Russian F-35 equivalent at MAKS 2021?

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

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7287
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post22 Jul 2021, 16:39

milosh wrote: This confirm it was design for foreign buyer because RuAF put more emphasis on load capacity and range then on RCS.




milosh wrote: Sukhoi official was talking about Checkmate and he said it could replace everything RuAF curentily use expect Su-57. Especailly if they use fighter and ucav combo.



milosh you told me Russia wasn't even going to bother with this thing?? now its going to replace everything in the Russian inventory except for 76 airplanes?

Thats a helluva plot twist.
Choose Crews
Offline

milosh

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1378
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 23:40
  • Location: Serbia, Belgrade

Unread post22 Jul 2021, 16:47

XanderCrews wrote:
milosh wrote: This confirm it was design for foreign buyer because RuAF put more emphasis on load capacity and range then on RCS.


milosh wrote: Sukhoi official was talking about Checkmate and he said it could replace everything RuAF curentily use expect Su-57. Especailly if they use fighter and ucav combo.



milosh you told me Russia wasn't even going to bother with this thing?? now its going to replace everything in the Russian inventory except for 76 airplanes?

Thats a helluva plot twist.


Of course Sukhoi is trying to sell this bird because numbers matters especially because they want as lot as possible price. So normally they will try to sell it to RuAF but I don't see why RuAF wouldn't be interested in AL-51 version and with ucav combo even lower loadout isn't problem anymore. And for Sukhoi it would be cozy if Russia pay development of AL-51 version :mrgreen:
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 26210
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post22 Jul 2021, 17:51

"zandu' had me chuckling with overpage: "...Speaking of infants, most programs their first few years take lots of money in, and only produce poop, bear that in mind...." Meanwhile here is an explanation & other stuff about teaser video earlier.
Russia’s New SU-75 Checkmate Promises A Lot. Can It Deliver? [long article prolly best read at source]
22 Jul 2021 Reuben Johnson

"The Su-75 Checkmate, produced by Sukhoi, is marketing itself as a single engine stealth fighter on par, but cheaper, than the F-35.

KYIV, UKRAINE: On Tuesday, Russia’s Unified Aircraft-Building Corporation (OAK) and the Sukhoi Aircraft Company used the opening day of the Moscow Aviation and Space Expo (MAKS) to take the wraps off a new single-engine stealth fighter. The roll-out of this airplane, now called the Su-75 Checkmate Light Tactical Aircraft, was made the centerpiece of the traditional Day One visit to the show by Russian President Vladimir Putin.

It’s a new design that Moscow hopes will create a niche for its combat aircraft industry in the export market. Their intent is to upend sales by competitor aircraft built by other nations — the Swedish JAS-39E/F Gripen, the Lockheed Martin F-35. and even the Shenyang J-35, a Chinese plane in development even longer than the Su-75 — by offering a cheaper, Russian-made alternative.

But there are serious questions to be answered about both the marketing strategy and the plane’s technical capabilities, which could combine to add the Su-75 to the long list of military aviation programs that never found life as an export....

...Russia proposed cooperation on the development of the Su-75 to the United Arab Emirates (UAE) in 2017. An agreement on the two nations sharing the cost of the program was to have been signed at the November 2017 Dubai Air Show. But an 11th hour announcement that Washington would reverse previous policy and allow allied Arab states to acquire the F-35 scuttled the deal.

Still, a promotional video released just a few days ago reveals that Russia has not given up on a sale to the oil-rich and financial powerhouse Gulf state. The film opens with a pilot in the UAE packing up his flight kit after receiving a scramble alert on his smartphone.

This scene is followed by pilots in three countries looked upon by the Russians as the most near-term customers — India, Vietnam and Argentina — receiving a similar return-to-base signal. They all join up in a group with pilots of a dozen other nations at an aerodrome as the aircraft is rolled out of a hangar. The message: Su-75 can be another multinational program — just like the F-35.

The aircraft is not going to be available any time soon, however. First flight of the new prototype is at least two years away. A series-manufactured version at least five to seven years in the future. And nations that are seen as the best prospects for a foreign sale may not be in a situation to wait that long.

