Military Review

The start of full-scale work on the PAK DA is scheduled for 2014 year.

34
The start of full-scale work on the PAK DA is scheduled for 2014 year.

In 2014, full-scale development work will begin on a promising aviation PAK DA long-range aviation complex, Russian President Vladimir Putin was told by the head of the United Aircraft Corporation Mikhail Pogosyan at a meeting on the development of the Air Force.



“This year a decision was made to speed up the work on a promising aviation complex for long-range aviation. We completed the coordination with the Ministry of Defense in September, and now we are at the stage of preparing projects to launch full-scale development work on these aircraft from next year, "Pogosyan said, RIA"News».

Recall the new strategic bomber PAK DA, which is to enter service with the Russian Air Force from 2020, will solve the tasks of the Tu-160, Tu-95MS and Tu-22. It was reported that the choice was made in favor of creating a subsonic machine based on the Tupolev family.

“According to the PAK FA, we are completing preliminary tests this year. Next year we will present the commander-in-chief (the Russian Air Force) to start state tests, ”reported Pogosyan.

He added that "in 2015, the first stage (of the tests) should be completed and we will continue to increase the functionality of this aircraft."

Earlier on Thursday, the president called for intensified work on the creation of promising long-range and front-line aviation systems.

Recall, November 20, the fifth prototype of the fifth-generation Russian fighter (PAK FA) arrived at the airfield near Moscow in Zhukovsky to conduct flight tests.

Until recently, four PAK FAs participated in the flight test program. The last fighter from this four made an independent flight from the Far East to Zhukovsky near Moscow in January of the current year. Two more fighters were tested on the ground.

T-50 (project PAK FA) - the aircraft of the fifth generation, equipped with a fundamentally new complex of avionics and advanced radar with a phased antenna array.

The first flight took place on 29 on January 2010 of the year in Komsomolsk-on-Amur, the first public demonstration of the fighter on 17 on August 2011 of the year at the MAKS-2011 international aerospace show in Zhukovsky near Moscow.
Originator:
http://vz.ru/
34 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. svp67
    svp67 29 November 2013 10: 29
    +1
    The start of full-scale work on the PAK DA is scheduled for 2014 year.
    We are waiting ... I really want everything to go successfully and quickly.
    1. Alexander Romanov
      Alexander Romanov 29 November 2013 10: 51
      +6
      Quote: svp67
      We are waiting ... I really want everything to go successfully and quickly.

      If they write that the adoption of 2020, then it is already somewhere assembled or should stand.
      1. Botanologist
        Botanologist 29 November 2013 16: 08
        +2
        Quote: Alexander Romanov
        somewhere the assembled stands or should stand.


        It was ringing, as if PAK YES was already rolling out, but it turns out that they had not yet begun to work on OCD request . Zvizdunov family
    2. AVV
      AVV 29 November 2013 11: 28
      -3
      This plane was needed yesterday !!!
      1. tronin.maxim
        tronin.maxim 29 November 2013 12: 17
        +4
        Everything at all subsonic speed confuses me. In this case, you need to make a real stealth, this is not counting the high maneuverability. The only plus that I see for subsonic PAK YES is the increased flight range multiplied by a large bomb load. In short, we are waiting!
        1. patsantre
          patsantre 29 November 2013 14: 18
          +2
          What the hell is high maneuverability?
        2. leon-iv
          leon-iv 29 November 2013 15: 51
          +1
          What for him maneuverability.
          There are 2 varinata
          1 A subsonic that can barrage for a very long time in the launch zone is not necessary for him there, and stealth is not needed, although it will be. Most likely the platform of the Kyrgyz Republic and the most powerful complex avionics-BKO-electronic warfare and so on (conditionally simpler option)
          2 Hypersonic here we sacrifice patrol time and cost.
          To be honest, I still will not take which is better. But for now I am inclined to subsonic.
          1. Odysseus
            Odysseus 29 November 2013 19: 36
            0
            Quote: leon-iv
            There are 2 varinata
            1 A subsonic that can barrage for a very long time in the launch zone is not necessary for him there, and stealth is not needed, although it will be. Most likely the platform of the Kyrgyz Republic and the most powerful complex avionics-BKO-electronic warfare and so on (conditionally simpler option)
            2 hypersonic here we sacrifice patrol time and cost

            The Chinese are doing so, one stealth in the near future (only it is supposedly supersonic, that is, half-stealth), the second hypersound in the long term.
        3. Oleg Kharkov
          Oleg Kharkov 30 November 2013 13: 48
          0
          Also, the sound of embarrassment. The only hope is that the distance of the distance of work on targets will be increased. Then the enemy air defense will need to be overcome only by the missiles themselves, and not by the plane. Which in my opinion is a huge plus.
    3. leon-iv
      leon-iv 29 November 2013 15: 47
      +1
      No, it will definitely be a long time.
    4. leon-iv
      leon-iv 29 November 2013 15: 47
      0
      No, it will definitely be a long time.
      1. Serg 122
        Serg 122 29 November 2013 17: 34
        -1
        Everyone - PAK FA - and Poghosyan - PAK DAAAAA ..... laughing
    5. And Us Rat
      And Us Rat 29 November 2013 19: 01
      +1
      Here is a video in the topic dug up fellow (I liked the music)

