Su-57 Felon

Unread postPosted: 06 Nov 2019, 01:46
by geforcerfx
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

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 06 Nov 2019, 03:14
by weasel1962
Next up J-20 "Jailbird"?

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

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 21 Dec 2019, 00:35
by awsome
Felons deployed again to Syria...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgHF1OV01N4

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 22 Dec 2019, 14:01
by mixelflick
awsome wrote: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.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 22 Dec 2019, 14:56
by madrat
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.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 23 Dec 2019, 04:39
by charlielima223
madrat wrote: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?

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 23 Dec 2019, 19:29
by milosh
charlielima223 wrote:
madrat wrote: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).

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 24 Dec 2019, 07:16
by knowan
milosh wrote: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: Image

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 24 Dec 2019, 07:25
by marsavian
Su-57 flying in Syria

https://youtu.be/ixlKGAM6mhU


Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 24 Dec 2019, 07:28
by Corsair1963
Nothing but PR....

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 24 Dec 2019, 14:28
by mixelflick
marsavian wrote: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..

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 24 Dec 2019, 18:13
by milosh
knowan wrote:
milosh wrote: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: Image



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.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 24 Dec 2019, 18:32
by mixelflick
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....

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 24 Dec 2019, 19:50
by wrightwing
mixelflick wrote: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.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 24 Dec 2019, 21:04
by milosh
wrightwing wrote:
mixelflick wrote: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.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 24 Dec 2019, 21:27
by milosh
mixelflick wrote: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....


Chinese have J-20 which is also VLO design. So no need to get Su-57 at all.

Indians? Well Indians have much bigger holes to close then getting stealth, for example they still didn't replace MiG-21.

And Su-57 as we see isn't finished product. First serial Su-57 crashed. But that doesn't mean it isn't VLO design.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 24 Dec 2019, 22:01
by wrightwing
milosh wrote:
wrightwing wrote:
mixelflick wrote: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.

At best, the Su-57 is an LO design, and not even necessarily an all aspect one at that. There isn't enough RAM/RAS, radar blockers, or nozzle designs, that can change that. Not even the Russians have made such a ridiculous claim.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 24 Dec 2019, 22:47
by knowan
milosh wrote:All three graphs are from different authors which imply different methods and conditions.


Same author, just different studies using same methods and standards.

It's treats each plane as a single metal object, no exterior objects like IR sensors or DIRCM, no visible engine face for the Su-57, no RAM coatings.

They are studies of the stealth shaping of the aircraft, and the Su-57 is objectively inferior in that regard (and also inferior in the things the studies exclude).


milosh wrote:So Frontal RCS is close to F-22.


About an order of magnitude worse.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 24 Dec 2019, 23:21
by wrightwing
knowan wrote:






milosh wrote:So Frontal RCS is close to F-22.


About an order of magnitude worse.

That's being very generous. It's several orders of magnitude worse, according to Russian and Indian sources.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 25 Dec 2019, 01:18
by Corsair1963
wrightwing wrote:
At best, the Su-57 is an LO design, and not even necessarily an all aspect one at that. There isn't enough RAM/RAS, radar blockers, or nozzle designs, that can change that. Not even the Russians have made such a ridiculous claim.



Best way to look at the Su-57 is as a Semi-Stealthy Flanker... :wink:

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 25 Dec 2019, 01:36
by madrat
Even if it's not an F-35 level of stealth, it is where the Russians need to be for relevance.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 25 Dec 2019, 01:55
by Corsair1963
madrat wrote:Even if it's not an F-35 level of stealth, it is where the Russians need to be for relevance.



That is the issue as the Su-57 isn't relevant. As a matter of fact it's really not much of a concern to any of the major players! This doesn't bold well for Putin's revised Russian Empire.


"IMHO"

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 25 Dec 2019, 03:20
by doge
From Su-57 displayed on the ground at MAKS 2019. 8) (I recently learned about this photo.)
Can the Su-57 not close the weapons bay exactly, properly!? :doh:

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 25 Dec 2019, 04:32
by wrightwing
doge wrote:From Su-57 displayed on the ground at MAKS 2019. 8) (I recently learned about this photo.)
Can the Su-57 not close the weapons bay exactly, properly!? :doh:

That's not even Chinese level fit/finish, much less approaching F-22/35 tolerances.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 25 Dec 2019, 06:11
by Corsair1963
wrightwing wrote:
doge wrote:From Su-57 displayed on the ground at MAKS 2019. 8) (I recently learned about this photo.)
Can the Su-57 not close the weapons bay exactly, properly!? :doh:

That's not even Chinese level fit/finish, much less approaching F-22/35 tolerances.



