Su-57 Felon

NATO gave the Su-57 a name.

It couldn't be better even if the late Tom Clancy were to have written it, and we have to believe he is smiling down from the tactical high ground of the afterlife. The latest Russian-5th generation "stealth" combat aircraft, the Sukhoi Su-57, was assigned an official NATO reporting name this week: "Felon"

Source: https://amp.businessinsider.com/nato-ga ... on-2019-11

Next up J-20 "Jailbird"?

However, due to NATO nomenclature which requires fighters to start with "F", would that be "failbird"?

Felons deployed again to Syria...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgHF1OV01N4

Felons deployed again to Syria...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgHF1OV01N4

Just another PR stunt. Nothing more or less...

Notice they never hang around for very long, and details as to what they're testing are never revealed. This was entirely designed to show potential foreign customers the bird is "combat proven". It didn't work the first time.

This time is no different.

Did Airbus aid Russia with Su-57 VLO?

https://asymmetricd.wordpress.com/2019/ ... s-cover-5/

Pardon me if this was already discussed. I come here daily and do not remember seeing this.

Did Airbus aid Russia with Su-57 VLO?

https://asymmetricd.wordpress.com/2019/ ... s-cover-5/

Pardon me if this was already discussed. I come here daily and do not remember seeing this.

I didn't read anywhere in that article linking Airbus to the PAKFA. Besides IF (and that is a really big "if") Airbus did aid Russia with the PAKFA, then why does the PAKFA's LO design appear so half-ass?

Did Airbus aid Russia with Su-57 VLO?

https://asymmetricd.wordpress.com/2019/ ... s-cover-5/

Pardon me if this was already discussed. I come here daily and do not remember seeing this.

I didn't read anywhere in that article linking Airbus to the PAKFA. Besides IF (and that is a really big "if") Airbus did aid Russia with the PAKFA, then why does the PAKFA's LO design appear so half-ass?

He probable meant about Su-57 model is on one photo, which doesn't mean Airbus helped Sukhoi it only mean Airbus did analyse of Su-57 model, nothing new Chinese did that in 2016, I posted study couple of times, design is VLO if Su-57 have radar blocker and stealthy nozzles.

Stealthy nozzle we saw (nozzle which new engine use) radar blocker is mentioned many times, and in patent mentioned problem of engine radar visability which is dealt (doesn't specify how).

design is VLO if Su-57 have radar blocker and stealthy nozzles.

Doubtful, given the poor RCS of the Su-57 even without the visible engine faces and nozzles being modelled:

Su-57 flying in Syria

https://youtu.be/ixlKGAM6mhU

Nothing but PR....

Su-57 flying in Syria

https://youtu.be/ixlKGAM6mhU

Syria is a good proving ground for Russia's new aircraft, but I can't imagine any Western Air Force flying prototypes in a war zone. It really does speak to the desperation they have in selling this thing abroad. Nobody was fooled the first time they pulled this stunt. 2nd time around will be no different.

Actually considering the recent crash, they better get the 2/4 or however many they have there home as soon as possible. And given the cause of the crash is under investigation, that may now be extremely difficult. If they fly them home, they'll be taking a tremendous risk..

design is VLO if Su-57 have radar blocker and stealthy nozzles.

Doubtful, given the poor RCS of the Su-57 even without the visible engine faces and nozzles being modelled:

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

But let we say they are same.

So Frontal RCS is close to F-22.

So frontal aspect is definitely stealth design something which people tried to disprove on this forum from 2010, pushing nartive about clean 4.5gen at best in frontal RCS.

Now let we look side RCS. Graph isn't easy to analyse because there are four frequencies instead one but if you look in tables max side RCS is ~14.2 dBsm which is ~25m2, F-22/35 max side RCS from graphs is ~5dBsm or 3m2

While 3m2 look much smaller then 25m2 it isn't similar to VLO vs non VLO comparison. For example radar which can detect 3m2 from 100km will detect 30m2 from 200km, so Su-57 would be detect from less then two times longer distance then F-22/35 by same airborne radar, if we analyse your graph comparison and table values.

Rear RCS is pointless to compare because Su-57 model is without stealth nozzles.

It's stealth is marginal at best, and the Russians know it.

The proof is in the weapons being developed for it. Virtually all of them from extreme standoff ranges and several claiming to be "hypersonic". Compare and contrast that with the JDAM's dropped by F-22's, 35's and B-2's. They don't want it getting anywhere near a capable radar, because they know they'll be seen first. Unfortunately for them, it sounds like US stealth in exercises has performed even better than advertised. It's much more likely F-22's and 35's will see the Felon first, then deal with it accordingly.

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....

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'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.