The first flight lasted only 17 minutes – it really is what is called the first preliminary stage after a ground test, when it is determined the main characteristics of the machine or part for their compliance with the standards of fitness and technical specification.
The pilot sat experienced, experienced more than 50 machines of different types test pilot, chief of flight service of the company «Sukhoi» Hero of Russia Sergey Bogdan.
Everything passed in a regular mode.
What kind of engine?
Still made by the machine of the fifth generation flying engine АЛ41-F1 (article 117). It is a good engine giving a thrust of 9500 kg of force (kgf) and 15 000 kgf in afterburner, with all-aspect control of the thrust vector (i.e., deviation of nozzles), and a plasma ignition system that ensure oxygen-free starting.
But about 40 test flights, conducted on the su-57, armed with this engine, showed that he was weak for the tasks for which it was established the plane. Roughly speaking, American rival the F-35 (Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II), with its 13 000 kgs could «make» our «drying» and normal, and afterburner, where it develops 19 500 kgs.
Then the «product 117» called intermediate, and disputes began to create «product 30», as he called the new engine. And now he can say, ready, time brought to the stage of flight tests.
From the information that is made public is not yet launched any new (and it really is completely new, not upgrade) the engine on the scheduled thrust 17 500 – 19 500 kgf. But in General, experts indicate that the thrust is actually significantly improved compared to the «intermediate option», and this, among other things, gives not only the increased speed capabilities, but also better dynamics of maneuvering, and with higher load and lower fuel consumption. «On this engine I can fly on afterburner much longer than today’s engine, that which is said in a conversation with Constantinople for another advantage one of the leading military experts of Russia Viktor Litovkin. — That is, it gives a higher speed for a longer time. That is not only more powerful but also more resilient».
«The aircraft of the 5th generation was the engine of the 5th generation», — concluded the expert.
Why we can do good military engines, and do not know how good civil?
«Well that’s not entirely true — he denied this point of view Viktor Litovkin. — Do we now have a good and civil engines. But here we must understand one thing: for a long time it was thought that we should not make civil aircraft and engines, because we participate in the international division of labour. Always, they say, will purchase Boeings, Airbuses, and the engines will fly it. Why do we need their production? This was the idea in the government, which is actively promoted by our liberals. But as it turned out, at any time this «tap» can be our Western «partners» is closed, and we remain with nothing».
Yes, but the military-the engine of the aircraft did not interrupt its development. Can we, for example, the same is no longer relevant «intermediate» АЛ41-F1 to transfer to civil aircraft production, let in some light, the «civil» version? And at the expense of unification would be possible to somehow «recapture» the costs of the creation of the su-57, which, according to some, achieved in a total of 60 billion roubles? Or even more, as almost always happens?
No, sorry Viktor Litovkin, in the civil sphere, the engine does not move. «Military from civil engines differ in that they are very noisy and consume a lot of fuel. All resources are directed to more power to create. And in the global civil aviation market demand environmentally friendly and economical engines, and according to these parameters we do always lagged behind. That Il-86 is a beautiful aircraft that is not inferior to Boeing, had to put on a funny, because the engine it was very noisy, and many countries have stopped taking this plane.»
As to economic considerations, the experts in the field of military-industrial complex, which was able to speak to Constantinople, demonstrate almost complete unity of views: either. That is: no, never will military production to make cheaper civil. And a military jet, in General, military product never fails, even easier, make cheaper civil. Better not to start.
Why? And initially, so start to bend the fingers experts.
First military production in Russia today is very overblown, especially in comparison with compact optimized civil proceedings. Because in the past years, saved a lot of running or half-dead plants due to the connection to the implementation of state defense orders, even if it was possible to do without them. But at a time when liberals and so all of Russia almost to death «optimized,» the conduct of the defense was natural and salutary.
Second, the defense industry is not only production, but also the specific and almost always very closed design. And power military surplus elementary design in the design of civil. Why in our aviation industry, where in the postwar years with pathos created passenger planes at the military base.
For example, the world’s first passenger jet Tu-104 was converted from a Tu-16. This, of course, greatly reduced the development time, but at the same time «cut» and quality and comfort, and even in many cases, the reliability of the machine. As explained in another example one of the experts, those who invent new types of weapons, think first of all the combat categories, and have them enter the human operator, and for civil engineering ideology is directly opposite — no man should enter into the car, and the car outline around the person…
Third: the fact that civil proceedings will cost, relatively, a million rubles, the military will cost $ 3 million. Why? And redundancy technology: if to build, for example, a civilian cargo ship at a military factory, which creates submarines, a huge amount is of no importance to him, technology will still be incorporated in the cost, because the cost of their creation is not canceled. By the way, as for the maintenance of the plant, personnel and so on.
Fourth: the military is enough functionality in the product, and civil operators to fulfill various third-party requirements. For example, certificates, standards, compliance with those requirements, the registration of the intellectual property in quite tightly regulated in the legal sense standards. So, the same collapse of the civil aviation industry in Russia, which was discussed, started with the certification of engines in accordance with the new European requirements on noise. And be advantageous to start to buy foreign aircraft, rather than developing a new model of private civil engines.
Here the circle has closed…
The exit experts see the merger of military and civilian production in one Corporation. With appropriate cooperation, standardization and savings associations that can be safely combined. In fact, movement in this direction in the Russian defense industry we see today. So it is not excluded that will come once the time for such structures as, for example, «Boeing», where unmerged, but also inseparable produced military and civilian aircraft. Or if we talk about engines — Pratt & Whitney America, where he created the product F135 for the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II.