LMFSNo i did use a layman term, i explained this better in my prior post, read it. The effect is the same, more Lift.
OK
This is the last post from me about your Pancake Landing Concept, cause PANCAKE is what will happen in 100% of the cases of you try this with a CTOL jet.
Hahaha good name! I guess we will see
LMFSIlya Kramnik with some thoughts on the planned purchase of Su-57 and some interesting price references:
Half a trillion for air supremacy: how much is the party su-57
Procurement of the fifth generation fighter for the Russian air force required, but will be costly
An excerpt concerning price:
The price of modern fighter jets is constantly growing — with the growth of their capabilities and design complexity. The first evaluation has already sounded: “Kommersant” suggested that 76 su-57 would cost about 170 billion roubles, which means the cost of the aircraft approximately 2.23 billion, however, there is concern that this estimate may be too optimistic .
The expected cost of the su-57 in the series, according to sources of “Izvestiya” in the aviation industry, amounted in 2014 to about 2.5 billion rubles, and today, with the influence of inflation over the years, reaches more than 3 billion rubles. With the announcement by Vladimir Putin of a 20% decline in industry prices on new fighter jets, the final value of the contract may indeed be close to the named value, but do not take this figure as the final price of a weapon system.
In export contracts, usually, in addition to supplying the actual aircraft, training of pilots and the supply of ammunition, ground vehicles and other equipment, the price of the planes themselves may be less than half of the total amount of the contract. In the “home” procurement supply planes, additional equipment and training is usually carried out under different articles of the budget of the different departments of the Ministry of defense, but not going away.
Given the fact that for the su-57 would require the purchase of a number of new weapons adapted to the use of the internal bays of fighter aircraft and the necessary ground equipment, the share of these costs can be much higher, and the total cost of the particular program of arms with all necessary additional costs can reach, by some estimates, 450-500 billion.
https://z5h64q92x9.net/proxy_u/ru-en…-partiia-su-57
EDIT: 3 billion was also my previous highest estimation (in line with previous comparisons to US hardware from Russian officials) for a cost VKS would be ready to face for a plane adding all the capability Su-57 can offer. It seems they negotiated with the industry and managed a price reduction of 20%, if 3 billion was really the baseline price this would mean a Su-57 for 2.4 billion, which would be a fantastic price (ca. $35 million). But I am not particularly optimistic that we will get to know real prices of the plane any time soon, at most after singing of the contract we may get an estimate based on official data.
LMFSLMFS. The Carnard on Su-30 is enhancing the Vortices going over the wings, in doing so you delay the wings from stalling.
I have no problem with you going technical on this.
But the effect is the same, the Carnards on Flankers do enhance the lift Curve due to you can have more AoA.
Higher AoA = more Lift.
You say these elements create a little lift as if they created it by themselves, so in the end not adding any substantial capacities beyond some reduction of the landing speed, when in fact they allow very big increases in AoA and hence remove the limitations to land with a given attitude. First you removed airspeed with high AoA, keep the planes altitude with thrust + lift and when the plane’s airspeed is at its lowest you reduce AoA and land practically on the spot. I understand all that you say but well, it seems there may be other ways, enabled by advanced aero, high TWR and above all modern controls. The last video Peregrinefalcon posted shows exactly the Su-57 executing the recovery of horizontal attitude we talk about, it is slow and controlled as you can see, with very moderate loss of altitude.
[USER=”40269″]FBW[/USER]
I am just saying evidence has been submitted that this landing mode exists and works beyond the drawing I provided and was immediately taken for “silly”. So this exists for real, like it or not.
Why am I derailing the thread, when the chief designer of Sukhoi has claimed that the Su-57 can land in half the distance of a Su-35? I am posting what I think is the explanation to that performance (any other ideas from your side?) together with the huge rewards it could have, both for operations from damaged runways and eventually even for carriers. Naval fighters are substantially heavier than CTOL versions due to reinforcements needed and are systematically “crashed” against the deck with insane sink rates on every catch that are very detrimental to their service life. They reach the carrier at enormous speeds that make the landing very dangerous in case anything goes wrong. Of course it would make sense to remove these undesired downsides from a naval fighter operation if possible, what is so difficult to understand?
