Su-57 FELON

Military aircraft - Post cold war aircraft, including for example B-2, Gripen, F-18E/F Super Hornet, Rafale, and Typhoon.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

milosh

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 961
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 23:40
  • Location: Serbia, Belgrade

Unread post24 Dec 2019, 21:27

mixelflick wrote:If this thing were anywhere near as stealthy from the front as the F-22, you can bet the Indians and Chinese would be all over it. India would be ordering it by the squadron and China would at least want several examples. But they're not, and that's a very telling fact when considering just how "low observable" the Felon is....


Chinese have J-20 which is also VLO design. So no need to get Su-57 at all.

Indians? Well Indians have much bigger holes to close then getting stealth, for example they still didn't replace MiG-21.

And Su-57 as we see isn't finished product. First serial Su-57 crashed. But that doesn't mean it isn't VLO design.
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3483
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post24 Dec 2019, 22:01

milosh wrote:
wrightwing wrote:
mixelflick wrote:It's stealth is marginal at best, and the Russians know it.


Exactly! You're not gonna get from ~.3m^2 to .0001m^2 by changing the engine nozzle, and adding radar blockers.


!?!

It is study about shape not about real RCS value.

Model in study don't have RAM and RAS it is metal or plastic. Same as models of F-22/35 which knowan used for comparison.

At best, the Su-57 is an LO design, and not even necessarily an all aspect one at that. There isn't enough RAM/RAS, radar blockers, or nozzle designs, that can change that. Not even the Russians have made such a ridiculous claim.
Offline

knowan

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 312
  • Joined: 24 Jul 2018, 10:39

Unread post24 Dec 2019, 22:47

milosh wrote:All three graphs are from different authors which imply different methods and conditions.


Same author, just different studies using same methods and standards.

It's treats each plane as a single metal object, no exterior objects like IR sensors or DIRCM, no visible engine face for the Su-57, no RAM coatings.

They are studies of the stealth shaping of the aircraft, and the Su-57 is objectively inferior in that regard (and also inferior in the things the studies exclude).


milosh wrote:So Frontal RCS is close to F-22.


About an order of magnitude worse.
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3483
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post24 Dec 2019, 23:21

knowan wrote:






milosh wrote:So Frontal RCS is close to F-22.


About an order of magnitude worse.

That's being very generous. It's several orders of magnitude worse, according to Russian and Indian sources.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6408
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post25 Dec 2019, 01:18

wrightwing wrote:
At best, the Su-57 is an LO design, and not even necessarily an all aspect one at that. There isn't enough RAM/RAS, radar blockers, or nozzle designs, that can change that. Not even the Russians have made such a ridiculous claim.



Best way to look at the Su-57 is as a Semi-Stealthy Flanker... :wink:
Offline

madrat

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2513
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2010, 03:12

Unread post25 Dec 2019, 01:36

Even if it's not an F-35 level of stealth, it is where the Russians need to be for relevance.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6408
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post25 Dec 2019, 01:55

madrat wrote:Even if it's not an F-35 level of stealth, it is where the Russians need to be for relevance.



That is the issue as the Su-57 isn't relevant. As a matter of fact it's really not much of a concern to any of the major players! This doesn't bold well for Putin's revised Russian Empire.


"IMHO"
Offline
User avatar

doge

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 387
  • Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 16:07

Unread post25 Dec 2019, 03:20

From Su-57 displayed on the ground at MAKS 2019. 8) (I recently learned about this photo.)
Can the Su-57 not close the weapons bay exactly, properly!? :doh:
Attachments
Su-57 weapons bay 2.jpg
Su-57 weapons bay 1.jpeg
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3483
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post25 Dec 2019, 04:32

doge wrote:From Su-57 displayed on the ground at MAKS 2019. 8) (I recently learned about this photo.)
Can the Su-57 not close the weapons bay exactly, properly!? :doh:

That's not even Chinese level fit/finish, much less approaching F-22/35 tolerances.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6408
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post25 Dec 2019, 06:11

wrightwing wrote:
doge wrote:From Su-57 displayed on the ground at MAKS 2019. 8) (I recently learned about this photo.)
Can the Su-57 not close the weapons bay exactly, properly!? :doh:

That's not even Chinese level fit/finish, much less approaching F-22/35 tolerances.



The Fit and Finish of the Chinese Stealth Fighters "appears" to be quite good....


J-20

J20FFQ.jpg


J-31

J31FFQ.jpg
Offline

disconnectedradical

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 868
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2010, 00:44
  • Location: San Antonio, TX

Unread post25 Dec 2019, 08:32

doge wrote:From Su-57 displayed on the ground at MAKS 2019. 8) (I recently learned about this photo.)
Can the Su-57 not close the weapons bay exactly, properly!? :doh:


The fit and finish of Su-57 isn’t great so far, but the model that was displayed at MAKS 2019 was a ground test airframe, you can tell by the lack of pitot tubes and meters. That means it’s one of the older ones so it shouldn’t be the best judge for the production aircraft, which crashed (though LO doesn’t seem to be a part of that accident).
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3743
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post25 Dec 2019, 12:39

madrat wrote:Even if it's not an F-35 level of stealth, it is where the Russians need to be for relevance.


"Relevance" as it pertains to 5th gen fighters would be stealthy/low observable (among other features). And the fact of the matter is that 10 years after its first flight, it still hasn't achieved anywhere near the level of stealth the US displayed in the ATF prototypes 30 years ago. Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised to find out its stealth is far inferior to the 1980's era F-117.

In the end, the SU-57 will be seen as a cautionary tale of what happens when too much ambition meets not enough money or expertise. You wind up with something that appears to have been stillborn...
Offline

vilters

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1153
  • Joined: 28 Sep 2009, 00:16

Unread post25 Dec 2019, 14:39

Long time ago, we got our first F-16's coming in to replace our F-104"s.

I was one of the first Western boys to see and touch a Mig-29.

At that time, remember this is many -many years ago and I said to myself ; It will take them at least a couple of decades to come close to our (by then obsolete) F-104 construction and finish quality.

One vivid memory stands out because a Mirage 2000 and Mig -29 are parked side by side.

Looking at the aerodynamic shape and build quality of the Mirage 2000 external fuel tanks, and then crawling under the Mig-29 to see its external belly tank was like a return to the stone age from construction/finish stand point.

Now on to the good (for the Mig-29) and not so good (ours) parts.


The Mig-29's where 100% reliable and flew the whole 2 weeks. (They changed 2 tires, that was all)

The Mirages needed the best part of a Transall in spare parts and we needed spare airplanes, and a C-130 of F-16 spare parts.
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3743
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post25 Dec 2019, 16:16

Corsair1963 wrote:
wrightwing wrote:
At best, the Su-57 is an LO design, and not even necessarily an all aspect one at that. There isn't enough RAM/RAS, radar blockers, or nozzle designs, that can change that. Not even the Russians have made such a ridiculous claim.



Best way to look at the Su-57 is as a Semi-Stealthy Flanker... :wink:


I'm beginning to think you're right. In fact, when I first saw it I thought to myself, "it looks like someone stepped on a Flanker". Now I'm sure it has some new tricks up its sleeve, but it appears based upon weapons integration one of those isn't going to be stealth, and perhaps not even super-cruise. Based on the weapons being developed for it, it appears the Russians are resigned to the fact it's going to be spotted first.

The reason for putting hypersonic and extremely long ranged, new air to air weapons on it is obvious: They want the ability to reach out and touch an enemy fighter soon after being discovered. The fact they'll be discovered first is a given, and a good bet is that it carries a home on jam hypersonic for said purpose. At the very least, they want the ability to get a weapon off and a home on jam hypersonic is the only way to get there. Carrying stock R-77's just isn't going to cut it...
Offline

madrat

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2513
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2010, 03:12

Unread post25 Dec 2019, 19:15

Or they realize that they will have to build a system to defend against both stealth and non-stealth forces. Their LO Felon fighters will be competitive in the near term with the Chinese and most of their neighbors. They do not have a Belt & Road play to compete with China. But they do have lots of firepower to obliterate it and that is diplomacy all by itself. The ulta-paranoia of the Russians makes sense when you consider how fragile Putin's regime could be to a coup d'etat. They cannot afford to let one creep up on them. We are talking existential threats. They certainly won't let a technology gap undermine them anymore than they'd let an internal threat get them. They'll just evolve to fit the threats.
PreviousNext

Return to Modern Military Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests