Simviation Forum - Invisible Russian

Reply #15 - Jan 29^th, 2010 at 10:22pm

NNNG Ex Member

Quote:

The Russian do have a love affair with HUGE intakes on fighter aircraft....not exactly stealthy

F-22, YF-23 & F-35 have huge intakes at the front. What makes the intakes stealthy is mainly because they block view of the engines from all angles, and also because the intakes are fixed.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #16 - Jan 30^th, 2010 at 3:36am

C Offline
Colonel
Earth

Posts: 13144

Quote:

The Russian do have a love affair with HUGE intakes on fighter aircraft....not exactly stealthy

F-22, YF-23 & F-35 have huge intakes at the front. What makes the intakes stealthy is mainly because they block view of the engines from all angles, and also because the intakes are fixed.

Indeed, and if you want smaller intakes, then you'd be paying a performance penalty.

Simplistically, big powerful engine = big intake!

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #17 - Jan 30^th, 2010 at 8:18am

expat Offline
Colonel
Deep behind enemy lines!

Gender:
Posts: 8499

expat wrote on Jan 29^th, 2010 at 2:53pm:

specter177 wrote on Jan 29^th, 2010 at 2:17pm:

And congress still thinks it's a good idea to quit making F-22s? I just hope Lockheed doesn't destroy the tooling..

Would not be the first time, still................."no we can't start the line up, but what we can do is start on the development of the F-23A and it will only cost......."

Matt

Did I mention...........$4 billion over 4 years for development of a new long-range strategic bomber.

Matt

PETA People Eating Tasty Animals.

B1 Boeing 737-800 and Dash8 Q-400

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #18 - Jan 30^th, 2010 at 2:18pm

The Ruptured Duck Offline
Colonel
Legally sane since yesterday!
Wichita, KS

Gender:
Posts: 2614

Quote:

Well, there are only so many ways to make an effective stealth fighter, so it's a given that some aspects are going to look similar among aircraft. Obviously many people are going to jump on the "Russians are copying us again" thing which has been popular to do since the start of the Cold War.
Maybe I am just more in tune with some aspects of Russian/Ukranian aircraft design, but I can see clear, original elements of Sukhoi craftsmanship in this airplane. You can really see the Su-27 series lineage here. I hope it does well.

Russians copying US designs? Nope, no way, never happened, you're pulling stuff out of your rear end Wink

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu-4

"If you would not be forgotten, as soon as you are dead and rotten, either write things worth reading, or do things worth the writing" -Ben Franklin&&&&"Man must rise above the Earth to the top of the atmosphere and beyond, for only thus will he fully understand the world in which he lives." - Socrates&&&&" Flying is a religion. A religion that asymilates all who get a taste of it." - Me&&&&"Make the most out of yourself, for that is all there is of you"- Ralf Waldo Emerson&&

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #19 - Jan 30^th, 2010 at 2:51pm

C Offline
Colonel
Earth

Posts: 13144

The Ruptured Duck wrote on Jan 30^th, 2010 at 2:18pm:

Russians copying US designs? Nope, no way, never happened, you're pulling stuff out of your rear end Wink

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu-4

That's not a copy. It was a licence built version of the B-29...

...only they forgot the licence. Grin

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #20 - Jan 31^st, 2010 at 12:51pm

OVERLORD_CHRIS Offline
Colonel
No C-17B's, C-5M's for
Every One!
Chalreston SC

Gender:
Posts: 1148

specter177 wrote on Jan 29^th, 2010 at 2:17pm:

And congress still thinks it's a good idea to quit making F-22s? I just hope Lockheed doesn't destroy the tooling. That looks like a cross between the YF-23 and SU-27.

Ahh You beat me to it!, that's was how I described it to my boss last night when I showed it to him at work.

If PAK FA stands for: Perspektivnyi Aviatsionnyi Kompleks Frontovoi Aviatsyi - Future Air Complex for Tactical Air Forces- Why does every one keep naming the plane PAK FA? They said it was the T-50 until Sukhoi gives it its Su designator, and yet every time I read post about it, out side of here, they saying "The new Russian PAK FA flown today or what ever"

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #21 - Jan 31^st, 2010 at 6:48pm

ShaneG Offline
Colonel
I turned into a Martian!

Posts: 10000

OVERLORD_CHRIS wrote on Jan 31^st, 2010 at 12:51pm:

If PAK FA stands for: Perspektivnyi Aviatsionnyi Kompleks Frontovoi Aviatsyi ... Why does every one keep naming the plane PAK FA?