Again, why can an UCAV land automatically on a carrier but a manned fighter could not perform an automated landing at higher than conventional AoA? What is the problem, the automated process or the high AoA, and why do you think so?
You know, you keep criticising but still don’t provide arguments as to why this method is not applicable in your opinion. That is IMHO what goes against the quality of the discussion in the thread.
LMFSHere, the “silly” (?) slide. There are another 11 or 12 with further technologies developed by Sukhoi but with so much animosity for bringing unusual info to the thread, it really makes me wonder if contributing makes any sense:
[ATTACH=JSON]{“alt”:”Click image for larger version Name:tris8.jpg Views:t0 Size:t282.6 KB ID:t3862669″,”data-align”:”none”,”data-attachmentid”:”3862669″,”data-size”:”full”,”title”:”ris8.jpg”}[/ATTACH]
[USER=”40269″]FBW[/USER] [USER=”20563″]haavarla[/USER]
As Peregrinefalcon has shown, this landing mode exists and is performed automatically by the plane, so many arguments reduced to nothing it seems, time to update your dogmas. There are many flaws in your argument haavarla, for instance you say canards, levcons increase lift. Not exact, they allow the plane to keep higher AoAs while still generating lift, by ensuring the airflow keeps attached to the wings beyond the angle it would naturally detach. As to my silly concept, 1) it is not mine and 2) is the way birds have been landing for some million years. Think a bit about how do they perform it and maybe you will understand the idea.
Carrier landings: I know how they are performed today, they call them “controlled crashes” not for nothing, they are brutal and dangerous. You can bitch and moan as much as you want, if a flight control system is devised that automatically controls the plane during landing instead of having to entrust it to the very unreliable and inevitably clumsy man in charge, the performance would improve massively. X-47B already landed autonomously, what is the problem in fighters including this capability, and maybe at high AoAs? The benefits of landing at very low speed on a carrier for the safety of the manoeuvre, reduction of stress on the airframe and accordingly reduction of its weight would be substantial. Maybe will be done, maybe not, but all this inquisitorial outrage is a bit weird in a forum about aviation technology.
[USER=”45638″]Dr.Snufflebug[/USER]
We know Su-57 can land in half the space of the Su-35, so they must be different in that regard. Don’t know what is silly or unrealistic in using the flight controls to land like this once the capability is there and brings advantages.
LMFSThat super dangerous, i don’t think any pilot wants to land like that
This is a kind of manoeuvre that allows a super short landing, and by the way with little stress to the airframe. So I would say it is not optional depending on the pilot’s mood but mandated by circumstances in case your landing strip is damaged or you plan to land on a carrier for instance. And given the flight controls can maintain the plane stable and control the transition from high to low AoA, I don’t think this is more dangerous than many of the manoeuvres that pilots have traditionally performed. For instance hovering a STOVL plane used to be an extremely difficult and dangerous stunt, now the pilot can do it without hands. Technology evolves and modern control systems are extremely autonomous and capable.
LMFSTHAT is NOT part of any Flanker flight Manual, i can assure you.
No, is a translated part of technological Sukhoi roadmap from 2013-14 IIRC as I told you. I am having trouble uploading the full slide right now, don’t know why
LMFSand on this current day we do not have any normal video with Su-57 on same way after many years…it seems need more time yet, or it is a problems with new missiles or i do not know, but all is very strange, and the first thing Su-57 need more time yet.
Seriously RALL? This is disapointing
> Do you think they order serial planes without functional WBs?
> CM launch from the bays was already shown like one year ago
> Can you just maybe think the bays are still classified and hence you see no detailed pictures of them? Maybe something to do with tactical relevant info like current and future weapons carrying capabilities?
F-22 was a mature airplane from its birth, with its definitive engines. So when first F-22 joined US airforce it was widely superior to the F-15. IMo i can not tell same with Su-57 comparing with the Su-35. Not in this current stage.
