Russian Su-57 Aircraft Thread (PAK-FA and IAF FGFA)

[Hyperwarp]

That's jamming.
A Low observable with EW is harder to find as a Target.
There have been others who covered the Ideas. Basically the DIRCM is the Russians trying to make up for there inability to master stealth. There added Radars are means at trying to fill gaps in there detection capacity.
It's not a Super fighter it's mostly the classic difference in Russian fighter design vs Western. The Russians emphasis in the Turning close fight. The American is on dominating from moderate to long range.

Like the active cancellation system that is supposed be on the Rafale??

and, yeah, the whole idea of the Russians seem to be to force the enemy into WVR battle. Even, the hypothetical plasma-stealth idea for the MFI had a similar use (I think). I don't think there ever was any practically applicable plasma-stealth device that could be put on a fighter but the idea was interesting. Unlike the all-aspect passive stealth of the ATF, for the MFI Russians went a different route. ATF-22/23 would get first-look, first-shot at the MFI but not first-kill. Activating the plasma-stealth device would render any incoming radar guided missiles useless and the MFI would force the opponent into a dogfight. In theory, an intereting idea but never materialized.Or will the Russians pull a rabbit out of the hat.

 

[TerraN_EmpirE]

problem with plasma stealth is even if you can get it to work beyond theory... It's a double edged sword. If you can get it to work you are invisible to all Radar and everything around you is invisible to you. Ergo it's useless.

the whole idea of the Russians seem to be to force the enemy into WVR battle

All fighter pilots try and get the enemy to fight to there strengths. If you are a pilot who is lured into that fight you are in trouble.

 

[ougoah]

Is there any truth to claims that Su-57's fan blades are almost 100% hidden from direct view exactly head on due to offset placement. It does appear to be so just from photos. Similarly to YF-23 how the engine sits on a higher elevation than the intakes. Of course from many angles, parts of the blades are still visible and they are planning to install "radar blockers" to shield those angles in future IIRC? LO or not, it's indeed impossible to eyeball but from the exposed tubes, bottom inlets, lack of surface smoothness, it wouldn't be surprising if the Su-57 ends up having a higher overall and frontal RCS than others. How much higher and how effected the RuAF will be is another matter. The Su-57 aims to be an F-22 equivalent not an F-35. Given some time, F-35s can be countered with better effectiveness than manageable today. Stealth adds an important but eroding advantage. It's all an ongoing arms race. Nothing is superior for certain. One thing that is for certain is that if the Russians weren't effected economically and technologically by the breaking of the Soviet Union and kept all their industries and talents working, they would have something far better than Su-57 probably already in service. Guess it's lucky for USA history went the way it did.

 

[Hyperwarp]

Is there any truth to claims that Su-57's fan blades are almost 100% hidden from direct view exactly head on due to offset placement. It does appear to be so just from photos. Similarly to YF-23 how the engine sits on a higher elevation than the intakes. Of course from many angles, parts of the blades are still visible and they are planning to install "radar blockers" to shield those angles in future IIRC? LO or not, it's indeed impossible to eyeball but from the exposed tubes, bottom inlets, lack of surface smoothness, it wouldn't be surprising if the Su-57 ends up having a higher overall and frontal RCS than others. How much higher and how effected the RuAF will be is another matter. The Su-57 aims to be an F-22 equivalent not an F-35. Given some time, F-35s can be countered with better effectiveness than manageable today. Stealth adds an important but eroding advantage. It's all an ongoing arms race. Nothing is superior for certain. One thing that is for certain is that if the Russians weren't effected economically and technologically by the breaking of the Soviet Union and kept all their industries and talents working, they would have something far better than Su-57 probably already in service. Guess it's lucky for USA history went the way it did.

No. The fan blades are atleast partially exposed. Su-57 requires a rather complicated blocker. Only example I can think of is the blocker in the X-32. There are several patents for the PAK-FA blocker. The production version of the YF-23 had more curvature in the intake, it had an additionaal bumb and a blocker to hide the fan blades.

