SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 22 Feb 2018, 04:39
by gc
Seems like the Su-57 is now in Syria. What for I have no clue. To deter USAF F-22As or other non-stealth coalition fighters? I suspect it has something to do with how US airpower smashed a combined Syria-Russia assault on coalition forces recently. The Russians must have felt damn naked when the bombs were falling. Time to hang IRST pods on the F-15, F-16 and F/A-18s. And get the F-35 into theatre to locate and track these Su-57s with their DAS and broadcast their locations to friendly forces.

http://alert5.com/2018/02/22/su-57-deployed-to-syria/

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 22 Feb 2018, 05:01
by Corsair1963
gc wrote:Seems like the Su-57 is now in Syria. What for I have no clue. To deter USAF F-22As or other non-stealth coalition fighters? I suspect it has something to do with how US airpower smashed a combined Syria-Russia assault on coalition forces recently. The Russians must have felt damn naked when the bombs were falling. Time to hang IRST pods on the F-15, F-16 and F/A-18s. And get the F-35 into theatre to locate and track these Su-57s with their DAS and broadcast their locations to friendly forces.

http://alert5.com/2018/02/22/su-57-deployed-to-syria/



The US would have never risked F-22's and/or F-35's so early into their development. Nonetheless, Russia is just trying to make the world believe. That it can go head to head with the US. Which, they can't....

So, do I need to remind some members that these aircraft are just early developmental aircraft. Which, are not combat ready or even remotely close to the finished product.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 22 Feb 2018, 06:05
by tsl256
If this is true, it shows that the Russians are getting desperate, they are behind the U.S and even China in the 5th gen race. It is rediculous that they would deploy a prototype that has not even demonstrated the capability to fire a missile or drop a bomb. Imagine if the U.S. deployed the YF-22 to perform combat missions before it even tested any weapons. This is all just propaganda. If they do fly it around Syria, the F-22s flying nearby would pick up a treasure trove of information on it. We will see just how "stealthy" it really is.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 22 Feb 2018, 06:47
by beepa
Probably a silly question but...I haven't seen any Luneburg Lens type projections on the Su57.....So, what are they using for signature enhancement?? Or is their stealth so poor they don't require such devices?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 22 Feb 2018, 07:01
by SpudmanWP
You only need those on VLO airframes... :roll:

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 22 Feb 2018, 07:03
by Corsair1963
Honestly, this could really backfire on Russia. As what happens if USAF F-22's or Israeli F-35's would sneak up on the Su-57's undetected??? Which, could easily happen....

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 22 Feb 2018, 08:42
by popcorn
Maybe they're hoping to impress the Indians? :devil:

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 22 Feb 2018, 08:51
by nutshell
They want to pull some PR stunt to bait a foreign country to join the PAK program.

Get ready for some BS fake news on RT and on Sputnik.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 22 Feb 2018, 09:37
by milosh
beepa wrote:Probably a silly question but...I haven't seen any Luneburg Lens type projections on the Su57.....So, what are they using for signature enhancement?? Or is their stealth so poor they don't require such devices?

tsl256 wrote:If they do fly it around Syria, the F-22s flying nearby would pick up a treasure trove of information on it. We will see just how "stealthy" it really is.

Those Su-57 are far from finished product, they loal nozzle nor they have radar blocker and probable not even RAM.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 22 Feb 2018, 12:59
by marsavian
Probably going to be used as ISR forward controllers the way F-22 generally is. These prototypes are still AESA equipped ? I am pretty sure that Gates and McCain assured us all that F-22 was a cold war relic not needed in modern times, how foolish they both look ! Anyway good chance to check out its sensors and system performance ... for both sides.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 22 Feb 2018, 13:16
by ricnunes
Agree, this is nothing more than a Propaganda Stunt by Russia...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 22 Feb 2018, 15:08
by smitty14
100% propaganda. Will give western radars and other sensors the opportunity to see how stealthy that thing really is (assuming they actually operate it). Probably would've been wise to leave it on the bench. On the other hand, it can't go worse than than the deployment of the Admiral Kuznetsov... or can it?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 22 Feb 2018, 15:41
by quicksilver
Complete fabrication that many will run with. And, of course there are other planted trolls around the internet who will ‘confirm’ it from ‘sources’, and that will be re-reported and thus the story will be ‘verified by many sources.’ :roll:

What in the video confirms that an SU-57 was deployed to Syria?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 22 Feb 2018, 15:51
by icemaverick
All we see at that source is a video of a couple of PAK FAs flying by. It could have been shot anywhere. Are we supposed to know that it’s Syria from the trees?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 22 Feb 2018, 16:05
by milosh
Maybe they want US to send F-35? So they can up close messure its RCS and IR signature? They probable play on media card which would hyped Su-57 and criticized F-35. US journalists really like to piss on F-35.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 22 Feb 2018, 16:24
by mixelflick
gc wrote:Seems like the Su-57 is now in Syria. What for I have no clue. To deter USAF F-22As or other non-stealth coalition fighters? I suspect it has something to do with how US airpower smashed a combined Syria-Russia assault on coalition forces recently. The Russians must have felt damn naked when the bombs were falling. Time to hang IRST pods on the F-15, F-16 and F/A-18s. And get the F-35 into theatre to locate and track these Su-57s with their DAS and broadcast their locations to friendly forces.

http://alert5.com/2018/02/22/su-57-deployed-to-syria/


Reeks of desperation, IMO.

Having said that, they'll no doubt use it like they did the SU-35 - to work out the bugs in a realistic combat environment. It would be surprising if they're weapons capable, but I suppose it isn't out of the question. Likely more to do with how stealthy it really is. I really hope we don't fall into the trap of an SU-57/F-22 photo op. They could use that to get the rub, and proclaim their "5th generation" fighter is now flying alongside ours...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 22 Feb 2018, 17:13
by vilters
Ach, you have to forgive them: They simply misunderstood the "#metoo" movement. :P

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 22 Feb 2018, 17:22
by SpudmanWP
I'm still amazed by all the ABJ crowd who screamed "PR Stunt" when the F-35 deployed to Europe for a few weeks who then believe this story is a "true" operational deployment....

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 22 Feb 2018, 20:45
by gideonic
SpudmanWP wrote:I'm still amazed by all the ABJ crowd who screamed "PR Stunt" when the F-35 deployed to Europe for a few weeks who then believe this story is a "true" operational deployment....


Well the Su-57 analog would be deploying AF-1 and AF-2 to Iraq in say 2009 just to fly around. Not "quite" the same, huh?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 22 Feb 2018, 23:43
by citanon
They are tired of losing arguments on f-16.net. Decided to troll for reals :mrgreen:

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 22 Feb 2018, 23:52
by aw2007
Potential for Su-57 VS F-22- what an interesting thought

Think a high school all-star vs LeBron James :P
Am I exaggerating ?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 23 Feb 2018, 01:55
by awsome
The Russians are an interesting bunch and do things for their own reasons. Maybe this is just one more tool in the EW game. Hopefully no American aircraft suddenly crash from "anti aircraft fire"...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 23 Feb 2018, 02:24
by charlielima223
F-22 Pilot 1 - "Hey whats that?"
F-22 Pilot 2 - "Well its not one of ours. Is that the PAKFA we've been hearing so much about?"
F-22 Pilot 1 - "It could be. I though it was supposed to be stealthy? Oh well... I guess not. Record it and send it to command"

PAKFA Pilot 1 - "Hey whats that?"
PAKFA Pilot 2 - "I don't know. Probably just bird"
PAKFA Pilot 1 - "Oh well... I bet those American pilots don't know we're here or else they would have done something by now"
PAKFA Pilot 2 - "Stupid Americans... hey! turn off your radar!"
PAKFA Pilot 1 - "What radar?"
PAKFA Pilot 2 - "Something is tracking and painting us!"
PAKFA Pilot 1 - "OH S**T! Do you think its that F-22 we've heard so much about?"
PAKFA Pilot 2 - "I don't know but lets get out of here!"

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 23 Feb 2018, 02:31
by popcorn
Russia seems willing to accept risks that Western countries would likely find unacceptable to promote their jet. This deployment to Syria, if true, could potentially backfire on them.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... oi-361092/

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 23 Feb 2018, 02:40
by awsome
popcorn wrote:Russia seems willing to accept risks that Western countries would likely find unacceptable to promote their jet. This deployment to Syria, if true, could potentially backfire on them.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... oi-361092/


Yep you had to go back to 2011 for that one...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 23 Feb 2018, 13:21
by mixelflick
Look closer at what we've seen so far...

The SU-57's aren't going anywhwere without SU-35/SU-30SM escorts. I'd bet good money that's the case the entire time they're there. Now, one question... How do board members here know it hasn't fired a missile or dropped a bomb? Or is that just speculation??

Its been 7 years since its first flight, surely they would have qualified some weapons on it by now?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 23 Feb 2018, 13:22
by marsavian
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-43155105

Meanwhile, two of Russia's most advanced fighter planes, Su-57s, have been sent to its coastal Hmeimim airbase, Russian military sources told BBC Russian.

The sources said the stealth fighter planes were still undergoing flight tests and there was no confirmation they had yet been used in combat.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 23 Feb 2018, 15:14
by milosh
mixelflick wrote:Look closer at what we've seen so far...

The SU-57's aren't going anywhwere without SU-35/SU-30SM escorts. I'd bet good money that's the case the entire time they're there. Now, one question... How do board members here know it hasn't fired a missile or dropped a bomb? Or is that just speculation??

Its been 7 years since its first flight, surely they would have qualified some weapons on it by now?


It think there was some official info from 2014 about PAK-FA development, weapon tests started with two prototypes.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 23 Feb 2018, 15:58
by jetnerd
charlielima223 wrote:PAKFA Pilot 2 - "Something is tracking and painting us!"
PAKFA Pilot 1 - "OH S**T! Do you think its that F-22 we've heard so much about?"
PAKFA Pilot 2 - "I don't know but lets get out of here!"


They may not even pick that up if the APG-77 is operating in LPI mode. Unless the F-22's are limiting its use to deprive the Russians the opportunity to try and study it.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 23 Feb 2018, 18:26
by geforcerfx
I think they got external weapons, never seen anything about internal weapons other than renders.

Image

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 23 Feb 2018, 19:35
by charlielima223
jetnerd wrote:
They may not even pick that up if the APG-77 is operating in LPI mode. Unless the F-22's are limiting its use to deprive the Russians the opportunity to try and study it.


I'm jokingly giving them the benefit of the doubt. Chances are is that the F-22 will "see" the PAKFA well before the PAKFA will know there is one in the area. Even if the PAKFA knew the F-22 was "looking" at it, the PAKFA most likely wouldn't know what is looking at it and from where.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 23 Feb 2018, 21:07
by XanderCrews
The wagner Russians got their asses kicked. The CNC is giving centcom full authority and they acted on it.


Read some of the reports. There has been mention of b-52s doing "JDAM arclights" and frustrated apaches with nothing left to shoot at

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 23 Feb 2018, 21:58
by juretrn
Anyone wants to trigger Russiaboos?
https://warisboring.com/russias-stealth ... ous-farce/
I mean, WiB is fine for F-35 bashing, so why not for Su-57?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 24 Feb 2018, 00:15
by awsome
mixelflick wrote:Look closer at what we've seen so far...

The SU-57's aren't going anywhwere without SU-35/SU-30SM escorts. I'd bet good money that's the case the entire time they're there. Now, one question... How do board members here know it hasn't fired a missile or dropped a bomb? Or is that just speculation??

Its been 7 years since its first flight, surely they would have qualified some weapons on it by now?



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qebsiLbNkyM at the :48 second mark

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 24 Feb 2018, 01:13
by zerion
awsome wrote:
mixelflick wrote:Look closer at what we've seen so far...

The SU-57's aren't going anywhwere without SU-35/SU-30SM escorts. I'd bet good money that's the case the entire time they're there. Now, one question... How do board members here know it hasn't fired a missile or dropped a bomb? Or is that just speculation??

Its been 7 years since its first flight, surely they would have qualified some weapons on it by now?



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qebsiLbNkyM at the :48 second mark

sorry I wasn't watching the time, but are you referring to the missing lunch? Because I'm pretty sure that's a fake video.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 24 Feb 2018, 02:41
by SpudmanWP
At worst, it's a fake... at best it's a weapon release test as that plane has no radar to guide the missile.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 24 Feb 2018, 07:04
by neptune
Since al-Assad only controls 1/3 of the country, I surmise the escorts are along to bomb any SU-57 crash site that should occur?
:)

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 24 Feb 2018, 08:22
by element1loop
neptune wrote:Since al-Assad only controls 1/3 of the country, I surmise the escorts are along to bomb any SU-57 crash site that should occur?
:)


may take a while ... dumb bombs only ... not good shot

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 24 Feb 2018, 15:13
by XanderCrews
awsome wrote:
mixelflick wrote:Look closer at what we've seen so far...

The SU-57's aren't going anywhwere without SU-35/SU-30SM escorts. I'd bet good money that's the case the entire time they're there. Now, one question... How do board members here know it hasn't fired a missile or dropped a bomb? Or is that just speculation??

Its been 7 years since its first flight, surely they would have qualified some weapons on it by now?



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qebsiLbNkyM at the :48 second mark



CGI is CGI

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 24 Feb 2018, 17:25
by mixelflick
awsome wrote:
mixelflick wrote:Look closer at what we've seen so far...

The SU-57's aren't going anywhwere without SU-35/SU-30SM escorts. I'd bet good money that's the case the entire time they're there. Now, one question... How do board members here know it hasn't fired a missile or dropped a bomb? Or is that just speculation??

Its been 7 years since its first flight, surely they would have qualified some weapons on it by now?



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qebsiLbNkyM at the :48 second mark


If I'm not mistaken, that was panned long ago as a work of fiction. Maybe it's occurred, but as others have stated here likely an unguided launch if that. They've been pretty free with releasing SU-57 videos and bragging everywhere they can about how it's moving along, so why so few videos about weapons release?

Tom Cooper is pretty respected jounalist, and had insights in his article I hadn't read elsewhere. I'd trust his sources/judgement on the issue. One thing that really hit home is... how are the pilots supposed to know how best to employ it given the test fleet is hardly enough to integrate with other assets, especially lacking exercises like green or red flag?

How many tactics have been worked out with SU-35's, A-50's, etc. given the fleet is around 10-12 prototypes, not all of which are airworthy? If the latest reports are true, 2 more have joined the fray in Syria. That's around half the prototype fleet in a war zone!!

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 24 Feb 2018, 18:10
by zerion
Imagine the excuses if one were to go down.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 24 Feb 2018, 18:19
by madrat
Never fear, I'm sure a tug will be around to tow it back to port safely... oops.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 24 Feb 2018, 19:07
by marsavian
I suspect they are just kicking the tyres on its sensor suites in a combat area. They are not in air combat with anyone in Syria just strike operations. They have S-400s yet they let the US/Turkey/Israel bomb at will even advertently their own citizens apparently.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 24 Feb 2018, 19:30
by mixelflick
marsavian wrote:I suspect they are just kicking the tyres on its sensor suites in a combat area. They are not in air combat with anyone in Syria just strike operations. They have S-400s yet they let the US/Turkey/Israel bomb at will even advertently their own citizens apparently.


It's possible that's what triggered this. The Russians desperately need to save face, and their vaunted SU-35's and S-400 were nowhere to be found when that bombing occurred. So in order to look (better), they need to up their game. The world at large isn't aware the SU-57 exists in prototype form only, and there are just a handful at that.

The great unwashed masses just read CNN's headline, "Russia's most advanced stealth fighter arrives in Syria"... I can only imagine they think it's invisible, combat tested and stamped out by the thousands...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 24 Feb 2018, 20:42
by tsl256

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 24 Feb 2018, 20:51
by marsavian
They are not going to use the S-400s in anger because there would be a major state conflict in Syria if they do. What usually happens is that whoever wants to fly in Syria runs it past the Russians first. Russia just wants to maintain its bases and influence in Syria and knock off as many jihadists as they can because some of them came from the Russian Caucasus states.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 24 Feb 2018, 22:10
by mixelflick
tsl256 wrote:There is 4 deployed now

https://www.google.com/amp/s/sputniknew ... l-reports/


So out of 11 airframs built so far (3 are static bench birds), 4 are deployed in a combat theatre (almost 40%). We know for sure they're flying with an inferior engine, not the desired avionics and god only knows how stealthy. I said it before and I'll say it again - I trust Tom Cooper's view on the subject. I for sure wouldn't want to be the pilots flying into a war zone with Russia's flagship fighter when it hasn't even gone IOC..

Has NATO assigned a codename yet? I rather like the SU-57 Firefly. Owing to its RCS balloning every so often on radar scopes... :mrgreen:

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 24 Feb 2018, 22:33
by SpudmanWP
Su-57 "Fake News" ??

:cheers:

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 24 Feb 2018, 22:40
by mixelflick
SpudmanWP wrote:Su-57 "Fake News" ??

:cheers:


OMG. Excellent!

Speaks to its "alleged" VLO properties...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 25 Feb 2018, 00:27
by delta9991
mixelflick wrote:
tsl256 wrote:Has NATO assigned a codename yet? I rather like the SU-57 Firefly. Owing to its RCS balloning every so often on radar scopes... :mrgreen:


I vote for SU-57 Flapjack

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 25 Feb 2018, 00:44
by southernphantom
delta9991 wrote:
mixelflick wrote:
tsl256 wrote:Has NATO assigned a codename yet? I rather like the SU-57 Firefly. Owing to its RCS balloning every so often on radar scopes... :mrgreen:


I vote for SU-57 Flapjack


It certainly is as flat as one. The thing looks like someone stepped on a Flanker.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 25 Feb 2018, 01:53
by count_to_10
delta9991 wrote:
mixelflick wrote:
tsl256 wrote:Has NATO assigned a codename yet? I rather like the SU-57 Firefly. Owing to its RCS balloning every so often on radar scopes... :mrgreen:


I vote for SU-57 Flapjack

But, but...that’s the name of the XF-5U!
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vought_XF5U

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 25 Feb 2018, 04:10
by mixelflick
I vote for SU-57 Flapjack[/quote]

It certainly is as flat as one. The thing looks like someone stepped on a Flanker.[/quote]

Hey, that's my line!

I knew I should have trademarked it..

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 25 Feb 2018, 17:43
by awsome
element1loop wrote:
neptune wrote:Since al-Assad only controls 1/3 of the country, I surmise the escorts are along to bomb any SU-57 crash site that should occur?
:)


may take a while ... dumb bombs only ... not good shot



They could always destroy any crash site with a missile strike from the Caspian sea... something else we thought they couldn't do.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 25 Feb 2018, 21:29
by charlielima223
rheonomic wrote:
mixelflick wrote:Love the way they neatly lined it up with their latest Flankers.

The same way our P-40's were lined up at Pearl Harbor... :P


I mean, it'd be a shame if something were to happen to them...


Russian and Syrian aircraft have been attacked on the ground by Daesh forces using some rather novel and clever tactics...

https://theaviationist.com/2018/01/08/d ... -in-syria/

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2018, 02:17
by h-bomb
Israeli satellite imagery has confirmed the deployment of Russia’s newest Sukhoi Su-57 stealth fighter jets in war-torn Syria.

DWzqFd0W0AEW1f6.jpg


Am I the only one who tried to look up this location?? 35.2434205, 35.5631936 is in the Mediterranean? About 20 miles off the coast?

Also Google Earth has a image from 25 Feb 2018 for 35.411667, 35.945 which is where the image above is from. The runways are both fully constructed, where 35L is still in construction here.

From the original post before people covered it:
https://twitter.com/warsmonitoring/stat ... 613622787/

Even Russia Today has the story as "Su-57’s debut? Video claims to show Russia’s 5th-gen jets in action over Syria"
The official cheerleaders of Russia in general is skeptical??

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2018, 11:48
by marsavian
https://www.rt.com/news/419816-su-57-syria-trial/

The aircraft have been sent to Syria to test their capabilities in a semi-combat environment, the Russian business daily Kommersant reported, citing insider sources. The trial will initially focus on electronic warfare and radar capabilities of the 5th-generation fighter jet, rather than its weapon systems, the report said. A decision on the Syrian trial was taken after the MAKS 2017 airshow near Moscow in July, the source revealed.

The advanced fighter jets were deployed to Syria less than two weeks after US forces attacked and devastated a group of pro-government forces, which included some Russian citizens. Moscow insisted that none of the Russians hurt in the incident were part of the country’s military force in Syria.

In addition to the Su-57s, Russia also deployed four advanced Su-35s fighter jets last week, and an A-50U airborne early warning and control plane.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2018, 12:11
by juretrn
"The trial will initially focus on electronic warfare and radar capabilities of the 5th-generation fighter jet, rather than its weapon systems"
That literally makes no sense.
Do the Russkies not have this?
Image
Or better yet, an instrumented test range like the US has in Nevada? To not risk your precious prototypes?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2018, 12:36
by marsavian
Instrumented test ranges don't have live F-22s flying around. They probably want to see at what range the main/rear AESA and IRST and wing L-band pick up the F-22 and the quality of the tracks. This is Su-57's most important mission, to try to detect and handle American stealth fighters.

Image

http://fullafterburner.weebly.com/aeros ... amechanger

Image

Image

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2018, 14:45
by mixelflick
[quote="marsavian"]Instrumented test ranges don't have live F-22s flying around. They probably want to see at what range the main/rear AESA and IRST and wing L-band pick up the F-22 and the quality of the tracks. This is Su-57's most important mission, to try to detect and handle American stealth fighters.

I would agree with this premise, although if I read correctly they're only equipped with 1 forward facing radar in the nose. Sure, she has other sensors but they're a long way from having the claimed 5 radars she's designed to carry. And isn't that one facing forward radar a PESA and not an AESA? I dunno. The SU-35 is also supposed to be a stealth hunter.

Couldn't they just use it to try and characterize the F-22's radar signature?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2018, 15:39
by botsing
marsavian wrote:Image

To quote garrya:

garrya wrote:The L band transmitter/receiver on PAK-FA is not a radar but an IFF system, a L band of that size will have horizontal angular accuracy of around 20-22 degrees and with only one line of T/R modules it wont be able to determine height either, pretty much useless as a radar

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2018, 16:46
by marsavian
Re L-Band array, I don't think anyone is expecting any more of it than just a radar early warning indication to cue the other more precise sensors. If it was just for IFF why have two of them spaced quite far apart ? It may also be used for EW jamming purposes in this popular communication band e.g. datalinks.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2018, 16:57
by SpudmanWP
An AESA based IFF makes sense so that it can query a potential contact without broadcasting a signal in every direction. Having them on the wings allows it to do so over a wider arc. Spacing makes no difference.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2018, 17:59
by milosh
juretrn wrote:Do the Russkies not have this?
Image


No they don't have. Sensors were tested on Su-57 prototypes.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2018, 18:16
by geforcerfx
marsavian wrote:Instrumented test ranges don't have live F-22s flying around. They probably want to see at what range the main/rear AESA and IRST and wing L-band pick up the F-22 and the quality of the tracks. This is Su-57's most important mission, to try to detect and handle American stealth fighters.


Mission: Poke the Bear

When satellite shows the Su-57's are in the air, launch hundreds of MALDs set to a varying low RCS settings toward the Su-57's if they react we know they can track small objects, also it would just be fun to watch them Sh*t there pants.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2018, 20:44
by SpudmanWP
Then an F-22 can fly above it inverted.. Don't forget the Polaroid.

:salute:

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2018, 22:01
by XanderCrews
milosh wrote:
juretrn wrote:Do the Russkies not have this?
Image


No they don't have. Sensors were tested on Su-57 prototypes.



I always when people tell me how smart and practical Russians are but CATB never crossed their minds

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2018, 22:22
by SpudmanWP
lol.. China's got one

Image

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2018, 22:35
by geforcerfx
I thought the russian's use a flanker like a cat bird, test engines and radar in them.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2018, 22:54
by SpudmanWP
The point of a Catbird-type airframe is the the avionics are separate from the operation of the aircraft and a problem in one will not affect the other. Also, extra engineers & equipment can be installed to monitor the systems that simply cannot be done in fighter.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2018, 23:25
by neptune
SpudmanWP wrote:The point of a Catbird-type airframe is the the avionics are separate from the operation of the aircraft and a problem in one will not affect the other. Also, extra engineers & equipment can be installed to monitor the systems that simply cannot be done in fighter.


....be interesting to see an AN/APG-77 "dish" fitted to the AN/APG-81 computer on the CATB!
:)

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 27 Feb 2018, 01:14
by SpudmanWP
A little more range but fewer features.. meh.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 27 Feb 2018, 04:20
by geforcerfx
If the backend was the same wouldn't the features be the same, just benefit from the larger array and potentially higher peak power?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 27 Feb 2018, 04:37
by SpudmanWP
IIRC the array of the -81 is of better tech.

If the only difference was dish size then the only benefit would be a slightly longer range.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 27 Feb 2018, 04:44
by XanderCrews
SpudmanWP wrote:The point of a Catbird-type airframe is the the avionics are separate from the operation of the aircraft and a problem in one will not affect the other. Also, extra engineers & equipment can be installed to monitor the systems that simply cannot be done in fighter.



It can also stay aloft for a good while

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 27 Feb 2018, 16:15
by mixelflick
The newspaper Kommersant cited military sources as saying that the Russian fifth-generation Su-57 fighter jets were deployed to Syria to test radar systems and electronic warfare.

The Su-57s will not take part in combat missions in Syria, the sources said, adding that the decision on the deployment was made during last year's MAKS airshow in Zhukovsky outside Moscow.

Yeah, but in a war zone with multiple stealth aircraft in theatre... combat happens. Personally, I'm hoping an F-15C takes at least one of them down.. :)

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2018, 18:25
by mixelflick
It's now being reported the planes performed 2 days of combat testing, then flew home LOL

https://www.rt.com/news/420188-russian- ... ets-syria/

Also, Russia says the Israeli satellite photo of the SU-57's lined up alongside Flankers is a fake. They say the SU-57's were in hangars while on the ground there.

Thoughts?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2018, 19:24
by SpudmanWP
Seems like a legit claim since the runway in the pic was incomplete yet is complete in Google Maps...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2018, 19:45
by mixelflick
SpudmanWP wrote:Seems like a legit claim since the runway in the pic was incomplete yet is complete in Google Maps...


Why would the Israeli's lie? OK OK, I know all countries do. What's the old line? The first casualty of war is the truth?

But to what end does this serve Israel? Or the US? If it's true they were there for 2 DAYS, how much operational testing could they possibly have done? It almost sounds as if they realized what a risk they were taking, then skedattled and got out of there ASAP..

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2018, 19:54
by mixelflick
OMG this is priceless. Posted just 16 hours ago on Sputnick..

https://sputniknews.com/russia/20180301 ... ane-ready/

You really have to hand it to them. They're ready to build a carrier capable SU-57 - but stopped all work on their super-carrier. But wait! This could be for the Admiral Kustenov (or however you spell it). Carrier trials shouldn't take that long (sarcasm), and we'd have a whole new SU-57 angle to rib them about :mrgreen:

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2018, 19:58
by SpudmanWP
mixelflick wrote:Why would the Israeli's lie?
You're assuming the image came from an official & current Israeli source. If it was official, why not use a more recent image of the airfield. Since the images are not publicly searchable (like Google Maps), the user likely had access to an old image and PS'd the SU-57's in.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2018, 16:51
by mixelflick
Sneaky, LOL

More conflicting data, or at least thoughts published by The Drive recently..

Judging by the peculiar statements made by Defense Minister Shoigu, the dearth of official statements otherwise, and the validity of such a truncated stop in war zone, or lack thereof, it's very possible, if not somewhat probably, that the aircraft actually have yet to return to Russia at all.

Yes, yes I know you guys question Tyler or whoever does most of their writing for them. But the thought that "the SU-57's have left" is disinformation vs. legit has to be considered. I mean, how much "testing" could they have done with 2 airframes (4 never confirmed) or even 4... in just 48 hours?

The whole thing makes little sense, and it's possible it was done for US/anti-Assad forces to drop their guard. I dunno. I really like the airframe and its lines, but the technology seems to be woefully lacking. They played the one card they realistically had (ordered more SU-35's). At least that is a nearly mature airframe, with corresponding avionics and weapons systems they can actually use.

Compared to an equivalent Western aircraft, how would you categorize the SU-35? Close to being an F-15C "Golden Eagle"?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2018, 17:24
by milosh
mixelflick wrote:OMG this is priceless. Posted just 16 hours ago on Sputnick..

https://sputniknews.com/russia/20180301 ... ane-ready/

You really have to hand it to them. They're ready to build a carrier capable SU-57 - but stopped all work on their super-carrier. But wait! This could be for the Admiral Kustenov (or however you spell it). Carrier trials shouldn't take that long (sarcasm), and we'd have a whole new SU-57 angle to rib them about :mrgreen:


Elections are very close so be ready to hear more propaganda from state media.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2018, 20:04
by rheonomic
milosh wrote:Elections are very close so be ready to hear more propaganda from state media.


I hear they think that Putin might win.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2018, 23:46
by white_lightning35
rheonomic wrote:
milosh wrote:Elections are very close so be ready to hear more propaganda from state media.


I hear they think that Putin might win.


Stoopid Americans only ever get two choices for president, they say.

xaxaxa, in glorious Soviet Russia you only need one! :mrgreen:

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 04 Mar 2018, 18:52
by mixelflick
Vlad is a man's man. Black belt in judo, doesn't take any sh!t from anyone. Fancies himself a pilot too, if the rumors are true. One thing's for sure: He's very hands on with his aircraft. I've seen him flying with TU-160 crews, AN-124's, Bears and loves inspecting various Flankers, the Mig 35 and now the SU-57.

I wonder if it's due to his short/diminutive stature?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 05 Mar 2018, 04:28
by awsome
mixelflick wrote:Vlad is a man's man. Black belt in judo, doesn't take any sh!t from anyone. Fancies himself a pilot too, if the rumors are true. One thing's for sure: He's very hands on with his aircraft. I've seen him flying with TU-160 crews, AN-124's, Bears and loves inspecting various Flankers, the Mig 35 and now the SU-57.

I wonder if it's due to his short/diminutive stature?


Maybe he is just like the rest of us and loves combat aircraft. If you had the opportunity to take a ride and even take the controls of any of these aircraft wouldn't you?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 05 Mar 2018, 04:31
by awsome
I still wonder how long they were really there and if they had a hand in the downing of the Israeli F-16...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 05 Mar 2018, 10:44
by botsing
awsome wrote:I still wonder how long they were really there and if they had a hand in the downing of the Israeli F-16...

Yeah, sure. Lets take the conspiracy theories to the max. LOL

What if they were there to make sure aliens could land to take part in the Syrian war? Some ragheads definitely seem to hide their whole head in front of the cameras so we cannot see their alien face.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 05 Mar 2018, 17:50
by mixelflick
awsome wrote:
mixelflick wrote:Vlad is a man's man. Black belt in judo, doesn't take any sh!t from anyone. Fancies himself a pilot too, if the rumors are true. One thing's for sure: He's very hands on with his aircraft. I've seen him flying with TU-160 crews, AN-124's, Bears and loves inspecting various Flankers, the Mig 35 and now the SU-57.

I wonder if it's due to his short/diminutive stature?


Maybe he is just like the rest of us and loves combat aircraft. If you had the opportunity to take a ride and even take the controls of any of these aircraft wouldn't you?


Absolutely. Good point.

I love planes, and take Jiu Jitsu too. I'm 6 feet tall and 240lbs of muscle.... and 48 years old. Only wish I had started Jiu Jitsu sooner!

With respect to the SU-57 in Syria, the grand experiment is reportedly over. I suppose they got a little PR from it, but something doesn't sound right. 2 days does not make much of a "combat deployment". It almost sounds like they realized this was a mistake, they were taking a huge risk with prototypes/pilots and scuttled the whole thing...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 05 Mar 2018, 18:18
by botsing
mixelflick wrote:2 days does not make much of a "combat deployment".

Two days is more than enough to make the Su-57 a more viable hybrid warfare weapon.

A nice example of that you can already see a few posts above yours, where a person is already speculating that the Su-57 was involved with the shootdown of an Israeli F-16.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 05 Mar 2018, 19:00
by nutshell
awsome wrote:I still wonder how long they were really there and if they had a hand in the downing of the Israeli F-16...


Blue on blue from a.defective PCA

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 07 Mar 2018, 15:53
by mixelflick
botsing wrote:
mixelflick wrote:2 days does not make much of a "combat deployment".

Two days is more than enough to make the Su-57 a more viable hybrid warfare weapon.

