wing and went into the army, to the delight of the mattresses, and the mattresses and other small shaved for diarrhea.
    1. redmont
      redmont 17 December 2012 10: 28
      0
      Good day. Here's another video of the flight of 4 aircraft.
      [media = http: //tvzvezda.ru/news/nocomment/content/v_komsomolske-na-amure_sostoyal
      sya_pervyy_1412.html]
    2. redmont
      redmont 17 December 2012 10: 30
      0
      [media = http: //tvzvezda.ru/news/nocomment/content/v_komsomolske-na-amure_sostoyal
      sya_pervyy_1412.html]


      video 4 aircraft
    3. redmont
      redmont 17 December 2012 10: 31
      0
      [media = http: //tvzvezda.ru/news/nocomment/content/v_komsomolske-na-amure_sostoyal
      sya_pervyy_1412.html]
    4. Botanologist
      Botanologist 17 December 2012 13: 30
      +5
      Let's wait for vaf, clarify the details. It seems that he previously wrote that the filling is already almost complete. Yes, and on the changes in the airframe, significant improvements. So, the prototypes and pre-production ones will have to fly for a couple or three years for the series to be "working".
      I hope that by the 2020 year of pieces 30-40 we will receive in the Air Force fully ready for combat use!
      1. VAF
        VAF 17 December 2012 14: 14
        +10
        Quote: Botanologist
        Let's wait vaf, we will clarify details.


        I've come, wink can be specified!

        I didn’t really like the article, again some assumptions and conjectures!
        How can one engage in weapons testing and not have a complete computing complex?
        then the only thing that can be done is to make "dumps" to check the operation of the APU and ACU!
        But here's "fresh news": according to the plan, they still make 2 flights and then drive them to paint (in the colors of the Air Force), to paint for 5 days and then plan on their own in Zhukovsky bully !
        But the "transfer" to the An-124 m on the 21st and beyond has not been canceled yet! soldier
        1. Botanologist
          Botanologist 17 December 2012 18: 41
          +2
          I came, wink can be clarified!

          wink Thanks for the info about 34. What do you think, a couple of years will bring?
          1. VAF
            VAF 17 December 2012 21: 05
            +8
            Quote: Botanologist
            What do you think, a couple of years will bring?


            I think before drinks ! At least for this, now everything is done! bully

            On the lawless, which took off on December 11th



            now has tail number 21

            1. Botanologist
              Botanologist 17 December 2012 22: 26
              +3
              Well, for this you can drinks
              Just brother boar dragged from the forest fellow
  2. Yuri11076
    Yuri11076 17 December 2012 08: 30
    +8
    Well, great news, tests are ongoing, this is another 1 step to serial production of PAK FA. Good luck in testing. Emergency takeoffs and landings ...
    1. yustas
      yustas 17 December 2012 09: 37
      +8
      Quote: Yuri11076
      Well, great news, tests are ongoing, this is another 1 step to serial production of PAK FA. Good luck in testing. Emergency takeoffs and landings ...

      + So that the number of take-offs always corresponds to the number of landings ... and clear skies to the car and the guys.
  3. snek
    snek 17 December 2012 09: 20
    +5
    The news is really great. The testers - successful flights, the car - an early entry into the series.
  4. omsbon
    omsbon 17 December 2012 09: 21
    +5
    Very GOOD and JOYful news.
    Clear sky to you T-50!
  5. Wedmak
    Wedmak 17 December 2012 09: 25
    +8
    It looks like the aerodynamics and handling have basically been checked, now it's up to the stuff. This makes me happy. Good luck in filling the beautiful aircraft with the "beautiful" avionics!
    Fifth and sixth already on the stocks hope?
    1. VAF
      VAF 17 December 2012 14: 15
      +7
      Quote: Wedmak
      Fifth and sixth already on the stocks hope?


      Already going to the full! +! bully
  6. Thunderbolt
    Thunderbolt 17 December 2012 09: 57
    +4
    Let-fly, fly and fly good about the T-50 come, only encouraging news. In the 21st century such a "bird" is very useful to us!
  7. anchonsha
    anchonsha 17 December 2012 10: 34
    -1
    Although this news pleases ... All the same, well done our designers, who created the newest aircraft of the 21st century. Try shaving and mattress padding !!!
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 17 December 2012 10: 40
      +4
      Mattresses have already been created. Earlier than us ... Only he is a little sick with them. wink
      1. yustas
        yustas 17 December 2012 10: 42
        +1
        Quote: Wedmak
        Mattresses have already been created. Earlier than us ... Only he is a little sick with them.