Design and Performance Details
Discussions with Russian industry sources, plus a July 20th evening presentation by OAK General Director Yuri Slyusar and Su-75 Chief Designer Aleksei Bulatov have provided details about the program.

The project has moved beyond the paper design and mock-up stage, with the aircraft shown this week being an actual prototype demonstrator. Its design utilizes lessons learned from the Su-57 and is powered by one of the larger aircraft’s two 5th-generation izdeliye 30 engines.... [THEN MUCH MORE DETAIL so best go to URL]

...The design team also claims that there is a high wing lift efficiency associated with the design. Particular attention has been given to the “V”-shaped vertical tail which accounts for part of the aircraft’s low RCS.

Overall, while the aircraft is being presented as a new development, it is reportedly based on a lightweight fighter concept originally developed at Mikoyan Design Bureau more than 7 years ago. One long-time Russian aircraft industry specialist in Moscow told Breaking Defense, “it is somewhat of a surprise that this design is now being credited to Sukhoi as most of the serious work on this kind of a single-engine platform was performed at MiG long ago.”

Program Priorities...
...[A] carrier variant of the Su-75 would almost certainly be proposed for the Indian Navy as a replacement for the MiG-29K carrier-capable fighter the force currently operates. The design team has also been evaluating the possibility of a two-seat variant, as well as an unmanned version, but there are no prospective buyers that have expressed interest in either of these options.

The big question mark is whether Moscow’s industry can carry through with this design concept to turn out a fully functional aircraft. The defense industrial base has suffered considerable contractions in its capacity and overall size since 2017. Critical personnel have also died in the last year due to the COVID pandemic, to include the general designer of the NIIP radar design bureau, Yuri Beliy.

While the Sukhoi designers have proven they can turn out an actual prototype of this new aircraft, the non-ferrous/ composite materials used in its construction may still be a question mark. In his presentation, Slyusar stated that it would take at least a year to complete the static “shake and bake” tests of the aircraft’s structure. This will be a real test of Russia’s composite materials industry, which is not nearly as well-developed as it is in the US or Europe.

Those materials are key to the aircraft’s low RCS. Not only would they have to be produced to extreme tolerances and the sections joined together without so much as a micron between them, but they would also have to have their radar-absorbing properties “baked-in” at the kiln for the aircraft to be a low-maintenance platform as advertised. But Russia’s approach to stealth in the past has been the opposite — a heavy reliance on coatings and appliques that are labor-intensive and require top-to-bottom refurbishing after every flight.

The other factor is that what makes a modern fighter aircraft effective in combat are its on-board systems, which in the past have been the proverbial “long pole in the tent” of Russian fighter designs. The izdeliye 30 engine is not in series-production yet and is still completing flight tests. Also, according to industry sources, Russia still has not been able to design a cost-effective AESA radar set and has problems with the technology required to manufacture the radar’s transit/receive modules.

Both the OAK and Sukhoi officials state that the airplane should make a first flight in two years and that series production could begin in as soon as four, although most experienced observers state that 5-7 years is a more realistic. Program projections such as these have a tendency to always move to the right — even in countries with more than one generation of experience in designing stealth aircraft.

Therefore, it is not unreasonable to suggest that the full-scale production of the Su-75 could be a much longer time in coming — if ever."

Source: https://breakingdefense.com/2021/07/rus ... t-deliver/
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

durahawk

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 548
  • Joined: 03 Feb 2012, 20:35

Unread post22 Jul 2021, 17:53

ricnunes wrote:Well, Apache pilots don't have and never had any problems aiming and firing unguided rockets with great precision and they use HMDs (IHADSS) for that effect. So no, HMDs wouldn't or shouldn't have such problems. :wink:
Oh and by the way, the Marines do the same with their AH-1Z attack helicopters and UH-1Y utility helicopters (Thales "Top Owl" HMD).


It's a fair point with the rockets, although I think the AH-1Z and Whiskey still have a HUD. The problem set for jet fixed gun strafe is quite a bit different than a slewable ground stabilized cannon on a helicopter though. The speeds involved afford less opportunity to walk your fire onto the target. On the other hand, helicopter HMD's have more vibrations to deal with.