A nice example of that you can already see a few posts above yours, where a person is already speculating that the Su-57 was involved with the shootdown of an Israeli F-16.


Other than wild speculation, what sources do these people have? Can't tell if you're serious here or not. And "hybrid warfare weapon"? What's that??

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 07 Mar 2018, 18:40
by botsing
mixelflick wrote:Other than wild speculation, what sources do these people have? Can't tell if you're serious here or not. And "hybrid warfare weapon"? What's that??

Mostly their sources are speculations based on half truths. These speculations are often repeated from different angles to make them look more legit.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_warfare

The first sentence on that page sums it up nicely:
Wikipedia wrote:Hybrid warfare is a military strategy that employs political warfare and blends conventional warfare, irregular warfare and cyberwarfare with other influencing methods, such as fake news, diplomacy and foreign electoral intervention.


Sending the Su-57 to Syria can be used to make "speculative claims" about the status of the Su-57 project, Russia's technology level and Russia's goals in the middle east. As such it can be "weaponized" for hybrid warfare, just take a peek at sites like RT and Sputnik news to see what propaganda can be brewed from it.

While this might not be the main reason why the Su-57 was send to Syria, it is clear that Russia will use any "speculative claims" to their fullest ability.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 07 Mar 2018, 19:48
by viper12
botsing wrote:Sending the Su-57 to Syria can be used to make "speculative claims" about the status of the Su-57 project, Russia's technology level and Russia's goals in the middle east. As such it can be "weaponized" for hybrid warfare, just take a peek at sites like RT and Sputnik news to see what propaganda can be brewed from it.


Spot on. That's why I'd suggest any forum regular to NOT put any link to RT, Sputnik and the like, for even if one doesn't believe [s]an ounce[/s] an atomic mass unit of what they say, putting such a link effectively helps the Russian propaganda machine.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 08 Mar 2018, 01:23
by awsome
viper12 wrote:
botsing wrote:Sending the Su-57 to Syria can be used to make "speculative claims" about the status of the Su-57 project, Russia's technology level and Russia's goals in the middle east. As such it can be "weaponized" for hybrid warfare, just take a peek at sites like RT and Sputnik news to see what propaganda can be brewed from it.


Spot on. That's why I'd suggest any forum regular to NOT put any link to RT, Sputnik and the like, for even if one doesn't believe [s]an ounce[/s] an atomic mass unit of what they say, putting such a link effectively helps the Russian propaganda machine.


So what is the alternative... hide here in your F-16.net/CNN echo chamber? In an environment where those who know know and everyone else is a spy, wild speculation is the only fun that is left.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 08 Mar 2018, 02:35
by white_lightning35
awsome wrote:
viper12 wrote:
botsing wrote:Sending the Su-57 to Syria can be used to make "speculative claims" about the status of the Su-57 project, Russia's technology level and Russia's goals in the middle east. As such it can be "weaponized" for hybrid warfare, just take a peek at sites like RT and Sputnik news to see what propaganda can be brewed from it.


Spot on. That's why I'd suggest any forum regular to NOT put any link to RT, Sputnik and the like, for even if one doesn't believe [s]an ounce[/s] an atomic mass unit of what they say, putting such a link effectively helps the Russian propaganda machine.


So what is the alternative... hide here in your F-16.net/CNN echo chamber? In an environment where those who know know and everyone else is a spy, wild speculation is the only fun that is left.


I don't recall f-16.net being listed as an affiliate to CNN, nor do I see many articles from CNN being posted here, so make of that what you will. And no, one does not have to engage in "wild speculation" when talking about these things, although sometimes it is fun. Many here actively cut through the misinformation on the internet, and attempt to share interesting knowledge with others. So avoiding giving RT and Sputnik extra clicks is a noble cause, for they peddle misinformation constantly, like many others.

Now, I am not the type to support the censorship of misinformation, because what is and isn't truth is whatever those with the most power say it is, in the eyes of too many. So I say let's make sure our side is the one with the most power.

Little off-topic at the end, but my point still stands.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 08 Mar 2018, 02:50
by element1loop
awsome wrote: So what is the alternative... hide here in your F-16.net/CNN echo chamber?


You're being quite disingenuous, the 'news' fodder quoted in here, official or otherwise, is constantly challenged re facts, analysed and debated in annoying details. That's not what generally occurs within actual online 'echo chambers', where it's a mirrored consensus line, with nothing else tollerated.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 08 Mar 2018, 14:42
by mixelflick
Why is it this board is seemingly the only one that can see the merits of the F-35?

Every other board I've been on trashes it. Sure, there are problems. But there are problems with any new weapons system. I heard the same BS about the F-15 back in the day. It's too big, too complex, won't work, is too expensive etc.. Today, it's far and away the most successful air to air machine in the world (based on combat record - the only record that matters).

I read a lot, and have yet to find another aircraft that can do ALL of these simultaneously..

1.) Carry a 5,000lb weapons load internally
2.) Pull 9 g's
3.) Fly at up to 50 degrees AOA
4.) Achieve mach 1.6
5.) Have superior SA to everything else flying - including the Raptor
6.) Make everything else around it that much more effective
7.) Has a 600+ mile combat radius
8.) Can carry a whopping 18,000lbs of weapons externally when the situation calls for it
9.) Comes in CTOL, STOVL configurations
10.) Carrier capable
11.) Has the VLO/stealth switch..

Did I miss any? This is a mighty impressive list, and it's only getting longer when new, more powerful and fuel efficient engines get here. Best of all, it's comparable in price (if not cheaper!) than so called 4++ gen Western jets. Russian Flankers are cheaper, but can't perform half of the functions I listed.

Why is this so hard for others to see? Nationalism??

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 08 Mar 2018, 18:16
by swiss
white_lightning35 wrote:Many here actively cut through the misinformation on the internet, and attempt to share interesting knowledge with others. So avoiding giving RT and Sputnik extra clicks is a noble cause, for they peddle misinformation constantly, like many others.


Good point. I learned here more than in the last decade about military aviation. And its really hard to decide who is right, the US or Russian e.g. when you try to get information in the net as a non expert. You hear all this fancy things about su-35, ibris-e or R-77. And then you see the official site of the manufacturer, and you realize most of it is BS. So its nice to have place were people with real knowledge are willing to share this with others.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 08 Mar 2018, 23:01
by white_lightning35
mixelflick wrote:
I read a lot, and have yet to find another aircraft that can do ALL of these simultaneously..

1.) Carry a 5,000lb weapons load internally
2.) Pull 9 g's
3.) Fly at up to 50 degrees AOA
4.) Achieve mach 1.6
5.) Have superior SA to everything else flying - including the Raptor
6.) Make everything else around it that much more effective
7.) Has a 600+ mile combat radius
8.) Can carry a whopping 18,000lbs of weapons externally when the situation calls for it
9.) Comes in CTOL, STOVL configurations
10.) Carrier capable
11.) Has the VLO/stealth switch..



I guarantee that no f-35 will ever pull 9g's, achieve mach 1.6, carry 18,000lbs of weapons, and be carrier capable simultaneously. 8)

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 09 Mar 2018, 00:03
by SpudmanWP
To be fair, the F-35 cannot do "all" of that simultaneously either.

It can only reach 9G,Mach 1.6, and a 600+ mile radius with internal weapons (5k for A/C and 3k for the B).

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 09 Mar 2018, 14:00
by hornetfinn
mixelflick wrote:Why is it this board is seemingly the only one that can see the merits of the F-35?

Every other board I've been on trashes it. Sure, there are problems. But there are problems with any new weapons system. I heard the same BS about the F-15 back in the day. It's too big, too complex, won't work, is too expensive etc.. Today, it's far and away the most successful air to air machine in the world (based on combat record - the only record that matters).


I think it's simple herd mentality. There were some very vocal people calling F-35 a failure and that still lives on as other vocal people are trying to sound intelligent and knowledgeable (and failing miserably).

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 09 Mar 2018, 14:23
by hornetfinn
white_lightning35 wrote:I guarantee that no f-35 will ever pull 9g's, achieve mach 1.6, carry 18,000lbs of weapons, and be carrier capable simultaneously. 8)


In APA world Su-27 derivatives can fly at Mach 1.8+, 50,000ft+ and carry 12 AAMs while simultaneously doing Cobras and Kulbits, so why not F-35... :P

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 09 Mar 2018, 14:56
by mixelflick
white_lightning35 wrote:
mixelflick wrote:
I read a lot, and have yet to find another aircraft that can do ALL of these simultaneously..

1.) Carry a 5,000lb weapons load internally
2.) Pull 9 g's
3.) Fly at up to 50 degrees AOA
4.) Achieve mach 1.6
5.) Have superior SA to everything else flying - including the Raptor
6.) Make everything else around it that much more effective
7.) Has a 600+ mile combat radius
8.) Can carry a whopping 18,000lbs of weapons externally when the situation calls for it
9.) Comes in CTOL, STOVL configurations
10.) Carrier capable
11.) Has the VLO/stealth switch..



I guarantee that no f-35 will ever pull 9g's, achieve mach 1.6, carry 18,000lbs of weapons, and be carrier capable simultaneously. 8)


Yes, I shouldn't have used the word simultaneously so broadly :)

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 09 Mar 2018, 19:06
by botsing
awsome wrote:So what is the alternative... hide here in your F-16.net/CNN echo chamber? In an environment where those who know know and everyone else is a spy, wild speculation is the only fun that is left.

The difference between wild speculation and an educated guess is that one of them sounds like a fairy tale and the other is supported with a solid hypothesis.

At F-16.net you can always make an educated guess that forms into a healthy discussion.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 09 Mar 2018, 21:02
by viper12
hornetfinn wrote:
white_lightning35 wrote:I guarantee that no f-35 will ever pull 9g's, achieve mach 1.6, carry 18,000lbs of weapons, and be carrier capable simultaneously. 8)


In APA world Su-27 derivatives can fly at Mach 1.8+, 50,000ft+ and carry 12 AAMs while simultaneously doing Cobras and Kulbits, so why not F-35... :P


TOVERIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!

You forgot that in APA's world, they can dodge the F-35's AMRAAMs, while simultaneously engage the F-35s from significant range, and then close in for superior WVR kills. :twisted:

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 09 Mar 2018, 22:50
by vilters
Russians went home after they saw that the US was actually USING the F-22. :devil:

"Damm, the thing exists, and it does exactly what it says in the folder?"
"Damm.........." :devil:

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 10 Mar 2018, 16:56
by mixelflick
vilters wrote:Russians went home after they saw that the US was actually USING the F-22. :devil:

"Damm, the thing exists, and it does exactly what it says in the folder?"
"Damm.........." :devil:


Honestly, I think there has to be lots of Russian 5th gen envy. Most obvious is the U.S., with small numbers of a deployed superfighter that puts everything else to shame. They're crowing a lot about their shiny new SU-35's, but they have to be realists too. It won't last long against the F-22. And now there are F-35's in theatre, which puts their vaunted S-300/400 SAM systems at risk. That too, poses an extreme risk to their SU-30's and 35's.

On their border, the Chinese have declared their J-20 IOC. While this may not be a truly combat capable bird yet, it's apparently a lot further along than their SU-57. The J-31 isn't far behind, and if it turns out to be even LO (if not VLO) and affordable, doesn't bode well for their Flanker exports. Even if the SU-57 became a mature design, how many countries could afford it? The Indians might be able to, but by all accounts they're panning it.

So I think they have a lot of 5th gen envy, and someone in Russia with the benefit of hindsight is probably kicking themselves for not running with a cheaper, more capable LO/VLO design vs. the SU-57. MIG is supposed to be working on one, but seems all but incapable. Sukhoi could start over with a clean sheet design from scratch, but that's unlikely. It will be at least another 5 years before the SU-57 bugs are ironed out, perhaps 10.

At which point F-35 costs will be circa 80 million, the aircraft will have matured and at least a half dozen countries will be flying and fighting with a 5th gen mentality. It isn't looking very pretty for them...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 10 Mar 2018, 23:13
by swiss
hornetfinn wrote:In APA world Su-27 derivatives can fly at Mach 1.8+, 50,000ft+ and carry 12 AAMs while simultaneously doing Cobras and Kulbits, so why not F-35... :P


Ironically, the A/A combat load in Syria for the Su-30/35 is only 6 AAM.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 11 Mar 2018, 19:23
by milosh
hornetfinn wrote:
white_lightning35 wrote:I guarantee that no f-35 will ever pull 9g's, achieve mach 1.6, carry 18,000lbs of weapons, and be carrier capable simultaneously. 8)


In APA world Su-27 derivatives can fly at Mach 1.8+, 50,000ft+ and carry 12 AAMs while simultaneously doing Cobras and Kulbits, so why not F-35... :P


I don't know what is old Su-27M top speed in this configuration but Cobra isn't problem with heavy missile load:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UsyMUAfh6fg

Su-35S would do that easier.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 12 Mar 2018, 08:58
by hornetfinn
milosh wrote:
hornetfinn wrote:
white_lightning35 wrote:I guarantee that no f-35 will ever pull 9g's, achieve mach 1.6, carry 18,000lbs of weapons, and be carrier capable simultaneously. 8)


In APA world Su-27 derivatives can fly at Mach 1.8+, 50,000ft+ and carry 12 AAMs while simultaneously doing Cobras and Kulbits, so why not F-35... :P


I don't know what is old Su-27M top speed in this configuration but Cobra isn't problem with heavy missile load:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UsyMUAfh6fg

Su-35S would do that easier.


Sure, but they are not doing those while flying at high supersonic speed at high altitude. Even heavy air-to-air missile load doesn't affect slow speed maneuverability that much. Super Hornet has also shown very nice airshow maneuvers in pretty heavy missile loads.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 16 Mar 2018, 00:06
by awsome
white_lightning35 wrote:
rheonomic wrote:
milosh wrote:Elections are very close so be ready to hear more propaganda from state media.


I hear they think that Putin might win.


Stoopid Americans only ever get two choices for president, they say.

xaxaxa, in glorious Soviet Russia you only need one! :mrgreen:


When your choices are hillary or trump two choices is not enough. When Putin is your choice one is all you need...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 16 Mar 2018, 14:39
by mixelflick
So now that the SU-57 is back home, what have they gained?

Such a brief publicity stunt fooled no one, least of which India? I rather doubt 2 days is/was long enough to evaluate her radar and other systems. I mean ok, you flew it there and back. Is 2 days enough of a window to accomplish... anything?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 16 Mar 2018, 17:00
by sprstdlyscottsmn
You could see whether or not your systems can detect any of the F-22s flying around. Just a checkbox item.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 16 Mar 2018, 23:55
by madrat
Since it has Su-35's radar, why not just do it with them?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 17 Mar 2018, 02:16
by awsome
maybe just a deployment to test if the nav system crashes when they change time zones... 8)

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 17 Mar 2018, 03:22
by citanon
madrat wrote:Since it has Su-35's radar, why not just do it with them?


Maybe its testing for a response from the US side.

EG: if we move towards AWACS A, how close can we get before interceptors to react?

It's also possible that the answer they got was: oh crap that was Hellas fast! Better retreat to the motherland!

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 17 Mar 2018, 03:46
by element1loop
awsome wrote:maybe just a deployment to test if the nav system crashes when they change time zones... 8)


Su57 has a nav system? ... Garmin BushWalker?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 07 Apr 2018, 22:24
by project458
madrat wrote:Since it has Su-35's radar, why not just do it with them?



No it does not, Su-57 prototypes are flying around with N036 Byelka AESA.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 08 Apr 2018, 01:58
by hythelday
project458 wrote:
madrat wrote:Since it has Su-35's radar, why not just do it with them?



No it does not, Su-57 prototypes are flying around with N036 Byelka AESA.


But is it 3D ROFAR?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 08 Apr 2018, 02:57
by wrightwing
hythelday wrote:
project458 wrote:
madrat wrote:Since it has Su-35's radar, why not just do it with them?



No it does not, Su-57 prototypes are flying around with N036 Byelka AESA.


But is it 3D ROFAR?

No.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 08 Apr 2018, 14:49
by vilters
Who cares about an A2A load in Syria?

IS has NO air force at all.

Some second hand drones perhaps, but that's about it.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 09 Apr 2018, 02:30
by collimatrix
vilters wrote:Who cares about an A2A load in Syria?

IS has NO air force at all.

Some second hand drones perhaps, but that's about it.


Turkey, however, does have an air force. They might even be tempted to use it to support their various proxy forces on the ground if it didn't mean tangling with RUAF.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 09 Apr 2018, 02:44
by madrat
Forget the idea that a whole squadron of Su-57 will be able to stop the coming strikes on Assad's forces. It's coming and there isn't a single thing the Russians can do to stop it.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 09 Apr 2018, 02:53
by collimatrix
The Russian Air Force in Syria can keep the Turkish Air Force from hitting their allies. There's not much they can do against the USN or USAAF.

I'm rather surprised that their air defenses haven't been able to bat down any cruise missiles though.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 09 Apr 2018, 11:20
by juretrn
"USAAF"
:D

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 09 Apr 2018, 22:58
by mixelflick
madrat wrote:Forget the idea that a whole squadron of Su-57 will be able to stop the coming strikes on Assad's forces. It's coming and there isn't a single thing the Russians can do to stop it.


^^^THIS^^^

You know Trump's going to hit them. It's just a matter of when and how hard. Since Syria has little to no air force, the Russians are the only thing standing in the way. And a handful of SU-30SM's/SU-35's isn't going to stop it.

Since Israel hit them today, I'm sure they shared some intelligence as to how difficult it was, how many missiles were swatted down, etc. The Russians claim they intercepted 5 of 8. Let's hear Israel's side. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle, but if Israeli F-15's and standoff munitions got through without much issue, Assad's forces are going to get slaughtered. Seems like a good opportunity to use the F-35, but then again I doubt the US/Israel would want to risk it. Why? Especially given legacy platforms and munitions got through the first time..

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 10 Apr 2018, 03:12
by awsome
madrat wrote:Forget the idea that a whole squadron of Su-57 will be able to stop the coming strikes on Assad's forces. It's coming and there isn't a single thing the Russians can do to stop it.



Just remember all of those strike aircraft have to land somewhere. The question is are the Russians willing to go all in and start WW3 over Syria. The hawks are betting all our lives that the answer is no.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 10 Apr 2018, 04:06
by madrat
The end of times for Muslims centers around a battle that is lost in Syria. This begins their prophecies in motion. I don't believe the Pentagon has any plans to fulfill prophecy anytime soon. However, sending a clear precision message to Assad and Iran is well within parameters.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 10 Apr 2018, 06:43
by hythelday
awsome wrote:
madrat wrote:Forget the idea that a whole squadron of Su-57 will be able to stop the coming strikes on Assad's forces. It's coming and there isn't a single thing the Russians can do to stop it.



Just remember all of those strike aircraft have to land somewhere. The question is are the Russians willing to go all in and start WW3 over Syria. The hawks are betting all our lives that the answer is no.


Lol, k.

Istanbul is an irradiated ash plane by now is it? And the nukes have been launched after russian mercs have been slaughtered by CJTF OIR forces. Stop this BS.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 10 Apr 2018, 08:38
by collimatrix
juretrn wrote:"USAAF"
:D


Ooops, I wasn't supposed to let that slip, but I guess the cat's out of the bag now.

It turns out that contingency plans for WWIII involve resurrecting Curtis Lemay and restoring him to his old command so the world can end in style.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 10 Apr 2018, 10:49
by juretrn
collimatrix wrote:
juretrn wrote:"USAAF"
:D


Ooops, I wasn't supposed to let that slip, but I guess the cat's out of the bag now.

It turns out that contingency plans for WWIII involve resurrecting Curtis Lemay and restoring him to his old command so the world can end in style.

Inb4 push for B-52 production restart.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 10 Apr 2018, 10:53
by botsing
awsome wrote:Yes the Russians noted the assembling of a strike flotilla two weeks ago at the same time as the Saudis are said to have been transferring chem munitions to the rebels.... http://useless.link.to.propaganda.site

It always helps to link to a state run "news agency" to give credit to your conspiracy theories. :doh:

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 10 Apr 2018, 13:42
by mixelflick
Srsly, what kind of strike are we looking at here?

The US strikes Assad's forces with cruise missiles and perhaps even strategic bombers (B-2)? Do we also hit Iran, given they're involved too? As for the Russians, they just don't have the conventional forces to withstand the onslaught. Certainly their S-300/400 batteries will be a factor, and I'd imagine their SU-30SM's/SU-35's would come up to fight. But F-22's and F-15's would likely make short work of them, with Navy SH's doing most of the air to ground work.

Again, I don't think the F-35 gets to play - not this early. But there is the Israeli F-35 factor, and of course if they act in conjunction with us the Muslim nations may balk at hitting Assad too.

I don't know. The military response almost seems simple vs. the politics that we have to navigate. Lots of ego involved (Putin, Trump etc) and it could get messy...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 10 Apr 2018, 16:35
by hythelday
mixelflick wrote:Srsly, what kind of strike are we looking at here?

The US strikes Assad's forces with cruise missiles and perhaps even strategic bombers (B-2)? Do we also hit Iran, given they're involved too? As for the Russians, they just don't have the conventional forces to withstand the onslaught. Certainly their S-300/400 batteries will be a factor, and I'd imagine their SU-30SM's/SU-35's would come up to fight. But F-22's and F-15's would likely make short work of them, with Navy SH's doing most of the air to ground work.

Again, I don't think the F-35 gets to play - not this early. But there is the Israeli F-35 factor, and of course if they act in conjunction with us the Muslim nations may balk at hitting Assad too.

I don't know. The military response almost seems simple vs. the politics that we have to navigate. Lots of ego involved (Putin, Trump etc) and it could get messy...



Iran is not game, too big, too soon. Maybe Israel decides to go at certain IRGC targets in Syria, but that is it.

Russians certainly know not to get involved; besides they have got an easy way out - show that US missed all the targets in the morning (been done before), declare that they defeated ISIS (been done before) and announce a withdraw (been done before, but maybe this time for real, especially if "unmarked" planes "accidentally" crater Hmeimim runway).

Destroy SyAAF and their bases, maybe hit some underground C&C well defended facilities just to show that the capability exists. Should be doable with US, British, French and Israeli participation. If GCC countries or maybe Turkey jump in on the party bus then even moreso.

Anyway, tomorrow morning SyAAF is going to be grounded permanently, either because of the reprisal strike, or because Russia stronk and launches nukes to end the whole world. Amirite, @awesome?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 10 Apr 2018, 23:34
by awsome
botsing wrote:
awsome wrote:Yes the Russians noted the assembling of a strike flotilla two weeks ago at the same time as the Saudis are said to have been transferring chem munitions to the rebels.... http://useless.link.to.propaganda.site

It always helps to link to a state run "news agency" to give credit to your conspiracy theories. :doh:


When the only proof you need is the word of the white helmets before you attack a sovereign state you have much bigger problems than the bias of one media outlet...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 11 Apr 2018, 01:54
by citanon
mixelflick wrote:Srsly, what kind of strike are we looking at here?

The US strikes Assad's forces with cruise missiles and perhaps even strategic bombers (B-2)? Do we also hit Iran, given they're involved too? As for the Russians, they just don't have the conventional forces to withstand the onslaught. Certainly their S-300/400 batteries will be a factor, and I'd imagine their SU-30SM's/SU-35's would come up to fight. But F-22's and F-15's would likely make short work of them, with Navy SH's doing most of the air to ground work.

Again, I don't think the F-35 gets to play - not this early. But there is the Israeli F-35 factor, and of course if they act in conjunction with us the Muslim nations may balk at hitting Assad too.

I don't know. The military response almost seems simple vs. the politics that we have to navigate. Lots of ego involved (Putin, Trump etc) and it could get messy...


Odds are the Russians will switch off their radars and hunker down their aircraft again and broadcast very precisely where all their people are.

Attempting to take on the coalition with what they have in Syria would be fool hardy. Attempting to shoot down million dollar cruise missiles with multimillion dollar long range SAMs would be a waste of money. They will protect their own bases in Syria but otherwise sit back, let Assad take the hit, and perhaps plot revenge some other way.

Only change would be if they see some juicy opportunity on a coalition aircraft that gets exposed to their SAM with high pK. However, they will have to think about it. If they launch, return fire will be incoming.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 11 Apr 2018, 14:30
by botsing
awsome wrote:When the only proof you need is the word of the white helmets before you attack a sovereign state you have much bigger problems than the bias of one media outlet...

RT is not a media outlet but a state run propaganda channel, anything they state is suspect and useless as a reliable source.

Pointing at other unreliable sources does not make your source more legit, your source is simply junk and should not be used on F-16.net.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 11 Apr 2018, 23:19
by awsome
botsing wrote:
awsome wrote:When the only proof you need is the word of the white helmets before you attack a sovereign state you have much bigger problems than the bias of one media outlet...

RT is not a media outlet but a state run propaganda channel, anything they state is suspect and useless as a reliable source.

Pointing at other unreliable sources does not make your source more legit, your source is simply junk and should not be used on F-16.net.


The issue is that the American administration is planning military intervention based on information provided by the white helmets. That is much more serious than basing internet statements on media outlet you find contradicts your America first world view.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 11 Apr 2018, 23:24
by botsing
awsome wrote:The issue is that the American administration is planning military intervention based on information provided by the white helmets. That is much more serious than basing internet statements on media outlet you find contradicts your America first world view.

Like I tried to explain to you before: Pointing at other turds does not make your own turd smell less.

Stop pretending RT is legit.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 11 Apr 2018, 23:44
by awsome
botsing wrote:
awsome wrote:The issue is that the American administration is planning military intervention based on information provided by the white helmets. That is much more serious than basing internet statements on media outlet you find contradicts your America first world view.

Like I tried to explain to you before: Pointing at other turds does not make your own turd smell less.

Stop pretending RT is legit.


You seem very offended by RT but not the fact your president is planning to kill people based on false information... am I ready you right?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 12 Apr 2018, 00:10
by awsome
botsing wrote:
awsome wrote:When the only proof you need is the word of the white helmets before you attack a sovereign state you have much bigger problems than the bias of one media outlet...

RT is not a media outlet but a state run propaganda channel, anything they state is suspect and useless as a reliable source.

Pointing at other unreliable sources does not make your source more legit, your source is simply junk and should not be used on F-16.net.



Every media source has a bias, no exceptions. With all media there will be some measure of truth mixed with lies whether intended or unintended. In order to have more truth requires viewing stories from as many sources as possible... even al jazeera (heaven forbid). Where the stories differ you have reason to question but where all the media outlets agree you have a good chance it is true. RT should be included as source on this site for the diversity of opinion if nothing else. :D

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 12 Apr 2018, 01:14
by element1loop
awsome wrote:
botsing wrote:
awsome wrote:When the only proof you need is the word of the white helmets before you attack a sovereign state you have much bigger problems than the bias of one media outlet...

RT is not a media outlet but a state run propaganda channel, anything they state is suspect and useless as a reliable source.

Pointing at other unreliable sources does not make your source more legit, your source is simply junk and should not be used on F-16.net.



Every media source has a bias, no exceptions. With all media there will be some measure of truth mixed with lies whether intended or unintended. In order to have more truth requires viewing stories from as many sources as possible... even al jazeera (heaven forbid). Where the stories differ you have reason to question but where all the media outlets agree you have a good chance it is true. RT should be included as source on this site for the diversity of opinion if nothing else. :D


This is not a pop-news aggregator, it's mil aircraft relevant stuff. Not interested in your definition of media or political 'balance', nor in unsolicited accessory 'schooling' in pet issues and spin. We all have the ability to surf the web so no one needs unsolicited 'assistance' to RT, Sputnik or TASS, nor do we need gratuitous topical issues to process and snarl up threads for pages. Read the site rules.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 12 Apr 2018, 20:08
by nutshell
awsome wrote:
botsing wrote:
awsome wrote:The issue is that the American administration is planning military intervention based on information provided by the white helmets. That is much more serious than basing internet statements on media outlet you find contradicts your America first world view.

Like I tried to explain to you before: Pointing at other turds does not make your own turd smell less.

Stop pretending RT is legit.


You seem very offended by RT but not the fact your president is planning to kill people based on false information... am I ready you right?


Dem threats from the notoriously trigger happy dutch government...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 12 Apr 2018, 21:55
by botsing
nutshell wrote:
awsome wrote: You seem very offended by RT but not the fact your president is planning to kill people based on false information... am I ready you right?


Dem threats from the notoriously trigger happy dutch government...

Careful now, or we'll send our flagship over.

:mrgreen:

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 12 Apr 2018, 23:12
by juretrn
botsing wrote:Careful now, or we'll send our flagship over.

:mrgreen:

That's a beautiful ship.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 13 Apr 2018, 00:18
by nutshell
That's even prettier than the Amerigo Vespucci!!!

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 14 Apr 2018, 02:47
by white_lightning35
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source= ... vL&ampcf=1

UK sources are saying they used tornados with storm shadows. No word on what others did other than tomahawks being used.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 14 Apr 2018, 04:27
by wrightwing
Apparently the B-1Bs used JASSM-ERs.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 14 Apr 2018, 14:52
by mixelflick
Surprised the Brits opted for using Tornado's. Then again, might as well use them as long as they're still around. Sounded like lots of Rafale's, Tornado's etc bombing and F-15/16 top cover out of Aviano.

IIW, they didn't use any of the really new toys..

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 14 Apr 2018, 15:11
by botsing
citanon wrote:Odds are the Russians will switch off their radars and hunker down their aircraft again and broadcast very precisely where all their people are.

Attempting to take on the coalition with what they have in Syria would be fool hardy. Attempting to shoot down million dollar cruise missiles with multimillion dollar long range SAMs would be a waste of money. They will protect their own bases in Syria but otherwise sit back, let Assad take the hit, and perhaps plot revenge some other way.

Only change would be if they see some juicy opportunity on a coalition aircraft that gets exposed to their SAM with high pK. However, they will have to think about it. If they launch, return fire will be incoming.

Great guesstimate!

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 14 Apr 2018, 16:49
by awsome
wrightwing wrote:Apparently the B-1Bs used JASSM-ERs.


Yawn... That was it? Russia gave away nothing in EW intel and America used up whatever credibility it had left. America can claim to have won this battle but it changes nothing as they have already lost the war just like in Vietnam. The west just blew its load and it was not very impressive...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 14 Apr 2018, 17:11
by milosh
SOHR reported more then 65 missiles were intercepted, while Pentagon said none was intercepted :?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 14 Apr 2018, 18:03
by nutshell
awsome wrote:
wrightwing wrote:Apparently the B-1Bs used JASSM-ERs.


Yawn... That was it? Russia gave away nothing in EW intel and America used up whatever credibility it had left. America can claim to have won this battle but it changes nothing as they have already lost the war just like in Vietnam. The west just blew its load and it was not very impressive...


Dude contain the autism, it was a mild, low scale missile strike and the targets got hit.

What did you expect a WW against a third world and a second world country just because?

Besides, that's the second, light strike russki equipment failed to repel.

TORNADO acting with impunity dude.

Tornado...jjeez...what year is this?1982?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 14 Apr 2018, 18:30
by awsome
Dude contain the autism, it was a mild, low scale missile strike and the targets got hit.

What did you expect a WW against a third world and a second world country just because?

Besides, that's the second, light strike russki equipment failed to repel.

TORNADO acting with impunity dude.

Tornado...jjeez...what year is this?1982?[/quote]


Trumpy: we will **** you up bigley
Syrian military this morning: is it in yet?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 14 Apr 2018, 18:36
by awsome
“That’s not the way the world really works anymore. We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality.

And while you’re studying that reality – judiciously, as you will – we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out.

We’re history’s actors … and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.”

– Karl Rove, Deputy Chief of Staff in the Government of George W. Bush.

I do wish people would study Rove’s words more carefully. Judiciously study them. If they did, then whenever the next alleged atrocity occurs and the United States, together with its coalition of supine vassals, starts yelling and hollering 10 minutes later for action to be taken, on the basis of a test-tube full of washing powder, or pictures of injured women and children in a war zone, and the entire media of dutiful stenographers shrieks that “something must be done”, then perhaps we might pause and wonder if we are being played. Instead of falling into an emotional spasm, maybe we would instead reject the deafening drumbeats of war – wars that have a habit of killing immeasurably more women and children than the alleged incidents on which they are based, by the way — and ask ourselves whether “Rove’s Law” has come into play.

As an aside, the West’s interventionist wars remind me of that wonderfully cynical exchange in the film, The Man With Two Brains:

Dr. Hfuhruhurr: “The only time we doctors should accept death is when it’s caused by our own incompetence!”

Dr. Necessiter: “Nonsense! If the murder of twelve innocent people can help save one human life, it will have been worth it!”