        Yeah, he drank, he was ill, smoked ... so he didn’t fly very close and not far =)))
        drinks
      2. Santa bear
        Santa bear 17 December 2012 10: 49
        +3
        then his paws break, then the tail falls off laughing
        1. Wedmak
          Wedmak 17 December 2012 10: 52
          +3
          Exactly!!!!!!! Our cartoons are predictions! You just need to know how to decrypt them!
          1. yustas
            yustas 17 December 2012 11: 07
            +1
            Quote: Wedmak
            Exactly!!!!!!! Our cartoons are predictions! You just need to know how to decrypt them!

            It's like in jokes .... flew, flew, forgot how to breathe and died .... =))))
        2. mda
          mda 17 December 2012 20: 29
          0
          Quote: Santa Bear
          then his paws break, then the tail falls off

          And the back is spinning and the head is tortured lol
      3. ikrut
        ikrut 17 December 2012 20: 03
        +1
        Apparently, both mattress birds were already born prematurely. And it is unlikely, for any money, it will be possible to make something sensible of them.
        Here is an interesting review:
        http://www.warandpeace.ru/ru/reports/view/75300/
        I was especially amused by the photo where the pilot is simply "cut out" from the cockpit of the serial F-22 by three local Emergencies Ministry officers. The dome is jammed. For FIVE hours the pilot sat in a serial combat aircraft without the ability to get out. No toilet. I wonder if they are given combat diapers for such cases?
        1. Wedmak
          Wedmak 17 December 2012 20: 11
          +1
          Americans will invest more and more in them, simply because they have no other options. They will cut them and PR, to the last.
  8. engineer74
    engineer74 17 December 2012 11: 13
    +1
    Good news! Only with dviglom not understand ... The competition for "Yeniseisk" was closed, "Saturn" already confused everyone with designations. It seems the T-50 will go into production with the 4 # generation engine.
    1. InkGrey
      InkGrey 17 December 2012 11: 25
      0
      So they have already said about this for a long time that at the first stage there will be 4+ engines, and there they will start installing the ones that are currently being developed. The main thing is that there should be no delays with avionics, and the emerging problems with reliability should be quickly resolved.
      1. engineer74
        engineer74 17 December 2012 11: 45
        0
        If it goes to the 4+ series, then it will remain there, but there should not be any major problems with the avionics: its level is not much higher than that which was installed on the Su-35 and other upgrades.
    2. VAF
      VAF 17 December 2012 16: 26
      0
      Quote: engineer74
      It seems the T-50 will go into a series with a 4 # generation engine.


      So far, yes, +! All prototypes and a pre-production batch will go from the "117A" (41-F1A) edition soldier
  9. radio operator
    radio operator 17 December 2012 11: 16
    +8
    It's nice to know that the T-50 also has a fraction of my work.
    Russian weapons were and will be the best!
    1. Administrator
      Administrator 18 December 2012 14: 48
      -4
      If you hadn’t stole 70% of the budget, I think Obama himself would have shook your hand and shook his head. The potential is endless, but there is no money for time to break through. But, the tail in the wind and the flag of the patriots will still be breathing!
  10. orkibotu
    orkibotu 17 December 2012 11: 24
    +1
    Soon this bird will gain supremacy in the air.
  11. zambo
    zambo 17 December 2012 13: 38
    0
    Good news!!!
  12. Russian sniper
    Russian sniper 17 December 2012 14: 44
    0
    In many articles devoted to the T-50 PAK FA, many users asked a large number of questions related to the cabin light, that is, its binding. winked They say that a lantern without binding reduces the ESR of a fighter. Many are unhappy why they say the T-50 has such a design, and on the F-22 and J-20, J-31, the lamp is not binding. Who can say anything about this ?? hi
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 17 December 2012 15: 17
      +2
      They say that a lantern without binding reduces the ESR of a fighter.

      Are there many reflections from a strip of metal (or maybe there is not metal at all, but some kind of plastic?) In 5-7 cm wide?
      The review is certainly better with no binding. But here I am in our dryers (and even in my twinks, too) I often saw rear-view mirrors in the video from the cockpit. And as I understand it, they just hang on the binding. There are two questions in connection with this: 1. Do they really help a lot or is it just for convenience?
      2. How will a pilot in a cab without a binding cabin look back (assuming that there is a view, it doesn’t block anything)? His head will not turn off, turn in all directions, and back is also terribly uncomfortable, probably?
      1. VAF
        VAF 17 December 2012 15: 26
        +6
        Quote: Wedmak
        The review is certainly better for non-binding


        Denis, it seems, like yes, +! But at the same time, you must not forget about the psychological factor of excessive viewing, which provokes a loss of spatial orientation - this manifested itself on the F-16. wassat
        Well, I answered all your other questions in the comment below. drinks
      2. ikrut
        ikrut 17 December 2012 20: 10
        +1
        They plan to implement the survey with the help of a special "transparent cockpit" helmet. There, in general, you can do with a non-transparent lantern. Whether they will succeed in this is not yet known.
    2. VAF
      VAF 17 December 2012 15: 18
      +14
      Quote: Russian Sniper
      Many are unhappy why they say the T-50 has such a design, and on the F-22 and J-20, J-31, the lamp is not binding. Who can say anything about this ??