Again, the point is that I don't look at the HUD in the wooden Checkmate with disdain for antiquated technology. I think it's a practical backup in the event of HMD failure and generally less error prone way of targeting forward firing weapons.
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3373
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post22 Jul 2021, 17:58

XanderCrews wrote:We should be looking at this from a very pessimistic, or at the least skeptical point of view. I don't believe they are planning on doing multiple versions necessarily either. I think they are putting variants out there to see what people want, and then they will buy that first. The alternative to that goes like this:

Russia will develop multiple variants simultaneously (JSF?) and thats going to require a lot of money

or more likely,

Russia will propose 3 variants, pick 1, and then if someone wants the other variants they will be on the hook for development costs.


I fully agree Xander!

Personally and in case this 'Checkmate' aircraft or whatever it is called ends up being successful - and with successful I'm outright NOT counting or outright excluding ALL the BS of being capable of supercruising, have lots or range, etc... - then the following will happen:
- This will be Russia's main 5th gen fighter aircraft! The Su-57 will be something 'interim' like some here already mentioned and thus only a few Su-57s will ever be built.
- There will be only one variant/version of 'Checkmate' or if there will be more than 1 variant of this aircraft then the diferences won't be that big (or even 'huge') as mentioned for example by milosh.
There could be somehow different variants if these are to be paid by the customer like for example happened with the Su-30, where you have the Su-30MKK (for China), the Su-30MKI (for India), Su-30MKV (for Venezuela), etc... but something tells me that there will be only one "main variant" of the 'Checkmate' just like happens with the Su-35 (which supersedes the Su-30) due to cost constraints (both acquisition and sustainment).
- Resuming, I believe that Russia will only get a single variant of 'Checkmate' (and again, in case of being 'successful') which will replace a myriad of aircraft like the Mig-29s, most or even all Flanker family, Su-25s, etc... and IMO not several variants like one to replace the Su-25 and another to replace the Mig-29 and so on like 'proposed' by milosh.
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call ECM and pretend like it’s new.
Offline
User avatar

durahawk

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 548
  • Joined: 03 Feb 2012, 20:35

Unread post22 Jul 2021, 18:06

XanderCrews wrote:Technology didn't exist to do HMD with Raptor, and it didn't even have helmet cueing at all since they ran out of money. JHMCS equipped hornets and F-16s have better helmets. F-22 didn't even get queuing until 12 years after it was in service after it was added retroactively.


I still don't think the Raptor has HMCS, Scorpion was tested, but to my knowledge it was never fielded fleetwide.
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3373
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post22 Jul 2021, 18:18

durahawk wrote:It's a fair point with the rockets, although I think the AH-1Z and Whiskey still have a HUD.


Nope, the AH-1Z does not have any HUD. It's all in the Helmet (or HMD)! Look here (specially in page 36):
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1KOXlxP ... sp=sharing

And neither the UH-1Y has a HUD.

The AH-1W did have a HUD but here we're talking about an older variant of the AH-1 which was already retired by the Marines and fully replaced by the AH-1Z.


durahawk wrote:The problem set for jet fixed gun strafe is quite a bit different than a slewable ground stabilized cannon on a helicopter though. The speeds involved afford less opportunity to walk your fire onto the target.


That's nothing that more processing power which modern computers have plenty of cannot solve :wink:


durahawk wrote:On the other hand, helicopter HMD's have more vibrations to deal with.


This, I imagine could potentially be a problem and IMO a quite bigger one than high speeds because vibrations should be much more unpredictable and thus to be taken into account with calculations.
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call ECM and pretend like it’s new.
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7287
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post22 Jul 2021, 19:35

durahawk wrote:
XanderCrews wrote:Technology didn't exist to do HMD with Raptor, and it didn't even have helmet cueing at all since they ran out of money. JHMCS equipped hornets and F-16s have better helmets. F-22 didn't even get queuing until 12 years after it was in service after it was added retroactively.


I still don't think the Raptor has HMCS, Scorpion was tested, but to my knowledge it was never fielded fleetwide.