Here’s Dr. Necessiter selling us into war in Iraq: “Nonsense! If it costs us the deaths of 500,000 people to topple the evil dictator Saddam Hussein, it will have been worth it!”



Here he is selling us bombs on Libya: “Nonsense! If turning Libya into a failed state, a terrorist’s playground, and causing a mass exodus of refugees is the price for getting rid of Gaddafi, it will have been worth it.”

And here’s Dr Necessiter again, this time trying to sell us into bombing Syria: “Nonsense! Risking a catastrophic clash with a country armed with thousands of nuclear weapons is worth it in order to respond to the alleged deaths of less than a hundred people in a totally unproven chemical weapons attack.”

Behold, the “logic” of the interventionists!

But back to Rove. What was he saying? Three things:

Number one: We – that is the Globalist Deep State, centred in Washington DC – are sovereign over the entire globe and we will do as we please.

Number two: That we don’t follow reality, we create it.

Number three: That we are prepared to do things that will make your jaws drop, your hair stand on end, and your eyes boggle as you wonder what is going on, and while your jaws, your hair and your eyes are busy doing their thing, we will have moved onto create our next reality.

In other words – we are God – and not a kind and merciful God, but a God who lords it over all peoples’, nations and tongues, who tells lies, and then tells more lies to cover up those lies and – when you poor saps are trying to work out what it is we’re really up to – before you know what has happened, those lies and those lies to cover up lies will have become the new reality. We’ll have moved on and the world with it, and the narrative we have created will have been written in the history books, which we ourselves shall write.

The cases of Sergei Skripal and the alleged chemical attack in Eastern Ghouta seem somehow to represent the zenith of this ideology.

I do not know who poisoned Sergei Skripal or for what reason. It could be that the Russian Government was behind it, although this would mean accepting the highly improbable thesis that they decided to target a has-been MI6 spy, who they released from prison eight years ago, using perhaps the dumbest assassination method in the history of the world – an ineffective, slow-operating, “military-grade” nerve agent, which could be traced back to them, and which they smeared on a door handle in rainy Salisbury –, a week or so before a Presidential election, and less than 100 days before they are due to host the World Cup. In other words, the official narrative does not rest on accepting that the Russian state is the epitome of pure evil; it rests on accepting that it is the epitome of insanity and bumbling incompetence.

I do not know what happened in Eastern Ghouta. It could be that the Syrian Government was behind what is alleged to have happened (if it indeed did happen), but this would mean having to accept the thesis that just 24 hours away from completely liberating the last pocket of resistance in Damascus, after the US, the UK and France had all warned that they would attack if chemical weapons were used, just a week or so after the US President, Donald J. Swamp, announced that the US would be pulling out of Syria (which they occupied illegally, by the way), they made the decision to use a weapon that gave them no military advantage whatsoever, but which was practically guaranteed to be used as a pretext for airstrikes against them. In other words, like the Skripal case, the theory does not stand on accepting that the Syrian state is the epitome of pure evil; it stands on accepting that it is the epitome of self-defeating stupidity on an epic scale.

But you see what I’ve done? I’ve fallen right into Karl Rove’s trap, haven’t I? I’m asking questions about whether the narratives in these cases stack up. In the Skripal case, I’ve been judiciously studying reality by asking lots of questions that ought to have occurred to anyone with a keen interest in arriving at the truth (here and here, for instance). I could do the same with the Syrian case, if I had the time.

Yet while I’m doing so, the narrative is moving on. I’m falling into exactly the trap that Karl and his disciples have laid. They want two sorts of people: those who just blindly accept that it was the Russians wot did it, or that it was Assad wot did it; and those who spend their time asking questions about the official explanations. The first group call the second group conspiracy theorists and nutters. The second group call the first group dumb sheeple. And the Globalist Deep State laughs and laughs and laughs as the two groups battle it out to make sense of what has happened, leaving it free to march on to create the next reality. Truly I tell you, these Bolsheviks have learnt their Hegelian Dialectics well.

Now, this is not to rule out that in the Salisbury and Eastern Ghouta cases the official narratives might – just might – be the correct ones. That both Vladimir Putin and Bashar Assad might be the Laurel and Hardy of Geopolitics. Yet it has to be said that whatever else you think about them, neither of them tends to come across in interviews as being what you might call dumb or inept. Nor do either of them give the impression that they have sudden insane impulses to do things which have absolutely no benefit to them, but which hand their enemies massive PR victories.

But this is besides the point. The point is not whether these particular incidents are what the official narrative says they are, or whether they are provocations. It suffices for the “new reality creators” to create their realities on occasion, or perhaps to distort occurrences which they didn’t create, and before you know it you have your two groups battling over events which may be real or fake: the conspiracists – who are studying every event to try to work out the details and the inconsistencies – and the sheeple – who believe that their Government is full of good hearted, white hatted chaps and lasses who would never, ever do anything bad – unlike those orcs over in Mordor.

Rove and Co have basically created a “reality” where truth is no longer discernible, where assertions of guilt are taken as fact, and where holes in these kinds of incidents only serve to divide the people further, so that the Globalist Deep State can move on to create their next reality.

But let’s not get gloomy.

The good news is that although they clearly think they can get away with it indefinitely, they can’t. No kingdom or empire built on a mountain of lies can stand indefinitely. They all fall. And can’t you start to sense the signs that the empire’s “new realities” – or what are known as lies in laymen’s terms – are reaching boiling point? Don’t you sense that they have just got too confident and in doing so have begun to get careless? They are making mistakes. And as they do, they are having to resort to bigger and bigger lies to cover up the ones they’ve already told.

Sadly for Rove and Co, but happily for the rest of us, the world doesn’t actually work the way they think it does. Reality – I mean real reality, rather than the phoney reality they have created – will catch up sooner or later. I sense that it’s on its way even now. And when it finally comes, the whole rotten edifice that these “history’s actors” have tried to create will crash and burn. Bringing much rejoicing. Rob Slane TheBlogMire.com - APRIL 14, 2018

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 14 Apr 2018, 18:44
by nutshell
Nope, he went full retard.

Tornado schooling SXXXs and the russian umbrella, the hell am i even arguing!?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 14 Apr 2018, 18:48
by awsome
nutshell wrote:Nope, he went full retard.

Tornado schooling SXXXs and the russian umbrella, the hell am i even arguing!?




When its so weak you don't even turn on the s400 ...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 14 Apr 2018, 18:50
by marsavian
Full Pentagon video with mission details

https://www.defense.gov/Videos/videoid/594372/

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 14 Apr 2018, 21:23
by juretrn
Should I read that wall of text or is it going to give me brain cancer?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 14 Apr 2018, 21:29
by citanon
awsome wrote:
nutshell wrote:Nope, he went full retard.

Tornado schooling SXXXs and the russian umbrella, the hell am i even arguing!?


When its so weak you don't even turn on the s400 ...


It was pointless to use the S400. All the Russians would have accomplished was to embarass themselves.

Not that the S400 is a bad system, but the cruise missiles are programmed to avoid the Russian AD bubbles. They would have flow around or under the effective coverage of the Russian radars. To find them and track them the Russians would have needed to have airborne assets.

But, let's just assume that the Russians magically do see the missiles flying toward Damascus or Homs. At least a couple of thoughts would probably crossed the Russian commander's mind:
  • I don't have that many missiles and each one with the range is going to cost a lot of rubles.
  • My SAMs will be flying a downward trajectory trying to hit a nap of the earth missile. IF I miss my own missiles are going straight into down town Damascus.

Obvious answer is, no thank you. I'm not engaging unless they are directly targeting my base.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 14 Apr 2018, 22:16
by citanon
juretrn wrote:Should I read that wall of text or is it going to give me brain cancer?


If you are Russia stronk brain cancer will just cure your hangover.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 15 Apr 2018, 01:18
by geforcerfx

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 15 Apr 2018, 03:16
by nutshell
citanon wrote:
awsome wrote:
nutshell wrote:Nope, he went full retard.

Tornado schooling SXXXs and the russian umbrella, the hell am i even arguing!?


When its so weak you don't even turn on the s400 ...


It was pointless to use the S400. All the Russians would have accomplished was to embarass themselves.

Not that the S400 is a bad system, but the cruise missiles are programmed to avoid the Russian AD bubbles. They would have flow around or under the effective coverage of the Russian radars. To find them and track them the Russians would have needed to have airborne assets.

But, let's just assume that the Russians magically do see the missiles flying toward Damascus or Homs. At least a couple of thoughts would probably crossed the Russian commander's mind:
  • I don't have that many missiles and each one with the range is going to cost a lot of rubles.
  • My SAMs will be flying a downward trajectory trying to hit a nap of the earth missile. IF I miss my own missiles are going straight into down town Damascus.

Obvious answer is, no thank you. I'm not engaging unless they are directly targeting my base.


Like it would've made any impact rofl.

Both the brits and the american are free to send everything they want all over Syria with guaranteed chance of success simply because anything from the 70s (apparently) with a pair of wings can do whatever it wants completely uncontested.

That SAM umbrella is simply failing hard to provide even the slightest coverage from predictable, early anticipated,low intensity cruise attacks AND air strikes.

Cruise attacks are tedious to deal with,ok with that, but cmon now. Tornados acting like F22s in 2018 is frankly ridiculous.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 15 Apr 2018, 07:59
by milosh
nutshell wrote:
Cruise attacks are tedious to deal with,ok with that, but cmon now. Tornados acting like F22s in 2018 is frankly ridiculous.


Tornado used scalp missiles. If they wanted they could use C-130 instead Tornado, effect would be the same.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 15 Apr 2018, 09:20
by southernphantom
milosh wrote:SOHR reported more then 65 missiles were intercepted, while Pentagon said none was intercepted :?


I suspect that the truth is somewhere in between.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 15 Apr 2018, 10:11
by juretrn
nutshell wrote:Cruise attacks are tedious to deal with,ok with that, but cmon now. Tornados acting like F22s in 2018 is frankly ridiculous.

You get what you pay for, especially in SAM...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 15 Apr 2018, 11:12
by vilters
All used platforms simply acted as missile trucks.

Could have been done with hot air balloons for my part, the result would have been the same.

You don't need multi billion dollar ships or aircraft for this kind of delivery.

If this is the future of war?
We can start scrapping and saving a LOT of taxpayers money.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 15 Apr 2018, 11:33
by gtg947h
vilters wrote:All used platforms simply acted as missile trucks.

Could have been done with hot air balloons for my part, the result would have been the same.

You don't need multi billion dollar ships or aircraft for this kind of delivery.

If this is the future of war?
We can start scrapping and saving a LOT of taxpayers money.


Well, not only were US/Uk/Fr unsure of the possible Russian response and were therefore playing it safe, but the weapons used may have either been new (and thus untested in a true operational setting), or been reaching the end of their "shelf life" and someone figured "better to use them than scrap them".

Just a thought...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 15 Apr 2018, 12:05
by popcorn
Hot air balloons... what's next? Kites? :mrgreen:

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 15 Apr 2018, 12:56
by vilters
Kites have been used in the past, are in use today, and will be used in the future.

PS : UK 's participation is understandable. It is less clear what France wants to win?
Unless they had some missile left-overs that approached their time limit.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 15 Apr 2018, 13:22
by mixelflick
vilters wrote:All used platforms simply acted as missile trucks.

Could have been done with hot air balloons for my part, the result would have been the same.

You don't need multi billion dollar ships or aircraft for this kind of delivery.

If this is the future of war?
We can start scrapping and saving a LOT of taxpayers money.


This is a very pertinent observation. I wonder who else was watching and learning, based on the "missile trucks' MO? Russia has been saying that all along since delaying their PAK-DA and investing instead in new build TU-160's. And since the SU-57 has been such a bust, I wonder how long it is for the world now? They may just decide to scrap it and build more SU-35's with better sensors and missiles.

Makes you wonder what the Chinese are thinking, now that they're heavily invested in 5th gen platforms...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 15 Apr 2018, 14:08
by nutshell
milosh wrote:
nutshell wrote:
Cruise attacks are tedious to deal with,ok with that, but cmon now. Tornados acting like F22s in 2018 is frankly ridiculous.


Tornado used scalp missiles. If they wanted they could use C-130 instead Tornado, effect would be the same.


That would be hilarious. Hope next round o'pound AC130 will be employed and please, tell the syrians and the russians one week before so they might be prepared.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 15 Apr 2018, 17:57
by icemaverick
Syria is far from being a major military power. Assad would have been finished if Russia and Iran hadn’t come to his aid. Of course the allies could get away with using legacy platforms. The 5th gens and newer gen weapons are meant for more capable adversaries.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 15 Apr 2018, 23:13
by madrat
Ordnance delivery costs are supposed to drop with the newest generation, too. They use tiered systems dependant on the target. Obviously they expected more resistance than four dozen blindfire SAMs in response.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 15 Apr 2018, 23:56
by citanon
Why did they even fire off the SAMs if there were no targets? Are they about to expire like old fruit?

And it's not as if the US is lying. You look at videos posted by Assad and co online claiming interception: sure enough, they show blind fired SAMs tracking nothing.

Awful expensive propaganda exercise.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 16 Apr 2018, 00:20
by jeff929
citanon wrote:Why did they even fire off the SAMs if there were no targets? Are they about to expire like old fruit?

And it's not as if the US is lying. You look at videos posted by Assad and co online claiming interception: sure enough, they show blind fired SAMs tracking nothing.

Awful expensive propaganda exercise.




How can you tell the SAMs are not tracking anything from the videos?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 16 Apr 2018, 02:08
by wrightwing
jeff929 wrote:
citanon wrote:Why did they even fire off the SAMs if there were no targets? Are they about to expire like old fruit?

And it's not as if the US is lying. You look at videos posted by Assad and co online claiming interception: sure enough, they show blind fired SAMs tracking nothing.

Awful expensive propaganda exercise.




How can you tell the SAMs are not tracking anything from the videos?


Apparently the SAMs were launched after the last cruise missile hit it's target.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 16 Apr 2018, 04:14
by citanon
jeff929 wrote:
citanon wrote:Why did they even fire off the SAMs if there were no targets? Are they about to expire like old fruit?

And it's not as if the US is lying. You look at videos posted by Assad and co online claiming interception: sure enough, they show blind fired SAMs tracking nothing.

Awful expensive propaganda exercise.




How can you tell the SAMs are not tracking anything from the videos?


A couple of things:

1: This is what SAMs look like when they actually have targets:




Notice the unpredictable turns as the missiles turn towards tracked targets?

Here are Saudi Patriots going up against Houthi ballistic missiles:



The last seconds of that video shows why you may NOT want to use your SAMs to shoot down incoming missiles even if you have some fancy S300 or S400 or S500 or Patriot Pac3 if you are not in the correct geographical location relative to the missile trajectory.

2: Missiles from 1 were trying to intercept rockets on ballistic trajectories. This is the altitude cruise missiles should be flying at in the vicinity of Damascus.



Notice a slight discrepancy between where the targets are supposed to be and where the Syrian S200s were headed? Not only were they shooting at thin air, they knew they were shooting at thin air.

This test video shows what the SAM should be doing when it actually intercepts a cruise missile: ie, heading downwards:


Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 16 Apr 2018, 04:41
by geforcerfx
To add to citanon one of the first articles I read stated the Syrian missile systems were firing in Damascus for 30-40 min. most cruise missile attacks are designed to hit within minutes of each other to overwhelm the defense system. They may have intercepted a couple, and that's a big maybe since Damascus had the JSOW's I believe, and they are only a few hundred feet off the deck. But the remaining 30 minutes of firing are your most likely fake shots.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 17 Apr 2018, 00:39
by geforcerfx
Syrian air defense systems have been activated in response to a missile attack apparently targeting Shayrat Airbase in Homs province, state media SANA reports.
Up to 10 missiles were destroyed by the Syrian Armed Forces, a military source told Sputnik. The Syrian air defenses managed to intercept some of the projectiles, according to a SANA reporter. Meanwhile, the Al Mayadeen news outlet is claiming that all the projectiles were intercepted and inflicted no physical damage or casualties at the targeted Syrian base.

The Pentagon has denied initiating strikes or conducting any other military activity in Homs province. “There is no US military activity in that area at this time,” the Pentagon’s spokesperson told Reuters. The same information was also shared with TASS news agency by Pentagon spokesman Eric Pahon.

The raid in Homs countryside reportedly coincided with another missile attack against a military airbase near Damascus. According to various Arabic media channels, three missiles targeted Al Dumayr airport, but they were all allegedly downed by the Syrian air defenses.

According to yet unconfirmed reports, the missiles entered Syrian airspace from Lebanon, which may indicate that the Israeli Air Force could have been involved, Al-Masdar News reports, citing a military source. The outlet’s reporter also published several videos allegedly showing the launch of interceptor missiles.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 17 Apr 2018, 08:23
by zero-one
Why did the coalition forces fire 105 cruise missiles on 3 targets, each with a 1,000 pound warhead?
Only one of those would render a building so heavily damaged, it might as well be demolished.

my theory is, they expected some to be intercepted. What they did was a saturation attack
All 3 targets had either JASSM-ERs or Storm shaddow or SCALP stealth cruise missiles, I think these were the ones that they were counting on to hit.

To increase the survivability, they also ripple fired dozens of tomahawks which would act as decoys and soak up the missile defenses.

But since very few or none were intercepted, all 105 missiles reduced the targets to fine powder judging from the photos.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 17 Apr 2018, 09:04
by f4u7_corsair
mixelflick wrote:Surprised the Brits opted for using Tornado's. Then again, might as well use them as long as they're still around. Sounded like lots of Rafale's, Tornado's etc bombing and F-15/16 top cover out of Aviano.

IIW, they didn't use any of the really new toys..

Because they clearly don't have anything else to do the job.
Their FGR.4s are completely unfit for such task (i.e. long range cruise missile strike). They were limited to air cover.

Similarly, French -5s provided air superiority.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 17 Apr 2018, 10:59
by zero-one
f4u7_corsair wrote:
mixelflick wrote:Surprised the Brits opted for using Tornado's. Then again, might as well use them as long as they're still around. Sounded like lots of Rafale's, Tornado's etc bombing and F-15/16 top cover out of Aviano.

IIW, they didn't use any of the really new toys..

Because they clearly don't have anything else to do the job.
Their FGR.4s are completely unfit for such task (i.e. long range cruise missile strike). They were limited to air cover.

Similarly, French -5s provided air superiority.


I don't necessarily agree with this.

There were lots of ways to destroy those facilities. On the top of my head, I can think of.
-B2 strike
-F-35 strike
-F-22 strike
-Anything that can carry the StormShaddow JASSM-ER or SCALP like a Typhoon, F/A-18, F-15E
-Tomahawk missile strikes from navy subs

But perhaps cost, availability, risk as well as other factors were taken into consideration and these units were deemed the best fit for that moment.

I just don't think it was either Tornado carrying StormShaddow or totally impossible for the Royal armed forces to destroy the targets against lowly Syria

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 17 Apr 2018, 12:45
by f4u7_corsair
I was talking strictly about the RAF. The only viable British alternative for cruise missile strike are sea and subsea-launched TLAMs.

Typhoon is unable to carry on such tasks, mostly because (1) the Storm Shadow isn't even integrated yet, (2) even if it was, it is only able to load them on the wet wing stations, and thus would only be able to carry a centerline fuel tank, leading to ridiculous range. Tornado, Rafale, Hornets and Super Dupers carry 50 to 100% more fuel than Typhoon with a 2 ALCM payload.

RAF will have a quite embarassing capability gap once the Tonkas will be out of the flight line.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 17 Apr 2018, 13:00
by hornetfinn
zero-one wrote:Why did the coalition forces fire 105 cruise missiles on 3 targets, each with a 1,000 pound warhead?
Only one of those would render a building so heavily damaged, it might as well be demolished.

my theory is, they expected some to be intercepted. What they did was a saturation attack
All 3 targets had either JASSM-ERs or Storm shaddow or SCALP stealth cruise missiles, I think these were the ones that they were counting on to hit.

To increase the survivability, they also ripple fired dozens of tomahawks which would act as decoys and soak up the missile defenses.

But since very few or none were intercepted, all 105 missiles reduced the targets to fine powder judging from the photos.


That and they probably wanted to make very sure that all the nasty chemicals and related equipment (and personnel) inside those buildings would also turn to ashes. Just damaging the buildings would mean they would've transported those to another location which would've just been a minor nuisance. It might've also released some of those chemicals that could've harmed civilians there.

Tomahawks were likely used as ships carry those and a lot of them float around there. So why not just use them to attack targets? They might have lower chance of penetrating the defences, but there are a lot of them and they probably are still highly capable weapons. I'd say they still have pretty decent chance of penetrating even the best defences.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 17 Apr 2018, 13:29
by zero-one
f4u7_corsair wrote:Typhoon is unable to carry on such tasks, mostly because (1) the Storm Shadow isn't even integrated yet, (2) even if it was, it is only able to load them on the wet wing stations, and thus would only be able to carry a centerline fuel tank, leading to ridiculous range. Tornado, Rafale, Hornets and Super Dupers carry 50 to 100% more fuel than Typhoon with a 2 ALCM payload.

RAF will have a quite embarassing capability gap once the Tonkas will be out of the flight line.


Well about that, according to this link:
https://www.eurofighter.com/news-and-ev ... er-typhoon

1. The typhoon's integration for Storm Shadow was done in 2015
2. Photos prove that the Storm shadow can be carried on the wing's weapon stations too
3. Even without EFT's NATO's vast fleet of refueling tankers should allow Typhoons to operate comfortably in the Mediterranean

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 17 Apr 2018, 13:35
by f4u7_corsair
Yes, the wing wet weapons stations.. where you hang the wing bags. It would be wing tanks OR Storm Shadow, not both.
Storm Shadow cannot be hung from the inner wing stations due to missile length (landing gear behind..) and the tricky release flight enveloppe clearance (the beast is 1,3 tons).

So the only ALCM strike setup for Typhoon is 2x wing Storm Shadows and 1x 1 000 L centerline tank.

Which clearly, is not enough fuel. Yes they could be (very frequently) refueled, but this is not operationally sane. Fighters with twice the fuel load already require enough AAR. "Vast fleet of tankers" sure, more than what the RAF is capable to support. It would be operationally unviable and very unflexible.

There's no wonder why I have yet to see any combat aircraft performing long range strikes with only a centerline tank (besides the F-16E, which has significant CFTs). Number speak for themselves: a SH or a Rafale in an heavy ALCM mission carries around 9-10 tons of fuel. A Typhoon tops off at 5,5 tons.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 17 Apr 2018, 13:46
by gideonic
f4u7_corsair wrote:There's no wonder why I have yet to see any combat aircraft performing long range strikes with only a centerline tank (besides the F-16E, which has significant CFTs). Number speak for themselves: a SH or a Rafale in an heavy ALCM mission carries around 9-10 tons of fuel. A Typhoon tops off at 5,5 tons.


Might this be the reason, why UK wants CFTs for Typhoons, after the Tornado retirement?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 17 Apr 2018, 13:51
by f4u7_corsair
It would certainly enable the Typhoon as an at least credible long range striker.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 17 Apr 2018, 14:04
by zero-one
well the RAF won't have a choice would they once the Tornados are retired.

They can also go with
1 x Storm Shaddow in the center line station
2 x Fuel bags on the wing's wet stations

This should give them more fuel.

Is it less optimal than using Tornados, sure, but it moves the argument from, "they didn't have a choice" to the 2nd option doesn't look as good.

All I'm saying is, there were other options on the table and if the RAF can spare tankers to send Typhoons all the way to Iraq, I'm sure they could easily handle strikes in Syria with Typhoons flying from nearby Turkey or Italy.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 17 Apr 2018, 14:16
by f4u7_corsair
no, the centerline clearance is too narrow betweeh the landing gear doors to allow anything bigger than a targetting pod or a 1 000 L tank there.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 17 Apr 2018, 15:19
by zero-one
f4u7_corsair wrote:no, the centerline clearance is too narrow betweeh the landing gear doors to allow anything bigger than a targetting pod or a 1 000 L tank there.


I'm afraid I'll have to ask for evidence now.
why can't they go with just 1 center-line tank anyway, if you're saying the range is too short, well how short is it?
Do you have any figures to share?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 17 Apr 2018, 15:39
by f4u7_corsair
An educated guess would indicate roughly and at best two thirds of the range of its counterparts.

Typhoon, without CFT, loads up two ALCMs, 1x 1 000 L centerline tank, 4-6 AAMs. Tops off at 5,5 tons of fuel (a bit less than 5 tons internally and 800 kg externally).

Hornets with similar ordnance loads up 2-3x 330 gal. tanks, so does the Super Hornet, respectively topping off at 7-8 tons and 8,5-9,5 tons of fuel. Rafale with 2-3x 2 000 L tanks tops off at 8,2 to 9,8 tons of fuel. For comparison with the raid, Tornado launches with 2x 2 250 L tanks, 2 AAMs, that makes 8,6 tons.

The trend is clear: the Typhoon holds roughly a 33 to 50% less fuel than its counterparts for equal ordnance. I will not go into fuel consumption and drag indexes calculations, as these data aren't reliably available to the public anyways. That wouldn't change much, since M88s, F404/414s and EJ200s are roughly similarly efficient (the latter sucking up slightly more fuel at its higher thrust rating however). The RB199s are known to be mildly optimized for med/high altitudes.

There's no need for a crystal ball to deduce Typhoon's range will be severly impared, for any mission profile (hi/lo/hi...). As for the centerline Storm Shadow, I don't have any technical figure to share, but eyeball analysis pretty clearly shows this is impossible. The facts that it is not even marketed in Eurofighter's PR efforts, let alone witnessed on development aircraft, confirm that.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 17 Apr 2018, 16:11
by zero-one
Well, I'm not going to argue with your hypothesis there. But at least its still an option on the table. The RAF really only has 2 types of combat aircraft. the Typhoon and the Tornado, both could theoretically carry out the strike.

If it really came down to a massive strike operation, the RAF could load them all with Storm Shadows, leave 1 or 2 squadrons of Typhoons for dedicated CAP.

They have no bombers, their entire combat aircraft fleet is made up of those 2 aircraft. Shes a far cry from her glory days of world war 2 where she was pretty much just 2nd to the USAF in overall strength, specially late in the game.

But they are still more capable than most air arms out there.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 17 Apr 2018, 16:50
by marsavian
I'm sure they could easily handle strikes in Syria with Typhoons flying from nearby Turkey or Italy.


UK Typhoons and Tornadoes are based in Akrotiri, Cyprus which is a UK sovereign base and is right next to Syria.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akrotiri_and_Dhekelia

However it is true that Eurofighter got the A-G hardpoint configuration seriously sub optimal and they almost need the CFTs just to recover parity. They probably concentrated too much on making it an intercepting dogfighting hot rod and left the strike role too much as an afterthought. One squadron of Tornadoes has already been retired due to the imminent squadron of F-35Bs coming online and the other two will be retired by 2019 so the Typhoon will have to take over the role of cruise missile strike by then.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 18 Apr 2018, 10:47
by zero-one
Thanks marsavian

Wow, once the Tornados are retired the entire RAF's combat capabilities will rest squarely on the shoulders of the Typhoon. And they only have around 120+ of those.

Yes they'll have F-35Bs on the QE class. But just considering the RAF alone, does anyone else feel they're no longer a top tier air force.

The Typhoon is one extremely capable air-air platform, probably top 4th gen air-superiority fighter, has okay strike capabilities, can probably perform SEAD or CAS if pushed.

But China, Israel, Japan, S.Korea, Russia and India may have a more complete combat aircraft force structure than they have even with the Tornado still in service.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 18 Apr 2018, 11:24
by ricnunes
zero-one wrote:Wow, once the Tornados are retired the entire RAF's combat capabilities will rest squarely on the shoulders of the Typhoon. And they only have around 120+ of those.

Yes they'll have F-35Bs on the QE class. But just considering the RAF alone, does anyone else feel they're no longer a top tier air force.


Well, as far as I know the UK is planning to order something like 138 F-35s. There are even some "rumours" that many of those 138 F-35s could end up being F-35As or resuming that the total order of 138 aircraft could be composed by F-35As and F-35Bs.
But even if that order ends up being 138 F-35Bs (solely) the combined RAF/FAA will have those 120+ Typhoons plus 138 F-35s. I would say that this would still be a very respectable air force and IMO the most powerful air force in Europe!
Heck, a fleet of 138 F-35s by itself would make any air force to become one of the most powerful and respected air forces in the world :wink:

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 18 Apr 2018, 12:58
by zero-one
But the FAA is part of the RN.
If they all happen to be B models under the RN's command, then the FAA could very well be the most combat capable air arm of the Royal armed forces.

Thats like saying the USN is better than the USAF in combat aircraft capability.
But hey back in the day the USN really believed they had the world's best air superiority fighter in the F-14
the world's best strike fighter in the F/A-18, and could match the USAF in other capabilities as well with their A-3 strategic bomber and E-3 AEWACs. The only thing they couldn't match was strategic air lift

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 18 Apr 2018, 16:46
by ricnunes
zero-one wrote:But the FAA is part of the RN.
If they all happen to be B models under the RN's command, then the FAA could very well be the most combat capable air arm of the Royal armed forces.

Thats like saying the USN is better than the USAF in combat aircraft capability.


Actually the F-35Bs are both RN and RAF. They will operate from 2 operational squadrons, one being the no. 617 squadron which is RAF and the other the 809 NAS which is RN. On top of this there will be 2 more RAF squadrons, the no. 17 squadron (an Operational Evaluation Unit) and the no. 207 squadron (and Operational Conversion Unit).
So there will be more RAF F-35 squadrons than RN squadrons so this makes the F-35 at least as much but likely more a RAF aircraft than a RN one. :wink:

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 18 Apr 2018, 18:59
by zero-one
ricnunes wrote:
Actually the F-35Bs are both RN and RAF. They will operate from 2 operational squadrons, one being the no. 617 squadron which is RAF and the other the 809 NAS which is RN. On top of this there will be 2 more RAF squadrons, the no. 17 squadron (an Operational Evaluation Unit) and the no. 207 squadron (and Operational Conversion Unit).
So there will be more RAF F-35 squadrons than RN squadrons so this makes the F-35 at least as much but likely more a RAF aircraft than a RN one. :wink:


I see, but why then B models? They're more expensive and besides STOVL capability, less capable than the A model.
less maneuverable, less range, less payload, acceleration, in almost every aspect of direct combat, it is inferior to the other 2 models. And it cost more.

It's still head and shoulders above almost anything else but hopefully they give A models to the RAF

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 18 Apr 2018, 19:32
by SpudmanWP
It makes every F-35 in UK service carrier & austere-basing capable.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 19 Apr 2018, 11:06
by ricnunes
zero-one wrote:I see, but why then B models? They're more expensive and besides STOVL capability, less capable than the A model.
less maneuverable, less range, less payload, acceleration, in almost every aspect of direct combat, it is inferior to the other 2 models. And it cost more.


Basically (and simplifying) the F-35Bs are meant to replace both the RAF Harrier GR9 and the RN Sea Harrier FA.2

Apparently (and like SpudmanWP said), the RAF still wants to operate aircraft capable of operating on UK/RN carriers and austere/makeshift/improved forward "bases" like they did during the cold war and in actual wars like the Falklands. And the F-35B fills this role nicely.

zero-one wrote:It's still head and shoulders above almost anything else but hopefully they give A models to the RAF


Like I previously mentioned, there seems to be some serious discussions withing the UK's Ministry of Defense and Armed Forces to modify the planned order of 138 F-35Bs into a mixed/combined F-35B and F-35A order. Now if this will actually happen or not, one can only guess/speculate... :wink:

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 20 Apr 2018, 15:13
by mixelflick
I think they'll do just fine with 138 B's, if that's what they ultimately choose.

But I would prefer an A/B mix, no question about it. The UK is always right by our side whenever military action is taken, as seen most recently in Syria. The A's would have greater range, better all around performance and most importantly - hit harder given the ability to carry 2,000lb JDAM's internally.

Other than the carrier scenario, I fail to see any conflict where runways were so damaged that CTOL aircraft couldn't operate. At least until they patched the runway and resumed operations. Hell the Iraqi's used taxiways as runways after we cratered them, still getting some aircraft airborne in DS1.

That may not hold true to future combat, but historically it looks like CTOL aircraft do just fine in wartime. And although the B is the worst performing of the bunch, I think it's safe to say it's head and shoulders over any harrier variant. I don't think it has the range of a Tornado, but then again can be based closer to the front. It still has what... 14,000lbs of internal fuel? That's double that of the F-16...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 20 Apr 2018, 16:18
by ricnunes
Also don't forget that the F-35A is also considerable cheaper than the F-35B, which is very important nowadays.