  2. Sirs
    Sirs 29 November 2013 10: 31
    0
    YES Pak Yes. Need over sound but with the function of a front-line bomber.
    1. 10kAzAk01
      10kAzAk01 29 November 2013 10: 47
      0
      YES Pak Yes. Need over sound but with the function of a front-line bomber.

      I still wonder how he will overcome air defense systems without supersonic?
      1. Andrew-88
        Andrew-88 29 November 2013 12: 33
        +4
        And what modern air defense systems allows you to overcome super-sound (suppose Mach 2) as opposed to subsonic (for example 850-1000 km / h) ???
        As I understand it, all modern air defense systems are missile systems with supersonic and even hypersonic speeds. Any modern rocket can catch a plane. After all, the aircraft will be discovered even on approach, and the enemy’s air defense systems will be in full combat readiness. Therefore, the rocket is likely to fly towards the plane. It doesn’t matter whether it is supersonic or subsonic ..
        Here you need to be hidden and try so that you are not noticed.
        The situation in the world has changed. Now completely different means of tracking, detection and protection. They are orders of magnitude better than they were in the 70-80 years. Now the whole world is under a cap. You can track everything.
        Previously, supersonic was needed to respond to aggression as quickly as possible. And now this is best done by the Strategic Missile Forces and the nuclear submarines. Long-range aviation, if it will participate, is only in the second tier.
    2. S-200
      S-200 29 November 2013 10: 48
      -4
      Quote: Sirs
      YES Pak Yes. Need over sound but with the function of a front-line bomber.

      PAK YES should already be hypersonic ...
      all other intermediate options - yesterday the American aircraft industry negative
      then it’s easier - the next modernization of the TU-95 without problems! winked

      PS I give Putin a free hint ...
      we need to work together to create PAK YES with the Americans!
      and this "absurd" idea "can be reasoned quite competently and mutually beneficial!
      (see our military technical cooperation with the Germans before the war)
  3. The comment was deleted.
  4. IRON_MAN
    IRON_MAN 29 November 2013 10: 33
    +6
    According to the NATO classification, the aircraft will be called 2 PAC bully
  5. Poruchik 90
    Poruchik 90 29 November 2013 10: 45
    0
    Success and no delays!
    1. Apollo
      Apollo 29 November 2013 10: 50
      +5
      quote-Recall, on November 20, the fifth prototype of the fifth-generation Russian fighter (PAK FA) arrived at the Zhukovsky airfield near Moscow for flight tests.

      quote-T-50 (PAK FA project) is a fifth-generation aircraft equipped with a fundamentally new avionics system and a promising radar station with a phased antenna array.
  6. Dmitry Zurn
    Dmitry Zurn 29 November 2013 10: 46
    +7
    Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen! Interesting article. However, it is somehow completely incomprehensible how one machine can replace three such different systems at once (medium bomber Tu-22 (over sonic M-about 2), long-range Tu-95, long-range supersonic missile carrier Tu-160 M-2)). would not work, the same as with the "Bulava". They can build something in the amount of twenty units, reduce the entire bomber aircraft, they say we have a universal toy, why duplicate tasks, spread the budget. By the time of the elections, we will be told on TV that the long-range aviation has been completely renewed by 100% and that one of the reformers will be photographed against the background of the plane. Everyone will be happy, they will clap their hands. At least that's how I imagine this unification. Sincerely.
    1. clidon
      clidon 29 November 2013 20: 52
      0
      You need something at the Tu-22 dimensional level, Tu-160 range, with stealth capabilities, two configurable compartments, and preferably not at a crazy price. So one aircraft will completely replace not only the Tu-22 and Tu-160, but ideally also the Su-24/34 part, taking over the functions of front-line attack missions. Then it will be possible to build not a couple of dozen, but up to hundreds of such machines.

      But one thing is clear, they will not particularly drive with the production of this machine. While there are still living Tu-22M and Tu-95/160.
  7. morpogr
    morpogr 29 November 2013 10: 59
    0
    I hope there will be no delays or delays. The main thing is to become the best among analogues.
  8. not good
    not good 29 November 2013 11: 05
    -3
    But Poghosyan has already sewn new pockets to his jacket. The second superjet would not have turned out.
    1. Apollo
      Apollo 29 November 2013 11: 19
      +2
      citation-In the 2014 year, full-scale development work will begin on the advanced aviation complex of long-range aviation PAK DA ............


      1. dimon-media
        dimon-media 29 November 2013 11: 41
        0
        The melody in this video is beautiful. good
  9. Migari
    Migari 29 November 2013 11: 46
    +1
    The newest and most necessary that we have today, good luck to you T-50.
  10. sasharos
    sasharos 29 November 2013 12: 10
    +1
    Erroneous concept: first of all, due to subsonic speed, and taking into account operation in the middle of the 21st century, the impossibility of suborbital flight is, in general, a plane of the last century, and this chapter of the UAC is simply a sawyer!
    1. S-200
      S-200 29 November 2013 13: 39
      +2
      Quote: sasharos
      Erroneous concept: first of all, due to subsonic speed, and taking into account operation in the middle of the 21st century, the impossibility of suborbital flight is, in general, a plane of the last century, and this chapter of the UAC is simply a sawyer!

      This is not an erroneous concept, but an indirect recognition by management, the technological and scientific-technical backwardness of our aviation industry ... And also the unwillingness to finance an expensive direction ...
      Today, our state can only afford such a concept PAK YES ... request
  11. Prapor-527
    Prapor-527 29 November 2013 13: 32
    +3
    The last fighter from this four It is more correct to say "extreme" ... hi
    1. S-200
      S-200 1 December 2013 14: 22
      0
      Quote: Prapor-527
      It is more correct to say "extreme" ...

      In Russian (as well as any other) language, all words have a certain initial, or later acquired meaning.
      "SIT DOWN"(nothing to do with serving a sentence), and do not "sit down" (for a minute, on the edge ...)
      Last - (instance) in line, series ...
      I looked yesterday EXTREME film series ... request
      because of their superstitions, one does not need to try to impose new awkward meanings on words ...
  12. chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 29 November 2013 13: 43
    0
    The money is planned, hosh is not hosh, but you have to spend it. And people are waiting, already go under the topic of loans scored.
  13. BIGLESHIY
    BIGLESHIY 29 November 2013 14: 50
    +3

    Or maybe such bombers are needed? laughing
    1. Lyapis
      Lyapis 29 November 2013 15: 47
      +1
      The main thing is not with such a crew. wink
    2. Andrey Yuryevich
      Andrey Yuryevich 1 December 2013 06: 34
      +1
      )))))) das east fiction))) smile
  14. polkownik1
    polkownik1 29 November 2013 14: 56
    +2
    The meaning of cruising supersonic is not to overcome air defense (today this is no longer a way), but to be at the turn of the start of your missiles as quickly as possible. Moreover, in the area where the enemy’s air defense is weak or not yet available. Still, complete surprise will not work, but it is important to forestall the enemy in maneuver by forces and means. It is for this reason that the enemy goes to great lengths to reduce the flight time of any means of air attack. The enemy, but not us. Not Poghosyan. No matter how outwardly the new PAK DA looks, it will only be a modernization of existing bombers. At a super-price of a new development.
  15. shpuntik
    shpuntik 29 November 2013 15: 51
    +1
    As for the PAK FA, it’s clear that something is moving. And as for the bomber, something strange is coming. It turns out that the Soviet Union did not understand anything, when they made different planes for different tasks? The journalist Rogozin came and voiced someone's imagination. what
    Recall, the new strategic bomber PAK DA, which should enter the arsenal of the Russian Air Force from 2020, will solve the problems of Tu-160, Tu-95MS and Tu-22.
    1. Andrew-88
      Andrew-88 29 November 2013 17: 45
      +1
      In the USSR everyone understood perfectly. They did not make different planes for different tasks.
      TU-95 was designed in 1951 year !!! Under the tasks that the military put forward in the 1951 year!
      TU-22M was designed in 1965-1967 years !!! Under the tasks that the military put forward in 60's!
      TU-160 was designed at the beginning of 1970's !!! Under the tasks that the military put forward in 70's!
      In 50-70's there was no such air defense system as it is now. There were no such sensitive radars, such high-precision complexes. The calculation was that these jets quickly fly up and fulfill their task. Now everything has changed. High speed will reduce only the time of approach to the target and that’s it. She will not allow to overcome air defense.
      And probably the most important thing. Recently there was an article about the fact that there is no way not to produce, but at least repair, in the right amount, engines for the TU-160. No production facilities, no qualified personnel! Over 20 of recent years, everything fell apart. After all, even if you repeat this TU-160 engine, it will not meet modern requirements. So you need a completely new engine. And they will not have time to develop and implement it before the 2020 year.
      Probably this influenced the choice of the military in favor of subsonic.
      1. shpuntik
        shpuntik 30 November 2013 07: 59
        +1
        Andrey-88 SU Yesterday, 17:45 ↑ New
        In the USSR everyone understood perfectly. They did not make different planes for different tasks.

