Dismiss Notice
Welcome to IDF- Indian Defence Forum , register for free to join this friendly community of defence enthusiastic from around the world. Make your opinion heard and appreciated.

why not su-47 berkut??

Discussion in 'Indian Air Force' started by he-man, Dec 30, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Gessler

    Gessler BANNED BANNED

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2012
    Messages:
    9,745
    Likes Received:
    9,636
    Country Flag:
    India
    You and your assumptions. Assume all you want.

    Goodbye.
     
  2. Scorpion82

    Scorpion82 Captain FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2011
    Messages:
    1,051
    Likes Received:
    326
    Guys you should study the backgrounds of the I-90/MFI programmes first, look at the roots of the Su-47 design, how it evolved from the S-32 that was originally proposed by Sukhoi as its entry into the MFI programme. The MFI was the Soviets response to the ATF and was its first attempt at designing a 5th generation fighter justified by the technological progress made with 4th gen designs like the MiG-29 or Su-27 being the base. The MFI designs had a reduced frontal RCS from a design perspective, with the exception of the Jak MFI which featured similar solutions as the YF-22. After the selection of the Izd. 1.42 Yakolev ceased development of its own design. Sukhoi continued at its own risk to remain proficient in fighter design. The original S-32 was developed into the S-37 which was proposed as an alternative to the MiG MFI as Mikoyan was in deep financial trouble and struggled to continue with its development.

    Only one S-37 airframe was ever built, in 2002 it was renamed to Su-47 an unusual move as this is an inservice designation, but the Su-47 was only an experimental aircraft/technology demonstrator similar to the YF-22 or Rafale A.

    Why didn't the Russians opt for the Su-47 or the MiG MFI? Both were deemed too large and heavy and both were regarded is inadequate to challenge the F-22. The lack of proper LO characteristics were the main drawback in addition to other shortcomings. The MFI was cancelled for these reasons and the I-21 programme was launched that concluded in the PAK FA programme.

    To suggest that the Su-47 was stealthier than todays T-50 is a rather dubious claim!
     
    5 people like this.
  3. Bismarck

    Bismarck BANNED BANNED

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2013
    Messages:
    2,435
    Likes Received:
    799
    Country Flag:
    India
    I think the design (forward swept) will offer better turn, the wing design and the engine it has can help it turn tighter than any plane including F-22, Rafale, EFT, that is the advantage of Forward swept wings, but then the design is not really efficient.

    As per me, forward swept wings will need powerful engines and the fuel consumption would be very high, thus it can have all the features that are found on F-35A, but even the range would be similar (because the design is not really fuel efficient design)
    Thus it can work as a short range interceptor, and thats not really much of an advantage when it comes to short range interception.
    For example Su-47 with backward swept wings will have better range than Su-47 forward swept wing design.

    Is there any data available on range?

    The Russians built 4 prototypes maybe they were trying to get all sort of data from testing.

    Maybe Su-47 was promising, but Russian tactics would prefer to have weapons with following priorities
    1. Speed
    2. Maneuverability
    3. Range
    4. Stealth

    Thus if this is their preference sheet, then Su-47 might is not really the priority, but PAKFA becomes the more Safer design
     
    3 people like this.
  4. randomradio

    randomradio Colonel REGISTERED

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    11,206
    Likes Received:
    6,312
    I don't know how good the aerodynamics on Su-47 are nor can I compare them to PAKFA's.

    Some aspects that I do know of, Su-47 was advertised with supercruise speed of mach 1.6. PAKFA should be significantly higher. HAL had posted info about FGFA a long time ago on their website and they took it off. The range for FGFA was given as 3880 Km on internal fuel. I don't know about Berkut, but it should be lower than that.

    Regardless, Su-47 was a more advanced design in comparison to the Eurocanards with features like supercruise and internal bays. But it wasn't a LO or VLO design like PAKFA. It simply had low RCS like the Eurocanards.
     
  5. randomradio

    randomradio Colonel REGISTERED

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    11,206
    Likes Received:
    6,312
    Experimental aircraft were given military designations too. Like Su-37, Su-38 and so on.
     
  6. Scorpion82

    Scorpion82 Captain FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2011
    Messages:
    1,051
    Likes Received:
    326
    That's a rather rare exception and more owed to the fact that they were based on in service aircraft.
     
  7. he-man

    he-man Captain SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2013
    Messages:
    1,320
    Likes Received:
    275
    why are u comparing 14 year old tech to this one??

    i wanted to say that airframe of su-47 should have been retained and the electronics of pakfa and product 30 engine would have been installed had that design been selected instead of pakfa.

    i don't believe that it had higher rcs than pakfa,no.
    it just was a better design in terms of stealth,maybe too costly for russia to develop.
     