Only different element of maturity I see are the engines. Other than that, you can argue that the lack of updates on the plane is rather a sign of failure to create a future-proof plane than a merit…
Not to attack, but there is clearly a bias in how we look things and you are not taking a very neutral stance here to understand that Russians normally reduce the program risks by reducing the size of the technological steps, Su-35S as a 4++G plane being the immediate step before the 5G Su-57, which is a phase the US didn’t go through. Instead, F-22 was preceded by YF-22 and redesigned thoroughly before being accepted. The program started in the 80’s and the first F-22 was commissioned in 2005. So the maturation process was through a very long program and a technological demonstrator that did not enter serial production (so USAF had no hedge against program failure) while in Russia an intermediate model was created, both for testing technologies and to give VKS an insurance in case the program had delays or would completely fail. This is quite smart and in line with proper risk management practices BTW, I dont know why people insist in criticising the program because of this when it just shows intelligent and successful management.
LMFS60` sounds excessive don’t you think..
And when you are alone on the final approach, to land, you are not pushing your flight envelope. But when flying in Close formation, you are.
This is part of disclosed Sukhoi technological roadmap. Most probably the reason behind the extreme short landing capability of the plane. Consider the plane control is automatic[ATTACH=JSON]{“data-align”:”none”,”data-size”:”full”,”title”:”Su-57 landing.png”,”data-attachmentid”:3862525}[/ATTACH]
LMFSDid anyone pick up on how the Su-57 was “sitting on its “@ss” when they flew formation with the[/COLOR][/URL] VIP liner?
The VIP liner probable did slow down when it passed over the Airport in low altitude(for PR stunt no doubt!).
But the take away is, it seems it pushing its flight envelope on slow speed handling when flying in CLOSE FORMATION.
Yes they fly rather high AoAs and quite slow… but for a plane capable of performing a landing at 60° this is not any wonder is it? 😎
LMFS[USER=”77174″]panzerfeist1[/USER]
To be clear first of all:
I am not in possession of insider knowledge or absolute truth, if you have researched the topic in depth and think they can be using GaN already I salute that. Thanks for the link BTW.
As to ROFAR, I understand the relevance of this development but I just take a more relaxed approach to it, simply out of experience I guess. I assume it will appear, and when it does other technologies will have evolved too that make the gain due to ROFAR less spectacular. This is logical because once a technology appears or starts being thinkable, immediately work will start to counter it. And while basic science is still susceptible of groundbreaking discoveries, technology development is more a matter of slow evolution and taking care of many, many small details.
I don’t know if I should laugh or cry if the module count and same based AESAs will be mass produced( I will let the 1st 12 slide to have the old radars) but if they are than starting the SU-57 project is completely meaningless and they could have saved their money not starting this project at all.
I never said this. They may have started with 7 W GaAs modules and now use say 15 W ones with better efficiency, noise and footprint parameters. I assume they have a very compressed and demanding roadmap for their MMIC technology, since they admit they have to catch up and they don’t have the money to spend happily in fancy electronics. And given I know no fighter radar where GaN is already in sue, I have to conservatively assume Byelka will be GaAs for now. It does not mean the PAK-FA should have never been started for god’s sake. Performance will be affected by the semiconductor used but you cannot reduce it only to that, there is a huge amount of science and know how in every algorithm, RF transmission technology, power management etc etc. Such systems are incredibly complex and not depending on one single technology to be effective.
Again, if you have solid evidence it is GaN I am the first one to be happy, but I haven’t seen it yet.
Not to be an obnoxious a$$hole but give me a reason why I should trust you over a KRET official that said we have switched to GaN?
No please you don’t have to believe me
The reason I believe the SU-57 would have this is that I consider it a high priority aircraft over the rest of their aircraft industry.
High prio yes. But not at any price. Besides, if you want power (main advantage of GaN), maintain PESA, it is better in that regard. GaN is better than GaAs but also much more expensive. When production is mature it will naturally be used, IMHO. You have seen how hard MoD has negotiated for price with the industry, they clearly don’t want gold plated hangar queens with alien technology inside, they want robust, affordable and proven tech that does its job and can be used by normal people in combat.