Blueprint:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Fan CGI of a F-23:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Vs

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Air Force Brat]

Is there any truth to claims that Su-57's fan blades are almost 100% hidden from direct view exactly head on due to offset placement. It does appear to be so just from photos. Similarly to YF-23 how the engine sits on a higher elevation than the intakes. Of course from many angles, parts of the blades are still visible and they are planning to install "radar blockers" to shield those angles in future IIRC? LO or not, it's indeed impossible to eyeball but from the exposed tubes, bottom inlets, lack of surface smoothness, it wouldn't be surprising if the Su-57 ends up having a higher overall and frontal RCS than others. How much higher and how effected the RuAF will be is another matter. The Su-57 aims to be an F-22 equivalent not an F-35. Given some time, F-35s can be countered with better effectiveness than manageable today. Stealth adds an important but eroding advantage. It's all an ongoing arms race. Nothing is superior for certain. One thing that is for certain is that if the Russians weren't effected economically and technologically by the breaking of the Soviet Union and kept all their industries and talents working, they would have something far better than Su-57 probably already in service. Guess it's lucky for USA history went the way it did.

NO! there's not, LOL, then you go on to argue that "its indeed impossible",,, NO its NOT impossible to assess the RCS of any given aircraft based on shaping, you go on to cite exposed tubes, bottom inlets, blah, blah, blah, concluding with "it wouldn't be surprising if the Su-57 ends up having a higher overall and frontal RCS"!

I'm NOT even going to get into "F-35's can be countered with??? "better effectiveness",,,, or "Stealth adds an important but eroding advantage"??

No doubt our adversaries are trying to "duplicate" the L/O aspects of the F-22, F-35, F-117,,, no doubt the Russians have made a serious effort with the Su-57?

and no doubt it likely has better L/O numbers than the Su-35, but not low enough to justify the additional expense....

and those early structural issues appear to have been addressed and fixed, the Su-57 is a very good airplane, it does have some L/O advantages over the Flanker, and they will keep working to improve those numbers.

 

[ougoah]

NO! there's not, LOL, then you go on to argue that "its indeed impossible",,, NO its NOT impossible to assess the RCS of any given aircraft based on shaping, you go on to cite exposed tubes, bottom inlets, blah, blah, blah, concluding with "it wouldn't be surprising if the Su-57 ends up having a higher overall and frontal RCS"!

I'm NOT even going to get into "F-35's can be countered with??? "better effectiveness",,,, or "Stealth adds an important but eroding advantage"??

No doubt our adversaries are trying to "duplicate" the L/O aspects of the F-22, F-35, F-117,,, no doubt the Russians have made a serious effort with the Su-57?

and no doubt it likely has better L/O numbers than the Su-35, but not low enough to justify the additional expense....

and those early structural issues appear to have been addressed and fixed, the Su-57 is a very good airplane, it does have some L/O advantages over the Flanker, and they will keep working to improve those numbers.

 

[ougoah]

I don't know whether you're confused and misunderstood my post or what you're trying to actually say. Apart from the F-35 is uber cool and the usual grand assumptions and statements people like to make for some reason.

 

[Air Force Brat]

I don't know whether you're confused and misunderstood my post or what you're trying to actually say. Apart from the F-35 is uber cool and the usual grand assumptions and statements people like to make for some reason.

Actually ougoah you're the one making grandiose statements about the Su-57, (which you then contradict with your own assessment)?

I think its a great airplane, by the Russians own admission?? (We won't compromise maneuverability for L/O), the L/O numbers are much higher than the Russians or the Indians anticipated...

That's the reason the Russians limited access to the Indians, (not a single sortie, by a single Indian pilot), and they kept the Indians out of the technical data as well, so the Indians have basically thrown up their hands in disgust??

the Russians themselves, cut their own buy from around 100 airplanes to 12, (which are going to a T & E squadron), and purchased the Su-35 instead,,, there's nothing confusing about the facts, they speak for themselves.

 

[ougoah]

Actually ougoah you're the one making grandiose statements about the Su-57, (which you then contradict with your own assessment)?

I think its a great airplane, by the Russians own admission?? (We won't compromise maneuverability for L/O), the L/O numbers are much higher than the Russians or the Indians anticipated...