And of course the bigger range of the F-35A makes it a better and a fine replacement for the Tornado compared to the F-35B.

So I guess that a A/B mix would make sense but then again, only time will tell if this will happen or not.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 20 Apr 2018, 17:34
by marsavian
48 UK F-35Bs are set in stone. The MOD sees the operational fleet of F-35Bs as eventually totally about 63 with 138 being ordered in total to cover for attrition/maintenance/sustainment.

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/governm ... 48-f-35bs/

I would be very surprised if the RAF don't eventually convince the MOD to give them two squadrons of F-35A (30 to 40 aircraft of the 138 total).

As for the Typhoons there will eventually be about 140+ aircraft, 37 tranche 1 single seaters, 67 tranche 2 and 40 tranche 3 not including attrition losses of which there has been at least 1 IIRC. The tranche 2/3 are the only ones who will receive major future enhancements like AESA and possibly CFTs. The F-35 fleet should therefore grow to rough parity over time.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 20 Apr 2018, 22:50
by ricnunes
marsavian wrote:As for the Typhoons there will eventually be about 140+ aircraft, 37 tranche 1 single seaters, 67 tranche 2 and 40 tranche 3 not including attrition losses of which there has been at least 1 IIRC. The tranche 2/3 are the only ones who will receive major future enhancements like AESA and possibly CFTs. The F-35 fleet should therefore grow to rough parity over time.


If I'm not mistaken the RAF plans to retire all their Tranche 1 Typhoons soon and so if this is the case than you should consider the RAF fleet of Typhoons to be about 120+ aircraft (which was the number that zero-one came up with).

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 21 Apr 2018, 05:12
by marsavian
No they are keeping the single seaters as specified in the 2015 SDSR to equip two legacy air alert defense squadrons.

https://fightersweep.com/4988/tranche-1 ... ert-force/

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 21 Apr 2018, 13:11
by ricnunes
marsavian wrote:No they are keeping the single seaters as specified in the 2015 SDSR to equip two legacy air alert defense squadrons.

https://fightersweep.com/4988/tranche-1 ... ert-force/


Ok, thanks

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 22 Apr 2018, 03:17
by charlielima223
This is an interesting article from TheAviationist

https://theaviationist.com/2018/04/21/c ... ia-strike/

what sparked my interest was the mentioning of ground units and the F-22.

New information also reveals that USAF F-22 Raptors were part of the game, ready to repel interception from aircraft and from surface-to-air missiles.
Another interesting part of today’s announcement is that, “F-22s were indeed flying in the area, ready to strike Syrian or Russian air defense systems and other assets if they threatened either coalition aircraft or US ground forces in the region.” This comment is of particular interest since it acknowledges that the U.S. had some type of ground forces in the area during the strikes.

While no specific information is available about the use of U.S. ground forces in this specific instance, it is common doctrine for special operations teams to provide target designation, search and rescue and bomb damage assessment in connection with air operations.

Tirpak and Everstine also quoted Pentagon spokesman Lt. Col. Damien Pickart in a Military.com report published on Monday, April 16, 2018, that the F-22, “was available, but wasn’t required for the operation as planned.” Lt. Col. Pickart added, “That said, the F-22 is well-suited for the defensive counterair mission it continues to conduct over Syria, protecting coalition forces on the ground and in the air.” Today’s reveal confirms that the F-22 was indeed used in the raid over Syria on April 14.

AFCENT spokesman Capt. Mark Graff also told reporters that, “Fifth generation platforms like the F-22 and the F-35 will continue to serve as the primary platforms capable of operating in the lethal threat rings of Integrated Air Defense System (IADS) environments like those found in Syria,” in his remarks about the April 14 strikes. Capt. Graff’s remarks hint at the possible future first use of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter in combat, although no F-35s from the U.S. are known to be in the region at this time. There have been rumors of the Israelis using F-35s, but these theories have been effectively debunked as inaccurate.

Graff went on to acknowledge that the 19 cruise missiles employed against the targets in Barzeh, Syria “were, in fact, not JASSM Extended Range (JASSM-ER) munitions” as reported by the Pentagon immediately following the attack. The cruise missiles employed in the strikes were actually, “JASSM-A, or the standard, non-extended range versions of the munition,” Graff said. Graff did confirm the April 14 strikes were the first use “of any variant of the JASSM.”


I would guess the F-22s are in the area not just in case Syrian or Russian units decided to get uppity but also provide additional target information. No doubt the passive sensors on the F-22 collected plenty of electronic data. Also were SOF units acting as forward observers for strike packages?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 22 Apr 2018, 12:32
by hythelday
charlielima223 wrote:This is an interesting article from TheAviationist

https://theaviationist.com/2018/04/21/c ... ia-strike/

what sparked my interest was the mentioning of ground units and the F-22.

... Article...


I would guess the F-22s are in the area not just in case Syrian or Russian units decided to get uppity but also provide additional target information. No doubt the passive sensors on the F-22 collected plenty of electronic data. Also were SOF units acting as forward observers for strike packages?


First of all "ground units in the region" could be anywhere in Syria, US does not make a secret of its presence "in the region" (i.e. Israel put its ground forces in Golan on alert too). Second, even if those ground assets were in the immediate vicinity then hardly 'twas SOF because they would need to be infil/exfiled, which is quite hard to do in downtown Damascus. How were they going to "spot" for TLAMs and JASSMs anyhow? Ground level BDA, if any, most likely came from a couple of well-wishers or "our men in Damascus".

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 22 Apr 2018, 20:34
by charlielima223
True, the United States doesn't keep its presence of ground forces a secret. However I doubt anyone outside of some secret and highly restricted SOCOM/JSOC/CIA/DIA TOC know where those people are. No one on the outside can say with absolute certainty how many ground units there are in Syria and exactly where. The most I know and can say with a degree of certainty is that there are some premo badasses in Syria. Also not all targets were in downtown Damascus. It could be that elements of SAD are already operating in various parts of Syria including parts of Damascus.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 23 Apr 2018, 17:44
by mixelflick
Interesting in that they flew DCA and SEAD. I'd imagine that means carrying SDBII?

When I saw the pics of Eagles and Vipers landing back at Aviano with AMRAAM's, I questioned why the F-22 wasn't present. It's likely that those F-15's and 16's could have done the job easily enough, but why not have your primo air superiority platform there - just in case? The SU-35 is a serious threat to the F-15 and 16, far less so to the F-22.

OK OK, it wasn't likely the Russians would put up a fight. But it was a possibility, however remote. Man I can't wait for the first Flanker to fall, either at the hands of an F-15 or 22. If nothing else to shut sputnick up about how the SU-35 is a "stealth killer"...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 24 Apr 2018, 02:50
by charlielima223
mixelflick wrote: I questioned why the F-22 wasn't present. It's likely that those F-15's and 16's could have done the job easily enough, but why not have your primo air superiority platform there - just in case? The SU-35 is a serious threat to the F-15 and 16, far less so to the F-22.

OK OK, it wasn't likely the Russians would put up a fight. But it was a possibility, however remote. Man I can't wait for the first Flanker to fall, either at the hands of an F-15 or 22. If nothing else to shut sputnick up about how the SU-35 is a "stealth killer"...


Yet F-22 Raptors were present during the event.

https://theaviationist.com/2018/04/21/c ... ia-strike/

http://airforcemag.com/Features/Pages/2 ... ASSMs.aspx

while not directly embedded within the strike packages (flying directly along side Bones, Vipers, Eagles or other French and UK aircraft), they were in the region. Their exact role is a bit fuzzy but they were in the region doing what they do best.

Also I 50/50 agree with your sentiments about the Su-35. It would definitely shut up a lot of doubters about the capabilities of 5th gen aircraft. Personally I wouldn't want to see one get shot down by the F-22 (even though it is very very likely it can be) because that would be a complete political and media sh*t storm. Also everyone in the right mind here at F-16.net knows that Russian state controlled media will just twist narrative and out right lie about the events... much like many Russian trolls all over the comment sections of various defense and military websites. Much like that event involving frogfoots and raptors. Russian state/government controlled media played it like the Raptor saw the Flankers coming and got scared then bugged out. Anyone who pays attention to how the Raptors operate knows that is complete bullocks/male bovine excrement. Russian media is very good at distorting things to fit their agenda. They have a pretty bad case of a dissociative disorder.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 24 Apr 2018, 16:37
by mixelflick
If a Raptor did wax an SU-35, I wonder how that would (or if it would) change things..

The thinking now is to produce SU-35's, while work on the SU-57 continues (albeit slowly). If they were faced with irrefutable proof the SU-35 is no match (either to F-22 or F-35 - or both), I wonder if more rubles would be re-directed to the SU-57. It may also be a matter of something more than just rubles. By all accounts, it sounds like they've run up against significant difficulties in engines, stealth, weapons and avionics/SA. Maybe throwing more rubles at it won't help things, maybe it will. Tough to say since so little is really known...

In a perfect world, I think they get the SU-57 to super-cruise, get the avionics/SA right, get the weapons to work and reduce the RCS somewhere slightly below that of a SH. Even with all that, it's going to have an uphill climb vs. a Raptor, maybe even the F-35. In hindsight, they made a mistake developing such a heavy fighter. They would have been much better served to develop and F-35 sized aircraft, optimized for export. The Chinese F-31 and American F-35 are going to eat the export market alive, and Russia will have nothing comparable to offer.

That ship has sailed, and there's no going back now...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 25 Apr 2018, 05:33
by Corsair1963
mixelflick wrote:If a Raptor did wax an SU-35, I wonder how that would (or if it would) change things..

The thinking now is to produce SU-35's, while work on the SU-57 continues (albeit slowly). If they were faced with irrefutable proof the SU-35 is no match (either to F-22 or F-35 - or both), I wonder if more rubles would be re-directed to the SU-57. It may also be a matter of something more than just rubles. By all accounts, it sounds like they've run up against significant difficulties in engines, stealth, weapons and avionics/SA. Maybe throwing more rubles at it won't help things, maybe it will. Tough to say since so little is really known...

In a perfect world, I think they get the SU-57 to super-cruise, get the avionics/SA right, get the weapons to work and reduce the RCS somewhere slightly below that of a SH. Even with all that, it's going to have an uphill climb vs. a Raptor, maybe even the F-35. In hindsight, they made a mistake developing such a heavy fighter. They would have been much better served to develop and F-35 sized aircraft, optimized for export. The Chinese F-31 and American F-35 are going to eat the export market alive, and Russia will have nothing comparable to offer.

That ship has sailed, and there's no going back now...



Yes, this is what I've been saying for sometime now. First, the Russia missed the boat by developing the PAK-FA/Su-57(Heavy Fighter) instead of the cheaper and far more exportable LMFS. (Lightweight Fighter) Second, she won't be able to afford the Su-57 is vast numbers. ($100 Million +) Third, she only has two options that I can see. Either accept a small number of Su-57's (~ 200-250) and become a minor Regional Military Power. That or acquire a Russianized J-31 from China.....

Many are critical of that view. Yet, I haven't heard of any real viable alternatives.....

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 25 Apr 2018, 17:10
by icemaverick
For national pride alone, Russia will never buy a Chinese jet. The Su-57 is something of a prestige project. Axing it now would look terrible. They will continue to buy it in tiny batches and make incremental improvements just as they have done with the Flanker series. They might even give them different numbers e.g. Su-60 etc.

Despite Russia’s posturing, everyone knows that they are already a regional power. They simply don’t have the economic might to compete with China, nevermind the USA. It will be interesting to see how the Su-57 fares against the J-20 and J-31 on the export market. They might be able to secure a few sales but certainly the Chinese will make a move into their turf.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 25 Apr 2018, 19:31
by marsavian
Russia claims to have retrieved an intact TLAM and ALCM from the recent strike as well as displaying fragments from alleged shot down ones. Those sites look pretty destroyed to me but I suppose this is as much a sales pitch for their SAMs as anything else now.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Apr 2018, 00:52
by Corsair1963
icemaverick wrote:For national pride alone, Russia will never buy a Chinese jet. The Su-57 is something of a prestige project. Axing it now would look terrible. They will continue to buy it in tiny batches and make incremental improvements just as they have done with the Flanker series. They might even give them different numbers e.g. Su-60 etc.

Despite Russia’s posturing, everyone knows that they are already a regional power. They simply don’t have the economic might to compete with China, nevermind the USA. It will be interesting to see how the Su-57 fares against the J-20 and J-31 on the export market. They might be able to secure a few sales but certainly the Chinese will make a move into their turf.



First, Russia has few options as she just doesn't have deep pockets anymore. As a matter of fact much of her Military is made up of either old ex-Soviet Equipment or Upgraded Versions of it. So, how is Russia going to replace all of it??? When it has a GDP about the size of Australia/Canada!

Also, while Russians have considerable pride. That didn't stop them from ordering two large Mistral Class "Amphibious Assault Ships (LHD's) from France.... :wink:

ENS_Gamal_Abdel_Nasser_(L1010)_Helicopter_Carrier.jpg




So, honestly this talk that Russia would "never" consider buying Chinese Military Equipment falls flat in my opinion. Also, I never suggested or said they should cancel the Su-57. I just stated they couldn't afford to produce it in large numbers and the design had a number of flaws.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Apr 2018, 02:04
by citanon
In another decade or so who knows what Russia's relationship with China will be. As a part of the Belt and Road, China is getting deeply involved with central Asian countries such as Kazahkstan. It's possible that this will result in even closer relations between Russia and China, a complete rupture in relations, or a combination of cooperation and competition.

Is it really a good idea for Russia to be buying Chinese planes? Perhaps in 10-20 years, Russia might be asking to buy the F-35. :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Apr 2018, 04:14
by Corsair1963
citanon wrote:In another decade or so who knows what Russia's relationship with China will be. As a part of the Belt and Road, China is getting deeply involved with central Asian countries such as Kazahkstan. It's possible that this will result in even closer relations between Russia and China, a complete rupture in relations, or a combination of cooperation and competition.

Is it really a good idea for Russia to be buying Chinese planes? Perhaps in 10-20 years, Russia might be asking to buy the F-35. :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:



Well, regardless what happen the current "status quo" will be long gone!

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Apr 2018, 04:39
by durahawk
icemaverick wrote: Despite Russia’s posturing, everyone knows that they are already a regional power. They simply don’t have the economic might to compete with China, nevermind the USA.


I'm not sure I would agree to calling any country with a stockpile of strategic nuclear weapons a "regional power" no matter how decrepit their conventional forces may become.

As for the SU-57, the lack of Indian money will certainly slowdown the program (even further) but I don't forsee it's cancelation. Like others have said, there is too much pride wrapped up in it. Compensate for lack of capability with bravado and propaganda.

Tis the Russian way.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Apr 2018, 05:20
by Corsair1963
durahawk wrote:
icemaverick wrote: Despite Russia’s posturing, everyone knows that they are already a regional power. They simply don’t have the economic might to compete with China, nevermind the USA.


I'm not sure I would agree to calling any country with a stockpile of strategic nuclear weapons a "regional power" no matter how decrepit their conventional forces may become.

As for the SU-57, the lack of Indian money will certainly slowdown the program (even further) but I don't forsee it's cancelation. Like others have said, there is too much pride wrapped up in it. Compensate for lack of capability with bravado and propaganda.

Tis the Russian way.



Russia has a vast fleet of Soviet Era Weapons. Yet, little in the way of resources to replace them.....

QUOTE:

In 1989, when the Soviet Union collapsed, its population was roughly 286 million. The U.S., by comparison, had a population of about 249 million. Since then, the U.S. population has grown to about 325 million, while that of Russia has fallen to about 143 million.

Comparisons of industrial production are difficult since they involve a large number of state-controlled enterprises that operated inefficiently. Between 50 percent and 60 percent of the industrial base of the USSR was retained by Russia. This does not include industry in the Communist bloc that the USSR could avail itself of.

A comparison of automobile production between the two countries can serve as a rough index of industrial capacity. In 2016, Russia produced about 1.3 million vehicles. The U.S. in comparison produced around 12.2 million vehicles.

In terms of GDP, in 1989 the Gross Domestic Product of the U.S. was $4.862 trillion, while that of the Soviet Union was $2.5 trillion. Per capita GDP was $19,800 versus $8,700.

By comparison, in 2016 Russia's GDP was $1.283 trillion, while that of the U.S. had grown to $18.62 trillion. Russian per capita GDP was roughly the same at $8,946, while that of the United States had increased to $57,608. Adjustments for purchasing power parity, however, would reduce the gap between the two countries.

At $1.283 trillion, Russia's GDP is smaller than Turkey's and just barely larger than the Philippines. Alternatively, it is slightly larger than the state of New York and slightly smaller than that of Texas. Russia may have inherited the military arsenal of a super power, but it is an economic dwarf on the world stage.


Moreover, its economy is heavily dependent on the extraction of raw materials, principally hydrocarbons. Roughly 70 percent of the Russian government's budget comes from the proceeds of its oil exports. Moscow needs oil prices to be between $65 and $75 a barrel in order to balance its budget, and it needs oil prices in excess of $100 per barrel in order to generate sufficient government revenues to fully fund its military expansion and modernization. Neither price threshold is likely in the short term.

The Kremlin's dilemma is that Russia's military aspirations are simply too big for its wallet. It may have a formidable military force, but that force requires maintenance to keep it effective and its technology has a life span. Most of it will be obsolete within one generation, all of it in less than two.

Legacy weapons systems can prove formidable against a tenacious but technologically unsophisticated adversary as Russia found out in Syria or the U.S. did in Afghanistan. But against a near-power rival, generation-old technology will quickly become obsolete.

https://www.military.com/daily-news/201 ... power.html

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Apr 2018, 15:08
by mixelflick
In other words, the Russian have champaigne taste on a beer budget.

I admire their airframes, but not so much their weapons, avionics, engines and stealth. The airframes though impressive in concept lack refinement, and that spells big trouble for stealth. As sustained supersonic speeds are realized they can no longer count on monster engines pushing crude airframes for short periods - they need to go longer.

I don't know where this all ends for them. It isn't looking good. They've got one horse to ride and the SU-57 will likely have a much greater bark than bite. The move to stealth in the west was more than just gaining an invisibility/VLO advantage - it highlighted their inability to manufacture to fine tolerances. At this rate, the European jets circa 2040 are going to out-class anything Russia has to offer.

Quite literally before our eyes, they are slipping behind China in conventional military hardware and only her nuclear forces save her from being overtaken by their neighbor to the South. Russian SU-57's and Flankers will have all they can handle from China's J-20 and J-31, the latter probably rolling off production lines by the 1,000's...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 04 May 2018, 13:18
by milos984
As I monitor some russian speaking sources, I share some informations which ar not so much known.
posted elsvere at Feb 26, 2018 11:42 am
https://sputniknews.com/military/201802 ... ent-radar/
Possible Reason for Deployment of Russia's 5th Gen Su-57 to Syria Revealed
26.02.2018
Four state-of-the-art Russian Su-57 stealth fighters, which have reportedly been deployed to Syria, will not be engaged in active combat, according to Kommersant, a Russian daily. The newspaper Kommersant cited military sources as saying that the Russian fifth-generation Su-57 fighter jets were deployed to Syria to test radar systems and electronic warfare. The Su-57s will not take part in combat missions in Syria, the sources said, adding that the decision on the deployment was made during last year's MAKS airshow in Zhukovsky outside Moscow. According to Kommersant, the planes were due to be deployed to Syria on the eve of Russia's Defender of the Fatherland Day, which is celebrated on February 23.
Another goal of the deployment is to promote the capabilities of Russia's military-industrial complex by showcasing Russian military activity in Syria.
...
Hope that usual bystanders do their job and set few ELINT/SIGINT traps here and there.
------------------
posted at Mar 02, 2018 11:04 am
as it was published that Su-57´s were there for two days.
But before it there was an relativelly sober liked here: https://topwar.ru/136725-detali-predsto ... arfiles.ru In RUSSIAN
Детали предстоящего боевого крещения Су-57 в ближневосточном небе. Без шанса «вскрытия» противником
26 февраля 2018
Просматривая сирийские и ближневосточные и западные информационные ресурсы поздним вечером 21 февраля, трудно было поверить своим глазам, когда в новостном блоке тактической онлайн-карты syria.liveuamap.com появились первые сводки о прибытии на сирийскую авиабазу Хмеймим пары многофункциональных сверхманевренных истребителей 5-го поколения Су-57 (Т-50 ПАК-ФА). Машины коснулись ВВП авиабазы при воздушном эскортировании со стороны одного из многоцелевых истребителей Су-35С, что было отчётливо видно в видеоматериале, опубликованном сирийским обозревателем Ваэлем аль-Хусейни на своей страничке в социальной сети «Twitter». Как позднее стало известно благодаря ресурсу онлайн-мониторинга воздушных бортов с активными транспондерами ADS-B «Flightradar24», ПАК-ФА и Су-35 лидировались пассажирским самолётом Ту-154Б-2.
:arrow: translation
Details of the upcoming baptism of fire Su-57 in the Middle East sky. Without the chance of an "autopsy" (of it) by the enemy
February 26, 2018
Looking through the Syrian and Middle Eastern and Western information resources late in the evening on February 21, it was hard to believe their eyes when the first news in the news block of the tactical online map syria.liveuamap.com showed the arrival of a pair of multifunctional super maneuvering fighters of the 5th generation of Su -57 (T-50 PAK-FA). The cars touched the GDP of the air base when air escorted by one of the multi-purpose Su-35S fighters, which was clearly visible in the video published by the Syrian observer Wehl al-Husseini on his page in the social network "Twitter". As it became known later, thanks to the online monitoring of the air beams with the active transponders ADS-B "Flightradar24", PAK-FA and Su-35 were leading with the Tu-154B-2 passenger aircraft.
Absolutely new multi-role fighters of the next generation that are not "run-out" in a hostile air space are suddenly transferred to the most unpredictable Syrian theater of military operations, saturated with an impressive number of ground-based and airborne radio-electronic and radar reconnaissance. So, near the airspace controlled by the air defense systems of the Syrian Armed Forces at the borders of the Euphrates and the northern provinces, Boeing 737AEW & C "Peace Eagle" airplanes regularly fly the Turkish Air Force and the E-3G of the US Air Force capable of directing air targets with EPR 3Q. m at a depth of 280 - 350 km. From the southern air direction, the Syrian sky is partially "pinched" by Israeli CAEW aircraft, equipped with active phased array radars EL / W-2085 radar from the company "Elta".
Consequently, the strengthening of the Syrian air wing of the Russian Air Force in Russia with regular Su-30SM and Su-34, with an effective reflecting surface in 12 and 3 sq. m. respectively, (with them) ELINT air reconnaissance means of the enemy will be almost impossible to surprise or "intimidate (by those Su-30/34)", especially when the missiles of the OVSV coalition are armed with AIM-120C-7 and AIM-120D air-to-air missiles, which threaten our vehicles at a distance 130 - 160 km. Another thing - Su-57, which are machines of a completely different kind. And do not rush to judge the combat potential of our air wing only in terms of the number of Su-57s transferred to Khmeim. An extremely important role here will be played by the parameters of the onboard radio electronic equipment of the two PAK-FAs arriving in Syria, as well as their small radar signature, which will become a significant obstacle to the detection of both AN / APG-80 enemy fighter aircraft on Israeli F-16I and using radar complexes MESA and AN / APY-2, installed in Turkish and US "AWACS".
Based on the table data of the source "Paralay", where the calculated effective scattering surface of the Su-57 is from 0.2 to 0.4 square meters. m, we can conclude that the above-mentioned Turkish and American RLDN means that our advanced fighters will be detected at a distance of 100-150 km, and therefore it will be extremely difficult to establish surveillance over the vehicles, especially when the A2 / AD air zone will be patrolling in addition to the Su-57 and Su-30SM / Su-35S, carrying on the containers of individual (L-265M10) EW protection or "Khibiny" group EW protection. We conclude that the Su-57, carrying out air operations over the central territories of Syria :!: , will be almost impossible to detect (by) enemy airborne radar, while the pilots will be able to test some of the avionics in a tactical situation close to combat, taking into account the complex network centric theater of operations . Why not all, but some?
The fact is that in addition to taking into account the enemy's use of ground-based and airborne-based long-range radar detectors operating mainly in L (D) and S-bands, it is necessary to remember the presence of passive radar complexes. These include: AN / ALR-67 (V) 3 on-board radiation warning stations (aboard the Super Hornets), the most advanced AN / ALR-94 in the world (as part of the F-22A Raptor ", Consisting of more than 30 highly sensitive passive radar sensors), as well as antenna posts with the passive station RTR" KORAL-ED ", part of the Turkish five-element self-propelled electronic warfare complex" KORAL ". The above multifrequency radio electronic reconnaissance devices operate in the frequency range from 500 to 40000 MHz and are capable of directing even weak sources of electromagnetic radiation, and then storing their frequency profile in the register of radio-emitting objects. This, in turn, imposes significant restrictions on the testing of the airborne radar complex N036 "Belka" in the active mode (in order to avoid familiarizing the enemy with the operation modes of the PAK-FA radar in combat conditions). :!:
...
A number of restrictions will be imposed on the active modes of operation of the on-board communication complex (including voice and the exchange of telecode information) with the C-111-N synchronized with the antenna-feeder system AIST-50. Despite the fact that this complex has much in common with the C-108 airborne information exchange complex of the Su-35S fighter (including the use of a pseudorandom frequency tuning mode with a frequency of about 156 jumps per second), its use for transmission in the current tactical situation in the Syrian theater military actions is fraught with the opening of the location of the "broadcasting" Su-57 with further deciphering and analysis of the pilot's negotiations with the allied KP.
...
Proceeding from this, it is not difficult to understand that it is possible to test C-111-N over Syria only under the following conditions: flight at low altitude (outside the viewing area of ​​KPRAL-ED stations and other ground-based complexes of enemy radio reconnaissance outside the radio horizon), at 100% confidence in the absence of "Rivet Joint" in the nearest 600 km, as well as at the small and medium power of the transmitter of the terminal, while the maximum is about 200 W. At this moment, one of the reasons why the second plane of the radar patrol and aiming A-50U arrived at the airbase of Khmeimim. Before the Su-57 test flights over Syria, one of the "Mainstays" will be used to detect any potentially dangerous airborne radio reconnaissance assets of the Allied Forces and Israel, approaching the Syrian airspace from the four operational directions.
...
Small addenda, various czecho-slovak fanboys say that it is not a problem with such testing, as Su-57 is stuffed with parts of the avionic and FCS from Su-35S. Seem´s logic at fisrt, but how much these systems from Su-35S are refined/redesigned to fit them into Su-57 airframe(?). Nobody can say for sure.
--------------------
posted at Mar 05, 2018 10:29 am
Regardless how much russian fan boys are boasting about KS-172 (with 400km reach) AAM´s and unbeatable X-58 antiradiolocation missiles, reality is that only at 25th January 2018 was reported that
"The newest "invisible" Russian Su-57 fighter took the first test flights with weapons. This was reported by the Russian media, referring to Boris Obnosov, the director of the company that manufactures air rackets. In years, according to the director, "high-precision weapons placed both inside the hull of the airplane and hung on the outer hinges" are tested. Launching the rockets is to be follow."

So only flights (from which no fotage was released - which could be expected in form of bombastic report at Pervyy kanal) without live firing (not to talk about some weapons separtion tests). These are only to be undertaken in the future (but how near is future :?: nobody knows).
Ragerding my link on russian articles which speculates how the flyght testing would be undertaken, which was posted before it became clear that Su-57´s were in Syrian just for two day. The informations there indicates that the job was regarded as not easy, because of a lot of potentional danger of ELINT/SIGINT Traps. So they speculates that it would be done ower central Syria and with only passive mode´s used.
-------------------
Its crazynes, but there is a method in it....
Announcements and re-announcements in T.50/SU-57 program are makeing a complete confusion to me.
Some czech comments http://www.armadninoviny.cz/ruska-stiha ... yrobu.html in June 2017 say:
"The Russian State Arming Program for the years 2018 to 2025(-2027?) counts for the purchase of 18 to 24 T-50s (Su-50). It is not certain whether the number includes (also) the mentioned prototypes or will (it) be (only) the newly manufactured ones, with engines Izdelije 30. However the first production batch is to contain six T-50 (or Su-50) serial aircraft, which together with the mentioned 12 prototypes is doing just 18 aircraft."
The mentioned artile from https://bmpd.livejournal.com/3087140.ht ... ium=social
Is also interesting, as it show some important details...
The contract for the first 12 serial Su-57 fighters of the installation batch will be concluded in 2018
bmpd February 9th, 0:09
Deputy Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation Yury Borisov during his visit to the Komsomolsk-on-Amur Aircraft Plant named after Yu.A. Gagarin (KnAAZ) of Sukhoi Company, said that in 2018 (exactly when :?: ) a contract will be signed for the delivery of the installation lot of the 5th generation of Su-57 fighters created under the PAK FA program. "We will first contract the first squadron - 12 aircraft," - specified Borisov.
According to Borisov, the first two planes from this party can enter the troops already in 2019. He added that earlier in the framework of development work on the PAK FA, 12 machines were manufactured, 10 of which are actively involved in flight tests.
...
So, IMO 11/12 prototypes and then the first, 12-aircraft operational-evaluation Eskadrila of Block 1 aircrafts.
Answering the question about the work on the new engine for the PAK FA, the defense secretary said: "It's hard to judge, because we had just one flight." It's all OK, but you understand, it's a test complex, you have to fly a long time.As a rule, such tests last two or three years. "
As in many other cases, like Indian Su-30´s (from vanilla Su-30KI´s to fully stuffed Su-30MKI´s). Firstly, there would pure airframes stuffed with bits of new technologies and with a lot of already working stuff from Su-35S and one day (someday in next decade) those upgraded ones came to combat service.
...
The bmpd comment. The contract for the purchase of the first 12 Su-57 fighters (T-50S) of the installation batch has been postponed for several years. According to previously disseminated unofficial information, the first two T-50C serial fighters of the installation lot KnAAZ planned to produce in 2017, two more - in 2018, and four - in 2019 and 2020. Yuri Borisov, when visiting KnAAZ in July 2016, said that the contract for the installation lot of the PAK FA should be signed in 2017 with the beginning of deliveries in 2018. Now the signing of the contract and the beginning of deliveries have been postponed for another year. Apparently, the delivery of the installation batch of 12 Su-57 will thus be carried out in 2019-2022. It is the data of 12 aircraft that will be used in the pilot-combat operation.
The aircraft of the installation lot, according to known information, must be made in the technical face of the experienced fighters T-50-9 / T-50-11 and equipped with engines of the type "117". Presumably, after the production of this installation lot, within the framework of the adopted State Arms Program for 2018-2027, a new contract for the production of 12-15 Su-57 aircraft of the installation batch in the form of the "second stage" should be followed, with the "engine 30" fitted with a prospective engine. Actual full-scale production of Su-57 fighters for equipping the linear parts of the Russian VKS will apparently be carried out in the shape of the "second stage" after 2027.