Because it just rolls off the tongue so easily. Wink

♪♫♪‼

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #22 - Jan 31^st, 2010 at 6:54pm

C Offline
Colonel
Earth

Posts: 13144

OVERLORD_CHRIS wrote on Jan 31^st, 2010 at 12:51pm:

If PAK FA stands for: Perspektivnyi Aviatsionnyi Kompleks Frontovoi Aviatsyi - Future Air Complex for Tactical Air Forces- Why does every one keep naming the plane PAK FA? They said it was the T-50 until Sukhoi gives it its Su designator, and yet every time I read post about it, out side of here, they saying "The new Russian PAK FA flown today or what ever"

Maybe they think it makes them sound cleverer, and that someone will consequently have to ask them!

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #23 - Jan 31^st, 2010 at 8:00pm

machineman9 Offline
Colonel
Nantwich, England

Gender:
Posts: 5255

Quote:

The Russian do have a love affair with HUGE intakes on fighter aircraft....not exactly stealthy

F-22, YF-23 & F-35 have huge intakes at the front. What makes the intakes stealthy is mainly because they block view of the engines from all angles, and also because the intakes are fixed.

Theres a video of the F22 somewhere where the intake design is shown. They couldn't show you the engine from the front simply because the intakes bent around such corners that it was impossible for them to get the camera in to show you.

The T-50 isn't very pretty, but I've come to just accept that Russian aircraft seem to 'do the job' rather than look pretty. If it works, it works. Why complicate things?

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #24 - Jan 31^st, 2010 at 8:11pm

DaveSims Offline
Colonel
Clear Lake, Iowa

Gender:
Posts: 2453

The Ruptured Duck wrote on Jan 30^th, 2010 at 2:18pm:

Quote:

Well, there are only so many ways to make an effective stealth fighter, so it's a given that some aspects are going to look similar among aircraft. Obviously many people are going to jump on the "Russians are copying us again" thing which has been popular to do since the start of the Cold War.
Maybe I am just more in tune with some aspects of Russian/Ukranian aircraft design, but I can see clear, original elements of Sukhoi craftsmanship in this airplane. You can really see the Su-27 series lineage here. I hope it does well.

Russians copying US designs? Nope, no way, never happened, you're pulling stuff out of your rear end Wink

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu-4

I still think the Tu-160 and the B-1 are also way too similar to be sheer coincidence.

Dave

www.flymcw.com

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #25 - Feb 1^st, 2010 at 2:10am

expat Offline
Colonel
Deep behind enemy lines!

Gender:
Posts: 8499

DaveSims wrote on Jan 31^st, 2010 at 8:11pm:

The Ruptured Duck wrote on Jan 30^th, 2010 at 2:18pm:

Quote:

Well, there are only so many ways to make an effective stealth fighter, so it's a given that some aspects are going to look similar among aircraft. Obviously many people are going to jump on the "Russians are copying us again" thing which has been popular to do since the start of the Cold War.
Maybe I am just more in tune with some aspects of Russian/Ukranian aircraft design, but I can see clear, original elements of Sukhoi craftsmanship in this airplane. You can really see the Su-27 series lineage here. I hope it does well.

Russians copying US designs? Nope, no way, never happened, you're pulling stuff out of your rear end Wink

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu-4

I still think the Tu-160 and the B-1 are also way too similar to be sheer coincidence.

Maybe, but when you are both designing an aircraft to do pretty much the same thing, there will always be similarities and even crossover points to a certain extent. It can be seen in US and Russian aircraft as much as in the designs of US contractors bidding for the same contract. Certain shapes and design features are know world wide to do a certain things at a certain speeds, hight, payload, endurance etc there are bound to be similarities.

Matt

PETA People Eating Tasty Animals.

B1 Boeing 737-800 and Dash8 Q-400

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #26 - Feb 1^st, 2010 at 12:16pm

machineman9 Offline
Colonel
Nantwich, England

Gender:
Posts: 5255

The Ruptured Duck wrote on Jan 30^th, 2010 at 2:18pm:

Quote:

Well, there are only so many ways to make an effective stealth fighter, so it's a given that some aspects are going to look similar among aircraft. Obviously many people are going to jump on the "Russians are copying us again" thing which has been popular to do since the start of the Cold War.
Maybe I am just more in tune with some aspects of Russian/Ukranian aircraft design, but I can see clear, original elements of Sukhoi craftsmanship in this airplane. You can really see the Su-27 series lineage here. I hope it does well.

Russians copying US designs? Nope, no way, never happened, you're pulling stuff out of your rear end Wink

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu-4

The Buran was an original design too Grin

Back to top

IP Logged

	Search the archive: