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

siegecrossbow said:

Rear radar in the tailsting?

Click to expand...

Su-35 and Su-34 has rear facing radar in a bulbous tail sting.
The first examples of the Pak-Fa showed a similar assembly, but this one introduced this narrow end.
Can she be a LRIP featuring something absent in the first batch of prototypes?

It got me thinking since the first time I saw the pic.

Julio Ramos said:

Su-35 and Su-34 has rear facing radar in a bulbous tail sting.
The first examples of the Pak-Fa showed a similar assembly, but this one introduced this narrow end.
Can she be a LRIP featuring something absent in the first batch of prototypes?

It got me thinking since the first time I saw the pic.

Click to expand...

Yes sir, and I am using the term LRIP "generously" here, but there have been numerous engineering changes to the LRIP F-35s for example...

If you wanted to??? at this stage on PAK-FA, you could say very LRIP, the production numbers are even lower than those of the J-20 at this stage, and yet there is every indication from Sukhoi and Chengdu that the aircraft they are currently building are indeed "production standard" rather than prototypes??

Air Force Brat said:

Yes sir, and I am using the term LRIP "generously" here, but there have been numerous engineering changes to the LRIP F-35s for example...

If you wanted to??? at this stage on PAK-FA, you could say very LRIP, the production numbers are even lower than those of the J-20 at this stage, and yet there is every indication from Sukhoi and Chengdu that the aircraft they are currently building are indeed "production standard" rather than prototypes??

Click to expand...

We should use the term VLRIP, in this case.

I noted something different between the aircrafts performing the show and that awoke my curiosity.

But you didn't solve my doubt.
What do you think, friends that sting in the tail boom could mean?

Julio Ramos said:

We should use the term VLRIP, in this case.

I noted something different between the aircrafts performing the show and that awoke my curiosity.

But you didn't solve my doubt.
What do you think, friends that sting in the tail boom could mean?

Click to expand...

They have obviously reconfigured the radar and associated hardware to an upgraded and far more functional configuration, maybe something that is in common service already, but that is fully functional and not a prototype configuration.

Air Force Brat said:

They have obviously reconfigured the radar and associated hardware to an upgraded and far more functional configuration, maybe something that is in common service already, but that is fully functional and not a prototype configuration.

Click to expand...

I thought the same, but the "unnatural" transition between the tail boom and the sting impressed me.
It looks like a last moment solution, the transition lacks fluidity and in this levels of engineering, it breaks the eye.

And, in another topic, where the Lunenburg lenses are?

Julio Ramos said:

I thought the same, but the "unnatural" transition between the tail boom and the sting impressed me.
It looks like a last moment solution, the transition lacks fluidity and in this levels of engineering, it breaks the eye.

And, in another topic, where the Lunenburg lenses are?

Click to expand...

Completely agree on the engineering, but my observation is no doubt accurate...

As to the Lunzberg lense, they DON"T NEED IT! Its not a stealthy airplane,,,, looks nothing like the F-117, F-22, J-20, FC-31, B-2, SR-71, or the F-35... While they did try to incorporate some sneaky pete tricks here?? (tiny all flying verts), (two smallish internal weapons bays), for example, this thing will show up on radar with only a small reduction in RCS from the Flanker,,, its smaller, and yes they did try to put a few tricky bits on it?? but the very traditional L/O shaping is just really not there, so no need for a Lunzberg lense, really.

They are more concerned with super-maneuverability, top end, and super-cruise,,, but they really didn't follow the modeling for L/O shaping for whatever reason??

b787 said:

The current Su-57 can not super cruise as fast as F-22, it reaches Mach 1.3, well behind the Raptor, perhaps Su-35 is as fast or a bit slower when it supercruises than Su-57.

Click to expand...

Few i have see mach 1.6 in this case with future engines and F-22 to mach 1.8 for SC the more fast

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

: 2 ×

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

F1 for initial production, izdeliye 30 for later production

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

• Dry thrust: 93.1 kN / 108 kN; 118 kN for supercruise (21,000 lbf / 24,300 lbf; 26,528 lbf supercruise) each
• Thrust with
  Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
  : 147 kN / 176 kN (33,067 lbf / 39,600 lbf) each

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Air Force Brat said:

Completely agree on the engineering, but my observation is no doubt accurate...

As to the Lunzberg lense, they DON"T NEED IT! Its not a stealthy airplane,,,, looks nothing like the F-117, F-22, J-20, FC-31, B-2, SR-71, or the F-35... While they did try to incorporate some sneaky pete tricks here?? (tiny all flying verts), (two smallish internal weapons bays), for example, this thing will show up on radar with only a small reduction in RCS from the Flanker,,, its smaller, and yes they did try to put a few tricky bits on it?? but the very traditional L/O shaping is just really not there, so no need for a Lunzberg lense, really.

They are more concerned with super-maneuverability, top end, and super-cruise,,, but they really didn't follow the modeling for L/O shaping for whatever reason??

Click to expand...

you are very wrong, and sorry, Su-57 looks very much like YF-23.


if you look at both aircraft, the forebody is basically the same layout concept housing weapon bays, same the intake air inlets, but in Su-57, they had a shorter inlet duct with a radar blocker like F/A -18E or X-32.
Both aircraft have podded engine nacelles with wing fuselage blending


According to press releases, Su-30MKI has a RCS of 20 squared meters, PAKFA a RCS of .5 squared meters so it is a 1/40th of the original Flanker

FORBIN said:

Few i have see mach 1.6 in this case with future engines and F-22 to mach 1.8 for SC the more fast

Click to expand...

at this moment, Su-57 is underpowered, it can not compete with the F-22, it only will match the 1.8 Mach supercruise speed with type 30 engine

b787 said:

you are very wrong, and sorry, Su-57 looks very much like YF-23.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

if you look at both aircraft, the forebody is basically the same layout concept housing weapon bays, same the intake air inlets, but in Su-57, they had a shorter inlet duct with a radar blocker like F/A -18E or X-32.
Both aircraft have podded engine nacelles with wing fuselage blending

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

According to press releases, Su-30MKI has a RCS of 20 squared meters, PAKFA a RCS of .5 squared meters so it is a 1/40th of the original Flanker

Click to expand...

Heh! Heh!, well believe what you like?? the SU-57 is NO where near the league of the YF-23, nor the Raptor, or F-35?? that super slender fuselage limits the size of the weapons bay! (the YF-23 had a smaller bay as well), and it just was not as practical, nor as maneuverable as the YF-22!

and that ad copy krap, ( that's Russian for you no what?) that PAK-FA has an RCS that is 1/40th of that of the Flanker, is simply not true, theres no way, but as I said, "believe what you want"??

and you well know that 055 was rebuilt using the fuselage/center section of what would have been 6-1?? so in all honesty as a builder, I would have called that bird 056! (it would have been, had not 055 burnt to a crisp in the fire), LOL

now the forward fuse of PAK-FA does have some chining, and that no doubt does help reduce its radar signature and produce some forward fuselage lift,,, PAK-FA no doubt develops a LOT of lift on the fuse, just as do the F-22 and F-35?

its just not as L/O, and those weapons bays are small, no doubt they are there?? none at all, but they are smallish, and that little fuse also limits internal fuel??