-----------------
posted at Mar 23, 2018 10:43 pm
https://www.facebook.com/vadim.lukashev ... 6230290408 Mr. Vadim Lukashevich was constructor at OKB Su where he was engaged in combat surviveability of Su-25 aircrafts, he later participated at Soviet BURAN project, but was fired from RossKosmos after he criticized the mismanagement there.
Взгляд со стороны, от бывшего потенциального партнера и/или заказчика.
По сути это подтверждение уже известного: наш Су-57 (Т-50), как и его предшественники семейства Су-27, действительно является более маневренным самолетом, возможно - самым маневренным в мире (с новыми двигателями). Но в современном воздушном бою, ведущемся на средних (10-15-25 километров) и дальних (50-300 километров) дистанциях сверхманевренность - мертвому припарка. В концепции истребителя пятого поколения на первый план выходят сверхзвуковая крейсерская скорость, малая заметность и качество оружия (бортовая РЛС + ракеты + электронные мозги + полное комплексирование всех систем в единый иерархический автоматический комплекс вооружения, решающий все задача боевого применения, от боевой эффективности до боевой живучести). Маневренность, которой мы так кичимся и которая столь эффектно смотрится на разных авиашоу в выступлениях штучных летчиков-асов и пилотажных групп, в современном воздушном бою полезна так же, как во время морского сражения - кортик морскому офицеру на подводной лодке.
И обратите внимание - это не заявления для пиара или пропаганды - это соинвестор реально считает результативность отдачи на свои затраты. И приходит к выводу, что участие в проекте для него убыточно по критерию "стоимость/эффективность"

A view from the side, from a former potential partner and / or customer.
In fact, this confirmation is already known: our Su-57 (T-50), like its predecessors of the Su-27 family, is indeed a more maneuverable aircraft, perhaps the most maneuverable in the world (with new engines). But in a modern air battle, conducted at medium (10-15-25 kilometers) and distant (50-300 kilometers) distances, super maneuverability - dead poultice. In the concept of a fifth-generation fighter, supersonic cruising speed, low visibility and gun quality (on-board radars + rockets + electronic brains + complete integration of all systems into a single hierarchical automatic armament complex that solves the entire combat mission problem, from combat effectiveness to combat survivability ). Maneuverability, which we are so keen on and which looks so spectacularly at different air shows in the speeches of individual pilots-aces and aerobatic teams, in modern air combat is as useful as during a sea battle - a dirk to a naval officer on a submarine.
And pay attention - these are not statements for PR or propaganda - this co-investor really considers the effectiveness of the return on his costs. And comes to the conclusion that participation in the project for him is unprofitable by the criterion of "cost / effectiveness"
https://42.tut.by/585798
-------
posted at Apr 28, 2018 5:54 am
Something new from mr. Vadim Lukashevich : https://www.facebook.com/vadim.lukashev ... 3051820059
"...авиаэксперт, бывший конструктор ОКБ «Сухой» Вадим Лукашевич в эфире НСН предположил, что собранные образцы Су-57 действительно могут не соответствовать техническому заданию.
«Надо понимать, что самолёт ещё сырой. Вряд ли те пять образцов, которые летают, на сегодняшний момент отвечают требованиям, заложенным техническим заданием заказчика. Самолёт должен пройти ещё длительный путь, пока он получит штатный двигатель, электронное оборудование, вооружение и так далее», - заявил НСН бывший конструктор.
...
:arrow: http://nsn.fm/army-and-weapons/aviaeksp ... -ssha.html

TRANSLATION (...
Vadim Lukashevich
23 apríl, 12:30 ·
"... the air expert, the former designer of the OKB" Sukhoi "Vadim Lukashevich on the air of the NSO suggested that the existing Su-57´s really may not meet the technical requirements.
"We must understand that the plane is still "fresh". It is unlikely that the five samples that fly, at the moment meet the requirements laid down by the technical task of the customer. The plane must go a long way until it gets a full-time engine, electronic equipment, weapons and so on, "the former designer told NNS.
However, for certain it will be known, according to the expert, only after the removal of the neck "top secret" with these characteristics. As Vadim Lukashevich specified, India was very disappointed with Russian equipment.
"The India´s are trying to get out from our aviation and technical cooperation under this pretext. They have very serious problems with already delivered aircraft. This is revealed at the beginning of operation very much. In Su-30, which are delivered to India, (there were) problems with the main power frames (the transverse edge of the ship - NSN): the frame of the center section has serious cracks, which is bad for the aircraft. This applies to the MiG-29. The Hindus are rather disappointed in us. For all the programs with which they were tied with us, they did not get what they wanted. We have unequal cooperation with them. We create a technique for them, and they act more like financial donors. If you just pay, then it's easier to take a quality product and to be content with it, "the air expert believes.
According to Vadim Lukashevich, if the Indians really refuse to buy Russian equipment, they will leave for the United States.
"To date, the two main trendsetters in fighter aircraft: we and the Americans. Naturally, any walk from us is an approach to the Americans. They also have problems with the F-35, there also is a mismatch of characteristics. Nevertheless, the Hindus prefer the Americans, because there the quality of assembly is different, the technology is of a higher level, "Lukashevich concluded on air.
But he rejoiced Magomed Tolboyev, on the verge of refuting what he said: "... Hero of the Russian Federation, Honored Test Pilot of the Russian Federation, Major General in reserve Magomed Tolboyev on air of the NSN denied India's claims to Russian military aircraft. all over the world is considered a model of world standards for service life, resources, simplicity of service, cheapness. ""
https://www.facebook.com/vadim.lukashev ... 3051820059
***********
IMO: The Su-57 is to be pressed into active service of the Ru_AF regardles. But there would be same odyssea in front of it as it was before MiG-23 in early 1970, when it take nearly two decades until they make a MiG-23MLD, from "vanilla" MiG-23MS. So dont expect front-line 5th gen. FMC plane before 2027-2030 (mean airplane equipped with all the stuff as originally presented)

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 06 May 2018, 22:35
by mixelflick
It sounds as if they're tacitly acknowledging delivering sub-standard birds to India? And that somehow, SU-57 progress will continue but it's going to be a loooong time before it gets anywhere near "5th gen". They're admitting big problems with the engines. I couldn't make heads or tails what he was trying to say re: avionics. And as far as stealth goes, he sounded way out in fantasy land.

They've got big problems with the SU-57. Perhaps not insurmountable but the clock is ticking. By the time it fulfills its potential 5.5 or even 6th gen jets will be proliferating. When the history books are written, this may be the moment where Russia fell out of the game, no longer competitive with American/Chinese designs...

It feels like that's what is going down...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 07 May 2018, 03:23
by Corsair1963
mixelflick wrote:It sounds as if they're tacitly acknowledging delivering sub-standard birds to India? And that somehow, SU-57 progress will continue but it's going to be a loooong time before it gets anywhere near "5th gen". They're admitting big problems with the engines. I couldn't make heads or tails what he was trying to say re: avionics. And as far as stealth goes, he sounded way out in fantasy land.

They've got big problems with the SU-57. Perhaps not insurmountable but the clock is ticking. By the time it fulfills its potential 5.5 or even 6th gen jets will be proliferating. When the history books are written, this may be the moment where Russia fell out of the game, no longer competitive with American/Chinese designs...

It feels like that's what is going down...



It is.....as Russia has pretty much handed the Non-Western Fighter Market to China. :doh:

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 07 May 2018, 14:53
by mixelflick
I wonder who made the call in Russia to bet on the SU-57?

Sukhoi seems favored, but I'm not certain who's calling the shots. Putin himself? He seems to love the bird. But honestly, this wasn't that hard to see coming, was it? PAK FA first flew in 2010, at which point it was pretty clear the F-22 was cancelled due to being too expensive, and the US then went full tilt with the smaller, more multi-role F-35 (thousands planned). It was no secret it would be exported.

China's first flight of the J-20 didn't occur until January, 2011. But you can't tell me Russian intelligence didn't know about it, or the J-31 for that matter. They knew for certain the US F-35 would be the export competitor. They should have known about the J-20/J-31.

Was it... ego?
In prior media exchanges, they positioned it as a Raptor killer. So they needed to have something (real or perceived) to compete with it. If it was national pride/ego, the Raptor really delivered: It caused them to make a fundamentally flawed decision, squarely knocking Russia out of the game with respect to exporting combat aircraft . It may be that when the final F-22 chapter is written, this was its greatest "kill"... 8)

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 07 May 2018, 21:59
by ricnunes
I agree with you mixelflick.

I always wondered (and believe that) if the Russians had gone the Mig LMFS route that perhaps they could have been much more successful.
Of course that the LMFS wouldn't still be a match for the F-35 (and subsequently the F-22) but at least they could get their hands on a "5th gen stealthy" fighter aircraft sooner and cheaper which would mean more fighter aircraft available for the Russian Air Force and above all, it would allow Russia to retain the "Non-Western Fighter Market".

Resuming if the Russians would have been smart on this regard, the LMFS could become the XXI century Mig-21 which again while not being a "match" for the newest western 5th gen fighter aircraft, if used in numbers and cleverly could become a serious threat to contend with just like the Mig-21 was in the 1960's and early 1970's and of course could be more than a match (actually superior) to current western 4th and 4.5th gen fighter aircraft.

But like you said the aparent "Sukhoi favoring" in the post-Soviet Russia seems to hinder the above and in the end put Russia in a position where it seems that the only way out is to continue with the mistake of continuing to develop the PAK-FA/Su-57.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 08 May 2018, 02:42
by Corsair1963
Well, the Flanker Series was more successful than the Fulcrum in the marketplace. So, I can only assume they believed the PAK-FA would follow in the former foot steps. Regardless, of the reasons the selection of the PAK-FA over the far more exportable LMFS was a 'Colossal" mistake. One that many in the public still haven't grasped...... :?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 09 May 2018, 00:37
by snypa777
awsome wrote:Dude contain the autism, it was a mild, low scale missile strike and the targets got hit.

What did you expect a WW against a third world and a second world country just because?

Besides, that's the second, light strike russki equipment failed to repel.

TORNADO acting with impunity dude.

Tornado...jjeez...what year is this?1982?



Trumpy: we will **** you up bigley
Syrian military this morning: is it in yet?[/quote]

Those S-300`s and S-400`s (Actually S-350) only have 250 mile range against targets that cooperate with them and fly at 40,000 ft....
Those Tornado`s were quite safe launching Storm Shadow cruise missiles with 500+ km range from an altitude of their choosing with Typhoons flying top cover out of Cyprus.
Additionally, the Tornado can carry 4 X Storm Shadow each if required. The Tornado is one hell of a capable attack aircraft in 2018. Pity we are retiring them soon.
The Russians, as Citanon has mentioned, were probably told of the targets beforehand so stood down and just watched.I don`t buy the "surprise we never told the Russians line". It was too dangerous not to.

You also have to remember that the attack came from all compass points, S-400`s acquisition radars operate in a 120 degree arc ,nor can they see thru mountains or defy the laws of physics by seeing below the horizon they probably wouldn't see jack, unless they were looking in the right direction and even that would only be at close ranges. even if they wanted to, the Russians could in no way have taken out 71 cruise missiles, I don`t think anybody could.
Looking at some of the vids, I was seeing 5 to 6 seconds separation between cruise missiles.
In conclusion, the US and Allies can pretty much attack Syria with impunity using cruise missiles.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 09 May 2018, 00:56
by snypa777
Corsair1963 wrote:
icemaverick wrote:For national pride alone, Russia will never buy a Chinese jet. The Su-57 is something of a prestige project. Axing it now would look terrible. They will continue to buy it in tiny batches and make incremental improvements just as they have done with the Flanker series. They might even give them different numbers e.g. Su-60 etc.

Despite Russia’s posturing, everyone knows that they are already a regional power. They simply don’t have the economic might to compete with China, nevermind the USA. It will be interesting to see how the Su-57 fares against the J-20 and J-31 on the export market. They might be able to secure a few sales but certainly the Chinese will make a move into their turf.



First, Russia has few options as she just doesn't have deep pockets anymore. As a matter of fact much of her Military is made up of either old ex-Soviet Equipment or Upgraded Versions of it. So, how is Russia going to replace all of it??? When it has a GDP about the size of Australia/Canada!

Also, while Russians have considerable pride. That didn't stop them from ordering two large Mistral Class "Amphibious Assault Ships (LHD's) from France.... :wink:

ENS_Gamal_Abdel_Nasser_(L1010)_Helicopter_Carrier.jpg




So, honestly this talk that Russia would "never" consider buying Chinese Military Equipment falls flat in my opinion. Also, I never suggested or said they should cancel the Su-57. I just stated they couldn't afford to produce it in large numbers and the design had a number of flaws.



Putin hated the Mistral deal. I dont think that kind of sale will ever happen again, in the end they were sold to Egypt with Saudi`s footing the bill.
It would not be a good idea to bank on Russia bankrupting themselves trying to keep up with NATO. We need to take control of this and set OUR agenda.
The Russians are far from stupid. Last year they actually reduced their defence budget to take the lower price of oil into account and dwindling hard currency reserves. I think they still remember what happened to the USSR so wont make the same mistake again. They aren't in as bad a shape as we would like to think, they have no debt.
I dont buy all of the Uber weapons propaganda they are spewing at the moment, if you add up the costs of all of those programs it probably amounts to more than their GDP per annum in program development and execution / manufacturing costs.
I had to pinch myself about the Nuke powered cruise missile, come on guys.....dont believe the hype.
A Russian friend of mine once said, "Russia wants respect, if they cant get respect, they will take fear".

Russian defence planners already know they are hopelessly outmatched by NATO in conventional terms but they can make up for that somewhat with hybrid warfare and unit cohesiveness. They dont have multiple national agendas to smooth over in times of conflict.
Finally, Russia does not want open conflict with the US, they would lose conventionally and it would be a pointless exercise in a$$ self-whuppery.
They will however, push in every other sphere, people need to wake up to that fact that the West is at "war" with Russia, the only thing missing is we aren't shooting at each other yet. God forbid but we need to face them down, they see political weakness as it is, an advantage for them.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 09 May 2018, 07:32
by Corsair1963
snypa777 wrote:Putin hated the Mistral deal. I dont think that kind of sale will ever happen again, in the end they were sold to Egypt with Saudi`s footing the bill.
It would not be a good idea to bank on Russia bankrupting themselves trying to keep up with NATO. We need to take control of this and set OUR agenda.
The Russians are far from stupid. Last year they actually reduced their defence budget to take the lower price of oil into account and dwindling hard currency reserves. I think they still remember what happened to the USSR so wont make the same mistake again. They aren't in as bad a shape as we would like to think, they have no debt.
I dont buy all of the Uber weapons propaganda they are spewing at the moment, if you add up the costs of all of those programs it probably amounts to more than their GDP per annum in program development and execution / manufacturing costs.
I had to pinch myself about the Nuke powered cruise missile, come on guys.....dont believe the hype.
A Russian friend of mine once said, "Russia wants respect, if they cant get respect, they will take fear".

Russian defence planners already know they are hopelessly outmatched by NATO in conventional terms but they can make up for that somewhat with hybrid warfare and unit cohesiveness. They dont have multiple national agendas to smooth over in times of conflict.
Finally, Russia does not want open conflict with the US, they would lose conventionally and it would be a pointless exercise in a$$ self-whuppery.
They will however, push in every other sphere, people need to wake up to that fact that the West is at "war" with Russia, the only thing missing is we aren't shooting at each other yet. God forbid but we need to face them down, they see political weakness as it is, an advantage for them.



What a bunch of baloney........ :lmao:

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 09 May 2018, 10:33
by juretrn
The West is at war with Russia? For real? Because Putin's cronies are being sanctioned? And because we keep on rolling our eyes at the constant " blame the West" rhetoric coming from the Kremlin? :doh:

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 09 May 2018, 11:37
by mk82
mixelflick wrote:I wonder who made the call in Russia to bet on the SU-57?

Sukhoi seems favored, but I'm not certain who's calling the shots. Putin himself? He seems to love the bird. But honestly, this wasn't that hard to see coming, was it? PAK FA first flew in 2010, at which point it was pretty clear the F-22 was cancelled due to being too expensive, and the US then went full tilt with the smaller, more multi-role F-35 (thousands planned). It was no secret it would be exported.

China's first flight of the J-20 didn't occur until January, 2011. But you can't tell me Russian intelligence didn't know about it, or the J-31 for that matter. They knew for certain the US F-35 would be the export competitor. They should have known about the J-20/J-31.

Was it... ego?
In prior media exchanges, they positioned it as a Raptor killer. So they needed to have something (real or perceived) to compete with it. If it was national pride/ego, the Raptor really delivered: It caused them to make a fundamentally flawed decision, squarely knocking Russia out of the game with respect to exporting combat aircraft . It may be that when the final F-22 chapter is written, this was its greatest "kill"... 8)


Agree 110%

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 09 May 2018, 16:11
by mixelflick
Some interesting background insofar as Sukhoi T-50 selection, vs Mig's LMFS...

"In April 2002, the Russian military chose Sukhoi's T-50 proposal in the fifth-generation fighter contest — which was codenamed the Perspektivniy Aviatsionniy Kompleks Frontovoi Aviatsii (PAK FA), or future tactical aviation air system. Since 2002, Sukhoi has been regularly meeting the subsequent milestones in the new fighter's development, which led to the Russian Air Force's approval of the T-50's preliminary design. To date, Sukhoi has developed a computer mock-up of the aircraft and an operating mockup of the cockpit. The PAK FA prototype's maiden flight is expected in 2009.

Sukhoi's victory in the Russian Air Force competition resulted not only from the T-50's design characteristics. The choice was made with the consideration of the company's sizeable profits from the sales of the Su-27 family aircraft to China and India in the 1990s and early 2000s. At that time, Sukhoi fighters represented half of Russia's aircraft production, and nearly half of Russian military technology exports. During the 1990s, Sukhoi maintained the largest workload of all Russian design bureaus. Unlike other Russian aircraft designers, the company counted more on its own resources than on government subsidies.

The Sukhoi T-50's rival in 2002 was the MiG design, the exact designation of which is classified. Later, when MiG Corp. decided to continue this program, it received the codename Liogkiy Mnogofunktsionalniy Frontovoi Samolyot (LMFS) or Light Multi-role Tactical Aircraft. MiG Corp. did not accept defeat in the contest against Sukhoi, and criticized the decision-making procedure. According to MiG, several aspects were omitted during the evaluation, like the purchase cost for the Air Force, the aircraft's lifetime maintenance costs and the export possibilities of various versions during the next few decades. MiG insisted that instead of initial projects, the choice of a winner should have been made at the phase of prototype tests."

Hindsight being 20/20, I have to agree with Mig. The T-50 was always going to be more expensive (bigger, more complex) both on a per unit cost and lifetime maintenance costs. Certainly the export possibilities were much greater for Mig's LMFS.

Their last point I think is most telling: "The choice of winner should have been made at the phase of prototype tests". There may be a lesson there: Company X and Y develop prototypes, winner takes all. That's how it went with the YF-22A and YF-35A, also how it worked with the X-35 and X-32. Although why they didnt' call it the YF-35 and YF-32 I'm not certain.

Hindsight being 20/20 for both of those programs, I think we can agree the best designs won those flyoffs too. Although I know the YF-23A made it a LOT closer than "The Monica" X-32 lol

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 10 May 2018, 00:23
by snypa777
Corsair1963 wrote:
snypa777 wrote:Putin hated the Mistral deal. I dont think that kind of sale will ever happen again, in the end they were sold to Egypt with Saudi`s footing the bill.
It would not be a good idea to bank on Russia bankrupting themselves trying to keep up with NATO. We need to take control of this and set OUR agenda.
The Russians are far from stupid. Last year they actually reduced their defence budget to take the lower price of oil into account and dwindling hard currency reserves. I think they still remember what happened to the USSR so wont make the same mistake again. They aren't in as bad a shape as we would like to think, they have no debt.
I dont buy all of the Uber weapons propaganda they are spewing at the moment, if you add up the costs of all of those programs it probably amounts to more than their GDP per annum in program development and execution / manufacturing costs.
I had to pinch myself about the Nuke powered cruise missile, come on guys.....dont believe the hype.
A Russian friend of mine once said, "Russia wants respect, if they cant get respect, they will take fear".

Russian defence planners already know they are hopelessly outmatched by NATO in conventional terms but they can make up for that somewhat with hybrid warfare and unit cohesiveness. They dont have multiple national agendas to smooth over in times of conflict.
Finally, Russia does not want open conflict with the US, they would lose conventionally and it would be a pointless exercise in a$$ self-whuppery.
They will however, push in every other sphere, people need to wake up to that fact that the West is at "war" with Russia, the only thing missing is we aren't shooting at each other yet. God forbid but we need to face them down, they see political weakness as it is, an advantage for them.



What a bunch of baloney........ :lmao:


ignorance is bliss.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 10 May 2018, 00:38
by snypa777
juretrn wrote:The West is at war with Russia? For real? Because Putin's cronies are being sanctioned? And because we keep on rolling our eyes at the constant " blame the West" rhetoric coming from the Kremlin? :doh:


"Learn something new".
A basic primer.
https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/p ... _CT468.pdf

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 May 2018, 14:25
by milosh

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 29 May 2018, 14:57
by marsavian
Russian electronic warfare firm claim that is going to upgrade products after studying US Tomahawks downed in Syria

https://www.rt.com/news/428105-russians ... wks-syria/
https://sputniknews.com/military/201805 ... ectronics/

A Russian military contractor, specializing in electronic warfare, will use information gained from dissecting a US Tomahawk cruise missile, used during an attack on Syria, to boost the capabilities of its own equipment.

The missile, delivered to Russia after the tri-party night attack on Syrian government targets by the US, the UK and France in April, is of particular interest to KRET, a leading developer of electronic equipment for the Russian military, according to Vladimir Mikheev, an aide to the company’s First Deputy Director Vladimir Zverev.

“Our new equipment needs to cover all spectra, optical and radio, which we found in the products of our counterparts,” Mikheev told Radio Sputnik.

“As specialists we were very interested in seeing the real-life use of various weapon systems in Syria, including the Tomahawks. Now having this missile in our hands we clearly know what channels it uses to communicate control, navigation and geolocation information,” he explained.

Mikheev said incorporating the knowledge gained from studying the US cruise missiles will take KRET two to three years. It will help Russian electronic warfare systems be better in countering American missiles “on all stages of combat deployment” he said.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 30 May 2018, 04:06
by popcorn
It probably means a lot to the Russians that the Su-57 got it's baptism of fire before the F-35. :roll:

https://southfront.org/syrian-war-repor ... -in-syria/

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 30 May 2018, 06:45
by Corsair1963
marsavian wrote:Russian electronic warfare firm claim that is going to upgrade products after studying US Tomahawks downed in Syria

https://www.rt.com/news/428105-russians ... wks-syria/
https://sputniknews.com/military/201805 ... ectronics/

A Russian military contractor, specializing in electronic warfare, will use information gained from dissecting a US Tomahawk cruise missile, used during an attack on Syria, to boost the capabilities of its own equipment.

The missile, delivered to Russia after the tri-party night attack on Syrian government targets by the US, the UK and France in April, is of particular interest to KRET, a leading developer of electronic equipment for the Russian military, according to Vladimir Mikheev, an aide to the company’s First Deputy Director Vladimir Zverev.

“Our new equipment needs to cover all spectra, optical and radio, which we found in the products of our counterparts,” Mikheev told Radio Sputnik.

“As specialists we were very interested in seeing the real-life use of various weapon systems in Syria, including the Tomahawks. Now having this missile in our hands we clearly know what channels it uses to communicate control, navigation and geolocation information,” he explained.

Mikheev said incorporating the knowledge gained from studying the US cruise missiles will take KRET two to three years. It will help Russian electronic warfare systems be better in countering American missiles “on all stages of combat deployment” he said.


Sorry, Sputnik and RT are hardly credible sources. As a matter of fact you will get little respect posting them here. :shock:

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 30 May 2018, 06:52
by weasel1962
Corsair1963 wrote:Sorry, Sputnik and RT are hardly credible sources. As a matter of fact you will get little respect posting them here. :shock:


Not sure what the issue is regarding media source. CNBC, which is a western source, basically just repeats the claim and doesn't make it any more respectable.
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/25/russia- ... apons.html

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 30 May 2018, 17:15
by botsing
weasel1962 wrote:Not sure what the issue is regarding media source. CNBC, which is a western source, basically just repeats the claim and doesn't make it any more respectable.
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/25/russia- ... apons.html

Pointing at other turds do not make these turds (RT and Sputnik) smell less.

They are all bad sources and should be discarded as "news". Just look at how casually they pretend to have these "facts":
a) tomahawks were "shot" down
b) Russia now have the remains of these tomahawks
c) Russia now "knows" how these tomahawks work to the fine details.

It's at best just mere speculation based on nothing but rumours. Why would a government show that they have very specific details about a competitors weapon? To give that competitor a fair and honest warning that it should upgrade these stated abilities?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 30 May 2018, 21:42
by marsavian
The impact remains were displayed at a public news conference plus the intact one(s) which did not work apparently. Obviously Syria is a sales pitch for Russian hardware for them but all information should be given a fair hearing regardless of the source. No-one has to believe any of it but it's interesting what they are claiming.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 31 May 2018, 14:31
by mixelflick
Back on topic... the SU-57/Syria story gets more confusing by the day.

Two (or was it 4) were allegedly sent to Syria. Then we were told they stayed for a whole 2 days. In those 2 days, we're told the testing involved this cruise missile shot, and that its "electronics" passed the test as well.

QUESTION: How much testing can you accomplish in 2 days? Why did they beat such a hasty retreat? If it did successfully drop/fire that cruise missile, what does that say about its potential roles if and when its operational?

And the status of the program swings wildly from media source to media source. The Aviationist seems to give it some credibility, as does The Drive. In almost all other western news outlets, its panned as an abysmal failure. Perhaps the truth lies somewhere in between?

No 2nd stage engine through 2025 means not many produced domestically, nor any foreign orders. Which means per unit cost must be astronomical. The Aviationist recently quoted an asking price of only around $50 million/copy. How on earth do you develop small quantities of a stealthy, supercruising sensor/shooter with integrated avionics and world class dogfighter (complete with all new weapons) - for an asking price of $50 million?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 01 Jun 2018, 03:01
by Corsair1963
Russia is the Master of Smoke and Mirrors. So, anything they say about what is really going on with the Su-57 has to be taken with a Grain of Salt.

:?


"IMHO"

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 01 Jun 2018, 12:38
by afjag
How on earth do you develop small quantities of a stealthy, supercruising sensor/shooter with integrated avionics and world class dogfighter (complete with all new weapons) - for an asking price of $50 million?


Governent imposed price controls. Something that is virtually impossible in the West.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 01 Jun 2018, 17:07
by geforcerfx
afjag wrote:
How on earth do you develop small quantities of a stealthy, supercruising sensor/shooter with integrated avionics and world class dogfighter (complete with all new weapons) - for an asking price of $50 million?


Governent imposed price controls. Something that is virtually impossible in the West.


Which results in cut corners and poor quality, all bad traits to a advanced aircraft trying to have some stealth in the design.

Russian can only control so much of the cost, they can't founder modern processors so they are buying those out of Taiwan and China which puts them at there mercy for cost. I haven't found a single Russian company that designs ASICs or FPGAs so they are prob going to rely on standard multipurpose CPUs for most of the processing.

If the aircraft is going to cost $50 million it will be significantly less stealthy than it's western counter parts, it will have more basic engines until they decide to fund the new ones into the fleet and it will be maybe 25% of the sensor and networking capabilities of western and Chinese aircraft. The cost advantage they have over the west if they were building a apples to apples fighter is labor cost, engineers are a lot cheaper and there factory workers make around 1/4 what American and European workers do. But China can beat them there and are trying to make a apples to apples fighter fleet with the west, and they have the tech know how to get there.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 01 Jun 2018, 18:23
by wrightwing
The simple answer is that the Su-57 won't cost $50 million. It's far more likely to be >$100 million.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 01 Jun 2018, 19:43
by vilters
If they are "smart", what I doubt. . . . . The Su-50's will be free. => Because they aren't gonna go in production.
What is the "+" value compared to a 27-35 series A/C? ? ? ? Newer metal? :D

Wait 10 more years for the engines? The design will be obsolete by then.

Be strong ;
Cut the cheese right here and right now, and start all over again on a clean sheet of paper.

But? They are Russians, and given a few dozen wodka's, they are not smart at all.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 01 Jun 2018, 19:56
by vilters
Don't know how close any of you guys have been to Recent build Mig or Su fighter aircraft, but they can not get even the most basic things together.

If you see how panels are joined. How Rivets are placed. How "visible" bolts hold the thing together. The gaps between panels, the lack of finishing, the rust and oxidation?

Do I have to continue?
Unfinished external panels overlapping. Best example I ever got was the CLT of a Mig-29.
That was a mechanical wonder.

Soms welds. Really? Are you serious?
Cockpit ergonomics. That pilot needs 2 heads and 6 hands to get it all done.

Maintenace is simple.
A screwdriver, some pliers and most of all : A solid hammer.

But? And that has to be said. They are solid.
Fuel, oil and air in the tires, and they are good untill overhould or crash whichever comes first.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 01 Jun 2018, 20:00
by vilters
Oh, another thing that brings out a smile every time.

On the Mig -29, they forgot to build wash-out in the wing.
Solution?
Fly with the ailerons some degrees UP all the time. :-) Funny guys those Russians. :-)

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 02 Jun 2018, 02:20
by awsome
"Learn something new".
A basic primer.
https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/p ... _CT468.pdf[/quote]


Actually read it and you will see where the worlds problems lie. Anyone who may be an economic competitor is seen by those setting American policy as "being at war" with America. f@%king psychos...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 02 Jun 2018, 16:39
by white_lightning35
awsome wrote:"Learn something new".
A basic primer.
https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/p ... _CT468.pdf



Actually read it and you will see where the worlds problems lie. Anyone who may be an economic competitor is seen by those setting American policy as "being at war" with America. f@%king psychos...[/quote]

I'm curious; did you actually read the paper? It is not about Russia being an economic competitor. Russia is nowhere close to being an economic competitor. Its economy is smaller than that of Texas alone. But that is not important here.

Russia is a cold, soggy leftover of the USSR that still retains some of its military and diplomatic clout. The Russians believe they can make up for the loss by engaging in what the your link talks about: hybrid warfare. Russia has many clever people left over who want to return the Motherland to its former glory, and they realize they can't do it conventionally. Hence wearing down the other countries slowly and surely, sowing discord.

And please don't pretend that poor, poor, Russia is being bullied by evil America. America and Russia are enemies, plain and simple, and everyone with half a brain knows it. Russia is just the little Chihuahua right now that has to bark loudly and bite the other dogs when they're sleeping, in order to make up for its lack of size.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 02 Jun 2018, 20:23
by awsome
I'm curious; did you actually read the paper? It is not about Russia being an economic competitor. Russia is nowhere close to being an economic competitor. Its economy is smaller than that of Texas alone. But that is not important here.

Russia is a cold, soggy leftover of the USSR that still retains some of its military and diplomatic clout. The Russians believe they can make up for the loss by engaging in what the your link talks about: hybrid warfare. Russia has many clever people left over who want to return the Motherland to its former glory, and they realize they can't do it conventionally. Hence wearing down the other countries slowly and surely, sowing discord.

And please don't pretend that poor, poor, Russia is being bullied by evil America. America and Russia are enemies, plain and simple, and everyone with half a brain knows it. Russia is just the little Chihuahua right now that has to bark loudly and bite the other dogs when they're sleeping, in order to make up for its lack of size.[/quote]

It is not just American relations with Russia. Any nation that has an independent foreign policy and pursues independent national objectives (like selling oil in currency other than US dollars) is primed and ready for a "freedom" beat down. Europe is at the edge of going their own way and it will be interesting to see what Rand has to say about them in a few years...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 03 Jun 2018, 12:12
by babybat{}.net
geforcerfx wrote:I haven't found a single Russian company that designs ASICs or FPGAs so they are prob going to rely on standard multipurpose CPUs for most of the processing.


Maybe you were looking bad. In Russia and Belarus, there are a number of manufacturers of both ASICs and FPGAs.
For example VZPP-S, Micron, Angstrem and others.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 03 Jun 2018, 13:45
by juretrn
babybat{}.net wrote:
geforcerfx wrote:I haven't found a single Russian company that designs ASICs or FPGAs so they are prob going to rely on standard multipurpose CPUs for most of the processing.


Maybe you were looking bad. In Russia and Belarus, there are a number of manufacturers of both ASICs and FPGAs.
For example VZPP-S, Micron, Angstrem and others.

They may exist, but they're as relevant as last year's snow.
A challenge for you.
Go here
http://uk.farnell.com/
or here
https://www.digikey.com/
and find a single component that's built, or even designed in Russia. Good luck!

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 04 Jun 2018, 14:49
by mixelflick
vilters wrote:
Be strong ;
Cut the cheese right here and right now, and start all over again on a clean sheet of paper.

But? They are Russians, and given a few dozen wodka's, they are not smart at all.


How likely do you think a clean sheet design will happen?

It's been 8 years since PAK FA first flew. They've got a lot invested in it so I'm guessing the chances are between nil and zero. A scaled down SU-57 would be a nightmare. Much of its good points would be lost (i.e. extreme range, capable of carrying a large array of weapons and sensors). If Mig was smart they'd dust off the Mig I.44, scale that down into a single engine version and focus on sensors and weapons. It may not be stealthy enough, but doubtful the SU-57 is going to be either. At least the scaled down I.44 would be more affordable, and expenses could be offset by allowing its export.

Without an F-35 type aircraft, we are looking at the end of Russian being competitive with the West. There was a time (Flanker export heyday) where you could get F-15 like performance for quite a bargain. Now, the best they can do is sell you 4++ jets in a 5th gen world. China will eat them alive with the FC-31, and between that and the F-35 nobody's going to be buying Russian jets anymore. Sad, given they have some really talented airframe engineers over there...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 11 Jun 2018, 10:18
by babybat{}.net
juretrn wrote:They may exist, but they're as relevant as last year's snow.

Information on more relevant samples is still classified.
It is obvious that they do not belong to the last generation, but they exist.

juretrn wrote:A challenge for you.
Go here
http://uk.farnell.com/
or here
https://www.digikey.com/
and find a single component that's built, or even designed in Russia. Good luck!