That's the reason the Russians limited access to the Indians, (not a single sortie, by a single Indian pilot), and they kept the Indians out of the technical data as well, so the Indians have basically thrown up their hands in disgust??

the Russians themselves, cut their own buy from around 100 airplanes to 12, (which are going to a T & E squadron), and purchased the Su-35 instead,,, there's nothing confusing about the facts, they speak for themselves.

Um no. This is 100% untrue. It is you who insist on making ambiguous and passively snide remarks and then saying cheap stuff like ..." but it's a fantastic plane and I love it etc etc" like the tone in most of your posts. Mine are pretty unambiguous. I have doubts about Su-57s LO. This is where semantics come into play since I can't give frontal or overall RCS, BUT I do suggest that I would not be surprised if it were lower than F-22 etc. I also make the clear disclaimer that Russians may have other thoughts and be heading in different directions than pursuing stealth the American way. I have not once contradicted myself. If anyone's comprehension is poor enough to think so, I challenge them to find a quote given the full context.

BTW any reasonable human being would say that your statement about F-35 certainly being superior is the only grandiose statement around for pages. Another passive aggressive thing you like doing is liking other people's posts you clearly have a problem with. I don't think anyone can make sense of your first response to my post which is clear and unambiguous... quite unlike the stuff you wrote.

 

[ougoah]

Let's break it down.

NO! there's not, LOL, then you go on to argue that "its indeed impossible",,, NO its NOT impossible to assess the RCS of any given aircraft based on shaping, you go on to cite exposed tubes, bottom inlets, blah, blah, blah, concluding with "it wouldn't be surprising if the Su-57 ends up having a higher overall and frontal RCS"

Yes it is impossible to know for sure from viewing 2D online images. You wouldn't know even if you were trained in the field... which btw you are not.

I'm NOT even going to get into "F-35's can be countered with??? "better effectiveness",,,, or "Stealth adds an important but eroding advantage"??

Okay fine. Don't mention it then. If you do mention something, make a clear point please. Since you will not, I will defend my statement. All military developments and inventions eventually found themselves to be countered with varying levels of success. This is just the nature of how technology evolves. Ergo, VLO platforms will also end up with their advantage eventually diminished with time, particularly true since they are static... no matter how you modify an F-35 or J-20, they will reach limits. This is not untrue or unreasonable.

No doubt our adversaries are trying to "duplicate" the L/O aspects of the F-22, F-35, F-117,,, no doubt the Russians have made a serious effort with the Su-57?

What's the point here?? Seriously don't understand people who go on with the blah blah blah and never end up making a single point. Even the suggestion or any implication of a point eludes me here. Are you trying to say the USA is ahead and other's are imitating? Just say it as it is. And if this is the case, so what? How does this little sentence add any value or say something everyone doesn't already know? Russians like the Chinese certainly see value in VLO. Su-57 and J-20 etc do not indicate anything else about their respective military programs that exist outside these projects, aimed directly at countering US stealth. Just because a nation invests in developing stealth fighters does not mean they think stealth fighters are the be all end all.

and no doubt it likely has better L/O numbers than the Su-35, but not low enough to justify the additional expense....

Expense is a function of so many factors. We can guess at a few but I doubt you know all of them. Therefore you don't know the utility calculations behind these decisions. Yes it should definitely have better RCS than Su-35 but how much better? If not better enough to justify costs as you suggest, why did they even develop it? Of course at this point it must be followed through with and if it's actually terrible, there is nothing stopping them from modifying and updating it (e.g. an F-35 has less room to improve on RCS than a supposedly poor J-20 or Su-57). The platform itself seems sound enough. The only visible issue being potentially poor RCS compared to Lockmart products (while this is an assumption, I maintain it is a reasonable one at least given the little we know about "stealth shaping rules" .... hence my comments about tubes, intakes, unevenness etc.)

and those early structural issues appear to have been addressed and fixed, the Su-57 is a very good airplane, it does have some L/O advantages over the Flanker, and they will keep working to improve those numbers.

Agreed on the second part. Not sure about what you mean by structural issues. I am ignorant of any.