Page 55 of 58

Re: SU-57: On hold for a decade

Unread postPosted: 14 Sep 2019, 10:29
by milosh
knowan wrote:
falcon.16 wrote:
knowan wrote:There's no RAM coating in those pictures, just regular paint.


How you know it?

99% sure it bring ram coat. But it does not mean is same Ram than in F-22 or F-35. Russia need Ram with few maintenance.


Visible panel riveting and large color differences.


What you see isn't riverts but screws, which are coated with RAM. Something similar you can see on F-22 for example:
download/file.php?id=16013&mode=view

057 with RAM coatings:
download/file.php?id=31286&mode=view
download/file.php?id=31287&mode=view
download/file.php?id=31288&mode=view

054 only with paint:

Re: SU-57: On hold for a decade

Unread postPosted: 14 Sep 2019, 16:40
by knowan
milosh wrote:What you see isn't riverts but screws, which are coated with RAM. Something similar you can see on F-22 for example:
download/file.php?id=16013&mode=view

057 with RAM coatings:
download/file.php?id=31286&mode=view
download/file.php?id=31287&mode=view
download/file.php?id=31288&mode=view

054 only with paint:


That F-22 has degraded RAM.

The Su-57 has a two color paintjob, that won't work with RAM.

Re: SU-57: On hold for a decade

Unread postPosted: 14 Sep 2019, 17:24
by milosh
knowan wrote:
milosh wrote:What you see isn't riverts but screws, which are coated with RAM. Something similar you can see on F-22 for example:
download/file.php?id=16013&mode=view

057 with RAM coatings:
download/file.php?id=31286&mode=view
download/file.php?id=31287&mode=view
download/file.php?id=31288&mode=view

054 only with paint:


That F-22 has degraded RAM.

The Su-57 has a two color paintjob, that won't work with RAM.


There is nothing degraded on that F-22, I can find of F-22 deployed in possible combat zone which look lot worse then F-22 photo I posted. RAM on that F-22 is in very fine condition.

You can say it isn't good solution compared to F-35 (there you have RAM tapes over panels) but compared to F-22 it is very similar solution.

Btw, as you can see there is huge difference between 054 and 057 in therms of surface quality.

Re: SU-57: On hold for a decade

Unread postPosted: 14 Sep 2019, 23:30
by falcon.16
knowan wrote:
falcon.16 wrote:
knowan wrote:There's no RAM coating in those pictures, just regular paint.


How you know it?

99% sure it bring ram coat. But it does not mean is same Ram than in F-22 or F-35. Russia need Ram with few maintenance.


Visible panel riveting and large color differences.


All Eurocanards (Rafale and Typhoon) have RAM. It was designed on 90´s. Really do you believe Su-57 on 2020 has not any Ram coat?
It does not mean is same RAM than other fighters has. RAM from Rafale sure is not same than in F-22 or F-35, too.

Re: SU-57: On hold for a decade

Unread postPosted: 15 Sep 2019, 16:11
by awsome
The kids in the Army are now being taught that if we ever fight the Russians anything that is not continually moving will be destroyed. The last time I checked land based air fields do not move and their exact locations are known. So just maybe it is most important for modern aircraft to be robust, low maintenance and able to use rough secondary fields and roads. The Russians are ahead of us in this regard and actually have made road networks with this in mind.They also build their aircraft with this philosophy. Maybe it is the Marine corps who got it right with their version of the F-35 over the hanger queen F-22...

Re: SU-57: On hold for a decade

Unread postPosted: 15 Sep 2019, 17:55
by botsing
awsome wrote:The Russians are ahead of us in this regard and actually have made road networks with this in mind.

You probably forgot all about the NATO exercises in the 80's with the German autobahn airfields.

Nothing new since WW2 with that doctrine.

Re: SU-57: On hold for a decade

Unread postPosted: 15 Sep 2019, 18:18
by awsome
botsing wrote:
awsome wrote:The Russians are ahead of us in this regard and actually have made road networks with this in mind.

You probably forgot all about the NATO exercises in the 80's with the German autobahn airfields.

Nothing new since WW2 with that doctrine.


When was the last time an F-22 used a rough strip or road?

Re: SU-57: On hold for a decade

Unread postPosted: 15 Sep 2019, 18:25
by botsing
awsome wrote:When was the last time an F-22 used a rough strip or road?

Why do you assume it cannot do that?

Re: SU-57: On hold for a decade

Unread postPosted: 15 Sep 2019, 19:26
by milosh
awsome wrote:The kids in the Army are now being taught that if we ever fight the Russians anything that is not continually moving will be destroyed. The last time I checked land based air fields do not move and their exact locations are known. So just maybe it is most important for modern aircraft to be robust, low maintenance and able to use rough secondary fields and roads. The Russians are ahead of us in this regard and actually have made road networks with this in mind.They also build their aircraft with this philosophy. Maybe it is the Marine corps who got it right with their version of the F-35 over the hanger queen F-22...


Well Su-35, Su-57 and MiG-35 can't be consider rugged soviet design. They have lot of sensitive tech so we can consider them also "hanger queen" especially compared to older russian/soviet fighters.

All three have RAM coatings for example.

Re: SU-57: On hold for a decade

Unread postPosted: 15 Sep 2019, 22:30
by juretrn
The F-35 has by far the toughest RAM produced yet.
Russian philosophy? Or is this just more hangar queen mentality? :roll:
Also, did anyone ever see any modern fighters landing on "rough fields"?