As an example:

Image
Image
Image

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 11 Jun 2018, 10:50
by babybat{}.net
mixelflick wrote:If Mig was smart they'd dust off the Mig I.44, scale that down into a single engine version and focus on sensors and weapons. It may not be stealthy enough, but doubtful the SU-57 is going to be either. At least the scaled down I.44 would be more affordable, and expenses could be offset by allowing its export.


The design of a light single-engine version of the "1.42 MFI" was called "4.12 LFI".
This project is deadlock and outdated.

Already in 2000s the company had more interesting prospects, like LFI S-21.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 11 Jun 2018, 10:52
by babybat{}.net
double-post

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 11 Jun 2018, 15:34
by mixelflick
babybat{}.net wrote:
mixelflick wrote:If Mig was smart they'd dust off the Mig I.44, scale that down into a single engine version and focus on sensors and weapons. It may not be stealthy enough, but doubtful the SU-57 is going to be either. At least the scaled down I.44 would be more affordable, and expenses could be offset by allowing its export.


The design of a light single-engine version of the "1.42 MFI" was called "4.12 LFI".
This project is deadlock and outdated.

Already in 2000s the company had more interesting prospects, like LFI S-21.


LFI S21?

Looks like a stealthed up J-10C!

Would have been a much better project than the SU-57 IMO. The world needs a good Mig-29 follow on (Russia too), and I don't think the Mig-35 is going to cut it...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 12 Jun 2018, 18:26
by charlielima223
babybat{}.net wrote:Image
Image
Image


A good example is Russian electronic components and products. While Russia does produce and manufacture their own, compared to the United States, S Korea, Japan, and Western Europe; Russia isn't anywhere in the same league. A good example/question of this is how many major electronic consumer goods use Russian built electronic components. If we were to relate this to modern avionics and radar, Russia would seemingly fall behind the United States. Not saying that they are not effective, they just wont have the same level of quality.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 12 Jun 2018, 18:46
by juretrn
After a week of searching, he finds 3 examples, and that's about it. Truth is, there is no real manufacturing base for semiconductors in Russia, and their best talent is "brain-draining" to the West (yet again). In case of relations with the West going downhill, who are they going to subcontract the designs they do have to?
What they do have is not competitive in the slightest, and could just barely (if at all) be considered adequate. There's a good reason why the early Zhuk AESAs were rejected by their air force and are about to field their first AESA sets with the Su-57: they are at least 20 years behind. So the next time you read about some super duper jammer or radar from Russia...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 13 Jun 2018, 14:03
by mixelflick
juretrn wrote:After a week of searching, he finds 3 examples, and that's about it. Truth is, there is no real manufacturing base for semiconductors in Russia, and their best talent is "brain-draining" to the West (yet again). In case of relations with the West going downhill, who are they going to subcontract the designs they do have to?
What they do have is not competitive in the slightest, and could just barely (if at all) be considered adequate. There's a good reason why the early Zhuk AESAs were rejected by their air force and are about to field their first AESA sets with the Su-57: they are at least 20 years behind. So the next time you read about some super duper jammer or radar from Russia...


I thought the first Russian AESA was to be on their Mig-35's? Or is that what you were referring to, those were rejected? I didn't think Russia had even taken delivery of her Mig-35's yet...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 13 Jun 2018, 14:08
by marsavian
AESA, like TVC, on the MiG-35 is an option not standard. Apparently for cost reasons no customer, domestic or foreign, is currently taking up either option.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 13 Jun 2018, 22:52
by juretrn
mixelflick wrote:I thought the first Russian AESA was to be on their Mig-35's? Or is that what you were referring to, those were rejected? I didn't think Russia had even taken delivery of her Mig-35's yet...

Indeed it was, but you know, the reality of MiG-35 is different to what was initially (and still is being) promised.
I am thinking of this thing:
http://www.deagel.com/Sensor-Systems/Zh ... 57005.aspx

I can't for the life of me remember where I read it was rejected by RuAF, but IIRC it was. Some one-off protoypes, at least.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 14 Jun 2018, 08:20
by gideonic
The current Mig-35 is actually just a "land version" of the Mig-29K. So no thrust-vectoring nor AESA

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 14 Jun 2018, 13:41
by gc
Russia, fanboys and press: Sukhoi fighters are invincible and affordable. US fighters are weak and expensive.
Reality: https://www.indiatoday.in/mail-today/st ... 2018-06-13

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 14 Jun 2018, 14:08
by mixelflick
gc wrote:Russia, fanboys and press: Sukhoi fighters are invincible and affordable. US fighters are weak and expensive.
Reality: https://www.indiatoday.in/mail-today/st ... 2018-06-13


That's a very interesting point. You always hear about how Sukhoi/Mig's are perhaps 1/3 as expensive as western birds. You never hear about the fact they require 3x's the maintenance. I was always under the impression the Indians were very happy with the SU-30MKI, as it allowed them to go toe to toe with anyone (including USAF).

If this is true, it spells big problems for Russian export aircraft. Because when your biggest (if not one of the biggest) customer isn't interested in procuring more of your aircraft... We may have reached the tipping point in Russia no longer being a major arms exporter of high performance military aircraft...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 14 Jun 2018, 14:12
by mixelflick
gideonic wrote:The current Mig-35 is actually just a "land version" of the Mig-29K. So no thrust-vectoring nor AESA


The whole Mig-35 upgrade is entirely misleading then. An up engined, thrust vectoring Mig-29 with 50% greater range and an AESA should be an incredibly capable aircraft. Yet, the Russians themselves are opting for no thrust vectoring and no AESA. It appears to have more wing area, a more robust frame and capable of carrying heavier loads further. But that comparison inevitably leads you to the Flanker family, and all of a sudden the Mig-35's range, payload and agility don't compare very favorably...,,

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 14 Jun 2018, 21:34
by collimatrix
The Russian order of MiG-35s looks like welfare to keep the MiG design bureau alive long enough for it to develop something that people would actually want to buy.

Not only is the MiG-35 a fourth-generation aircraft, it's easily the second or third least capable fourth-generation aircraft after Gripen and FC-17, and it doesn't have the virtue as being as cheap as those two. I'm not counting advanced trainers that moonlight as fighters, obviously.

MiG-35s are conventionally stable, which usually works out to something like a 10% hit to lift/drag ratio, they're much heavier than earlier MiG-29 variants and their engines haven't been uprated enough to make up the difference, so it sacrifices the old Fulcrum's thrust to weight ratio which was one of the key strengths of the type. On the flip side, they do at least have a much better avionics fit and more internal fuel than the old MiG-29s, which partially remedies one of the big weaknesses of the type.

The price reductions Lockheed Martin announced for the F-35 are really putting the screws on the fighter market. Nations that have a choice between Western as well as Russian and Chinese fighters won't even pause in their decision. Nations that can't buy Western have the choice of various Flanker variants, and the Chinese FC-20 might be available soon, and both of those options are clearly more capable than the MiG-35.

MiG had better be working on something more impressive, because they're not going to stay in the game if this is their best shot.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 15 Jun 2018, 07:13
by hornetfinn
mixelflick wrote:
gc wrote:Russia, fanboys and press: Sukhoi fighters are invincible and affordable. US fighters are weak and expensive.
Reality: https://www.indiatoday.in/mail-today/st ... 2018-06-13


That's a very interesting point. You always hear about how Sukhoi/Mig's are perhaps 1/3 as expensive as western birds. You never hear about the fact they require 3x's the maintenance. I was always under the impression the Indians were very happy with the SU-30MKI, as it allowed them to go toe to toe with anyone (including USAF).

If this is true, it spells big problems for Russian export aircraft. Because when your biggest (if not one of the biggest) customer isn't interested in procuring more of your aircraft... We may have reached the tipping point in Russia no longer being a major arms exporter of high performance military aircraft...


When Finland did last fighter competition in early 1990s, MiG-29 was one candidate and was seriously considered and also seriously offered by Russia. Others were F-16C, F/A-18C/D, JAS Gripen and Mirage 2000-5. It was found that MiG-29 was the most expensive aircraft to buy and operate. It was about 10-20 percent more expensive to buy and about twice as expensive to operate. Another serious problem would've been that it had half the service life of other candidates (15 yrs vs 30 yrs). So it would've been twice as expensive aircraft with half the service life meaning it would've cost 3-4 times more in real life. It also had easily the least capable avionics and electronics with limited capabilities and no real multi-role capability.

It's likely that Su-27 derivatives have similar problems. Sure later versions of both MiG-29 and Su-27 have made improvements in all areas, but are still not up to western standards in many areas. It's likely that maintenance requirements and costs are still higher than in Western equipment. Service lives are also shorter even with the latest kit.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 18 Jun 2018, 05:18
by rheonomic
collimatrix wrote:MiG had better be working on something more impressive, because they're not going to stay in the game if this is their best shot.


I've been under the impression that, domestically, MiG has lost out to Sukhoi, and that export-wise their only strength has been that the MiG-29K is a bit more carrier-suitable than the Su-33 seems to be.

LMFS seems to be all but dead from open sources.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 22 Jun 2018, 10:20
by babybat{}.net
rheonomic wrote:
I've been under the impression that, domestically, MiG has lost out to Sukhoi, and that export-wise their only strength has been that the MiG-29K is a bit more carrier-suitable than the Su-33 seems to be.



The question of which aircraft is better suited for an aircraft carrier is not so unambiguous. Su fighters occupy slightly more space in the hangar than the mig-29k due to a different folding mechanism. But Su fighters have better characteristics.
The choice was made in favor of Mig-29k, because it was already created for Indian NAVY.
The new version of the Su-33 was supposed to be created for PLA NAVY, but the Chinese created it themselves (j-15), buying a prototype of the Su-33 in Ukraine. For this reason, a new version of the Su-33 was not created, and the fleet of existing machines underwent a modernization under the «Hephaestus» program.

rheonomic wrote:LMFS seems to be all but dead from open sources.


The LMFS program, as well as the PAK-DP program (replacement of Mig-31, and possibly Tu-22m3) is continued at the expense of the company's own funds. Last year, it was announced that the first prototype LMFS will make the first flight until 2025.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 22 Jun 2018, 13:43
by mixelflick
I really hope Mig gets it in gear with this LMFS. I've seen several artist concepts, but it's hard to believe the rubles are going to be there for it, given so many other supposed big ticket items.

Had Russia pursued an LMFS type circa 2000 vs. the PAK FA, they'd be in a much better place today. Perhaps still lacking in stealth, but at least the cost/logistical footprint would be a lot more manageable. This concept below looks intriguing, but it's been a long time since the Russians have opted for a single engine bird (Mig-23?) I wonder if they have the confidence to do it, especially given the presumed supercruise requirement?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 22 Jun 2018, 13:45
by vilters
Face it: Russia, with all its drinking and corruption issues placed itself out of the market.

If you "invest" 15 dollar over there?
5 go to alcohol,
5 go to pay off some "friends" (or to keep friends as friends)
3 for yourself in bad times
1 is left for material cost
1 is left for R&D.

Oh, they get something done?
Well, they would not get their next 15 dollar if they left you with nothing, right?

Their 6th gen fighter is probably build out of wood mixed with some gas and oil left-overs.
Ach, they can always cut down the Siberian forest and sell the wood to N-Korea.

In brief : Russia's "great times" are over, and done with.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 22 Jun 2018, 13:49
by vilters
[quote="mixelflick"]I really hope Mig gets it in gear with this LMFS. I've seen several artist concepts, but it's hard to believe the rubles are going to be there for it, given so many other supposed big ticket items.


Even if they manage to build the airframe?
They have no engine for it.
They don't have the avionix. (Not even 4th gen)

Overall and as you wrote: 20 years too late.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 22 Jun 2018, 17:37
by babybat{}.net
mixelflick wrote:I really hope Mig gets it in gear with this LMFS. I've seen several artist concepts, but it's hard to believe the rubles are going to be there for it, given so many other supposed big ticket items.

Had Russia pursued an LMFS type circa 2000 vs. the PAK FA, they'd be in a much better place today. Perhaps still lacking in stealth, but at least the cost/logistical footprint would be a lot more manageable?



Initially, it was planned that a new (medium) fighter would replace both types of vehicles (both su-27 and mig-29). In the tender for the I-21 program (2001), both Sukhoi Design Bureau and Mikoyan Design Bureau participated. In 2002, it was announced the victory of the T-50 project. The machine that Mikoyan offered to tender is still classified

mixelflick wrote:This concept below looks intriguing, but it's been a long time since the Russians have opted for a single engine bird (Mig-23?) I wonder if they have the confidence to do it, especially given the presumed supercruise requirement?


Of course, the promising LMFS will be twin engine like J-31, AMCA, TFX, KFX(IFX) and X-2
Image

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 22 Jun 2018, 22:02
by juretrn
Man, if you can tell from that model it's supposed to be a twin engine...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 23 Jun 2018, 14:29
by mixelflick
juretrn wrote:Man, if you can tell from that model it's supposed to be a twin engine...


Let's say it is.. The question I'd have then, is why? Apparently it wasn't an issue with the Mig 21 or 23. But as soon as the Mig-29 and SU-27 appeared, they went back to twin engine designs. They seem enamored with widely spaced engine nacelles, the "tunnel" between them and blended wing/body designs. I get the fact that kind of airframe carries a lot of gas, but engines are the most expensive part of an aircraft, yes?

It just doesn't make any sense IMO. Single engine birds will be lighter, cheaper and presumably more $ could be put into integrated avionics and SA, where they're also having great difficulty. Once you've settled on a twin engine design, you're baking in expense on top of expense..

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 23 Jun 2018, 17:46
by gtg947h
mixelflick wrote:The question I'd have then, is why? Apparently it wasn't an issue with the Mig 21 or 23. But as soon as the Mig-29 and SU-27 appeared, they went back to twin engine designs. They seem enamored with widely spaced engine nacelles, the "tunnel" between them and blended wing/body designs. I get the fact that kind of airframe carries a lot of gas, but engines are the most expensive part of an aircraft, yes?

It just doesn't make any sense IMO. Single engine birds will be lighter, cheaper and presumably more $ could be put into integrated avionics and SA, where they're also having great difficulty. Once you've settled on a twin engine design, you're baking in expense on top of expense..


Engines are expensive (though maybe not the most expensive part)... but it's going to fall back on mission requirements. If you have some kind of survivability requirement, or some need to make long flights away from a landing area (see Canada's thinking with the original F-18 purchase), you might need that second engine.

Or, perhaps you lack the ability to make an engine of the appropriate thrust level in the time frame you'd need it. If your single-engine design needs an engine with 45klb thrust and you only have engines that make 30k, well...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 25 Jun 2018, 01:47
by Corsair1963
The LMFS was canceled when the PAK-FA was selected. Unless, something has changed recently???

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 25 Jun 2018, 14:58
by mixelflick
Corsair1963 wrote:The LMFS was canceled when the PAK-FA was selected. Unless, something has changed recently???


The Indians pulled out, that was one recent change. They deployed 2-4 to Syria, that's another recent change. It may be that testing in Syria went swimmingly, but maybe it didn't. A 2 day deployment I'd say sways that scenario to the latter.

I think it's a longshot they cancel PAK-FA/SU-57 and re-tool for the LMFS, but it's the right thing to do IMO. The SU-57 won't be ready for another 5 years, probably 10 the way things are going. The LMFS is going to have a much better export potential, probably have 90% of the combat potential of the SU-57 but at 1/3rd the cost. Maybe 1/2 if they do it right.

I dunno. I just think the SU-57 is too big, too complex and too ambitious a project for them. They bit off more than they could chew, and that's why after almost 10 years of development - they have less than a dozen developmental aircraft flying. None of which are anything close to combat capable. It may take another 10 years for the LMFS to go into production, but at least they'll know it could sell in the international market. The same just isn't true of the SU-57...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 25 Jun 2018, 21:27
by hythelday
mixelflick wrote:
Corsair1963 wrote:The LMFS was canceled when the PAK-FA was selected. Unless, something has changed recently???


The Indians pulled out, that was one recent change. They deployed 2-4 to Syria, that's another recent change. It may be that testing in Syria went swimmingly, but maybe it didn't. A 2 day deployment I'd say sways that scenario to the latter.

I think it's a longshot they cancel PAK-FA/SU-57 and re-tool for the LMFS, but it's the right thing to do IMO. The SU-57 won't be ready for another 5 years, probably 10 the way things are going. The LMFS is going to have a much better export potential, probably have 90% of the combat potential of the SU-57 but at 1/3rd the cost. Maybe 1/2 if they do it right.

I dunno. I just think the SU-57 is too big, too complex and too ambitious a project for them. They bit off more than they could chew, and that's why after almost 10 years of development - they have less than a dozen developmental aircraft flying. None of which are anything close to combat capable. It may take another 10 years for the LMFS to go into production, but at least they'll know it could sell in the international market. The same just isn't true of the SU-57...


How did you calculate the "90% at 1/3 cost"? Why would LMFS have better export potential?

Russians won't cancel PAK-FA, deal with it.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 06 Jul 2018, 06:24
by milos984
hythelday wrote:Russians won't cancel PAK-FA, deal with it.
Certainly they are not going to cancel it, the question is if the expected numbers (-> 48 machines in first stage) would be real.
Few weeks back they signed a contract for firts 12 serial machines.
Now there is interesting link IN RUSSIAN: http://forum.militaryparitet.com/viewtopic.php?id=21088 which direct you to report from http://www.militarynews.ru/story.asp?rid=1&nid=485254 the first vice- president of the Union of Machine Builders of the Russian Federation mr. Vladimir Gutenev who is also member of Duma commite for aviation industry.
He talked about words of Yury Borisov, Deputy Prime Minister of the Russian Federation.
What is interesting? Read...
The Su-57 should be considered as an aircraft with export potential, and efforts should be concentrated on the creation of a fighter of the 6th generation - Gutenev
07/04/2018 15:40:54
Moscow. 4th of July. Interfax-AVN - The Su-57 fighter should be considered as a fine aircraft with export potential, but the main efforts should be focused on creating a transitional machine, the head of the State Duma commission for legal support of the development of defense industry organizations, the first vice- president of the Union of Machine Builders of the Russian Federation Vladimir Gutenev.
"I believe that the sixth-generation fighter will be a transitional vehicle between manned aircraft and unmanned intellectual shock complexes (bespilotny intellektual'ny udarny kompleks - BIUK) - in this case we are talking about aerial BIUK that can, thanks to their intellect, carry out the tasks set, including those that are sufficiently massive groups, "he said, commenting on the statement by Yury Borisov, Deputy Prime Minister of the Russian Federation, that there will be no mass deliveries of the fifth generation of Su-57 fighters to Russia.
"I am largely in agreement with the words of Yuri Ivanovich (Borisov) about the fact that it is hardly worthwhile to expect a massive purchase of the Su-57," Gutenev said.
"Given the undoubted merits of this machine, we certainly understand that the program was launched in 2001, and the implementation of the program for a number of objective reasons was delayed (initially it was planned in 2006-2007 to conduct flight tests, and from 2014 already deliver in the troops), in connection with the very dynamic development of technology - this applies to the systems of electronic warfare, and new composite materials, and new opportunities that additive technologies provide in terms of constructive cheaper machines, "- konstestirov Al he.
"Well, of course, this is due to the fact that we have very sophisticated machines - the Su-34 and Su-35, which showed themselves well," said V.Gutenev. "Until 2023-2024 on the Su-57 is not supposed to install the engine of the second stage, the test of which has just started, it is" Product 30 ", and despite the fact that our car is much cheaper (according to my estimates, 2.5 times , than foreign analogues of the 5th generation), but still it is much more expensive and requires more fine services in comparison with the Su-34 and Su-35, "added V.Gutenev.
"Therefore, I agree with the opinion of Yuri Ivanovich (Borisov), according to which we already have experience, when thanks to reasonable technical policy we actually jumped through the generation, saving the budget to a considerable extent," he said.
"We were probably able to clarify a number of possible and accompanying data on the ability of the F-22 and F-35 to detect our aircraft in the short-term stay of our Su-57s in Syria in February this year - telemetry provided a significant reason for their improvement," - said V.Gutenev.
"Therefore, the concentration (effort) in the transitional, 6th generation, it seems to me, would be much more appropriate, and the 5th generation should serve in a small-series variant to develop technical tasks that would allow on the one hand to capitalize in foreign markets the costs incurred on this machine, and on the other hand - to improve the system (of prospective aircraft), "V.Gutenev is sure.
"This is an extremely rational and correct approach, ensuring a balance between the interests of the defense industry complex and the customer," he said.
The deputy believes that in the interests of the defense industry it would be "simply enough to form the export image of the Su-57 with the engine of the second stage."
"This is absolutely correct and pragmatic solution," he said.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 06 Jul 2018, 13:19
by sferrin
That almost reads like, "huh. Both the F-22 and F-35 detected us without difficulty. Back to the drawing board." On the other hand, how would they know unless they could also detect the F-22 and F-35? :?:

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 06 Jul 2018, 13:31
by mixelflick
Let's try and translate this, shall we?

"We'll buy a few examples, just enough for the world to see we use it ourselves". A very few. Call it a baker's dozen"

"This thing is so late, we'll be rolling out our first 5th gen fighter while the rest of the world is flying 6th gen"

"As if the airframe/avionics and weapons weren't taking long enough, the engine ETA is even worse".

"We brought it to Syria, and noticed the F-22 and 35 easily detected it"

"Since we don't want to buy this turkey in any numbers, we'll try and convince other countries to do so"

"The only chance in hell we have of coming up with the $ to build a sixth gen, is convincing enough suckers to buy SU-57's".

Incredibly candid comments from the Russians. They seem to have acknowledged that they couldn't make 5th gen work, and are going to try again with their 6th gen offerings. After all the success Sukhoi had with their Flanker series, this has to be a bitter pill to swallow...



"

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 06 Jul 2018, 14:25
by sferrin
I guess add the Su-57 to the Mig 1.42 and Su-47 Berkut on the list of failed F-22 wannabes. :shrug:

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 06 Jul 2018, 17:03
by zerion
sferrin wrote: On the other hand, how would they know unless they could also detect the F-22 and F-35? :?:


Well we've been using the F-22 as a sort of AWACS to route coalition aircraft around the Russians, so maybe they flew a 57 close enough and they noticed the coalition aircraft avoid them.

Or we detected them, and we called them on the phone inquiring as to their intentions.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 06 Jul 2018, 17:31
by mixelflick
sferrin wrote:I guess add the Su-57 to the Mig 1.42 and Su-47 Berkut on the list of failed F-22 wannabes. :shrug:


Just read a few online articles pertaining to this. The language used here though is startling. It really speaks to putting this thing on the back burner, and the fact it's going to be a LONG time until it's a factor in any major conflict...AL

Also, let's not forget this gem: "Therefore, I agree with the opinion of Yuri Ivanovich (Borisov), according to which we already have experience, when thanks to reasonable technical policy we actually jumped through the generation, saving the budget to a considerable extent," he said.

You see what they did there? They're SO advanced, they're going to just skip the 5th gen fighter thing and move to 6 gen birds! And to think, the U.S. now fields around 500 5th gen aircraft, with plans for over 2,000 more.

Silly Americans... :mrgreen:

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 06 Jul 2018, 21:06
by awsome
So in the end the Russians realized they win if they are NOT 26 trillion in debt...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 07 Jul 2018, 05:00
by geforcerfx
awsome wrote:So in the end the Russians realized they win if they are NOT 26 trillion in debt...


Seems more along the lines of we can field this jet at $85 million and get 30% better overall performance than the jets were are fielding at $30 million and have decades of experience with. Then you factor in that neither is competitive with there main adversaries and why waste the extra money? With the other (Su-35, Su-30sm) you can field a decent amount of them within the tight budget the Russian economy can muster. Will they buy some? Yes, prob 50 or so seems decent enough. If they can master some basic stealthy networking and 5th and 4th gen mixing it could still offer a lot of force improvements for the flankers flying missiles trucks in the back. If they can secure some decent export orders they may get more, are they going to have a answer for the 3,000 F-35's flying around the world, no, but the Su-57 was never going to answer that problem anyways.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 07 Jul 2018, 14:04
by sferrin
awsome wrote:So in the end the Russians realized they win if they are NOT 26 trillion in debt...


The Su-57 was going to put them $26 trillion in debt? I must have been hella expensive.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 09 Jul 2018, 15:07
by mixelflick
gtg947h wrote:
mixelflick wrote:The question I'd have then, is why? Apparently it wasn't an issue with the Mig 21 or 23. But as soon as the Mig-29 and SU-27 appeared, they went back to twin engine designs. They seem enamored with widely spaced engine nacelles, the "tunnel" between them and blended wing/body designs. I get the fact that kind of airframe carries a lot of gas, but engines are the most expensive part of an aircraft, yes?

It just doesn't make any sense IMO. Single engine birds will be lighter, cheaper and presumably more $ could be put into integrated avionics and SA, where they're also having great difficulty. Once you've settled on a twin engine design, you're baking in expense on top of expense..


Engines are expensive (though maybe not the most expensive part)... but it's going to fall back on mission requirements. If you have some kind of survivability requirement, or some need to make long flights away from a landing area (see Canada's thinking with the original F-18 purchase), you might need that second engine.

Or, perhaps you lack the ability to make an engine of the appropriate thrust level in the time frame you'd need it. If your single-engine design needs an engine with 45klb thrust and you only have engines that make 30k, well...


Yeah, that's a good point. Even the 2nd stage engines for PAK FA are said to put out 39,000lbs in full blower, and who knows when those will be available. An F-35 class offering from Mikoyan would probably need an engine well north of 40,000lbs, especially if it's packed with fuel like the F-35. It boggles the mind really, 18,000lbs of fuel carried by that little jet.

And let's not forget: Russian engines aren't nearly as fuel efficient as their western counterparts. So it'd be a double whammy to the LMFI team and they'd probably have to opt for 2 engines. Of course, this assumes they're still working on it. With no evidence that they are, it's pretty much toast. Shame really, would have liked to see them at least be competitive again...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 09 Jul 2018, 15:29
by milosh
mixelflick wrote:Yeah, that's a good point. Even the 2nd stage engines for PAK FA are said to put out 39,000lbs in full blower, and who knows when those will be available. An F-35 class offering from Mikoyan would probably need an engine well north of 40,000lbs, especially if it's packed with fuel like the F-35. It boggles the mind really, 18,000lbs of fuel carried by that little jet.


We don't know real numbers for AL-41F3. 39.000lbs sound unrealistic because engine is 25% lighter then AL-41F1 (1600kg). So F3 is 2670lb (1200kg) so if its thurst is 39k then T/W ratio is 14.6 which is ridiculous. IMO, F3 is have similar AB thrust as F1 but better dry thrust. So it isn't russian F135.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 10 Jul 2018, 16:45
by mixelflick
You see any meaningful production run once the engines are ready?

I don't. Can never be bought in large numbers, adds complexity to the spare parts/logistics chain which is already a nightmare insofar as fielding a half dozen different Flanker variants.

Going to be more of a silver bullet force than the F-22 IMO...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 10 Jul 2018, 20:00
by nutshell
awsome wrote:So in the end the Russians realized they win if they are NOT 26 trillion in debt...


Lol, combining all the public debts of all countries in the world you might get barely half of that. Or a third.or a 4th.

Jeez.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 10 Jul 2018, 22:11
by southernphantom
nutshell wrote:
awsome wrote:So in the end the Russians realized they win if they are NOT 26 trillion in debt...


Lol, combining all the public debts of all countries in the world you might get barely half of that. Or a third.or a 4th.

Jeez.


The US is at $21.2T USD total debt, along with $113.9T USD unfunded liabilities such as pensions and Social Security. Never underestimate the power of big government to spend a country into the ground.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 11 Jul 2018, 12:23
by milos984
mixelflick wrote:Let's try and translate this, shall we?
...
"We brought it to Syria, and noticed the F-22 and 35 easily detected it"
"Since we don't want to buy this turkey in any numbers, we'll try and convince other countries to do so"
"The only chance in hell we have of coming up with the $ to build a sixth gen, is convincing enough suckers to buy SU-57's".
..."
There was an russian lenguage article, which - shortly after deployment to Syria - speaks about modus operandi in Syrian theatre. There was openly stated that testing of Su-57´s passive electronic systems would be done in "hole" ower the desert in Palmyra area, where is smallest chance that Su-57 would be compromised by ground and air based ELINT systems of the adversaries.
It was writen before they pull out Su-57´s from there after two days. Since then they stress that "two days" was not a problem and with help of A-50U AWACS´s everything was done to test what was planned.
I have doubts about this, as I dont understand from where USAF F-22´s or IDFAF F-35I´s came there just to show themselves for waiting russian.
But lets say they dont lie this time.

The Indians then pull out from the issue and our czecho-slovak pro-russian fan boys has nothing better to say just:
Cikani z prednej Azie stupnovali poziadavky na rusov v podobe transferu technologii, a vetsiho podielu na vyrobe FGFA. Indom stejne dochadzaju zdroje na obranu, tak skrtaju... https://www.modelforum.cz/viewtopic.php ... 0#p2107370
-> Gypsies from the front of Asia have made requests for Russians in the form of technology transfer, and a greater share of the FGFA production. Indom equally has the resources to defend, so shrink ...
or:
https://www.modelforum.cz/viewtopic.php?p=2107103#p2107103 Masina ide do finale. Zacnu vyrabat pre seba a urcite prejavy zaujem cina.
Ind je nespolahlivy partner ten nakupuje od kazdeho podla toho co od koho potrebuje.
Mozno sa rusom aj ulavi ked sa zbavia v tejto faze inda.
-> The Su-57 is coming to a finale. They going to pick them up for themselfs, and I'm sure Chine would be interested. India is a reluctant partner who buys from everyone according to what he needs. The russians may be gratefull when they get rid of of india in this phase.

So at all, everything is fine, they can be happe that they get rid of Gypsies (Indians).

Then offcials announced that there would be no large scale purchases of Su-57 and our czecho-slovak pro-russian fan boys has nothing better to say just:
V súčastnosti majú stovky nových SU-30SM,SU-30M2 a SU-35,ktoré im bohato postačujú a v podstate krásne stačia na to,čo vo svete lieta.Nemajú prečo nakupovať SU-57. https://www.modelforum.cz/styles/prosil ... target.gif
-> Today, hundreds of new SU-30SMs, SU-30M2s and SU-35s are in service and that is enough and basically beautiful enough for what the world has to offer. They have no reason to buy SU-57.
They have the resources, I would not see the problem (in that) and the technologies used on these prototypes are (for) years tested on other SU-27 variants, so if they were forced, I think they can start doing (producing) them immediately. But everything is just speculation, what they want on the aircraft (is) to be still in development...


So again and again they say, the existing Su-30/34/35´s are well enough for our needs - I ask how they know - deployment to syria where even Su-35S are droping dumb OFAB-250-270 GB-bombs on enemy which has nothing as integrated ai defense. But they know better...

Also funny is their convincion, that what is need for mass production of Su-57 is already on place and tested for years on Su-30´s - so no problem there.

As is organizing mass production in short time is that easy. So if they really produce some LRIP dozen of Su-57 how they want to organize te whole proces of production and then operational evaluation and then system integration. I dont know but they forget that whole avionic system, regardles how advance, need some operational deloyment to properly "learn how to function". Such cold start with production - not to talk about mass production - would be nightmare for project managers.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 11 Jul 2018, 13:35
by mixelflick
In response to the Mig-29 and SU-27, the US decided to build the ATF. And across the pond the Eurocanards were built for the same purpose.

The only thing Russia has built in response to that has been.... updated Mig-29's and SU-27's.

So they're largely flying 1980's platforms today with some updated avionics and better engines than existed then. If we were fielding tricked out F-15's and 16's and not the F-35, I'd be concerned. But as it stands, the F-35 is a generational leap for which they don't have an answer.

And probably still won't 5-7 years from now. For better or worse, PAK FA is their only hope. But it is increasingly clear that it's a long shot. Real long...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 13 Jul 2018, 02:07
by rheonomic
sferrin wrote:
awsome wrote:So in the end the Russians realized they win if they are NOT 26 trillion in debt...


The Su-57 was going to put them $26 trillion in debt? I must have been hella expensive.


Rubles maybe?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 13 Jul 2018, 06:33
by juretrn
LOL at fanboys thinking every system of the Su-57 exists on Super Flankers.
Except for things such as
- central avionics computer (the one that supposedly uses Elbrus processors)
- Radar
- Himalayas ESM
- DIRCM
- IRST
- New weapons integration
...

