FalconDudeAre we going to ignore the photo of the plane with the utterly non LO optical pod attached?
FalconDude…and you have long ignored repeated attempts to educate you that the Su-57 will incorporate CNT/fullerene RAM in its (widespread) PMC radar absorbent structures. Research that RUSNANO and OKB Sukhoi initiated as far back as 2007, before the first metal was even cut on T-50-1.
http://www.up-pro.ru/library/innovations/management/okb-sukhoi.html
One does not preclude the other.
FalconDudeHuh? Dig up the construction photos. It uses a conductively loaded carbon fiber shell backing with absorbent adhesive tiles covering it and then absorbent paint coatings on top of that. It already has RAM. Color (a property resulting from a material’s electrical permittivity and magnetic permeability in the visible spectrum) is irrelevant. It is only the conductivity, electrical permittivity, and magnetic permeability in the microwave region that must be controlled.
I have long suggested the production Su-57 surface wise will look exactly like the current flying test-beds. Other than some different antennas and sensors don’t expect the production plane to look any different.
FalconDudeNot as much of a beacon as the aircraft using its radar against the Su-57.
I must have missed something. Did anyone demonstrate ability to detect LPI radar reception?
FalconDudeDIRCM is doable with faceted windows, there are several examples around. Even if we concede the point for argument’s sake, what bearing do the DIRCM apertures have on the IRST, which is an entirely separate system? Frankly speaking, along with the variable intake ramps (which I still suspect will disappear once the Izd. 30 engine comes online), the spherical IRST & DIRCM windows actually are among the very few criticisms of the Su-57 low-observables design whichI can rationally accept and follow.
Even if we assume that the IRST has 0% contribution to the aircrafts RCS when turned backwards/downwards so the special treatment protects it, are we accepting that when the pilot turns it on, it becomes a beacon?
FalconDudeThis thread is a bit barren as of late. Have we no news from any russian sites regarding our favorite russian plane?
FalconDudeThe leaked information about the 100 F-35s to Japan (interest) is another way of pressuring Turkey not to go ahead with the purchase of the S-400! 100 is exactly the number of planes Turkey has ordered.
FalconDudeWhat it means for Su-57 ? It means that it does going on a full combat mission. It is a test but it’s real.
Perhaps, but the photos from the deployment in Syria show the planes exactly as they fly for testing, i.e. what most of us in here identify as -no RAM treated surface- ..how does one explain that?
FalconDudeBy western standards, very little makes sense in the development of this program. The deployment of (so sensitive) prototypes in a war zone makes no sense by any standards.
I can’t make heads or tails of any of this.
I won’t be surprised with any announcement or news about this program, from complete cancellation, to mounting a railgun on it.
FalconDudeHave we any news on the current state/status of the PAKFA program?
FalconDudeWhat are the major differences between the current engine and the idz.30 ?
FalconDudeExcellent Austin!!
FalconDudeSo have we got any news? Is the PAKFA project on its last legs or not? No news ? no whispers ? no interviews ?
Greek aviation site : https://www.ptisidiastima.com/su57-not-quite-dead-yet/ (you need google translate) suggests the project is not quite dead yet, but faces problems with :
Sensors and sensor fusion
software
Radar signature
engines
with the engines being the most important one (which probably condemns the project)-This is confusing to me at least, as the current engines should be powerful enough for operational requirements, especially if they can push the plane to supercruise. Other aircraft have entered service with interim engines in the past. Am I wrong?
comments, opinions, contributions?
FalconDudeYou do understand that PakFa entered development late, due to Russia strives after fall of SU?
You do understand what the acronym PakFa stands for?
You do understand that in case of Russia, if they gonna make the PakFa really capable, then it will cost em, and Russia can’t throw $Billions around?
I don’t see how these have any connection with what I was trying to say, sorry.
Gutenev is probably a Senator sitting in some Russian Defense committee. That does not make him a Need to Know or a decision maker in any way.
I think people established that he heads a commitee in the Duma(?), but that is perhaps less important, what is important is he himself is referring to a statement made by the deputy prime-minister. Are we to not attach any significance to what the deputy prime minister said either? (Note, I have no Idea what he deputy prime-minister’s original statements were, just go by what the text infers)
Well, No ,no, no and against no.
Russians have never had anything that would even getting close to the concept and the production share of the low end multirole fighters of the USAF.
Both during the Cold War than today they had a vaste array of planes, each covering a well specific mission.
So there will not be NEVER a plane like the F-35 accounting for the 80% of the total fighter line in russian service, like there were not a single counterpart of the F-16 during Cold War but several specialized models (ever more than one for a given role like in the case of Su-17/Mig-27).
It was stated however many times over here by our more learned contributors that the Su-57 is mainly antagonising the F-35. I am not judging whether this is right or wrong, I merely posted a piece of information, that if true (as I don’t know that) could mean a lot for the development targets of said Su-57. That’s all.
May I also point out that one of the criticism points around the F-22 was based on the existance of only 187 of these things. Now someone -high up enough- suggests there might even be less than that for the Su-57 and no one bats an eye? I thought that was the point.
In any case, these statements (by the russian officials) were made a few days ago. Have we had any response from ‘other’ Russian officials that may or may not know more? Was there any response at all? Not a single journalist cared to write an article in any russian speaking website or newspaper about these?
FalconDudeWhy is everyone ignoring the main point?
Some things have been stated, by apparently, some officials. Questions remain..
*Who are these guys?
*Under what authority are they involved in Defence programmes?
*What would the extend of their involvement be?
*What is their track record with making public statements of fact?
*Russian speaking, members, will you please read that article/statement and give us your opinion on what it was about and what it was saying?
Note *******Bellum beat me to this, I’ll read his post and then may delete this one.
Note2 ******I’ve read Bellum’s post, but I will leave this up, I don’t want anyone to think I take things down.
Right, at the point…
Oh, it was available online, sold. I certainly don’t find the reason to post it in the Su-57 thread “evident” at all so please do “school” me, if you weren’t in fact just trolling and now unable to justify your dumb behavior. Even posting that piece of obvious fake news in F-35 thread would have been dubious, because the crediblity was so low, for anyone with a working brain. Maybe if there was an argument about Iran buying Su-57 to beef up their air defense, then you might have had an argument to post that rubbish, but that wasn’t the case.
The story was re-published by at least onε respectable aviation website (Greek) other than the original source which I linked at swerve’s request.
The Greek link:
https://www.ptisidiastima.com/f-35i-reached-as-far-as-isfahan/
Google translate will help you. Unless you only deem worthy, sources that you use, in which case please provide us with a link !
As to the reason I posted it in that thread, I think it is quite clear. If the technological (and generational) equivalent of the Su-57 can indeed achieve such a feat, then it is directly related to the development of the subject plane, no?
Isn’t the F-35 the plane the Su-57 is supposed to counter and/or match? (and the similar or better F-22)?
Suppose we go back in time and Russia is trying to build a mach 2 plane to counter a US alleged 2 mach plane and the latest news infer a performance of mach 1.9 for the Russian plane, when news break out that a radar caught the US plane doing mach 2.4, would you NOT want to comment on it on that thread??????
As for
Even the idea that the Russians would specifically want to expose the actually RCS ready aircraft to hostile radars is idiotic. They have plenty of radar sites where they can test Su-57’s radar signature to heart’s content. The fact that ActionJackson is jizzing himself, shouldn’t impress you so much.
Yes, I posted something very similar at the time…
And yet they flew it all the way to Syria, a heavily contested EW space!! I wonder how you interpret that, because weapons tests don’t stop others from snooping at you.
And it brings me to the last point….why should we take your word and not that of an official (according to the info you brought forward.) Unless fools are regularly in officials positions in current Russia politics stage.
Sign In
