Tuesday, March 9, 2010

PAK FA with 'Brahmos'

The PAK FA chief designer Alexander Davydenko said, that during development work, the fight between T-50 and F-22 was modeled with good outcome for T-50. He also informed that the new avionics, weapon systems are already exist but will appeared latter since the 1st prototype is not ready for actually weapon carrying. The 2015 as the end term for starting serial supply was confirmed too. 
Most inportant he said, T-50 will be built together with India 'in parity principle 50 and 50%', and can be equipped with 'Brahmos' missiles. It's first official confirmation about possibility of 'Brahmos' installation on PAK FA/FGFA fighter. However, it's not clear whether these missiles would be installed internally or externally. Anyway, it can be 1-2 missiles only due to heavy weight of 'Brahmos' supersonic missile. 

He also denied any negotiations with Chinese about PAK FA. 
Early, the Sukhoi chief Pogosyan informed that KNAAPO modernizes its manufacturing capabilities for T-50 production.  He confirmed too that the only partner on PAK FA program is India. Other countries can only purchase the export version of T-50, which will be built together by Russia and India. The T-50 variant for IAF can be almost similar to the Russian one but built in India, he said. He also confirm that Indian side will take as 50% of all program work despite the fact that now 'Russia is well ahead' in this program. The first prototype will be transferred to Zhukovsky. All testing program includes as 2000 flying till 2015. A number of prototypes will take participation in it.

Other Indo-Russian program is successfully follow too: the Indian sources in Moscow confirmed negotiations for more 42 Su-30MKI purchase.  
the pictures above are taken from the internet 


  1. Igor buddy does this mean brahmos 2???
    which should be ready before PAK FA enters service.
    Imagine PAK Fa with hypersonic cruise missile capability :):):):):):)

  2. I remember seeing a picture of R-77s in an internal bay in the mid 1990s.
    It was just a line drawing, but it had 4 R-77s mounted side by side in an internal weapons bay.
    First of all I should point out that the R-77 was designed from the start to be stored internally.
    The standard launch rail for the R-77 has a catapult built in to it that throws the missile down at launch, even from an external wing pylon.
    With the rear grid fins folded you could store 4 side by side in an internal weapon bay smaller than the width of 4 R-77 missiles by having them staggered vertically so that the two upper missiles are closer together than one missile width but because the two other missiles hang below they can be closer together than one missile too.
    Because all the missiles are thrust downwards at launch as long as you launch the two lower missiles first then all 4 missiles should have no problems with clearance or separation.

  3. Is there such a thing as 'external bay' or do you mean 'external pylons'?

  4. Thanks for the correction Igor.

    Regarding PAK FA with BrahMos II, it should be a formidible combination, especially for a Russian only model not restricted by the MTCR.
    The irony is that the MTCR (missile technology control regime) prevents Russia from selling India missile technology for weapons with warheads greater than 500kgs or flight ranges of more than 300kms, but because India didn't sign the MTCR treaty India could sell to anyone they like a missile with a heavier warhead and longer range than any weapon Russia could sell on the international market.
    I think the only place such a missile could be carried would be between the engines and unless a stealthy external pod could be developed the missile itself would need a long range to compensate for the reduction in stealth it would impose on the PAK FA.
    If it can't be made stealthy it would make more sense to use the Tu-22M3 to carry perhaps 4 Brahmos II missiles each and use PAK FA as escorts.
    Of course once you have created an external stealthy pod to carry Brahmos II on the PAK FA then it could be used for all sorts of things like 360 degree radar or extra fuel or AAMs or other ordinance... or even dozens of towed decoys and anti radiation missiles for SEAD missions.
    The potential uses make it sound almost worth the investment.

  5. to igorr

    is mig35 under construction or not?

  6. to GarryB:

    ==once you have created an external stealthy pod to carry Brahmos II on the PAK FA then it could be used for all sorts of things like 360 degree radar or extra fuel or AAMs or other ordinance... or even dozens of towed decoys and anti radiation missiles for SEAD missions.==

    - Would be interesting to see, how it can be looked on PAK FA even in principle? any proposition?