So basically everything :/

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 14 Jul 2018, 03:38
by aaam
If (notice I say If) true, interesting development in light of this discussion:

http://www.businessinsider.com/russia-a ... ?r=UK&IR=T

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Oct 2018, 12:33
by marsavian
charlielima223 wrote:
rheonomic wrote:
mixelflick wrote:Love the way they neatly lined it up with their latest Flankers.

The same way our P-40's were lined up at Pearl Harbor... :P


I mean, it'd be a shame if something were to happen to them...


Russian and Syrian aircraft have been attacked on the ground by Daesh forces using some rather novel and clever tactics...

https://theaviationist.com/2018/01/08/d ... -in-syria/


Russia is wildly claiming a P-8 led this !

https://www.rt.com/news/442219-kremlin-attack-us-syria/
https://www.rt.com/news/415374-drones-s ... n-defense/

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Oct 2018, 16:27
by mixelflick
So back to the SU-57... :)

This whole deployment was a publicity stunt, with the goal of keeping the Indians in the game. It failed miserably, as the Indians pulled out shortly thereafter. If I'm not mistaken, they had already poured hundreds of millions into the project. Hundreds of millions that will be desperately needed to get the new engine working, AESA, offensive/defensive systems etc.. Predictably, they built a hell of an airframe. I really do like the layout, considering...

1.) They carried over the "tunnel" from the Flanker, which gives a nice weapons storage/area for more fuel
2.) Extremely low drag is a big improvement over the Flanker airframe
3.) Retained the excellent range of the Flanker series
4.) Potential for stealth (whether that potential will be realized is another matter)
5.) 3D thrust vectoring
6.) Nose, wing mounted radars

Everything else is deservedly in doubt, but you have to hand it to Russian engineers - they build beautiful airframes. The real problem being that even if all the other pieces fall into place, it's going to only get more expensive. No mass production means small, extremely expensive production batches of 10, 12, maybe 20 aircraft at a time.

It will be no match for F-22's or 35's, but present great difficulty for Rafale, Typhoon and every other (lesser) 4th gen. US F-15's will in all likelihood finally meet their match with this bird. The SU-57 will hold it all over it in virtually every category, save perhaps for avionics and weapons. Those matter and matter a lot, but it should be able to get close to the F-15, and in everything from BVR to WVR the SU-57 will likely (but not definitively) prevail.

We shall see...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Oct 2018, 17:23
by sprstdlyscottsmn
mixelflick wrote:
1.) They carried over the "tunnel" from the Flanker, which gives a nice weapons storage/area for more fuel

Yeah, about that. Imagine how much more volume for fuel/weapons you would have if you filled in the tunnel? Better RCS by reducing the number of corner reflectors. Less form drag from interference of those interior corners. Arguably some increase in wave drag as it changes the area ruling.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 29 Oct 2018, 14:39
by mixelflick
sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:
mixelflick wrote:
1.) They carried over the "tunnel" from the Flanker, which gives a nice weapons storage/area for more fuel

Yeah, about that. Imagine how much more volume for fuel/weapons you would have if you filled in the tunnel? Better RCS by reducing the number of corner reflectors. Less form drag from interference of those interior corners. Arguably some increase in wave drag as it changes the area ruling.


Very true, I wasn't looking at it like that. But for a stealth aircraft, makes a lot of sense.

There's still time to redesign, right? :)

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 29 Oct 2018, 14:54
by marsavian
There's still time to redesign, right?


Sure, they are still building prototypes to test the avionics still with the old Su-35 engine but now masquerading 'in service'. As a next generation fighter it has failed purely on the inability for the design to solidify enough and be potent enough to be mass produced. Meanwhile 320 F-35s have been built in the same development time ready to enhance allied power around the world. It's pretty good Russia doesn't have any real enemies only fake ones produced by their politicians to rile the natives up ;). Oh maybe Ukraine but they were always going to win that one without any NATO support on their side.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 30 Oct 2018, 15:29
by mixelflick
That's a really good point... failed purely on the inability for the design to solidify enough and be potent enough to be mass produced.

The counter argument is that the design is plenty solid, it just needs a new engine. These same folks claim there's no issue with its stealth (they achieved their goals, whatever those were), it's radar/avionics are all set and the airframe is "final". If that were the case though, why not build a few hundred and just re-engine when the "stage 2" engines get here?

Now some of that may be rubles, not many around and sanctions have taken their toll. On the other hand, they seem to have plenty of rubles to keep pumping out various SU-30, SU-34 and SU-35 derivatives?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 20 Nov 2018, 03:49
by fidgetspinner
It will be no match for F-22's or 35's, but present great difficulty for Rafale, Typhoon and every other (lesser) 4th gen. US F-15's will in all likelihood finally meet their match with this bird. The SU-57 will hold it all over it in virtually every category, save perhaps for avionics and weapons. Those matter and matter a lot, but it should be able to get close to the F-15, and in everything from BVR to WVR the SU-57 will likely (but not definitively) prevail.

We shall see...[/quote]

I got a very odd feeling that if this guy joined this forum there are going to be like 20 pissed off comments with the guy getting banned the moment he starts his account here. Thankfully the newbie privilege here will prevent him from posting too much. https://qr.ae/TUhm5x Let everyone's blood pressure rise at their own discretion.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 20 Nov 2018, 03:53
by knowan
fidgetspinner wrote:I got a very odd feeling that if this guy joined this forum there are going to be like 20 pissed off comments with the guy getting banned the moment he starts his account here. Thankfully the newbie privilege here will prevent him from posting too much. https://qr.ae/TUhm5x Let everyone's blood pressure rise at their own discretion.


Idiot fanboys like that are the reason Quora is so sh*t.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 20 Nov 2018, 03:55
by Corsair1963
fidgetspinner wrote:It will be no match for F-22's or 35's, but present great difficulty for Rafale, Typhoon and every other (lesser) 4th gen. US F-15's will in all likelihood finally meet their match with this bird. The SU-57 will hold it all over it in virtually every category, save perhaps for avionics and weapons. Those matter and matter a lot, but it should be able to get close to the F-15, and in everything from BVR to WVR the SU-57 will likely (but not definitively) prevail.

We shall see...

I got a very odd feeling that if this guy joined this forum there are going to be like 20 pissed off comments with the guy getting banned the moment he starts his account here. Thankfully the newbie privilege here will prevent him from posting too much. https://qr.ae/TUhm5x Let everyone's blood pressure rise at their own discretion.


Who says the Su-57 will ever reach mass production???

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 20 Nov 2018, 07:27
by juretrn
fidgetspinner wrote:I got a very odd feeling that if this guy joined this forum there are going to be like 20 pissed off comments with the guy getting banned the moment he starts his account here. Thankfully the newbie privilege here will prevent him from posting too much. https://qr.ae/TUhm5x Let everyone's blood pressure rise at their own discretion.

I am almost willing to bet certain body parts that he did - his username was wewuzkangz. Same bad English, same fanboyism, same weasel words, and same functional illiteracy.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 20 Nov 2018, 10:45
by knowan
juretrn wrote:I am almost willing to bet certain body parts that he did - his username was wewuzkangz. Same bad English, same fanboyism, same weasel words, and same functional illiteracy.


Pretty sure I saw that Quora poster having a sook about F-16.net at some point. He's a total shithead that spams qoura with misinformation then has a tantrum because he got kicked off these forums for trying to do it here.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 20 Nov 2018, 22:40
by swiss
New Russian Video about the development of the Su-57.


Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 20 Nov 2018, 23:45
by vilters
Jut looked at the video.

With all those "naked" rivets and bolts in the outer skin? Let us not even talk about RCS.
They don't know what the word means.

And with those engines and exhaust?
The IR signature must look something like a football field high up.

And if you look at the smoke plume?
It is back to F-4 Phantom days. To fid the fighter? Follow the smoke plume.

Next try please… LOL.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 20 Nov 2018, 23:52
by SpudmanWP
Image

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 21 Nov 2018, 00:24
by collimatrix
vilters wrote:Jut looked at the video.

With all those "naked" rivets and bolts in the outer skin? Let us not even talk about RCS.
They don't know what the word means.

And with those engines and exhaust?
The IR signature must look something like a football field high up.

And if you look at the smoke plume?
It is back to F-4 Phantom days. To fid the fighter? Follow the smoke plume.

Next try please… LOL.


I could buy that smoke plumes tend to scatter IR, and thus would show up against a clear sky.

That said, if you watch the video of the testbed SU-57 with the new engine ("Type 30," the one with the serrated nozzle), it does not appear to smoke. But then, most jet engines only smoke at certain throttle settings, and there's hardly video of the new type 30 engine being tested in the air through its entire throttle range. So far, the testbed aircraft only has one of the new engines installed (but there was a picture from the documentary of it with the starboard engine position empty, presumably in preparation for the installation of the new engine). The engines on the SU-57 are pretty wide-set, so if the AL-41F is going full military power, who knows what the Type 30 is doing. Probably not full power, I would imagine there would be yaw issues.

In any case, there's a good chance that the new engine doesn't smoke.

As for the rivets... well, maybe yes and no. Having rivets that stick out like that is probably not great for RCS, or even for subsonic drag coefficient for that matter. Certainly not ideal.

But the issue, such as I understand it, is that radar waves tend to bounce off of portions of the aircraft where there are discontinuities in conductivity. So, from that perspective, is a rivet really the worst way to connect two pieces of material on an aircraft? A rivet gets forcibly deformed into place, and it actually squeezes the two pieces of metal together. If you were to, say, put a bit of conductive paste on the edges of the two pieces of metal to be riveted together, would the return from the joint be all that much worse than a butt weld? You would have the round shape of the rivet heads, but those are only a problem from certain angles. Welding is expensive and tricky; there are all sorts of ways you can accidentally screw up the metallurgy of the work pieces. If the first few planes are just technical demonstrators and testbeds, then Sukhoi probably doesn't want to pull their hair out with expensive and technically risky manufacturing processes.

I think it's broadly consistent with the overall design goal of the current PAK-FA demonstrators. It doesn't look perfect and pretty because it doesn't have to. The US ATF prototypes were in a competitive fly-off, so they had to look the part. That meant smooth, composite skins that looked very futuristic. Remember how much Northrop groaned about Lockeed shooting an AMRAAM out of the YF-22? An ATF prototype that looked as rough as the PAK-FA prototypes would be a lot harder to take seriously in a competitive fly-off.

Sukhoi isn't dealing with a fly-off. They're the only game in town, and the Russian government knows this. MiG is an absolute shambles right now. Right now, MiG has the MiG-35, which the Russian government has bought a small number of simply to keep MiG afloat. Nobody else is interested because the MiG-35 is, as a piece of military hardware, slightly less outdated than cavalry sabers. The rumored MiG fifth-generation fighter has not seen the light of day, meaning that it likely exists only on computer screens and blueprints right now. Furthermore, beyond India, there's no serious talk of exporting the SU-57.

So, since Sukhoi isn't trying to sell the plane to anyone, the prototypes don't have to look pretty. They have have all sorts of provisional equipment and production shortcuts. Think of the big, lance-like nose pitot tube on the YF-22. Stuff that's clearly just for the prototype. That but moreso. The production, combat-coded aircraft are clearly not going to have air intakes that expose the engine fan face without some sort of blocker. You wouldn't go to all the effort of putting the stabilators in line with the main wings and planform aligning the entire front of the aircraft and putting sawtoothing on all the access panels and then just forget about the compressor face.

I stand by my prediction that the air intakes will be re-designed. The definitive aircraft will have air intakes with more stealth features, and they will probably be resized to match the airflow requirements of the new engines. This is a major feature to re-design this late in the game, but there is precedent.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 21 Nov 2018, 00:31
by collimatrix
sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:
mixelflick wrote:
1.) They carried over the "tunnel" from the Flanker, which gives a nice weapons storage/area for more fuel

Yeah, about that. Imagine how much more volume for fuel/weapons you would have if you filled in the tunnel? Better RCS by reducing the number of corner reflectors. Less form drag from interference of those interior corners. Arguably some increase in wave drag as it changes the area ruling.


My read is that low supersonic drag was a high design priority for the PAK-FA. Sucker is designed to go fast, at least in a dash. The intakes are supposed to have some sort of VG ramps hidden in them, the wings are extremely swept, the aircraft has no less than three ways of trimming out supersonic CG shift (thrust vectoring, stabilators, LEVCONs), and the entire design has a generally high aspect ratio at the expense of lots of wetted area.

The fuselage underside and air intake design gives a lot of opportunities for area-ruling, as you point out. On top of that, it gives two other important advantages. The first is that podded or semi-podded intakes can be more easily re-sized later on to accommodate new engines that have different airflow requirements. The second advantage is that the intakes are widely spaced and thus far away from the weapon bay doors, which means no worries about any interactions between the intake flow and the disturbance caused by the doors opening.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 24 Nov 2018, 15:22
by mixelflick
Slick video. You almost get the impression they're aiming for it to be their next gen air superiority platform but of course, we know that's not the case.

Two words: Technology demonstrator. That's it. Nothing more, nothing less. They're going to build a dozen. OK. That means roughly 50% may be airworthy at any one time. Barely enough to integrate the new engines, weapons and radar/electronic warfare suite. This also assumes no attrition/losses. How exactly are they going to take their new toy and integrate it with the rest of the fleet? Do they have anything similar to Red Flag, where they can determine how it works with their other aircraft? Combat deployments? To where? Syria?? What does it do for them the SU-35 doesn't???

That's the real question. They seem to have answered that question by NOT mass producing it. Sure, they leave the door open to after the 2nd stage engines are perfected etc, but by then the US PCA will be flying, along with thousand of F-35's and significantly upgraded F-22's. Not to mention ever increasing numbers of J-20's and quite possibly J-31's on their border..

They do have the prettiest camo schemes for their birds, I'll give them that...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 25 Nov 2018, 05:37
by charlielima223
Typically whenever I see something about the PAKFA its usually some kind of photo shoot from Russian propaganda. Whenever I read something about it, its usually overly exaggerated/hyped.

Looks like it can take time out of its busy modeling schedule to actually do something...

Time index 1:08 it looks like the PAKFA is doing an engine shut off test

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 07 Dec 2018, 00:42
by fidgetspinner
Seems that they are planning on having a missile that is similar to the Kinzhal but yet they want it to fit inside the SU-57.

http://tass.com/defense/1034559

"In accordance with Russia's State Armament Program for 2018-2027, Su-57 jet fighters will be equipped with hypersonic missiles. The jet fighters will receive missiles with characteristics similar to that of the Kinzhal missiles, but with inter-body placement and smaller size," the source said.

Anyone got a good guess what size they would need. For example the kinzhal is like 8 meters long how much room would they have left to fit this inside the SU-57? What size would the missile have to be reduced to?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 12 Dec 2018, 18:27
by knowan
fidgetspinner wrote:Seems that they are planning on having a missile that is similar to the Kinzhal but yet they want it to fit inside the SU-57.

http://tass.com/defense/1034559

"In accordance with Russia's State Armament Program for 2018-2027, Su-57 jet fighters will be equipped with hypersonic missiles. The jet fighters will receive missiles with characteristics similar to that of the Kinzhal missiles, but with inter-body placement and smaller size," the source said.

Anyone got a good guess what size they would need. For example the kinzhal is like 8 meters long how much room would they have left to fit this inside the SU-57? What size would the missile have to be reduced to?


According to this site: https://thaimilitaryandasianregion.word ... fa-russia/ the Su-57 weapon bays are 4.6 meters long by 1.0 meters wide.

Image

The bays do not appear to have a great volume or depth to them however:
Image

They are probably only half a meter or less in depth.

Given the Iskander is 7.3 meters long by 0.92 meters in diameter, it would have to be drastically shrunk to fit inside those bays, resulting in much reduced missile performance.

It would probably result in something similar to the Kh-15 (4.78 meters length, 0.455 meters diameter); Mach 5 speed with 300 km range.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 12 Dec 2018, 18:48
by sprstdlyscottsmn
I question that lower photo. The center missile is literally sticking out of the bay.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 12 Dec 2018, 20:34
by botsing
sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:I question that lower photo. The center missile is literally sticking out of the bay.

That "center" missile actually looks like a second store level of the left side missile, like this if you look at it from the rear:
Code: Select all
     | _ |     
----[|---|]----
     /O O\
      O


I am not sure how that can fit in the Zoomski, especially the rear doesn't look that deep.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 12 Dec 2018, 21:30
by sprstdlyscottsmn
I suppose

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 12 Dec 2018, 23:28
by knowan
Also note that Russian claims of Mach 10 velocity and 2000 km range for the Kinzhal are likely severely inflated about real performance.

The claim the missile has a 3000 km range when launched by the Tu-22M is a giveaway, indicating Russia is counting combat radius of the launch aircraft as part of the missile range.
Given the MiG-31 has a combat radius of about 1400 km and the Tu-22M about 2400 km, that suggests the actual range of the missile is merely 600 km.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 13 Dec 2018, 09:29
by milosh
knowan wrote:The bays do not appear to have a great volume or depth to them however:


That is cgi done by some fanboy it isn't accurate (first drawing is lot closer to reality), weapon bay will carry two missiles not three. How deep weapon bay is? Well Su-57 can internally carry big Kh-59 in rear weapon bay:
https://cdn2.desu-usergeneratedcontent. ... 737227.gif

Kindzal inside Su-57? Nonsense.

knowan wrote:Also note that Russian claims of Mach 10 velocity and 2000 km range for the Kinzhal are likely severely inflated about real performance.

The claim the missile has a 3000 km range when launched by the Tu-22M is a giveaway, indicating Russia is counting combat radius of the launch aircraft as part of the missile range.
Given the MiG-31 has a combat radius of about 1400 km and the Tu-22M about 2400 km, that suggests the actual range of the missile is merely 600 km.


We can estimate Kindzal range based on Iskander-M, its speed is Mach 6 and it have 400-500km range. Kindzal is Mach 10 and is similar dimension as Iskander-M.

http://www.convertalot.com/ballistic_tr ... lator.html

When I put Isknader-M data (at 15km it achieve max speed of 2km/s) I got ~420km for Iskander-M.

When use Kindzal data (max speed 3.3km/s and I use 30km as alitutude (launch from 15km)) I got ~1100km range.

Carrying Kindzal would create much bigger drag for MiG-31 then when it carries four semi recessed R-33 missiles so combat radius for MiG-31 with missiles can't be used for analyse.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 13 Dec 2018, 17:24
by charlielima223
knowan wrote:

Image



I am skeptical of this picture. IMO this picture is CG modified picture. Mainly when looking at the internal bay itself, there doesn't look like there are any internal workings. It looks too clean. In contrast here are F-22 and F-35's internal weapon bays.

Image
Image
Image

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 13 Dec 2018, 21:11
by knowan
milosh wrote:That is cgi done by some fanboy it isn't accurate (first drawing is lot closer to reality), weapon bay will carry two missiles not three. How deep weapon bay is? Well Su-57 can internally carry big Kh-59 in rear weapon bay:
https://cdn2.desu-usergeneratedcontent. ... 737227.gif


I hadn't noticed the second image was likely CGI when I linked it, but I agree it likely is.

Kh-59 is 38cm in diameter, which give a lower limit to the bay depth.


milosh wrote:We can estimate Kindzal range based on Iskander-M, its speed is Mach 6 and it have 400-500km range. Kindzal is Mach 10 and is similar dimension as Iskander-M.

http://www.convertalot.com/ballistic_tr ... lator.html

When I put Isknader-M data (at 15km it achieve max speed of 2km/s) I got ~420km for Iskander-M.

When use Kindzal data (max speed 3.3km/s and I use 30km as alitutude (launch from 15km)) I got ~1100km range.

Carrying Kindzal would create much bigger drag for MiG-31 then when it carries four semi recessed R-33 missiles so combat radius for MiG-31 with missiles can't be used for analyse.


I'll admit my analysis was rough and inaccurate.

Good to see calculated data that proves the 2000 km range claim is garbage though, thanks for providing that.


That said, there are indications the Iskander-M performance claims are inflated too; it may only have the same 280 km range as the Iskander-E export variant.

https://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/worl ... /ss-26.htm
The first Iskander tactical surface-to-surface ballistic missile system has entered service with the Russian Army's Western Military District, regional commander Arkady Bakhin said on 14 December 2010. "We are at practically 98 percent permanent readiness. We are carrying out reequipment and delivery of new types of weapons," Bakhin said. Iskander-M ballistic missile systems, which can effectively engage two targets within a minute at a range of up to 280 kilometers, will be provided to all Russian Ground Forces missile brigades by 2018, the country’s defense minister said 28 June 2013. The missiles have a non-ballistic flight path that is difficult for the enemy to predict and are guided throughout their flight. A missile brigade in southern Russia’s Astrakhan Region received an advanced Iskander-M missile complex.


https://militarytechcooperations.wordpr ... ad/page/2/
MOSCOW, June 28 (RIA Novosti) – Iskander-M ballistic missile systems, which can effectively engage two targets within a minute at a range of up to 280 kilometers, will be provided to all Russian Ground Forces missile brigades by 2018, the country’s defense minister said Friday.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 13 Dec 2018, 23:10
by milosh
I dont want to create more off topic but here you have nice analyse of Iskander:
https://www.doria.fi/bitstream/handle/1 ... L4_42w.pdf

Iskander-E is 280km and that is becuase:
https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/mtcr
to restrict their exports of missiles and related technologies capable of carrying a 500-kilogram payload at least 300 kilometers or delivering any type of weapon of mass destruction.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 14 Dec 2018, 05:12
by garrya
fidgetspinner wrote:I got a very odd feeling that if this guy joined this forum there are going to be like 20 pissed off comments with the guy getting banned the moment he starts his account here. Thankfully the newbie privilege here will prevent him from posting too much. https://qr.ae/TUhm5x Let everyone's blood pressure rise at their own discretion.

That dude on Quora (Paul Krupa) is you.
Your previous account here is wewuzkangz.
Same ID, same location, same tiring arguments.
You even post the same article on Quora as the one you posted here.
1.PNG

https://www.quora.com/Can-we-expect-a-r ... ear-future
viewtopic.php?f=38&t=54642&p=405952#p405952

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 14 Dec 2018, 17:34
by knowan
garrya wrote:
fidgetspinner wrote:I got a very odd feeling that if this guy joined this forum there are going to be like 20 pissed off comments with the guy getting banned the moment he starts his account here. Thankfully the newbie privilege here will prevent him from posting too much. https://qr.ae/TUhm5x Let everyone's blood pressure rise at their own discretion.

That dude on Quora (Paul Krupa) is you.
Your previous account here is wewuzkangz.
Same ID, same location, same tiring arguments.
You even post the same article on Quora as the one you posted here.
1.PNG

https://www.quora.com/Can-we-expect-a-r ... ear-future
viewtopic.php?f=38&t=54642&p=405952#p405952


I had similar suspicions; he seems like the immature sort that would still be butthurt about being banned. And stupid enough to try something like this.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 15 Dec 2018, 00:15
by firebase99
garrya wrote:
fidgetspinner wrote:I got a very odd feeling that if this guy joined this forum there are going to be like 20 pissed off comments with the guy getting banned the moment he starts his account here. Thankfully the newbie privilege here will prevent him from posting too much. https://qr.ae/TUhm5x Let everyone's blood pressure rise at their own discretion.

That dude on Quora (Paul Krupa) is you.
Your previous account here is wewuzkangz.
Same ID, same location, same tiring arguments.
You even post the same article on Quora as the one you posted here.
1.PNG

https://www.quora.com/Can-we-expect-a-r ... ear-future
viewtopic.php?f=38&t=54642&p=405952#p405952


Good catch... its assumed hes a paid Kremlin troll on Quora.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 15 Dec 2018, 00:51
by popcorn
firebase99 wrote:
garrya wrote:
fidgetspinner wrote:I got a very odd feeling that if this guy joined this forum there are going to be like 20 pissed off comments with the guy getting banned the moment he starts his account here. Thankfully the newbie privilege here will prevent him from posting too much. https://qr.ae/TUhm5x Let everyone's blood pressure rise at their own discretion.

That dude on Quora (Paul Krupa) is you.
Your previous account here is wewuzkangz.
Same ID, same location, same tiring arguments.
You even post the same article on Quora as the one you posted here.
1.PNG

https://www.quora.com/Can-we-expect-a-r ... ear-future
viewtopic.php?f=38&t=54642&p=405952#p405952


Good catch... its assumed hes a paid Kremlin troll on Quora.

LOL...BUSTED...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 15 Dec 2018, 16:15
by hythelday
LOL what kind of backhanded tactic is that? Post a negative comment about someone (yourself) just to get people to click on a link. ROFAR© technology believer is really desperate for attention I see.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 30 Dec 2018, 05:15
by awsome
So after 23 pages of "who has the only 5th gen aircraft in Syria", it turns out it doesn't matter. The Russians won anyways...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 30 Dec 2018, 15:34
by icemaverick
awsome wrote:So after 23 pages of "who has the only 5th gen aircraft in Syria", it turns out it doesn't matter. The Russians won anyways...


What exactly have they “won?”

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 30 Dec 2018, 16:38
by knowan
icemaverick wrote:
awsome wrote:So after 23 pages of "who has the only 5th gen aircraft in Syria", it turns out it doesn't matter. The Russians won anyways...


What exactly have they “won?”


A $250 billion+ bill to rebuild Syria.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 31 Dec 2018, 15:43
by awsome
knowan wrote:
icemaverick wrote:
awsome wrote:So after 23 pages of "who has the only 5th gen aircraft in Syria", it turns out it doesn't matter. The Russians won anyways...


What exactly have they “won?”


A $250 billion+ bill to rebuild Syria.


Everybody who was involved in Syria wanted something. To say otherwise now is a bit like saying this game is stupid, taking your ball and going home just because you are losing. As far as the whole issue of stealth fighters it seems it takes something else other than just technological or even military superiority to win. After so much mocking of Russia's stalled SU 57 program it turns out it just doesn't matter... yet.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 01 Jan 2019, 17:24
by mixelflick
IMO, the sole reason the SU-57 deployed to Syria was a last ditch effort to keep Indian interest in the program. And on that score, it failed miserably.

They did gain some valuable experience with their various Flanker derivatives, especially the SU-30 and SU-35. As Russia's front line fighters, they needed to find out where the last few bugs were. Granted, there weren't any air to air "kills", but those assets were flying and fighting in the same airspace as US 4th and 5th gens. They had to have learned something.
With respect to weapons, their lack of sophistication was glaring. Most dumb bombs being dropped, and a lot more R-27's carried vs. R-77's.

In regards to the SU-57, their lack of air to air weapon miniaturization is really hurting them. Those big, honking fins on most of their birds severely limits the number that can be carried internally, and I'm not buying that picture of 6 R-77's in its weapons bay. Someday perhaps, but not now. If weapons testing had flushed out a 6 R-77 capability, you can bet we'd be seeing many more, higher quality pics. And all this talk about AAM's with a range of 200, 300km or more AWACS/Tanker killers is just that, talk. The only carriage for those would be external, worsening its already marginal stealth properties.

Beautiful piece of engineering though, I really like its looks (first 3/4 of the aircraft anyway). It falls apart toward the rear though. Almost looks like they gave up LOL.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 02 Jan 2019, 00:09
by vilters
They went in with their Su-57 because nobody can see a stealth aircraft.

Then they where "seen".
Oeps ! !


"Bug out", "Bug out", "Bug out". And home they went.



Please Ruskies : Next time paint them in Pepsi colors.
That way we might even get a smile out of the Su-57, when their pilots turn Green.

=> The US in Red Coca and the Ruskies in Pepsi blue colors. LOL. => Hey, that's a good one for airshows.

PS; Coca is still better then Pepsi.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 05 Jan 2019, 00:34
by knowan
Su-57 has a new paintjob:
Image

Which shows that Russia still doesn't have a working RAM coating for the plane.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 05 Jan 2019, 03:50
by charlielima223
Seems like the only thing the PAKFA is good at is appearing for photo ops. The PAKFA is like that "celebrity" that hasn't done ANYTHING notable but will do anything to appear in a photo op to appear relevant and famous. All the while Russian state controlled media is the publicist...

PAKFA - LOOK AT ME! Got a new paint job and I'm flying low over some crowd somewhere
Russian State Media - Look at how relevant and high tech it is. It hasn't done anything as of yet but its day is bound to come well after 2020. We have plenty more photo sessions to attend to before the PAKFA finally does something.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 05 Jan 2019, 11:20
by marsavian
The 3F equivalent production version of Su-57 with new engines, full stealth/avionics/weapons probably won't appear until about 2025 which is about 20 years after the fighter it was meant to counter, F-22, arrived which will be in MLU condition then. Over the totality of conventional and nuclear forces Russia probably gets the most bang for buck of any nation however they really dropped the ball on stealth aircraft and they have been looking at Western stealth aircraft for a long time now ever since the F-117 which apparently the Su-57 is not as stealthy as which is very poor on their part.

Their main stealth PR strategy now is to pretend to all their sycophants that Western stealth aircraft are not as stealthy as claimed which I suppose when you have been totally outcompeted is all you have left. The practical effect of this stealth deficiency is that foreign buyers of Russian military aircraft will be at a power projection disadvantage and indeed Russia itself but then it always has its nuclear deterrent to fall back on unlike its allies.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 05 Jan 2019, 15:20
by mixelflick
Very good points all around. I don't think it ends well for the SU-57. Best case scenario Russia orders 50-75 and they're done. Even assuming they get it working, its stealth will be (to use APA's terminology), "double inferior" to the F-22's/F-35. It will exist in that rare area between a clean SH/Typhoon and the F-117.

The price tag for such a low production run is going to be astronomical. The logistics will be a nightmare, and its ability to project power will be limited b/c the F-35 is proliferating everywhere. Even in Syria, it was flying with Israeli F-35's and American F-22's... which if things got hot would have = 2/4 less SU-57's the Kremlin had at its disposal.

I don't know how they fell so far behind... they otherwise made a nice comeback with the Mig-29/SU-27. Their mistake was developing a "heavy" stealth fighter, vs the LMFS. Of course, they would have run into the same problems, but at least they may have been able to produce them in quantity. Provided they weren't fighting American 5th gen jets, the LMFS may have made a measurable impact, particularly in foreign orders. No going back now though. They've got too much invested in this turkey...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 05 Jan 2019, 16:16
by marsavian
It will exist in that rare area between a clean SH/Typhoon and the F-117.


J-20 also hangs out there which is also handy for F-22/F-35 fliers ;).

Best case scenario Russia orders 50-75 and they're done.


No, I think the best case is better than that but just very drawn out over many decades. It's safe to assume that eventually Su-57 or its derivatives will replace all Flanker derivatives (Su-27/30/35) but just not very fast as new production Su-30/Su-35 are still being cranked out in higher volumes due to being much cheaper and actual finished products. The Su-57 stealth is what it is now but the whole platform can still be improved in the future in other ways e.g. improved GaN AESA or even photonic radar if they ever get it working, more potent missiles, better EW/IRST. All these will help in combating F-22/F-35 but they probably will always start at a technical disadvantage.

I don't know how they fell so far behind.


They used the same design philosophy as the Euro-Canards, build a maneuverable aerodynamically efficient aircraft and tune the stealth afterwards ... and got similar results. It's easier to build a stealth aircraft first, if you have the know-how in the first place, and tune it for maneuverability than vice versa e.g. F-35.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 06 Jan 2019, 14:59
by mixelflick
Wow, you really think they're going to produce that many? That would be 500 plus airframes, a figure I just can't see them affording (finished product is going to be expensive). Likely an order of magnitude more expensive as we're not talking about a total production run anywhere near F-35 levels (3 to 4,000).

That's a really good point about aerodynamics first, stealth second. I hadn't thought of that, but it makes a lot of sense. It also occurred to me that one of the reasons they've fallen so far behind was the collapse in 1990/91. So just when we were finalizing the ATF and accelerating its testing/final form, they more or less closed up shop. We then embarked on 15 years of refinement/testing of the YF-22A while they.... languished. In those 15 years, LM went from a winning prototype to an IOC F-22A. 17 years after the PAK FA contract was awarded to Sukhoi (2002), there's still no definitive production version.

If they do produce circa 500 or so, most of those will come more than 30 years after Sukhoi was awarded the contract...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 07 Jan 2019, 01:30
by vilters
If they are gonna build 500 airframes, they are gonna have to find/build 1.000 engines.
That is going to be another chapter///////

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 07 Jan 2019, 01:37
by vilters
As far as the Ruskies and their Pak-Fa go..

What where they thinking with those "open/exposed" engines? ? ? ?

And covering them up is gonna add lots of weight aft side and there goes the cg….. Then counterbalance that one adding more weight to the nose, and their engines are already so weak…… (And only 10 years late)

And more power requires more fuel and out goes the internal bay.

Then the gear becomes too weak for the lot and the list goes on and on.

Well, you can always strip the paint, or put the pilots on a diet, and pump less air in the tires. LOL.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 07 Jan 2019, 15:38
by mixelflick
But maybe the forego the re-designed air intakes, and greater stealth as a whole. Then she can super-cruise with the new engines, super-maneuverability remains intact and from there its finding the right weapons fit for air to air, air to ground etc..

I'm not suggesting the "final" airframe will be competitive with the F-22/35. I'm suggesting the final rendition will be superior to all American 4th gens, and about equal to the Typhoon. It will however, hold several kinematic advantages vs. the Rafale and of course the Gripen.

The big problem for Russia is that every day that ticks by there are more and more F-35's showing up around the globe. And every day that ticks by, is another day closer to the Chinese FC-31 being ready for export. We don't know how capable that aircraft will be, but form outward appearances its going to have a RCS that's smaller than the SU-57. Couple that with long range Chinese AAM's and the marketing/PR arm of Sukhoi is going to have a real uphill battle selling the thing.

The Russians may wind up being its only operator. Which spells doom aka the Mig-35, given its in a similar situation...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 18 Jan 2019, 08:39
by knowan
Gee, who could have predicted this outcome?

https://thediplomat.com/2019/01/serial- ... east-2020/

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 18 Jan 2019, 16:26
by mixelflick
knowan wrote:Gee, who could have predicted this outcome?

https://thediplomat.com/2019/01/serial- ... east-2020/


So they're slow walking the airframes destined for the "2nd stage" engine.

What this tells me is that there's going to be no easy, "swap out" for this new engine. That is, using the same airframe... they just install the new engine and go flying. Now of course it's going to take testing to get it right, but it also suggests it's a lot bigger deal than perhaps previously thought. You didn't see the US Navy stop producing TF-30 powered F-14's, while awaiting more powerful motors. There wasn't a new inlet design that needed to be put into place, etc.. No, you had some of those same aircraft swap the TF-30 for the more powerful GE F-110's when it was ready.

I don't get the sense it'll be that easy on the SU-57. Which means a lot longer test period, and holding off on any substantial airframe buys until the new engine is truly ready. We already know the inlet design needs work, at least from a stealth perspective. Dealing with that might be small potatoes vs. airflow issues given the much greater thrust and supercruise they're trying to accomplish. 2025 might be do-able, but I think 2027 - 2030 is a lot more realistic.

Opinions?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 18 Jan 2019, 17:32
by hythelday
I am fairly certain they won't modify the inlets in any way at all.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 18 Jan 2019, 18:04
by knowan
The plane needs a lot more work than just the inlets, but I think late 2020s is much more realistic than the latest projections coming out of Russia.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 20 Jan 2019, 15:41
by mixelflick
They will make something of it, there's too much national pride at stake. And Putin's a big fan, so that needs to be taken into consideration as well.

But as a mass produced item it's doubtful, in fact they said it wouldn't be. Then left the door open for maybe it would, if "the rest of the world" catches up to their SU-35S, LOL. But honestly, by the time the engine etc is ready it'll arrive at 5th gen status, once the world is fielding 6th gens...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 22 Jan 2019, 00:52
by milosh
mixelflick wrote:So they're slow walking the airframes destined for the "2nd stage" engine.

What this tells me is that there's going to be no easy, "swap out" for this new engine. That is, using the same airframe... they just install the new engine and go flying. Now of course it's going to take testing to get it right, but it also suggests it's a lot bigger deal than perhaps previously thought. You didn't see the US Navy stop producing TF-30 powered F-14's, while awaiting more powerful motors. There wasn't a new inlet design that needed to be put into place, etc.. No, you had some of those same aircraft swap the TF-30 for the more powerful GE F-110's when it was ready.


There will not be new inlet! It will have radar blocker,which is mentioned in couple of Sukhoi patents. Radar blocker isn't present with 117 engine because it is part of new engine. New engine is also important for rear RCS because its nozzle have much smaller RCS and probable smaller IR signature then classic nozzle( new one is fattier plus have something which look like cooling ports) :
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/TlkKATsijzU/hqdefault.jpg

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 22 Jan 2019, 16:23
by vilters
They are gonna use the most sophisticated Russian tools to get that thing going no matter what we say, think or do.

Some random pliers, some torn screwdrivers, some rusty hammers, some rolls of duct tape and a gallon of superglue.
Then paint the thing pink and call it 7th gen to spook the crows. (Who will drop out of the sky laughing anyway).

While the levcons are actually a good idea? ? ? My barn doors have better hinges.

But?
As usual, they'll shine at airshows.
(Replacing molten engines every time they put air in the tires.)

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 23 Jan 2019, 18:35
by zero-one
This may sound stupid for a lot of people but does the Su-57 have RWR?
I went through the avionics of the Su-57 (granted it was only Wikipedia) but I couldn't find it.
The Himalayas system is ECM? can it perform RWR? If not, then that means that the only long range detection method of the Su-57 is via Active radar

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 23 Jan 2019, 18:44
by milosh
zero-one wrote:This may sound stupid for a lot of people but does the Su-57 have RWR?
I went through the avionics of the Su-57 (granted it was only Wikipedia) but I couldn't find it.
The Himalayas system is ECM? can it perform RWR? If not, then that means that the only long range detection method of the Su-57 is via Active radar


https://thaimilitaryandasianregion.word ... fa-russia/

Himalayas [RWR] – ESM

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 23 Jan 2019, 19:40
by zero-one
milosh wrote: :cheers:

https://thaimilitaryandasianregion.word ... fa-russia/

Himalayas [RWR] – ESM

:cheers:

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 23 Jan 2019, 20:40
by milosh
zero-one wrote:
milosh wrote: :cheers:

https://thaimilitaryandasianregion.word ... fa-russia/

Himalayas [RWR] – ESM

:cheers:


:)

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 24 Jan 2019, 13:25
by collimatrix
zero-one wrote:This may sound stupid for a lot of people but does the Su-57 have RWR?
I went through the avionics of the Su-57 (granted it was only Wikipedia) but I couldn't find it.
The Himalayas system is ECM? can it perform RWR? If not, then that means that the only long range detection method of the Su-57 is via Active radar


On a fifth-gen fighter the line between RWR, radar, ECM and IFF is blurred, since an AESA can perform any of those tasks. The SU-57, by reports released thus far, will be no exception. The electronics probably won't be quite as compact and efficient as those in the F-35, but by the reports thus far, they are designed to work in broadly the same way.

That said, RWR is of fairly dubious value for long-range targeting, at least against airborne targets.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 24 Jan 2019, 14:20
by knowan
milosh wrote:
zero-one wrote:This may sound stupid for a lot of people but does the Su-57 have RWR?
I went through the avionics of the Su-57 (granted it was only Wikipedia) but I couldn't find it.
The Himalayas system is ECM? can it perform RWR? If not, then that means that the only long range detection method of the Su-57 is via Active radar


https://thaimilitaryandasianregion.word ... fa-russia/

Himalayas [RWR] – ESM


Given Russian electronics inferiority, it is unlikely the Himalayas is a very good ESM either; it is likely equivalent to Western 1990s systems at best, but probably more similar to 1980s systems.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 24 Jan 2019, 18:31
by milosh
knowan wrote:
milosh wrote:
zero-one wrote:This may sound stupid for a lot of people but does the Su-57 have RWR?
I went through the avionics of the Su-57 (granted it was only Wikipedia) but I couldn't find it.
The Himalayas system is ECM? can it perform RWR? If not, then that means that the only long range detection method of the Su-57 is via Active radar


https://thaimilitaryandasianregion.word ... fa-russia/

Himalayas [RWR] – ESM


Given Russian electronics inferiority, it is unlikely the Himalayas is a very good ESM either; it is likely equivalent to Western 1990s systems at best, but probably more similar to 1980s systems.


2000s if you look antenna technology (AESA to be precise). I don't know any western ESM which use AESA antennas in 1990s, maybe I am wrong.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 24 Jan 2019, 19:56
by knowan
milosh wrote:2000s if you look antenna technology (AESA to be precise). I don't know any western ESM which use AESA antennas in 1990s, maybe I am wrong.


The sensitivity of the antenna is more important than being AESA or not, as is the other components. It uses an Elbrus processor for example.

I freely admit to having little knowledge of these topics, but to the best of my understanding, Russia is still decades behind the West in related eletronics fields.
I also admit I probably exaggerated the relative technology of Himalayas by a few decades; access to Western technology has allowed the Russian technology base to catch up a fair bit since the end of the Cold War, just not completely.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 25 Jan 2019, 18:24
by mixelflick
knowan wrote:
milosh wrote:
zero-one wrote:This may sound stupid for a lot of people but does the Su-57 have RWR?
I went through the avionics of the Su-57 (granted it was only Wikipedia) but I couldn't find it.
The Himalayas system is ECM? can it perform RWR? If not, then that means that the only long range detection method of the Su-57 is via Active radar


https://thaimilitaryandasianregion.word ... fa-russia/

Himalayas [RWR] – ESM


Given Russian electronics inferiority, it is unlikely the Himalayas is a very good ESM either; it is likely equivalent to Western 1990s systems at best, but probably more similar to 1980s systems.


How do you reconcile a 5th gen airframe (with supercruise), some stealth, new longer range weapons and... avionics from the late 80's/early 90's??

Would it not hurt it where a 5th gen really is a 5th gen..... in the avionics/SA department??

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 25 Jan 2019, 19:17
by sprstdlyscottsmn
mixelflick wrote:
How do you reconcile a 5th gen airframe (with supercruise), some stealth, new longer range weapons and... avionics from the late 80's/early 90's??

Would it not hurt it where a 5th gen really is a 5th gen..... in the avionics/SA department??

That's the rub, isn't it? So far every metric we have seen on the new Russian AESA radars indicates they are as capable as US 1990s MSA radars. Others on the boards have gone through great lengths to discuss how things like SAR range/resolution is a great indicator of overall radar capability. Now, the Su-57 still has multiple spectrums covered by the sensors. It may have a form of data fusion. It probably has a network datalink (since the MiG-31 has this even back in the 80s). These other things mean it still fulfills many of the 5th gen criteria, just not very well. However by that metric alone (systems) the Rafale is as much of a 5th gen. The Rafale has a reduced basic signature. The Rafale has some supercruise ability. The Rafale lacks proper total signature management in that its RCS when loaded for combat will still be in the 0-10dB range. The Su-57 is expected to be in the -10-0dB range according to the Russians. This order of magnitude reduction is huge for radar detection ranges (~40% reduction). When looking at something like the Typhoon, Rafale, and Su-57 it becomes a little blurry on where 4th gen truely ends and where 5th gen begins. The U.S. set the bar absurdly high on the kinematics and signature management front with the F-22, and then again with multispectral fusion and networking on the F-35. Maybe the question comes down to "Can you without a doubt win the SA battle 99.99% of the time against an F-15?" or "Can you prosecute an F-15 with impunity?".

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 25 Jan 2019, 21:01
by knowan
mixelflick wrote:How do you reconcile a 5th gen airframe (with supercruise), some stealth, new longer range weapons and... avionics from the late 80's/early 90's??

Would it not hurt it where a 5th gen really is a 5th gen..... in the avionics/SA department??


Well, I admit I exaggerated; they probably are now equivalent to Western 2000s electronics, at least with their cutting edge stuff that may or may not be ready for service.


But as for where I'm coming from, it is because the Soviets were weak when it came to semiconductor industry, and Russia has inherited that weakness.
The Soviets were capable of producing powerful radars and other electronics, it came at the expense of mass and volume. When mass and volume was comparable, Western radar was far more powerful; see the 0.9 meter diameter APG-71 having at least twice the detection range of the 1.1 meter diameter N001 radar.

Post-Soviet Russia has better access to Western electronics, they also lost a decade of development time and are definitely still far behind.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 14 Feb 2019, 21:55
by swiss
I found this graphic on two Russian websites.

Image

https://cont.ws/@andrejknyazev/275684

https://pikabu.ru/story/su57__panatseya ... ey_5892243

When i got this right, you can see on the bottom right of the picture the RCS from the Su-30 and Su-57. So that would also confirm, that the Su-57 has a RCS of 0.5m2

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 14 Feb 2019, 22:04
by popcorn
swiss wrote:I found this graphic on two Russian websites.

Image

https://cont.ws/@andrejknyazev/275684

https://pikabu.ru/story/su57__panatseya ... ey_5892243

When i got this right, you can see on the bottom right of the picture the RCS from the Su-30 and Su-57. So that would also confirm, that the Su-57 has a RCS of 0.5m2

In their dreams maybe. Wasn't there speculation in The Russian press that the US 5gens had a 0.5m RCS? They never explained how they knew. Lol

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 15 Feb 2019, 00:02
by juretrn
Yeah, it was 0.5 m2 RCS "average" which is supposedly a similar "average" to the F-22.
How they performed that "averaging" was not explained. I can think of at least 3594043 ways to "average" such a value out.
Statistics can take a lot of abuse if needed.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 15 Feb 2019, 03:06
by fidgetspinner
Jesus Christ as much as I love new sources both of these when using google translate sounds like some Russian copied Wikipedia since most of this stuff as well is old information. I am just wondering what those circles on those images indicate(the circle on the wing and the circle on the body of the su-30) when stating 0,5 and 20 for the SU-57 and su-30. Anyone feel like helping my lazy a$$ out translating those Cyrillic alphabets?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 15 Feb 2019, 07:29
by hythelday
It says "low RF, optical and IR observability" and the second line is "area of radio reflecting surface" (0,5 vs 20 m2). I think the silhouettes with circles are supposed to represent that "T-50" has only 1/40 of relative radar reflection size of Su-30 - they criss-crossed the whole Flanker but only a small portion PAK FA. My guess is that is graphic designer's understanding of what the RCS is - quite poor may I say :D

Given that they call it "T-50", it is probably from some years back. BTW " TV zvezda" is Russian MoD outlet, so expect them to be as honest and truthful as any other Russian MoD source (hint: they are not)

I also enjoy immensly that they proudly advertise 117 engines as having " fully digital control system" (thats the line with 1s and 0s in the brackets) and also "plazma ignition system". Brace yourselves for fanbois who say 117 is superior to F119 because of that. Also I suppose that ignition system is connected to flux capacitor that generates plazma for stealth and will propell Su-57 forwstd in time 30 years to catch up with the rest of the world.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 15 Feb 2019, 22:17
by swiss
hythelday wrote:It says "low RF, optical and IR observability" and the second line is "area of radio reflecting surface" (0,5 vs 20 m2). I think the silhouettes with circles are supposed to represent that "T-50" has only 1/40 of relative radar reflection size of Su-30 - they criss-crossed the whole Flanker but only a small portion PAK FA. My guess is that is graphic designer's understanding of what the RCS is - quite poor may I say :D


Thanks for the translation. This is in line, with the statements of the Indian Ministry of Defense. So it's very likely, that the statements about the RCS for Su-57 and Su-30 are correct.

hythelday wrote:. BTW " TV zvezda" is Russian MoD outlet, so expect them to be as honest and truthful as any other Russian MoD source (hint: they are not)


Interesting to know. So lets say 20m2 and 0.5m2 for this Fighters are the best possible values. :wink:

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 16 Feb 2019, 10:16
by milosh
popcorn wrote:In their dreams maybe. Wasn't there speculation in The Russian press that the US 5gens had a 0.5m RCS? They never explained how they knew. Lol


You can find on net that study it is median frontal RCS.

Same thing as Chinese academical PAK-FA study from 2016, where they calculated PAK-FA median frontal RCS as 0.5m2 but lowest possible RCS they got was -40dBms and they conculded PAK-FA is VLO design but only if Russians use intake radar blocker (they concluded one in study) and develop stealthy nozzle, new nozzle design was seen in first flight of type-30 engine.

BTW speed data isn't right, it isn't 2600km/h or 2.6M (high altitude). Butowski was told on MAKS they lower max speed to 2.1M because or RAM and composites.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 16 Feb 2019, 14:11
by mixelflick
Let's give them the benefit of the doubt. Let's say they get the RCS down to something on the order of a SH, slightly less. Let's also give them the benefit of the doubt on engines. The new ones allow it to super-cruise at mach 1.8. And say they get the radar, other sensors and ECM/ECCM working.

How many do you figure they can afford?

I don't see how they're able to make this thing (with all of the aforementioned capabilities) for under $100 million. Even $80 million.

How many can they build, and what constitutes the minimum effective force?

I say 100 airframes, organized into..

1.) 3 Front Line squadrons of 48 aircraft
2.) 2 training squadrons of 36 aircraft
3.) Remaining birds are for test, evaluation and cannibalization

Thoughts?

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 16 Feb 2019, 22:00
by charlielima223
mixelflick wrote:How many do you figure they can afford?


The reality that I've shown many Russian trolls that I have encountered is that Russia CAN NOT afford the PAKFA in any meaningful numbers at any meaningful rate of production. All their hype and talk about new things and they can't afford it. Take for example their T-14 Armata

https://thediplomat.com/2018/08/russia- ... ttle-tank/

https://russiabusinesstoday.com/manufac ... expensive/

https://www.businessinsider.com/russias ... 018-7?r=UK

Many detractors of the F-22 claim that the F-22 was cut short because of its high cost yet we produced 187 units at a rate of 2 units per month and could very well accommodate (the desired) 339. Though I will partially agree with them I would however also point out that when the F-22 was being mass produced there was a shift in military and political necessities; which to me was the main driver and factor to the F-22's substandard numbers. On the other hand Russian military knows that certain areas (air power) they have dramatically fallen behind and the reality is they do not have the economy and funds to catch up let alone keep up.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 14 Mar 2019, 10:21
by tomcooper
charlielima223 wrote:
mixelflick wrote:How many do you figure they can afford?


The reality that I've shown many Russian trolls that I have encountered is that Russia CAN NOT afford the PAKFA in any meaningful numbers at any meaningful rate of production. All their hype and talk about new things and they can't afford it.
Not only that they can't afford it, but they do not even have the necessary know-how.

Russian aviation industry suffered an irrecoverable 'brain-drain' over the last 20 years: in many disciplines they can't make anything new - which in turn is the reason why all they're really rolling out is rehashed stuff from 20+ years ago.

For one good example, see this: New Russian VTOL Aircraft

...considered a highly promising design by Soviet and Western observers, the Yak-141 program was canceled after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Lockheed Corporation entered into a partnership with Yakovlev with the official aim of funding the program. Years later, many Russian observers suggested that Lockheed, already working on its X-35 F-35 prototype, effectively bought out the Yak-141's technical documentation for about $400 million.


Actually, Lockheed - i.e. Lockheed-Martin - not only bought all the R+D documentation but also the know-how from Yakovlev - in form of dozens of involved Russian engineers that were hired and re-settled in the USA.

This resulted in the following situation:

At the same time, according to Panteleev, the specially-designed engine may prove to be the new plane's biggest problem. "The developer of the engine for the Yak-38 has ceased to exist. While the technical documentation about the Yak's thrust nozzles, including its afterburner, is probably still around, the specialists with the practical experience to create these components probably aren't around anymore. Here, we've probably lost our expertise."


I.e. directors supposed to be in charge of such projects can't even say if they still have the necessary, 20+ years old documentation, to re-start the work. And they openly admit, they do not have the people necessary to do the job.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 15 Mar 2019, 13:44
by mixelflick
So... 50, maybe 100 aircraft?

Their "silver bullet" squadrons will be even leaner than the Raptor's, and I'm guessing everything from the per unit cost, to the logistics to cost per flight hour are going to be ugly. There really is no comparison to the Raptor, nevermind the F-35.

Someone really needs to do the autopsy on this to see where it all went wrong. Was it too ambitious a program, for their first crack at stealth? Did they err insofar as building a big, heavy stealth fighter vs. something smaller? Was it simply a question of rubles or lack of expertise?

It's worth noting that the SU-57 was the first "new" aircraft program put in motion after the fall of the Soviet Union. It may be that they lacked the infrastructure to bang it out from concept to operational, front line examples. For my money, its the fact that 1.) They don't have the money 2.) They lack some expertise 3.) They should have developed the LMFS.

Looking back, I think the Russians will realize PAK FA is where everything really went south. Sad, sad day given Sukhoi's success with the Flanker series...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 15 Mar 2019, 16:58
by marsavian
Was it too ambitious a program, for their first crack at stealth?


Not remotely ambitious enough. They basically went for a super maneuverabe evolved Flanker with enclosed weapons bay and worried about sorting out the stealth later. The Europeans had a similar approach with their Euro-Canards which were designed around getting the best aerodynamics out of canard deltas and stealth was then worried about afterwards. The Su-57 lies in between genuine all aspect VLO aircraft like F-22/F-35 and the Euro-Canards/Super Hornets which are only LO front on and in a clean configuration. Don't be surprised if the Russians double down and eventually produce an even bigger but stealthier variant and call it Su-67. Obviously they need to get rid of the exposed engine faces in such a variant so will need a wider fuselage. Russians are all about evolution not revolution in their aircraft designs.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 15 Mar 2019, 23:50
by vilters
Their problem is enginering quality.

All their capable engineers fled North and South, East and West when the GREAT RUSSIAN EMPIRE collapsed and money dried up.

The period when all was done for the honor of staying out of jail is over.
They wanted to be paid in real money, not in some Red Party Vodka left-overs.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 16 Mar 2019, 09:57
by milosh
marsavian wrote:Don't be surprised if the Russians double down and eventually produce an even bigger but stealthier variant and call it Su-67. Obviously they need to get rid of the exposed engine faces in such a variant so will need a wider fuselage. Russians are all about evolution not revolution in their aircraft designs.


No S-duct intake doesn't automaticilly mean no stealth, we can expect Su-57 have radar blocker combine with RAM composite curved IGV (photo of that IGV was publish in 2017 or 2018).

Only big change which Saturn CEO mentioned in last interview is flat nozzle, if AF or some buyer want (India was mentioned eariler) it wouldn't problem, prototype is tested on ground.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 16 Mar 2019, 12:18
by falcon.16
milosh wrote:
popcorn wrote:In their dreams maybe. Wasn't there speculation in The Russian press that the US 5gens had a 0.5m RCS? They never explained how they knew. Lol


You can find on net that study it is median frontal RCS.

Same thing as Chinese academical PAK-FA study from 2016, where they calculated PAK-FA median frontal RCS as 0.5m2 but lowest possible RCS they got was -40dBms and they conculded PAK-FA is VLO design but only if Russians use intake radar blocker (they concluded one in study) and develop stealthy nozzle, new nozzle design was seen in first flight of type-30 engine.

BTW speed data isn't right, it isn't 2600km/h or 2.6M (high altitude). Butowski was told on MAKS they lower max speed to 2.1M because or RAM and composites.


I think this is the study about you talk...

http://www.scielo.br/pdf/jatm/v8n1/1984 ... 1-0040.pdf

And really they do not tell nothing about -40db is significant, only in certain angles can get this number, but you need know this happends with any airplane, and do not need to be VLO.

For example. You can see on next picture, this civil airplane can get more than -30 db in some specific angle. This is the same for Su-57 but it is not relevant data.

Image

On this study, they take for this study a 3d perfect model of the Su-57, with no irst, pitots, dircm and other elements on its surface that you can find and real airplane as no swathood angles, etc...

And this is important note from the study:

The RCS numerical simulation method applied in the paper
is an approximate method for cavity calculation, and the exact
solution for the inlets and nozzles cannot be obtained. The
engines that have not been exposed to radar wave directly
for
the inlets are closed with inclined protective screening. The
inlets of the model are also sealed with inclined planes for
the calculation of RCS.
The nozzles of the model are closed
with cones and annuluses for calculation.



So, they dont take into consideration of inlets with exposed engine blades....and this is a very important contribution on frontal RCS.

On resumen, this number around 0,5 m2 from frontal view is not about real Su-57 but about perfect 3d model. If you make study about real airplane you will get bigger frontal rcs than 0,5 m2, and only you will can get around RCS sukhoi patent (0,1-1 m2) when you have apllied ram.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 16 Mar 2019, 14:24
by mixelflick
So.... it has the approximate RCS of a clean SH, maybe a little bit better?

I concur with the position that they built an evolved, super-maneuverable Flanker, then stealthed it up as much as possible later. The "super-maneuverability" looks to be an order of a bit less than the SU-35 though, at least when you eyeball it. Either that or they haven't fully opened up its full envelope.

Regardless, I have to think even the Russians look at the SU-57 as a failure. Almost a decade after its first flight, they're still quite a way away from the operational version. And even then it won't be mass produced. At some point, you have to wonder how much more $ they're going to plow into it. That "Hunter" UAV can't be cheap either, and if they pursue that it'll mean even less rubles for the SU-57...

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 16 Mar 2019, 19:35
by milosh
falcon.16 wrote:I think this is the study about you talk...

http://www.scielo.br/pdf/jatm/v8n1/1984 ... 1-0040.pdf

And really they do not tell nothing about -40db is significant, only in certain angles can get this number, but you need know this happends with any airplane, and do not need to be VLO.



In forward aspect they got -5.6 dB but that is median but people use median value as best possible RCS and that makes problem. That is what I wanted to point out and you used -40dB as example I am not right, you missed my point 100%.

This part is interesting:

The mean RCS value in a range
of ± 30° of the forward direction is −5.625 dBsm when exposed
to 10-GHz radar wave.In general, it is the same or even exceeds
the stealth level of modern fighters in the world.



So they consider it VLO model.

falcon.16 wrote:
So, they dont take into consideration of inlets with exposed engine blades....and this is a very important contribution on frontal RCS.


Because they can't guess how much RCS of engine is reduced with radar blocker.

@mixelflick

Without RAM and RAS it is 0.3m2 for +- 30 deg left and right by Chinese study, so you can try to figure out how lower it would be with RAM and RAS.

What I think about Su-57?

I think we will have to two variants. Small fleet as you call silver bullet which would be done to be as VLO as possible and more casual one maybe with thin RAM and less RAS, this second one could replace Su-27 much easier then true VLO and still would be force multiplayer.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 16 Mar 2019, 23:56
by marsavian
milosh wrote:The mean RCS value in a range of ± 30° of the forward direction is −5.625 dBsm when exposed to 10-GHz radar wave.In general, it is the same or even exceeds
the stealth level of modern fighters in the world.

So they consider it VLO model.


Only from the front and rear. From the sides its average is around 15 dBsm which is completely unstealthy and frankly I can't see being made up with RAS/RAM. From the sides the Su-57 would be very visible to both fighter and missile radar. In contrast the F-35 shape peaks at a similar level but its average over ± 30° from the sides is well under 10 dBsm, i.e. still quite LO before RAS/RAM is taken into account.

Image

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 17 Mar 2019, 02:02
by juretrn
Isn't the blk 3 SH also getting radar blockers?
Yet no one is calling that thing VLO (except a certain orange buffoon)

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 17 Mar 2019, 02:10
by marsavian
Already present in earlier blocks.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 17 Mar 2019, 09:35
by milosh
marsavian wrote:Only from the front and rear. From the sides its average is around 15 dBsm which is completely unstealthy and frankly I can't see being made up with RAS/RAM. From the sides the Su-57 would be very visible to both fighter and missile radar.


Yeap but model have classic nozzle because back then they didn't know Russian will test something like LOAN nozzle for Su-57:

https://i.stack.imgur.com/c3UKL.jpg
https://youtu.be/282XF5vBTFM?t=28

@juretrn

Radar blocker is normal solution for stealths, some UAV/UCAV use it, F-117 use it,
I think B-2 have radar blocker too, I saw earlier some photo where it can be seen in intake, I don't know was that photoshop or real.

Japs in their studies of future fighter consider them they even go that far they consider integrated it with engine where engine IGV and engine fan blades would be design in such way so radar return would be minimal.


And I almost forgot flying bath tub, F-32.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 17 Mar 2019, 13:13
by mixelflick
Bet that's the last "deployment' we see for a LONG time...

It is interesting though, to watch how Russia chips away at the SU-57's problems and further develops it. In much the same way they did on the Sukhoi T-10, culminating in the SU-35. Decades and decades of refinement in that case led to a world class fighter, albeit we have little combat experience to properly evaluate it.

It was supposed to replace SU-27's 1:1 in Russian service, but I think that's a pipe dream at this point. They're going to have to settle for a mish mash of various Flanker types, and perhaps a token amount of Mig-35's and SU-57's.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 18 Mar 2019, 05:10
by charlielima223
milosh wrote:
Yeap but model have classic nozzle because back then they didn't know Russian will test something like LOAN nozzle for Su-57:

https://i.stack.imgur.com/c3UKL.jpg
https://youtu.be/282XF5vBTFM?t=28



Cheezy video btw. As its looking the PAKFA wont be a "Top Gun" any time soon.
Happy St Patricks day! :pint:
As I type this I'm already 3 shots into Jameson and got Boondock Saints playing in the background!

At any rate; just because it looks like it doesn't mean it will be as good. The Chinese are even doing their own take on the LOAN design and have incorporated a TVC design similar to the F-16VISTA

Image
Image

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 18 Mar 2019, 07:37
by marsavian
milosh wrote:
marsavian wrote:Only from the front and rear. From the sides its average is around 15 dBsm which is completely unstealthy and frankly I can't see being made up with RAS/RAM. From the sides the Su-57 would be very visible to both fighter and missile radar.


Yeap but model have classic nozzle because back then they didn't know Russian will test something like LOAN nozzle for Su-57.


The nozzle is only a small part of the 15 dBsm, it's mostly the long flattish side profile. This will have to be alleviated using RAS/RAM ... if they can.

Image

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 18 Mar 2019, 09:23
by milosh
charlielima223 wrote:
milosh wrote:
Yeap but model have classic nozzle because back then they didn't know Russian will test something like LOAN nozzle for Su-57:

https://i.stack.imgur.com/c3UKL.jpg
https://youtu.be/282XF5vBTFM?t=28



Cheezy video btw. As its looking the PAKFA wont be a "Top Gun" any time soon.
Happy St Patricks day! :pint:
As I type this I'm already 3 shots into Jameson and got Boondock Saints playing in the background!

At any rate; just because it looks like it doesn't mean it will be as good. The Chinese are even doing their own take on the LOAN design and have incorporated a TVC design similar to the F-16VISTA

Image
Image


In stealth tech look is important. You can't have stealthy nozzle with classic round one. So new nozzle surely is better in stealth therm. Also that is prototype nozzle one of them, becuase I saw at least two different nozzles for Su-57,

This one which was in Salyut factory, saw-toothed edge of serrated feather:
http://in24.org/wp-content/uploads/2017 ... F-30-2.jpg

and this one Saturn nozzle:
https://cdn.aviaforum.ru/images/2017/11 ... 958d4e.jpg

It look similar to one in video but feather tip is totally different and it more rounded then one on video.

So it look like nozzle RCS is important for Russians. And you have that Saturn flat nozzle which is in development (latest interview with Saturn CEO) it isn't for Su-57 even though it is nozzle for AL-51 engine.

Chinese nozzle looks really rounded from side, maybe it is new nozzle for J-10/11, I doubt they would use such rounded nozzle on stealth.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 18 Mar 2019, 12:18
by madrat
Looks like purely research. They even scabbed on mounts for a camera system to stare at the nozzle.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 19 Mar 2019, 04:38
by charlielima223
marsavian wrote:
The nozzle is only a small part of the 15 dBsm, it's mostly the long flattish side profile. This will have to be alleviated using RAS/RAM ... if they can.

Image


I doubt RAM can do much about the PAKFA's side profile signature to a radar. From the front view the PAKFA appears to have LO complaint design

Image

yet as you travel further back the shaping of the engine nacelle changes to the more conventional rounded lobes

Image

Image

The same cannot be said of the F-22 that maintains a constant angle throughout the majority of the fuselage

Image

Image

Image

and the F-35 using complex blended cuvatures
Image

Image

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 19 Mar 2019, 08:07
by milosh
@charlielima223

He mean reduction in RCS value because without RAM&RAS, Su-57 sides have big RCS as you can see in study. With RAM&RAS it could be noticable lower.

Re: SU-57 deployed to Syria

Unread postPosted: 29 Mar 2019, 19:05
by falcon.16
milosh wrote:@charlielima223

He mean reduction in RCS value because without RAM&RAS, Su-57 sides have big RCS as you can see in study. With RAM&RAS it could be noticable lower.


Shapping is the bigger contribution to a litle RCS.

With a very good shapping and RAS+RAm you can get a VLO fighter.

With a not good Shapping + (RAM+RAS) you can not get a VLO Fighter.

If it should so easy than only put RAM+RAS, Superhornet would be a VLO fighter same or Rafale or EF.-