      Well:
      1st - unhappy because. that they don’t understand what they’re talking about! (the stealth criterion overshadows everything)!
      2.-e- to create a seamless lamp with the necessary characteristics of strength, transparency, distortion, temperature conditions - a very difficult scientific and technical task, which at the moment has been solved on only three types of aircraft - F-22, F-16 and F-35. , we will poke in this matter, but ...... for binding we have rear-view mirrors installed, and they?
      The 3rd Non-binding lamp is polycarbonate.
      Nobody has made unbinding lights from more heat-resistant fluoroacrylate or silicate glasses.
      Therefore, fighter jets with non-binding lights are not capable of performing any sort of lengthy flights at speeds of more than two sounds. What are the flight speed records for the F-16 and F-22 based on 500 km and 1000 km? lol
      Not installed? wink
      The fact that the Chinese used a non-binding flashlight in the J-20 design demonstrates that they also do not plan to fly long afterburners. request
      The 4th flashlight on the T-50 will be silicate, while on the F-22, for example, it will be polycarbonate.
      Silicate glass, as far as I can understand wink , slightly less durable than polycarbonate (... in addition, in recent years, the strength of ordinary silicate glass has been increased by 20-30 times, thanks to the development of hardening technology, which makes it possible to produce silicate glazing with comparable mass and dimensional characteristics. ..), but it has incomparably better characteristics in terms of heat resistance and optical properties. good

      Well, and finally, otherwise it can be "diluted" to infinity, another clear advantage of silicate glass is safety. soldier

      When the pilot was “rescued” from the F-22 cockpit by cutting out a piece of polycarbonate, the rescuers were dressed in protective chemical suits and gas masks. wassat
      Silicate in this respect is absolutely harmless. fellow
      1. VAF
        VAF 17 December 2012 15: 35
        +8
        Quote: vaf
        When the pilot was "rescued" from the F-22 cockpit by cutting out a piece of polycarbonate


        Visual photo forgot to insert hi (clickable!)
        1. Russian sniper
          Russian sniper 17 December 2012 17: 01
          +2
          Thank you Sergey for the full report on my question hi
        2. Denzel13
          Denzel13 17 December 2012 21: 27
          +3
          Sergey, good evening!
          And why did they pick out his "disease" from there? Couldn't he himself? I would take it and catapult. laughing
        3. postman
          postman 18 December 2012 14: 36
          0
          Quote: vaf
          clear advantage of silicate glass - safety

          I assure you, if silicate glass DO NOT CRUSH,and cut diamond wheel, then SILICOSIS (occupational lung disease caused by prolonged inhalation of dust containing free silicon dioxide) provided 9 without PPE essno). And when cutting, protection is nothing less.
          reference: “LUNG SILICOSIS: sandblasting disease?

          Silicosis This is a chronic disease, the severity and pace of development of which can be different and are directly dependent on the aggressiveness of the inhaled dust (dust concentration, the amount of free silicon dioxide in it, dispersion, etc.), and on the duration of exposure to the dust factor and individual characteristics of the body.
          The silica content in quartz sand is 80–90%, while particles of 5–10 microns stay in air for a very long time.

          Polycarbonate light transmission parameters (for cell)


          Physical characteristics in the table (true for cellular, but except K. thermal conductivity and weight, everything will be better)
          Polycarbonate
          Certificate of Conformity No. С-RU.ПБ30.В.01217.
          This material belongs to the group flammable materials - B2 in accordance with GOST 30402-96; smoke-generating ability: to a group of building materials with low smoke-forming ability - D1 according to GOST 12.1.044-89; on toxicity of combustion products: to the group of low-hazard building materials - T1 according to GOST 12.1.044-89.

          I don’t know if this is a real shot (it’s ridiculous to cut the entire lamp, not the castle connection), but I can assume the equipment of the workers is a modern trend. It's a cheaper costume than making excuses for years that the cancer wasn’t caused by this sharp
      2. InkGrey
        InkGrey 17 December 2012 16: 09
        +2
        Regarding Chinese aircraft, I think the short duration of the afterburner flights is doubly probable with their current state of affairs in the engine resource.

