SU-57 deployed to Syria

To quote garrya:

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 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.

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.

Do the Russkies not have this?

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

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.

Then an F-22 can fly above it inverted.. Don't forget the Polaroid.

Do the Russkies not have this?

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

lol.. China's got one

I thought the russian's use a flanker like a cat bird, test engines and radar in them.

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.

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!

A little more range but fewer features.. meh.

If the backend was the same wouldn't the features be the same, just benefit from the larger array and potentially higher peak power?

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.

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