Re: SU-57: On hold for a decade

Unread postPosted: 15 Sep 2019, 23:05
by awsome
botsing wrote:
awsome wrote:When was the last time an F-22 used a rough strip or road?

Why do you assume it cannot do that?


Hmmm, I guess you could consider Honolulu international a rough strip... :devil:

Re: SU-57: On hold for a decade

Unread postPosted: 15 Sep 2019, 23:10
by awsome
milosh wrote:
awsome wrote:The kids in the Army are now being taught that if we ever fight the Russians anything that is not continually moving will be destroyed. The last time I checked land based air fields do not move and their exact locations are known. So just maybe it is most important for modern aircraft to be robust, low maintenance and able to use rough secondary fields and roads. The Russians are ahead of us in this regard and actually have made road networks with this in mind.They also build their aircraft with this philosophy. Maybe it is the Marine corps who got it right with their version of the F-35 over the hanger queen F-22...


Well Su-35, Su-57 and MiG-35 can't be consider rugged soviet design. They have lot of sensitive tech so we can consider them also "hanger queen" especially compared to older russian/soviet fighters.

All three have RAM coatings for example.


While not a dirt strip this is still a cool video. Check out that landing gear... https://www.rt.com/russia/467514-russia ... way-drill/

Re: SU-57: On hold for a decade

Unread postPosted: 22 Sep 2019, 14:23
by esq
milosh wrote:


I didn't mean paint because prototypes which are flying are painted too but there is noticeable difference between them and 057. What I guess Su-57 is closer to F-22 then F-35 in therms of RAM, it need thicker layer of RAM I doubt it have fiber mat as F-35.


It's little bit tricky to say that we have some kind of "f-22 - like treating", not only in terms of "can we" but in the situation where we have very questionable VLO\LO airframe. If u can't hide the IRST or DIRCM - nothing is matter.
And as far as i know, we only present the ability to produce fiber mat structure, but question about is it really absorb material or just composite is still there. It can be just a lightweight structure for the long range and extra loadout.

So when you apply RAM coatings on Su-57 you can see noticeable difference between RAM threated plane and non RAM treated.


But how will you know that? :D
There is the missed point about Sukhoi and others. Our manufacturers is just tools for the goverment, they are not in lead of technological or manufacturing decisions. It's a different, there are military chief staff can easily ignore the technical reality and just bring the obsolete solutions on the table and everyone in industry should follow.

So, when it comes to interview or any statements - it's all about internal politics and shiny future and nothing about production transparency and technical base.

Btw, using Zhuk-AE as analogy isn't logical. Zhuk-AE was private project, NIIR needed Indians to selected MiG-35 so it could repay credit it took from bank for development and get new credit to finish R&D and production line, because Indians didn't select MiG-35 NIIR was near bankruptcy and state bailout company. NIIR is really weak with electric scan array radars for fighters. NIIP for example making them from mid 1970s, they have huge experience especially with software for such radars compared to NIIR.


No, it's perfect example cuz there is nothing "private" in the company. If u lurk about MiG-35 u will see that the project was started in 90s and was implemented with AESA from the scratch. But, when it comes to testing in 2007 it was stunned and then in 2009 trashed in open competition, when it was 2 years since stand testing and simulation process.

"Bankruptcy" was just of matter of time when you have "uneducated, unprofessional staff" which only grab the money and keep promising the good result.
If u want to play private card u should know how it works on open and free market - it just give u motivation to fulfill requirment and hard working. If NIIR on the private basis was unable to do that - how u can imagine that the goverment-controlled project will prevail in that?

And yea, they was lead designer of Su-27 and MiG radar solutions.

No Israelis were involed in Zhuk-AE development, USA would go nuts if something like that happen. Neither Indians were involed, just NIIR and their promises. I think much better solution would be they focused on some PESA radar for MiG-35. It would be finish years ago and now they could offer MiG-35 with it to Indians, and not still promising Zhuk-AE is around corner when much more experienced NIIP with state funding only recently finish N036 development (probable not fully capable).


Read carefully - i never said that they were involved in the development. They colab in testing and optimization, you could find it easily like 5 years ago. And US don't give a sh*t cuz israelis not only create our early AWACS solutions but also imported the crucial materials for radars.
And that was pretty obvious cuz fighter was eliminated because of his perfomance, backed by main reasons like AESA and overall maintance. The had some big troubles with that device and probably tried to solve it "on the place".

Maybe PESA would fit well, but when you have opponents with AESA and other technologically advanced systems u will likely lose. And, as i said before, it isn't about NIIR decisions - it's all about goverment demands.

Re: SU-57: On hold for a decade

Unread postPosted: 22 Sep 2019, 16:33
by XanderCrews
awsome wrote:The kids in the Army are now being taught that if we ever fight the Russians anything that is not continually moving will be destroyed. The last time I checked land based air fields do not move and their exact locations are known. So just maybe it is most important for modern aircraft to be robust, low maintenance and able to use rough secondary fields and roads. The Russians are ahead of us in this regard and actually have made road networks with this in mind.They also build their aircraft with this philosophy. Maybe it is the Marine corps who got it right with their version of the F-35 over the hanger queen F-22...



I'm a huge fan of the F-35B and its mentality, but

Image

Image

The America no make stronk airplane to be in bad weather meme needs to die.

Re: SU-57: On hold for a decade

Unread postPosted: 22 Sep 2019, 16:59
by botsing
XanderCrews wrote:The America no make stronk airplane to be in bad weather meme needs to die.