        Plus, I’ll add that the absence of an unbranded flashlight in our country is probably not a fact of a lag in solving the problem of creating the flashlight itself, but not a very big need for it. The EPR gain is probably small - I don’t have any numbers, I won’t say anything. Mirrors, again)) ..
      3. dmitreach
        dmitreach 17 December 2012 18: 29
        +1
        vaf, the most reasonable version I have read about, dealt with the nuances when ejecting a pilot. In short, part of the canopy plays the role of a "windshield", affecting safety in case of emergency leaving the cab. That is, the question is not that they do not know how to make an uninterrupted fanlight, but that it is safer to leave the cockpit when it comes to high speeds.
      4. Kir
        Kir 17 December 2012 18: 31
        +1
        Here the truth is an inconsistent note, in Switzerland a few years ago they built a super greenhouse, which they just covered with plexiglass, supposedly let in more light spectrum and shatter, well, actually .......!, But in fact it dimmed earlier than the estimated time! !!
        And with regards to toxicity or something else, the Zapadents are generally reinsurers, with the same operation, ours will be quite able to do with a respirator with glasses, and these will be dressed up as for going into open space !!!
        And the main thing is not to forget the "patriotic Yankees", they will choose their own from other equal materials !!!

        And for Ours it is infinitely happy, and with all my heart I wish all the best to all those involved and to the "Bird" itself, for me it is many times more attractive than theirs !!!
      5. patsantre
        patsantre 17 December 2012 19: 15
        +2
        Is the F-35 unbinding?

        it seems not a prototype
      6. saturn.mmm
        saturn.mmm 17 December 2012 21: 33
        +5
        Quote: vaf
        which is currently decided on only three types of aircraft - F-22, F-16 and F-35.,

        Hello Sergey. Allow a little adjustment.
        When creating the F-35, the Americans decided to abandon such a twist as a bezpleboltny lamp and now the cabin looks like this with the most modern American F-35 aircraft.
        1. saturn.mmm
          saturn.mmm 17 December 2012 23: 04
          +1
          Link pretty good photos F-22
          http://pkk-avia.livejournal.com/31071.html?thread=459359#t459359
          If anyone is interested
      7. postman
        postman 18 December 2012 14: 27
        +2
        Hi Serge.
        Let me try to answer.
        Part 1
        1.Cavity of the cockpit contributes (lope%?) To the EPR (if irradiation comes from the upper hemisphere, at an appropriate angle). To calculate (with a sufficient degree of certainty) the EPR of this area is practically impossible and the data will not coincide with reality.
        Therefore, a BP-flashlight COVERED with a diffusing coating is used. Metallized glazing. TASK: the RCS value of the cockpit, averaged over a small sector of observation angles, will decrease significantly, and the “cockpit” will not “phonate” against the background of the hull (there is such a pun). At the same time, it (the canopy must remain transparent)
        The reflection coefficient of the glazing of the cab lantern in the microwave range should be close to unity, and in the optical one to zero.
        with binding and silicate glazing - this is not to get
        UV protection and cockpit heating - let it stay behind the scenes.
        Reference: FUNDAMENTAL AND APPLIED PROBLEMS
        STELS TECHNOLOGIES

        about binding and loss of spatial orientation, yes.
        Joffrey W. McCarthy. (Aeromedicine and Training Diges, 1990, July, vol. 4.)
        Over the past 10 years since the arrival of this aircraft in the U.S. Air Force, 58% of all flight accidents with the F-16 fighter (as of October 1988) are related to the human factor.
        however, the non-tearing all-cast glazing design of the F-16 fighter deprives the pilot of a visual assessment of the spatial position of the aircraft in goniometric coordinates. Having lost the spatial orientation or in a difficult spatial position, the pilot of the F-16 aircraft does not have reference points for the quick adoption of corrective estimates and actions in flight.

        2.On the F-35, the lamp is without binding but with INTERNAL support (barbell or HZ what is it)

        I can assume two options (there is a photo):
        -tk. the plane is unified with STOVL (for landing on deck or with UVP) the pilot needs to look around down (to see the deck) the dimensions of the lamp did not allow for strength (and the cockpit on it is really wider and slightly different), which means it was strengthened
        - when ejecting through the "binding", the lamp breaks (see photo) and the visor remains, protecting the consultant from the oncoming air flow, ie. returned to the "old scheme"
        / link Martin-Baker US16E -photo /
        Or maybe this and that, all together
        Approx. on the F-16 it is "kind of" the same with a binding (back)

        For comparison, F-22
        1. postman
          postman 18 December 2012 14: 40
          +1
          PART 2
          About rear-view mirrors. Does he (the pilot) need them? If there is Helmet Display System (HMDS) + cockpit with electronics


          [img] http://image.slidesharecdn.com/thef-35cockpitapproach-120417081628-phpapp01

          /95/slide-4-728.jpg?1334668942 [/img]




          3. Until 1983 it really is: polycarbonate with 3/4 "monolith with TWO side anti-abrasive coating
          ----------------------------
          From 1983 to 1995 this is "PIE":
          0,150 "Acrylic Mil-P-5425 transparent heat-resistant plastic, and even with "anti-icing sv-mi
          (more about it patent RU (11) 2272062 (13) C2)
          0,055 "TPU Interlayer (thermoplastic elastomer)
          0,53 "polycarbonate
          Anti-abrasive
          The difference m / y polycarbonate and acrylic video below
          The photo is not from a flashlight, but the principle explains


          Acrylicperfectly smooth surface, maximum transparency, no image distortion
          resistance to adhesion; low UV susceptibility; chemical resistance
          Polycarbonate
          Transparency depends on the thickness and is comparable to glass, but compared to it, Lexan Solid is 2 times lighter and 250 times stronger.
          a wide range of operating temperatures (from -40 ° С to + 135 ° С) while maintaining strength characteristics.

          Saved about 10 pounds (about 3,3 kg) in weight
          ---------------------------
          Since 1995 I have been usingt laminated polycarbonate
          anti-abrasive spraying
          0,523 "polycarbonate
          0,025 "TPU Interlayer (Thermoplastic Elastomer)
          0,190 "bullet resistant polycarbonate
          anti-abrasive coating


          lost weight (compared with 1973-1995) 4 pounds = 1,300kg
          / link Texstars Inc. |
          1. postman
            postman 18 December 2012 14: 41
            +1
            Part 3
            4. on the T-50 will be smooth, "solidly drawn" and not silicate

            Link GOZ 2009, Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 103355 of 29.12.2008

            The fact that they called it "all-glass", well, the level of education of the government is such that what can be done
            about the f-22 lamp in paragraph 3
            Silicate glass is not stronger than polycarbonate, but wear and heat resistant than PC, and MUCH heavier.
            The difference is greater than with acrylic (video)

            Quote: vaf
            Silicate in this respect is absolutely harmless.

            You forgot about silicosis.
            I answered under the photo with a "sharp" flashlight ....
    3. ikrut
      ikrut 17 December 2012 20: 06
      +1
      Look here http://www.warandpeace.ru/ru/reports/view/75300/ about the F-22 smooth cockpit. How it is "discovered" on a combat plane with a chainsaw.
  13. Lone gunman
    Lone gunman 17 December 2012 15: 12
    0
    I believe in the heroic future of the T-50, an excellent machine should work out, how much informed is a heavy class, QUESTION FOR SPECIALS - but what about a light class like F 35, J 31, stealth verticals, roughly speaking VTOL? At least some development is underway in this region or, as always, there is no money —type Russians steal too much — corruption, kickbacks, oligarchs, oil, gas, very large salaries of state employees, pensioners, etc.?!))))
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 17 December 2012 15: 47
      +1
      Our Mig-35 with the 4 + generation in the lightweight class is fully consistent with their 5. And the stealth vertical, in my opinion, is from the realm of fantasy. Including on the question - why is it needed?
      By the way, J-31 can hardly be called easy. It is the size of a Su-27, even a little larger in my opinion.
      1. Lone gunman
        Lone gunman 17 December 2012 16: 20
        -2
        you know, judging by this, then why do we need PAK FA ?, there is a Su -35s, it seems ++ (like a plus) can improve another 1 plus, and so what? in my opinion it is necessary to connect the helicopter and the plane for these devices, the future, and I'm not talking now, but in the near future, we are talking about developments, maybe single copies of prototypes, for example, C 37 (Su 47) ?! will we again catch up with the amers? And the F-35 is really a decent car, (I don’t know about J31), but as a counterweight, we should have a vertical like VTOL ...
        1. Wedmak
          Wedmak 17 December 2012 16: 35
          +4
          you know, judging by this, then why do we need PAK FA ?, there is Su -35s, it seems ++ (like a plus) can 1 plus be improved, plus what?

          Any machine has a life cycle. Su-35С is certainly good, but if memory serves me well, this series of machines is already approaching (or has come) at the maximum of its potential. And considering that the creation of a new aircraft took many years, the T-50 program was launched on time.
          in my opinion it is necessary to connect the helicopter and the plane for these devices, the future, and I'm not talking now, but in the near future, we are talking about developments, maybe single copies of prototypes, for example, Su 37 ?!

          Americans have already connected, meet Bell V-22 Osprey. However, this machine did not show significant advantages over a helicopter and an airplane. Numerous restrictions on take-off and landing modes, unreliable control ... in general, not ice.
          And the F-35 is really a decent car, (I don’t know about J31), but as a counterweight, we should also have a vertical like VTOL ...