I believe you are correct actually. I thought it got it about 4 years ago, but that appeared to be a no go :doh: I think that kind of proves the point though. Gen 4 on the face, Gen 5 in the jet. :mrgreen:
Choose Crews
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7287
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post22 Jul 2021, 19:46

spazsinbad wrote:
Program Priorities...
...[A] carrier variant of the Su-75 would almost certainly be proposed for the Indian Navy as a replacement for the MiG-29K carrier-capable fighter the force currently operates. The design team has also been evaluating the possibility of a two-seat variant, as well as an unmanned version, but there are no prospective buyers that have expressed interest in either of these options.




Su-75A CTOL
Su-75B uaVTOL
Su-75C Carrier variant


Image
Choose Crews
Offline

milosh

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1378
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 23:40
  • Location: Serbia, Belgrade

Unread post22 Jul 2021, 19:55

Info which we missed:

Однако теперь на презентации Булатов заявил, что "двигатель будет в классе 14,5-16 т.


Bulatov said that "the engine will be in the 14.5-16 ton class."

So it is something between AL-41 and AL-51, probable AL-41 with increased thrust and reduce service life or maybe AL-41 with some AL-51 tech.

14.5tons is emergence thrust of AL-41 something like Vmax for F-15. Normal max thurst of AL-41 is 13.9tons.
Offline
User avatar

element1loop

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1804
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2015, 05:35
  • Location: Australia

Unread post23 Jul 2021, 01:40

milosh wrote:Info which we missed: Bulatov said that "the engine will be in the 14.5-16 ton class."

So it is something between AL-41 and AL-51, probable AL-41 with increased thrust and reduce service life or maybe AL-41 with some AL-51 tech.


Sukhoi needs the most powerful engine it can get, there is no room for anything else.

AL-51 ... what's that? Never heard of it. Plugged that into a search engine and came up with one or two completely unsourced single sentences referring to such a critter.

A sub-$30 mill 5th-gen is a crackhead's pipe-dream. Without doing it right with the right engine they will not get a 20:1 exchange ratio against Su35. Skimping on the engine would be false-economy and just make it much less attractive for export. 'Hotting-up' an AL41 is a terrible idea. P&W tested F135 to >50,000 lb with 43,000 lb (static) in service (44,000 lb was originally intended).

What would 400 hr TBO do to F-35A availability, CPFH and export numbers? Would USAF operate more than 100 of them, as an F-117A replacement? And what would that fleet of 100 F-35A cost?

If the Russians do this they need scale, and they need the best no-compromise engine they can possibly put in it.
Accel + Alt + VLO + DAS + MDF + Radial Distance = LIFE . . . Always choose Stealth
Offline
User avatar

element1loop

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1804
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2015, 05:35
  • Location: Australia

Unread post23 Jul 2021, 02:16

mixelflick wrote:Since they're only $30 million/copy, I ordered 2.


lol

The idea they sell multiple hardware and code versions just blindly ignores the 16 years since F-35 flew, and is still in IOC, due to system-of-systems integration, testing and refinement to deliver the actual 5th-gen 'information-dominance' advantage. There's no cutting corners to get that on the cheap.
Accel + Alt + VLO + DAS + MDF + Radial Distance = LIFE . . . Always choose Stealth
Offline
User avatar

element1loop

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1804
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2015, 05:35
  • Location: Australia

Unread post23 Jul 2021, 03:39

durahawk wrote:
ricnunes wrote:Again, the point is that I don't look at the HUD in the wooden Checkmate with disdain for antiquated technology. I think it's a practical backup in the event of HMD failure and generally less error prone way of targeting forward firing weapons.


If we were worried about backup/redundancy the jet would have two engines. :wink:

As things are backup instruments are almost not needed as the primary instruments and screens have so much redundancy they typically degrade gracefully, a pilot does not need a HUD as a backup, nor its added mass on the jet. With a reliable HMD and primary instrument displays it's safe to remove the HUD as then the large primary instrument display plus autopilot are the HMD's flight data backup. Both could fail in combat but there's a small backup screen in F-35s with independent air-data sensor which is most likely cross-checked with a backup GPS/INS. The pilot still doesn't need a HUD backup to get it down, plus they can follow a wingman for nav and approach.