  7. The only planes I remember seeing an external pod that contained weapons were bombers.
    The Hustler bomber on the American side because of lack of internal space, and the Bear could carry external bomb carrying pods for bombing airfields and the like with lots of smaller bombs than could be carried internally.
    Regarding the Bears pod I think it could carry up to three pods each filled with 250 or 500 kg bombs.
    Of course the purpose of a pod for the PAK FA would be stealthy or something that can be detached in flight when stealthy flight is required.
    The pod could even be like a UAV when not fitted with a Brahmos II, and when it is fitted with Brahmos II it could be like the supersonic Club missile with a slow subsonic perhaps high flying stealthy vehicle that is fired towards the target and when the pod runs out of fuel the Brahmos II is launched like the warhead of the supersonic model of the Club missile, to accelerate and climb further to extend range and conceal the position of the launch aircraft.
    My assumption would be that the Brahmos II will want to be stealthy from the front at least so the pod can have the Brahmos sticking out the front and when it isn't being used with the Brahmos then another stealthy front could be designed for other payloads.
    The sides and the rear of the pod would need to be stealthy but can include aerodynamic fairings that also keep RCS to a minimum (at least till launch).
    I have seen videos of the air launched version of the Club series missiles that show the missiles being carried in large outer shells that open after launch to release the club missile.
    This I believe is largely because the Club is a naval missile designed to be fired from a "tube".
    Making the same for the Brahmos II should be quite easy as it is to be sub and ship launched too.
    The main problem will of course be space as the Brahmos II will be huge and the design of the undercarriage means the inner wing position is not really an option and it is too large and heavy for outer wing pylons.
    It is probably too ambitious, though perhaps we have only seen the prototype and the final two seat in service model has one long large weapons bay so the Brahmos II can be mounted semi conformally under the aircraft...
    Who knows... :)

  8. Would add that when the external pod was carried without the Brahmos II it could carry all the weapons in its lower area and the internal weapons bays could carry extra fuel so that if the front of the pod had expensive bits and pieces in it like radar antenna arrays or IR systems and laser target marking systems then the aircraft could use the weapons in the pod and not have to drop it to use weapons in the belly weapons bay.
    The entire pod can be pretty much any shape above and would probably work best from a RCS if it was a fully conformal pod that completely filled the gap between the engines.
    When carrying Brahmos II this would give it a strange upper shape after launch but would allow weapons within the weapon bay to be used normally.
    As I said however it would probably be much easier to load 4 missiles on the Tu-22M3 and perhaps 6 missiles for whatever is replacing the AS-16... if there is one... in its bomb bay.
    Or how about this... New AESA array for the Tu-22M3 with 4 Brahmos IIs on the external pylons and which ever missile wins the long range AAM battle, whether it is the K-100, KS-172, R-37, or R-37M you can put 6 of these 400km range AAMs in the bomb bay using one of the largest AESAs in the air to guide it on any AWACs or AEW aircraft guarding the target ships.
    Add some PAK FAs in support and perhaps the USN might find some money for something better than the Super Hornet and the F-35.

  9. Gary B:

    A <300km range hypersonic missile will be a joke.Basically the rumor is the brahmos and brahmos 2 are something like 650-700km range missiles but are classified under 300km by 1>showing an impractically large no. of S curves to target.2>a nudge nudge wink wink digital limiter which can easily be over clocked by India.

  10. http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-PAK-FA-Multimedia.html

  11. This is rather off topic Igor, but I was wondering it you knew much about the RPG-32.
    In particular, the sighting system that can be attached to the two different calibre rocket types with two types of warhead for each calibre.
    Does the sight contain a laser rangefinder and ballistic computer to generate an accurate aiming point for the user or is it just a useful mount that will allow the use of two different calibre rockets and two different rocket warhead types for each calibre to be used with a standard launcher?

  12. to Garry:

    According to my knowledge, it has no, but no need since the optic sight with zoom makes the same work well. Also the laser light can trigger the enemy tank soft-kill ADS. What is really needed - the IR sight for aiming through fog and during night-time. I can guess they work on this with some Russian IR sight developer, but dont know outcome.

  13. See photos of Pak-Fa prototype being built at the factory; see the glass cockpit for the first time, and more: http://blog.daum.net/trent/8211902

  14. The first link posted go to the wrong page. Correct link below. Pak-Fa prototype being built at the factory; see the glass cockpit for the first time, and more - Pak-fa with paint:


  15. NEW DELHI: Giving a fillip to their ties, India and Russia on Friday signed 19 pacts, including three in civil nuclear field and one for purchase of 29 MiG-29 fighters besides inking the revised agreement on Gorshkov aircraft carrier, a deal that was stuck for three years over price.

  16. IGOR, any news from your end? Esp on defence cooperation during Putin's visit to Delhi?

  17. to GarryB:
    ==Lase something next to the tank to get range rather than the tank itself.
    Once you are out of ammo start lasing tanks when you see them to get them to expend all their smoke grenades.===

    - Yes, but during this time the enemy tankmen can see you with theit IR sights, fire and change position.

    I know 'Cyclon' and even spoke with their representatives on the last exhibitions in Moscow and San-Pets, but didnt see yet a thermal sight for grenade-launchers. It must be adopted for the particullary specific use.

  18. to Manish Kumar:

    still few details can add to the published in Indian press. Like Russia will transfer GLONASS military codes to India for producing GLONASS devices together with India.

  19. More Pak-Fa stuff:

  20. Aviation Week article about Pak-Fa: http://blog.daum.net/_blog/ArticleCateList.do?blogid=0JgIK&CATEGORYID=318654&dispkind=B2201#ajax_history_home

  21. To Igor regarding Lasing targets.
    A laser ranger does not send a long continuous beam like a laser target marker.
    Even a Laser Target Marker will only mark the target for 1 to three seconds (one for direct fire munitions and three for indirect ballistic rounds) in Soviet and Russian use.
    A laser rangefinder will pulse the target for a fraction of a second.
    Looking through even the best thermal sight if you blink at the wrong time you could completely miss it.
    My suggestion to lase targets after you are out of ammo is to intentionally set off their defence systems like smoke and other defence systems.
    This will make them rather difficult to work near with much of the smoke systems being fast acting models with phosphorus or similar materials which make standind outside the tank rather uncomfortable.
    With the rockets not having a sustainer rocket like the RPG-7 their flight path will be rather more curved so that accurate range estimation will be critical to getting a hit.

    BTW the Russians transfering military codes for Glonass to India is genius. Indian production of GLONASS receivers with dramatically reduce price due to volume of receivers made which will benefit both countries.

  22. to GarryB:

    The problem with armored targets - they are moving and could even accelerate within seconds, so any discosure of shooter can lead to failure of the attack.

    As regards to GLONASS: of course it's welcomed development. I always asked myself, why India doesn't do at least what Ukraine does for Russian mil. complex, like gas-turbine engines (original and licensioned), radar devices, tubes for pipelines etc. Politically and strategically India is not less close with Russia than Ukraine. Of course, electronics - is one of most prospective direction on this way.

  23. India also provides a potential 1.2 billion person market for Russian technology, as long as the Russians can make the move from pure military to dual civil and military technology.
    Glonass is a good example of a military technology with significant use in civilian field.

    Regarding lasers I was thinking more in terms of ambush sitations or not conventional warfare situations where automatic tank defences that fire flares and smoke every time the vehicle is lased, setting it off all the time will cause confusion and lack of trust in the system.
    It might also use up consumable materials so when it is needed it is not available.
    From the perspective of ground troops I think working next to tanks that keep firing smoke all the time and retreating to cover would be inconvenient and drive a wedge between infantry and armour.
    Just a thought anyway... :)

  24. The problem is Russia simply does not have some of the technology india wants. If we see radars, India went with Israel and France to codevelop AESA for BMD as Russia did not have the technology at the same level. Added to this is the general US ass kissing policy of Manmohan Singh who looks upto the west as a slave looks to the master.

  25. To Anonymous (April 25, 2010 6:51 PM)

    Although, current Congress Government in India is leaning towards USA in some matters such as Iran nuclear issue etc. but I think the above statement is bit extreme. India will have reasonably good relations with US in future, but that's about it. There will be plenty of issues where interests of both will collide such as NPT/CTBT, Energy Security, Pakistan etc. Indian relations with Russia are on another level, I mean who will lease India a nuke submarine or help in indigenous nuke sub.? I would like India to have good relations with Russia in future too because we never had any conflict with them, in known history. Same can be said about China as well if we take out last 50 or so years. Sorry, it was Off-Topic though.

    Pak-Fa with Brahmos or any future Supersonic Cruise missile is an interesting idea, but it defeats the purpose somewhat mostly w.r.t stealth (assuming carried externally), maybe agility as well. Above role can be performed by Su-27,34,35 in case of Russia and Su-30 will be used in case of India.


  26. About the MTCR, correct me if I'm wrong but isn't it more like a set of guidelines than actual law? After all the USA and European countries regularly trade missiles with longer ranges like the Tomahawks and other 400+km cruise missiles.

    I'm sure if Russia and India made a strong case for a sale it would be possible for us(India) to obtain the longer range missiles we need. For instance our future SSNs need a Granat-type long range LACM.