  8. he-man

    he-man Captain SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2013
    Messages:
    1,320
    Likes Received:
    275
    [MENTION=8921]Picdelamirand-oil[/MENTION]

    the rafale thread has closed down,,pls open another thread and i promise there will be no fighting there.the discussion must not stop
     
  9. he-man

    he-man Captain SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2013
    Messages:
    1,320
    Likes Received:
    275
    yes thats my intuition too

    it was a safer and cheaper design.but may i suggest that we could have designed backward swept wings while keeping other things the same??

    because pakfa is just too different,almost opposite of su-47
     
  10. Scorpion82

    Scorpion82 Captain FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2011
    Messages:
    1,051
    Likes Received:
    326
    A more even flar belly and s-ducts doesn't make a "stealth fighter". The lack of proper stealth characteristics of designs like the Su-47 and MiG MFI was the primary reason why they were dismissed and why the PAK FA programme was ultimately launched to replace the MFI. The Su-47 inherits some limited RCS treatments, but that's about it. The lack of planform alignment alone is a major disadvantages, the number of control surfaces (canards plus tailplanes) is rather detrimental to a LO aircraft! It's rather naive, to put it mildly, to believe that the Su-47 could have been any more stealthy than the T-50. The main advantage of the forward swept wing design was a perceived advantage in transonic maneuvering performance that's basically all about it. Sure the Su-47 looks mean and beautiful, but people shouldn't judge about aircraft capabilities by liking or disliking its looks, at least not people who claim to be serious anout aviation!
     
    2 people like this.
  11. he-man

    he-man Captain SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2013
    Messages:
    1,320
    Likes Received:
    275
    u were so blunt man:cry:
     
  12. Picard

    Picard Lt. Colonel RESEARCHER

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Messages:
    5,865
    Likes Received:
    3,024
    It is only temporary closure, it happened before.
     
    1 person likes this.
  13. Bismarck

    Bismarck BANNED BANNED

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2013
    Messages:
    2,435
    Likes Received:
    799
    Country Flag:
    India
    Many say that Su-47 was a technology demonstrator, but then one questions why there were 4 prototypes?

    The Sukhoi bureau as per me did want to push a radical plane that might give it an edge in 5th generation planes (F-22 and F-35) given what technologies the Russians might have incorporated, it would have matched F-22 in dogfights and out turned it. F-35 could have stood no chance. But ultimately it is not only about the planes and its technology but also the weapons that it carries. Most combat would be soon as the planes were detected by avionics and thats when the action starts. And since planes would be suited with active and passive anti missile systems, having a gun might at end be useful.

    with forward swept concept, the advantage is tighter turn, but then those who know about aerodynamics, for better speed backward swept wing is best, when the wings are not swept at all (like WW2 propeller driven planes) the advantage is better lift at the cost of some speed, but then the change from backward swept wing to forward swept wing there is no advantage of lift (thats where the canard comes in handy) and also there is strong resistance of wings and that causes drop in speed.

    At present juncture, the Russians are in position to support one "horse" of each company (sukhoi and MiG) thus there is possibility that the Russian MoD did suggest Sukhoi bureau to give it a plane which has good speed, maneuverability and ability to fight off any 4th or 5th generation plane from stand off distance. For example, if you have a gun and know how to use it, why to get into a knife fight?

    Thus the Sukhoi did try hard convincing Russia to support Su-47 but then Russia did not want to over stretch its resources of what might be a very maneuverable plane but at cost of Range.

    Maybe Sukhoi will not shelve the project but come up with the same design in another Avatar. Maybe the partner for PAKFA.
     
    2 people like this.
  14. he-man

    he-man Captain SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2013
    Messages:
    1,320
    Likes Received:
    275
    nice,thank u

    yes its the same conclusion,breakup in 1991 affected everything.

    pakfa will be cheaper to build sue to conventional inlets etc compared to the s-ducts of su-47.
    plus i love the underbelly of su-47,,,pakfa sucks at that.
     
  15. Scorpion82

    Scorpion82 Captain FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2011
    Messages:
    1,051
    Likes Received:
    326
    There was only one Su-47 not 4! This sole aircraft was a company funded technology demonstrator that could have formed the base for a production aircraft had the RuAF decided to go for it. It didn't. Sukhoi continued with flight tests and also used it to support the PAK FA programme, namely weapons bay development testing. Dunno what's its current state, but when one thing is sure then it is that we'll never see the Su-47 in operational service or even form a base for a future variant. This train is long gone.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page