Early British Tempest CGI showed a full size HUD as well but their static display seemed to have a simple backup micro HUD, which may just be airspeed and altitude for a visual aid to finals.

Image

I'd be very surprised if Sukhoi didn't include an HMD to provide 5th-gen integration advantage in combat, and remove the HUD for a delivered production version.
Accel + Alt + VLO + DAS + MDF + Radial Distance = LIFE . . . Always choose Stealth
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7287
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post23 Jul 2021, 06:40

element1loop wrote:
milosh wrote:Info which we missed: Bulatov said that "the engine will be in the 14.5-16 ton class."

So it is something between AL-41 and AL-51, probable AL-41 with increased thrust and reduce service life or maybe AL-41 with some AL-51 tech.


Sukhoi needs the most powerful engine it can get, there is no room for anything else.

AL-51 ... what's that? Never heard of it. Plugged that into a search engine and came up with one or two completely unsourced single sentences referring to such a critter.



same here, I couldn't even find a wikipedia page on it. I found 1 diagram. (I think)

A sub-$30 mill 5th-gen is a crackhead's pipe-dream. Without doing it right with the right engine they will not get a 20:1 exchange ratio against Su35. Skimping on the engine would be false-economy and just make it much less attractive for export. 'Hotting-up' an AL41 is a terrible idea. P&W tested F135 to >50,000 lb with 43,000 lb (static) in service (44,000 lb was originally intended).

What would 400 hr TBO do to F-35A availability, CPFH and export numbers? Would USAF operate more than 100 of them, as an F-117A replacement? And what would that fleet of 100 F-35A cost?


I don't know either. I also don't know how much better their engine reliability, engine serviceability, and engine support is. Russian engine depots were experiencing terrible turn around times at some points plus expense, to the point where even Africa couldn't take it anymore and SAFAT emerged. This isn't an F414. There are things like Algeria returning their Fulcrums, and people here saying Mig-29s cost what Flankers do. (aw yes the "low end" fighter there cost as much as the big one)

element1loop wrote:
mixelflick wrote:Since they're only $30 million/copy, I ordered 2.


lol

The idea they sell multiple hardware and code versions just blindly ignores the 16 years since F-35 flew, and is still in IOC, due to system-of-systems integration, testing and refinement to deliver the actual 5th-gen 'information-dominance' advantage. There's no cutting corners to get that on the cheap.


I just can't get on board with the idea theyre going to do triple the work load, at triple the price all so that some guy can kick the tires on them and say "I'll take 4" after they've blown billions of dollars on the other versions that no one is interested in.

The Russians just can't be that stupid. This is very much "Gripen NG" style market shopping. They offered like 6 different versions of that thing, whichever one sold first would be the "Gripen E" If not for Brazil there would not be a 2 seat version. If not for Brazil there would be no single piece cockpit display. Sweden was downright stingy and wanted none of that.

The proposed EW version has never seen the light of day. The heavy fuel Dutch pitch of course is ancient history. even in Finland Saab/Sweden have had to fall over themselves to offer capability Gripen E doesn't have but will co fund if they're given the contract. So in every case the "highly customizable for customer needs!" Gripen is that way because if you want something on it, the customer is 100 percent on the hook for developing it.

its literally "no we dont have that! but we are so adaptable you can add it yourself after you buy it for additional cost! we are like an iphone!"

Wow what a deal!! I pay full price for a feature you don't offer for an already lackluster deal and then pay even more!!

its all "wide open!" not because there's a plethora of great options ready to chose from, but because they have no idea what people will be willing to pay for. nothing is ready, and they have no idea what this Frankenstein will cost because -- AGAIN-- they can't tell you what features will even be included which might you know alter the price in surprising and drastic ways. I'm honestly terrified someone is going to ask for a 3 seat version. or one with side by side seating. :mrgreen:

we don't know what it will be, but we know the cost? Thats a pretty amazing thing... most people have to know what they are price estimating before they estimate.
Choose Crews
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7287
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post23 Jul 2021, 07:06

Image

obligatory
Choose Crews
PreviousNext

Return to Modern Military Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: wrightwing and 23 guests