          Maybe F-35 is worthy, but not so long ago there was news (as I recently thought) about Australia's request for F-18, and the rejection of this advantage ... As a result, America itself will use F-35. Maybe they will even fly around bases like F-22. smile
          Why do we need vertical? No aircraft carriers yet. We are not going to attack anyone. It can be created of course (there is a benefit), but for this, demand should appear.
          1. InkGrey
            InkGrey 17 December 2012 16: 46
            0
            I will support the lack of urgent need for aircraft GDP. I think that in five years this issue will be resolved. Either the need for aircraft carriers and, accordingly, in similar aircraft, or ... either. I’m not at all surprised if they try to combine the topic of such an airplane with MFIs approximately by analogy with the JSF - LFI seems to be needed, an airplane with GDP would also be nice to have, however, it’s wasteful to do two completely different planes for this.
            1. Lone gunman
              Lone gunman 17 December 2012 17: 28
              -1
              "The LPI seems to be needed, an airplane with a GDP is also a good idea, but making two completely different aircraft for this is wasteful." If we didn’t spend on weapons, then apart from a stone ax, we wouldn’t have anything, and now it’s not 90 years when we were in full ... ope.
          2. Lone gunman
            Lone gunman 17 December 2012 17: 10
            -3
            "about Australia's request for the F-18", so they all counted on the F-22, and the amers showed them a fig, they say there are top-secret alien technologies like))). They will sell both the F-22 and F-35, when the T-50 (Su-XX) enters the market - this is not a question, you think we only bought the Mistral technology for helicopters, and on the way, we need a next-generation VTOL aircraft carrier rather than F-35 !!!













            0
            1. Wedmak
              Wedmak 17 December 2012 17: 29
              0
              Well, that's when they will sell, then we'll see. It’s even interesting to know how much the price of serial export F-22 or F-35 will decrease. And also their LTH. laughing So, the Americans very cleverly fooled 10 countries with a new fighter, this can not be taken away from them.
              Mistral, generally not a very clear acquisition for us. For example, I think that this is nothing more than a projection of force in our territorial waters + floating command posts. In some cases, it can be used for evacuation from a natural disaster area on the coast. That's all.
              1. Su24
                Su24 17 December 2012 23: 00
                -1
                It will not decrease, but increase, because The export price is always higher than when ordering your own MO. The example of Norway is indicative.
          3. patsantre
            patsantre 17 December 2012 19: 28
            +1
            Quote: Wedmak
            The Su-35S is certainly good, but if my memory serves me right, this series of machines is already approaching (or has come) at the maximum of its potential.

            And our 4 + based on the MiG-29 do not come close to the maximum of their potential?
            Quote: Lone gunman
            QUESTION FOR SPECIALS - but what about the light class type F 35

            It’s a mistake to consider the F-35 light, it’s rather average.
            Quote: Wedmak
            Our Mig-35C generation 4+ in the light class, it fully matches their 5

            MiG-35S? About this for the first time I hear, maybe behind time)
            Nevertheless, I fundamentally disagree with your statement. Many people like to compare the Su-35S and F-35, and indicate that the drying performance is higher. This comparison is not true, in the aspect that it has a higher performance, and everything else (avionics, stealth did not take into account). But back to the MiG-35. For many performance characteristics, it does not even exceed the F-35, in range, for example. I'm not talking about the superiority of the F-35 in avionics and stealth. you also need to consider that the MiG-35 was created to gain air supremacy, and the F-35 is essentially a universal, although in principle the MiG-35 can also work on the ground. But it has one good advantage - it is much cheaper.
            1. Wedmak
              Wedmak 17 December 2012 19: 57
              0
              Yes, MiG-35С, I didn’t mix anything up, he went into the series, 3-th recently took off.
              And our 4 + based on the MiG-29 do not come close to the maximum of their potential?

              I think the MiG-35С came up, just the most tricked out of this series. But there is one more side - it seems that we have enough money (or maybe they didn’t want to scatter forces) for only one program of a heavy fighter, moreover it is more universal than a light one.
              Many people like to compare Su-35С and Ф-35, and indicate that the TTX is higher in drying. This comparison is not true, in the aspect that it has higher TTX and everything else (avionics, stealth did not take into account)

              I don’t know, I don’t know ... I didn’t compare them, they are from different classes.
              But let us return to the MiG-35. For many performance characteristics it does not even surpass the F-35, in range, for example. I’m not talking about the superiority of the F-35 in avionics and stealth. And we must also bear in mind that the MiG-35 gaining dominance in the air, and the F-35 is essentially a station wagon, although in principle the MiG-35 can also work on the ground. But it has one good advantage - it is much cheaper.

              That's right they said, MiG fighter gaining superiority in the air. But it is by no means conquered by long-range missiles, but by close battles over the front line. Now tell me, who is more likely to win? The MiG has two engines, high maneuverability, a large set of missiles. What does the F-35 have? One engine. Only 4 missiles will fit into its scanty compartments, not a lot ... Maneuverability is also not so hot ... Stealth is generally for the most part a myth. The price is also of great importance - which country allows itself to lose dozens of such expensive cars?
              1. patsantre
                patsantre 17 December 2012 20: 24
                +1
                Quote: Wedmak

                Yes, MiG-35С, I didn’t mix anything up, he went into the series, 3-th recently took off.

                Yes, there is no MiG-35S, there is just a MiG-35. Even he just drove into the search engine, he did not find any MiG-35S, in my opinion one of us is blunting)
                Quote: Wedmak
                I think the MiG-35С came up, just the most tricked out of this series. But there is one more side - it seems that we have enough money (or maybe they didn’t want to scatter forces) for only one program of a heavy fighter, moreover it is more universal than a light one.

                Perhaps I agree, but I didn’t say that we urgently need to start another project of the 5th generation, although it’s worth considering. If the F-35 turned out to be such a shit that some consider it (and intelligence is still more visible), then you can try , and by the time the series began this aircraft he would not have serious competitors for export ...

                Quote: Wedmak
                I don’t know, I don’t know ... I didn’t compare them, they are from different classes.

                It's just that when they compare our plane with the Amer plane (it doesn’t matter which planes), they like to put pressure on what our TTX is better in a dispute. And when comparing the MiG-35 with the F-35, ours has this advantage, or is, or not, is no longer clear.

                Quote: Wedmak
                That's right they said, MiG fighter gaining superiority in the air. But it is by no means conquered by long-range missiles, but by close battles over the front line.

                But here I deeply disagree. Why did you draw such a conclusion? Will they really observe each other on the radar from a long distance and wait for rapprochement? In my opinion, air combat in most cases starts from the moment when one plane illuminates the other on the radar (and here is the first factor: The F-35 radar, most likely, is much more powerful, and it is hardly noticeable, + their medium-range missiles are longer-range).
                As for the BVB, it’s difficult to judge, again. Of course, the F-35 is a pregnant cow compared to the MiG. And the MiG has a much better chance of sitting on the tail of the F-35. That's only if you take into account the capabilities of the F-35 avionics, most likely no one will have to sit on the tail. He can go back and up, and wherever you want to launch the rocket. Honestly, if the F-35 all-round view is really implemented at the level at which it is generally accepted, then it is simply impossible to judge the outcome BVB between these two planes.
                1. Wedmak
                  Wedmak 17 December 2012 20: 37
                  0
                  Well, yes, maybe I made a mistake with the letter "C", I admit.
                  But here I deeply disagree. Why did you draw such a conclusion? Will they really observe each other on the radar from a long distance and wait for rapprochement? In my opinion, air combat in most cases starts from the moment when one plane illuminates the other on the radar (and here is the first factor: The F-35 radar, most likely, is much more powerful, and it is hardly noticeable, + their medium-range missiles are longer-range).

                  Why such a conclusion? The Americans also thought that BVB with the advent of missiles is a thing of the past, Vietnam set their brains on them. So it is here. The set of long-range missiles is not large, they are heavy, large. Not the fact that they get it yet.
                  That's just, if you take into account the capabilities of the F-35 avionics, he will most likely not need to sit on his tail anyone. He can go back and up, and where you want to launch the rocket. That's honest, if the F-35 all-round view is really implemented at the level at which it is generally accepted, it is simply impossible to judge the outcome of the BVB between the two aircraft.


                  Their radar still has problems tracking the target against the background of the earth, so with proper tactics, getting to the F-35 is quite possible. After which the enemy pilot will only have to catapult. As for the all-round visibility and missile guidance, there are very strong doubts.
                  1. patsantre
                    patsantre 17 December 2012 20: 57
                    +1
                    Quote: Wedmak
                    Why such a conclusion? The Americans also thought that BVB with the advent of missiles is a thing of the past, Vietnam set their brains on them. So it is here. The set of long-range missiles is not large, they are heavy, large. Not the fact that they get it yet.


                    50 years have passed since then. The missiles themselves, as well as the means of detection and target designation, have stepped up several steps.

                    Quote: Wedmak
                    The set of long-range missiles is not large, they are heavy, large.

                    And who is talking about DB missiles? The most recent development of medium-range missiles has a range of 180 km with a weight of not more than 200 kg.
                    AIM-120C-7 has a range of 120 km with a mass of only 160 kg. A little more MB missiles with a mass of 100-120 kg.
                    1. Wedmak
                      Wedmak 17 December 2012 21: 08
                      0
                      50 years have passed since then. The missiles themselves, as well as the means of detection and target designation, have stepped up several steps.

                      What 50 years, what are you talking about? We are talking about today.
                      I could be wrong, but like the F-35, it cannot carry a medium-range missile modification at 180 km, only at 120. At maximum range, such a missile has a small chance of defeat. Especially for such an actively maneuvering target as the MiG-29 / 35.
                      1. patsantre
                        patsantre 17 December 2012 21: 55
                        0
                        Quote: Wedmak
                        What 50 years, what are you talking about? We are talking about today.


                        Quote: Wedmak
                        Vietnam ruled


                        Themselves about Vietnam have begun.

                        Quote: Wedmak
                        I could be wrong, but like the F-35, it can’t carry a modification of a medium-range missile at 180 km, only 120.


                        The first time I've heard...
                        Quote: Wedmak
                        At maximum range, such a missile has a small chance of defeat. Especially for such an actively maneuvering target as the MiG-29/35.


                        Do you confuse this missile with DB missiles by chance? Yes, and how is it so different from MD missiles that it has a small chance of defeat?
                      2. Wedmak
                        Wedmak 17 December 2012 22: 48
                        0
                        Do you confuse this missile with DB missiles by chance? Yes, and how is it so different from MD missiles that it has a small chance of defeat?

                        The farther, the less chance of defeat. This is generally not a secret.
                      3. patsantre
                        patsantre 18 December 2012 16: 58
                        0
                        How are the range and chance of defeat related?
                        Then our best in the world of air defense is not the best in the world, and she does not need to shoot at distances of 200-400 km.
        2. ikrut
          ikrut 17 December 2012 20: 24
          +1
          The F-35 is not a VTOL at all. Is only that the version of the F-35B - and even then - half. Short takeoff and vertical landing. But even here not everything is simple. The F-35V can even sit upright only without a load of fuel and weapons. Those. - empty. So it's not even half VTOL. Maybe about a quarter :))) Not so "worthy". By all characteristics, it is limited. A tribute to unification - trying to create a single plane for all occasions. But so far no one has canceled the "golden law of mechanics" - "Community is inversely proportional to power." Those. - the airplane promises to be not very bad. Although rather weak, according to modern requirements. No more.
  14. Uncle
    Uncle 17 December 2012 17: 48
    +3
    I saw a familiar face, in the center, in a blue jumpsuit and a round helmet ... Nice ...
  15. Administrator
    Administrator 17 December 2012 18: 43
    -2
    By 2025 there will be 20 planes at best. Until 2030 they will finish testing everyone. In 2035 they will find a problem. In 2040 they will solve and say everything, print. So we are waiting for 100 planes in 2050. China will paste in 2020 and sell the first 2025 in 300. Stupid writability? No, realism of optimism.
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 17 December 2012 19: 58
      +4
      No, not even pessimism, and not the realities of optimism. Just stupid.
    2. ikrut
      ikrut 17 December 2012 20: 30
      +4
      Neither "pissimism" nor "really optimism". Among our people, this is called "bullshit". This is not to offend the bearer of "thoughts".
      1. Administrator
        Administrator 18 December 2012 14: 39
        -1
        I hope that the truth is yours, and I really am talking nonsense. drinks
  16. Quiet
    Quiet 17 December 2012 19: 00
    0
    obeyed the controls and did not have any problems with engines or electronic equipment.


    Found than boasting !!!!! fool Everything on it is raw ... Unfortunately .....
    1. ikrut
      ikrut 17 December 2012 20: 33
      +3
      For this, tests are carried out so that "raw" becomes "digestible". And no one else has it. Look, the F-22 is still "raw", although it has been a long time since they were put into service.
      So, that regret is out of place. IMHO.
  17. Karmin
    Karmin 17 December 2012 19: 37
    +2
    Quote: Quiet
    Everything on it is raw ... Unfortunately .....

    Of course raw! What did you want ?! This is the latest development. That would take, for example, avionics MiG-21BIS, then you probably would not have regrets!

    Quote: Administrator
    Stupid writability?

    That's it!
  18. Stavros-dok
    Stavros-dok 17 December 2012 21: 04
    -1
    Everything goes the way. In such matters it is impossible to rush. The preparation of complex systems, nodes requires a certain time. I am sure. The plane will turn out to be great for the envy of gilts. bully
  19. robinson
    robinson 18 December 2012 22: 09
    0
    I don’t understand anything in aviation, except that without a spotter she isn’t needed. BUT! Our planes are the most beautiful. No options. I can watch the Su-27 aerobatics video endlessly.
  20. 916-th
    916-th 18 December 2012 22: 10
    0
    PVD tube on the nose fairing belay
    Where did the PVD tube, monsters? request
    If you choose between the AFAR antenna and the LDPE tube, I choose the LDPE tube! Return the erotic symbol of fighter aircraft to its rightful place! angry

    Our mind gave us steel arms, wings,
    And instead of chl @ na - a tube of LDPE!
  21. vovanrusich
    vovanrusich 18 December 2012 22: 41
    0
    Good news! Congratulations!