        Then it turns out that Tu-160, Tu-22М3, Tu-95 have the same tasks?
        If they were designed and built in different years, did they replace each other? lol
        Tu-95 is ideal for reconnaissance, TsU-has a duration of flight on the sound.
        Tu-160 longer range than Tu-22M3. Different planes for different tasks.
        Now everything has changed. High speed will reduce only the time of approach to the target and that’s it. She will not allow to overcome air defense.

        Well, then for your plane at subsonic speed it is easier to overcome missile defense? request
        Recently there was an article about the fact that there is no way not to produce, but at least repair, in the right amount, engines for the TU-160.

        Do not believe nonsense, the whole press is under control. If desired, everything can be restored. Examples? Please: VK-2500 transferred production to Russia. Make an engine for PAK FA. They make PS-90A in Perm.
        Probably this influenced the choice of the military in favor of subsonic.
        Now the military is not deciding. Gaidar institutes. hi
        1. Andrew-88
          Andrew-88 30 November 2013 20: 53
          0
          Quote: shpuntik
          Then it turns out that Tu-160, Tu-22М3, Tu-95 have the same tasks?

          Not now. They are adapted to perform various tasks. But when they were created, they all, in fact, had one main task - to convey nuclear weapons.
          The TU-95 was created after the war on those advanced technologies that were in the early 50s. A complex technology with variable wing geometry was tested at the TU-22M. In principle, these were "pen tests" before the creation of a long-range military jet. Then the TU-160 appeared, because The TU-95 no longer fully met the requirements that were imposed on the aircraft in the 70s. They had one main task - to carry nuclear weapons over a long distance.
          A new aircraft should replace them, since they can no longer meet modern requirements.
          Therefore, your statement:
          Quote: shpuntik
          It turns out that the Soviet Union did not understand anything, when they made different planes for different tasks?

          , I think is not entirely correct. These aircraft were created at different times, with different technologies, but for one main task. The fact that they are flying now is the merit of the designers.
          Quote: shpuntik
          Well, then for your plane at subsonic speed it is easier to overcome missile defense?

          Not. It’s just a lot cheaper.
          1. shpuntik
            shpuntik 1 December 2013 00: 43
            0
            Ensign
            Andrey-88 SU Today, 20:53 ↑ New
            Therefore, your statement:
            Quote: shpuntik
            It turns out that the Soviet Union did not understand anything, when they made different planes for different tasks?
            , I think is not entirely correct.

            I understood you.
            These aircraft were created at different times, with different technologies, but for one main task. The fact that they are flying now is the merit of the designers.
            Gliders can serve for a long time, change engines, electronics is cheaper than making a new plane. For example: IL-476. Oh yes, I almost forgot, there is a relative of Rogozin, there is interest in the TSZT. yes
            Not. It’s just a lot cheaper.
            Not sure. How much cheaper? There are no miracles in aerodynamics; gliders are unlikely to do better. Engines, yes, but it’s cheaper to upgrade the old ones than to build new plants, to make equipment. This is, firstly, and secondly, the well-known principle is not respected: first build a new one, then destroy the old one.
            Therefore, I repeat: all these conversations are aimed at reassuring the military, a kind of "breakfast feeding", and at the same time to the gradual disappearance of strategic aviation as a class. It is the enemies of the state that do this.
            When you are brainwashed about the high cost of armaments, and at the same time, 90 billion a year is flowing out of the country, is that what you think ?? 15% inflation, does it mean anything? If the annual profit of an enterprise in the West of 15% was considered a good result, then on the contrary, they charge you an additional tax in the same amount. What PAK YES are we talking about, what are we arguing about? I proceed from this in reasoning, through the prism of economics I look at these bravura statements.
            By the way, $ 90 billion is 90 nuclear submarines per year. We don’t need so much, this is for comparison. We take into account that 90 lard are official statements, apparently without taking into account cash and precious metals.
  16. 1c-inform-city
    1c-inform-city 29 November 2013 16: 01
    +1
    Stealth is complete bullshit! The American military-industrial complex at one time smuggled through this wretched and very expensive concept, money was stolen immeasurably now, and our "comrades" are working in the same direction. They will create squalor like B-2, which, due to its size, will still be visible, only it may not be in time to the launch area due to speed.
  17. alone
    alone 29 November 2013 20: 05
    0
    what And I thought that at least one PAK YES is already ready at least. It will only be released in 2014.
  18. complete zero
    complete zero 29 November 2013 23: 39
    0
    so I’ll be a fool and die, but for the life of me I don’t understand what kind of "invisibility" we can talk about - when the flight routes of the "strategists" have long been known to everyone (that we are theirs and ours) - and all these zones are covered as land-sea groups and air ... its one hell will be found, but many such expensive (aircraft) and cannot be ...