As long as you don't have unrealistic expectations about it, I see no reason why not. Supposedly artificial intelligence is used even in the Su-34, and the Russians have always had an interest in trying to reduce as many decisions as possible into calculations and norms that are then more suitable for automation, while the West tends to believe military thinking is an art and can't be and shouldn't be "reduced" to a science.

Oh, indeed, you only have to look at the Alfa at their early attempts to reduce workload through automation and computers. I was just wondering what kind of things this AI would do?

I think they used old engines as the new ones aren't ready. Nothing new in that.

But hey that doesn't stop Golts letting it get in the way of a story criticising the Russian airforce and equipment.

Dont worry, there's no risk of US getting it's arse kicked. You know, they only seek easy fights and boast at the rest of the world "Look mom! Look dad! I can wipe my own arse!". US is in it's teenage years and acts like one, bullies those who cant do nothing about it and then brags about it. The rest of the world is living their 50's already, watch US go and think to themselves "Ow the youth of today..." :DL

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dU02tyBAp4A

Sorry, couldn't resist :D

Aaahhh... Nice plane russia, I think it looks better than the american thing...:up: Ive always thought the russian stuff looked abit better than the american...:yep:

That's what I thought at first, too, when reading about the old engines, but I found no confirmation for that. I also wonder whether a flight test like this makes sense if later thrust vectoring is planned anyway. It would be a "start from scratch" again. This early demonstration maybe just a PR stunt, then, to please their Indian (and also Brasilian?) partners. A website I had, mentioned Brasil, too.

:haha: Ha ha, they're only 30 years behind us now.

Going to bet they still have cable flight controls........

First look at it, it looks kind of pretty. However I see many problems with it if they're trying to achieve something like F-22/F-35.

* Too many exposed rivets are present in the airframe. This tends to reduce any hull form stealth in a big way. Also, there are no saw shaped patterns, nor does there seem to be much apparent shaping techniques utilized to break up radar emissions. Airframe has a couple of other things sticking out.

* Cockpit has a large metal frame on top. That's going to reflect radar energy. In addition to the fact that no radar absorbing material (F-22 uses gold) is placed on the cockpit canopy.

*Air intakes are large and uncanted. From a 30-120 aspect or so, any enemy fighter that shines its radar at the Pak Fa will see a nice radar reflection. (F-22 cants this angle downward - resulting in enemy aircrafts radar reflecting towards ground or away from the enemy fighters radar receiver regardless of F-22 angle of bank).

*There is no denying looking at these pictures that the rear of the aircraft is huge, resulting in a large cross section. This Pak-FA is absolutely unstealthy from the rear.

*With the size of the engines to the section of airframe fitting them, there doesn't seem to be alot of space for weapons. Unless there will be a compromise to use racks on the wings, which will of course further degrade any attempts at stealth design.

Assuming the fraction of money available to the Russians (compared to USAF) to propagate the design, modify it, and export it against F-35, just how many do you think will ever be produced? I doubt there will be many in the near term. I don't discount that this aircraft has been a step forward for Sukhoi. But looking at it as a whole, it's no F-22 or F-35.

There is space enough to carry what seems like 7 missiles inside its weapons bay, plus eventually another 6 missiles carried externally. Thats more than enough for AA combat. Heck even american jets don't carry 7 Air to Air missiles. The F-14 Tomcat used to carry at most 6 Phoenix missiles (and these were the longest range AA missiles of the day).
7 internally carried long range AA missiles are going to ruin the day of any F-22 IF the sensors are up to the job.

http://www.aereo.jor.br/wp-content/u...-fa-t-50-e.jpg
http://www.aereo.jor.br/wp-content/u...-fa-t-50-h.jpg

I think you need to remember this is a first flight and second it is the prototype. The canopy is going to be replaced by a one piece job.

Secondly we don't know what arrangement is in the intakes to hide the fans.

Thirdly if you see watch the video of take off and the stills you can clearly see two weapons bays between the engines. The keypublishing forums have an interesting thread on it.

As for the engines apparently they are thrust vectoring. An interesting thing is the LERXs can move so it is still designed with super maneuverability in mind.

AS for the rivets, You look at preproduction F-22s and F-35s before the paint is applied you can see the rivets. They are then covered up with RAM paint.

Longjam - The Russians have been using FBW for decades now.

Sure? I see nothing nowhere indicating that. But maybe I just don'T know where to look for what.


On the armament, I read 2x (!) 30mm cannons, 10 internal hardpoints (!!!), plus optional 2x4 external. That is amazing, considering the bigger fuel store needed if the plane really has twice the range of an F-22. For a stealth fighter, of course forget the external hardpoints to be loaded with weapons.

I wonder if this plane really is as stealthy as the F-22, or if maybe it is only significantly lowered in radar signature, like the Typhoon.

You may want to discuss that with some of their air-air-missiles. Some of them I'd pick over AMRAAMs or Sidewinders any day. Or their anti-tank-missiles. Tank-protection. And some more.

In the wars of the past 20 years, american forces never have faced Russian first line equipment in Russian production standard, only B- and C-grade equipment that was old and was produced for export and maintained and operated by personnel often of "sub-optimal" training.

Modern western equipment is better than 20-30 year old Russian equipment, yes. Big surprise! ;)

On a modern-versus-modern comparison, again I say they do not need to reach total equality with american standards. If they shift the kill ratios so much against american acceptance levels so that a conflict becomes too costly for the US, they have achieved their mission. And I think they definitely have the ablity to cripple a carrier battle group, or to break up an armoured land attack. and when it comes down to close combat in boots and with rifles - well, then everybody is equal amongst equals again.

http://forum.keypublishing.com/showp...5&postcount=39

Wow there seems to be a lot of rivets on the F-35 don't you think?