I will give you an example of a similar situation from another industry branch: in power electronics there was a fever about SiC some years ago, everybody thought it would replace Si immediately due to being massively better in that role for many technical reasons. Ten years afterwards, most products still use Si, because its technology has advanced a lot too, and the know how invested on it is so massive that it does not compensate to abandon it. And besides, there were problems with SiCs reliability and price and that is a no-go. Semiconductor industry requires massive investments and that severely restricts the speed of changes. Consumer electronics leverages production volumes of many millions of pieces, military MMIC industry cannot do that.
F-22 and F-35s had either replaced their modules or added more modules and if your telling me that after all these years they are still planning to mass produce the old **** avionics, and regarding the possible RCS of the SU-57 this project should have never been started in the 1st place
.
I am not sure I understand you. RCS of Su-57 is unknown in its details, as average it has been described as “0.1 to 1 m²” and “similar to that of F-22”. The rest is speculation.And regardless of the RCS discussion, the plane has much greater capabilities compared to 4G and is therefore relevant and necessary.
LMFSSpeculative article from Kommersant:
The choice of these “strategists”
The military can buy more Tu-160M2, but less of the PAK DA
https://z5h64q92x9.net/proxy_u/ru-en.ru/https/www.kommersant.ru/doc/3967519
I find the customary doubt-sowing job here uninteresting, but there are some dates that may be considered:
Now KAZ has begun to create prototypes of PAK DA (their number is not revealed), and the rollout of the first of them is planned to be implemented in 2021 or 2022. The military previously came from the fact that the first flight of the PAK DA will make in the years 2025-2026, and mass production will begin in 2028-2029. This work will continue, and the terms remain the same, says a top Manager of one of the enterprises of the aviation industry, however, in light of the Ministry of defense plans for a massive acquisition of Tu-160M2 purchase PAK DA is unlikely to be large. “Apparently, they will focus on how to make the most of the available machines full potential, but PAK DA will remain as a Foundation for the future,” he said. The interlocutor of “Kommersant” notes that such an ideology is actively promoted former Deputy Minister of defense, now Deputy Prime Minister for defence industry Yuriy Borisov in the procurement of fighter aircraft, when the rate was made for active use su-35S, and buy the latest su-57 “shifted right”.
We will see, but I doubt PAK-DA seeks to substitute Tu-160 or that the new production of the later will mean the former gets cancelled. They now serve different purposes IMHO. So MoD gets their most urgent need of an strategic missile carrier addressed with the Tu-160M2, while less pressing requirements will be addressed with the PAK-DA.
LMFSThe military received a second military transport aircraft Il-76MD-90A
LMFS[USER=”76365″]RALL[/USER]
some comments below
Not only the Aesa radar, but the OLS-50 too, because this sensor i think will be IIR than previous OLS-35 is IR only.
Based on catalogue info I would say OLS-35 is IIR (TV, IR and TV+IR video claimed)
But Pesa from Su-35 S is a good Pesa, we do not know how will be new Aesa radar for Su-57 and if its features will be a lot more better than Irbis E or only marginal better. You need think, it will be the first Aesa radar on a Fighter in Russia. Aesa radars are better than Pesa, but you need a lot of job on it for take the best features.
We have a knowledgeable user here that begs to differ that AESA is so clearly better in performance, being reliability the main advantage. Russians have said they have already noticed the improvement in this regard. Irbis is probably the best PESA radar all around and in terms of range it will be difficult to surpass it due to its huge power. Havingsaid that, my point was cost and not performance, since the MMICs are quite expensive and not present in PESA.
Su-57 will have composites, but i read time ago Su-35 S have many composites in his airframe too, for to reduce and improve its RCS. You think Su-27 is around 10-15 m2 and Su-35 S i read is around 3 m2, so this big improvement is because use the composites on Su-35S. Maybe is not big difference here on this thing comparing with Su-57.
I cant find the composite proportion for the Su-35 but I assume Su-57 is well ahead in this regard, having being designed from the onset with their use in mind. They will include elements like the structural integrity monitoring based on FO that need to increase costs.
There is a Russian patent about the structure and its load bearing characteristics, have not read it yet but it may be interesting to understand the role of composites to allow the layout of the plane and its high overload and carrying capacities.
Iz30 should be very much expensive than current engine, and engine from Su-35S. Maybe for this is important make some normal contract for 60-70 fighters for reduce overal prices, because contract for 16 units until 2028 really is very poor.
Why much more expensive?
Regarding numbers, see my comment above about Russian MIC. Not so clear to me that the government would not help with industrial base issues like creating a production line for cutting edge engines.
When they talk about costs of the fighter, IMO they talk about cost per unit excluded (Research+Development). If you include R+D on the costs of each unit, Su-57 will be very very much expensive than Su-35S.
Sure, but this is greatly irrelevant to Russia. They needed to reactivate the industry and Su-57 was the vehicle to get it done. So it is very difficult to attribute exclusive costs to the program, since a large number of future programs will benefit from it.
Although it is good news for Su-57 proyect, Imo they need other partner and this movement maybe is a political movement from Putin for to attract to Erdogan to the proyect.
Cannot agree on that. PAK-FA / Su-57 is and was an exclusively Russian project. I am not aware of any partner having been sought to develop it. That means, the budget needed to sustain the program and make it viable comes from MoD, irrespective of what anyone does. For Russia it would be absurd to launch such a program in which the viability of its air force and military aviation industry depends on foreign political will.
On this moment Turkey is miles away from F-35 and they need other option, and it is not more options than Su-57 and officials from russia told they can to share R+D with Turkey. Just what they denied time ago to the Indians; very strange.
I think you are missing a couple of elements here:
> As said above, the discussion with India was never about PAK-FA but about FGFA, an Indian-specific development more or less based on PAK-FA. So related R&D was never PAK-FA specific but that related to the Indian plane.
> The Indians were supposed to be co-developers of the FGFA and entitled to IP, manufacturing and sales of the plane, with Russia in fact accepting them as competitors in the international markets against their own Su-57. That is going quite a bit further than programs like the Su-30MKI or for the like the base discussions around the planes that Turkey may eventually buy. It did not materialize in that format but not because Russia was denying sharing R&D, it was because India didnt want to pay the requested amount for it.
> For Turkey I could see Russia taking the Su-57E as a basis and then modifying it with avionics and subsystems of Turkish origin. This modification, as well as a local production, could be organized together with Turkish military companies and hence a share of R&D would be necessary. Or do you have links indicating a more advanced form of collaboration?
LMFS[USER=”64730″]Marcellogo[/USER]
I am not sure the scale economies work for state controlled Russian MIC the same as we are used to. The main reason a company can produce cheaper the more units they manufacture is the spread-out of non-recurring costs. But if the state needs the company to produce some equipment which is of national interest and is ready to pay, subsidise or in any way support the upfront costs of for instance a new production line which is necessary, then cost savings due to amounts could be in turn smaller than in a 100% private enterprise.
[USER=”76365″]RALL[/USER]
The most obvious difference between Su-57 and previous Russian planes that could be an important cost driver is the AESA radar and the airframe with high proportion of composites and RAM/RAS. Izd. 117 should be a bit more expensive than 117S too. If they have managed to reach the prices of the Su-35 despite them, then it is a big success. I am still a bit sceptic about that price but maybe it is real. We did not have great details about previous Su-30 and Su-35 contracts either.
As to the Izd. 30, it is possible that basic performance has been confirmed and hence it supports further progress of the program. But I think it is not as critical as we may think. Izd. 117S is pretty much an export product, so I would not be surprised if domestic Su-35 could use, or in fact are already using, Izd. 117 without Russians making it public. If that was the case, producing Su-57s and installing the first stage engine on them until the second stage one is ready would not be a big issue, since the used units could go to the Su-35’s fleet. I am not aware of any fundamental difference between the 117 and 117S that would prevent its installation on the Su-35 and given the plane itself is to a great extent an insurance against the failure of Su-57, it would make sense to use it to support the development of its new engines too.
LMFSThis comes from Kommersant so take it with a pinch of salt:
https://z5h64q92x9.net/proxy_u/ru-en.en/https/www.militarynews.ru/story.asp?rid=1&nid=508325&lang=RU
If correct, would mean each Su-57 would cost ca. 2.2 billion ruble, so quite close to the values we know for Su-35 and Su-30. Putin referred to weapons and ground equipment too, so I am not convinced the info is reliable, hopefully we will know more in the near future.
Sign In