The Fit and Finish of the Chinese Stealth Fighters "appears" to be quite good....


J-20

J20FFQ.jpg


J-31

J31FFQ.jpg

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 25 Dec 2019, 08:32
by disconnectedradical
doge wrote:From Su-57 displayed on the ground at MAKS 2019. 8) (I recently learned about this photo.)
Can the Su-57 not close the weapons bay exactly, properly!? :doh:


The fit and finish of Su-57 isn’t great so far, but the model that was displayed at MAKS 2019 was a ground test airframe, you can tell by the lack of pitot tubes and meters. That means it’s one of the older ones so it shouldn’t be the best judge for the production aircraft, which crashed (though LO doesn’t seem to be a part of that accident).

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 25 Dec 2019, 12:39
by mixelflick
madrat wrote:Even if it's not an F-35 level of stealth, it is where the Russians need to be for relevance.


"Relevance" as it pertains to 5th gen fighters would be stealthy/low observable (among other features). And the fact of the matter is that 10 years after its first flight, it still hasn't achieved anywhere near the level of stealth the US displayed in the ATF prototypes 30 years ago. Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised to find out its stealth is far inferior to the 1980's era F-117.

In the end, the SU-57 will be seen as a cautionary tale of what happens when too much ambition meets not enough money or expertise. You wind up with something that appears to have been stillborn...

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 25 Dec 2019, 14:39
by vilters
Long time ago, we got our first F-16's coming in to replace our F-104"s.

I was one of the first Western boys to see and touch a Mig-29.

At that time, remember this is many -many years ago and I said to myself ; It will take them at least a couple of decades to come close to our (by then obsolete) F-104 construction and finish quality.

One vivid memory stands out because a Mirage 2000 and Mig -29 are parked side by side.

Looking at the aerodynamic shape and build quality of the Mirage 2000 external fuel tanks, and then crawling under the Mig-29 to see its external belly tank was like a return to the stone age from construction/finish stand point.

Now on to the good (for the Mig-29) and not so good (ours) parts.


The Mig-29's where 100% reliable and flew the whole 2 weeks. (They changed 2 tires, that was all)

The Mirages needed the best part of a Transall in spare parts and we needed spare airplanes, and a C-130 of F-16 spare parts.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 25 Dec 2019, 16:16
by mixelflick
Corsair1963 wrote:
wrightwing wrote:
At best, the Su-57 is an LO design, and not even necessarily an all aspect one at that. There isn't enough RAM/RAS, radar blockers, or nozzle designs, that can change that. Not even the Russians have made such a ridiculous claim.



Best way to look at the Su-57 is as a Semi-Stealthy Flanker... :wink:


I'm beginning to think you're right. In fact, when I first saw it I thought to myself, "it looks like someone stepped on a Flanker". Now I'm sure it has some new tricks up its sleeve, but it appears based upon weapons integration one of those isn't going to be stealth, and perhaps not even super-cruise. Based on the weapons being developed for it, it appears the Russians are resigned to the fact it's going to be spotted first.

The reason for putting hypersonic and extremely long ranged, new air to air weapons on it is obvious: They want the ability to reach out and touch an enemy fighter soon after being discovered. The fact they'll be discovered first is a given, and a good bet is that it carries a home on jam hypersonic for said purpose. At the very least, they want the ability to get a weapon off and a home on jam hypersonic is the only way to get there. Carrying stock R-77's just isn't going to cut it...

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 25 Dec 2019, 19:15
by madrat
Or they realize that they will have to build a system to defend against both stealth and non-stealth forces. Their LO Felon fighters will be competitive in the near term with the Chinese and most of their neighbors. They do not have a Belt & Road play to compete with China. But they do have lots of firepower to obliterate it and that is diplomacy all by itself. The ulta-paranoia of the Russians makes sense when you consider how fragile Putin's regime could be to a coup d'etat. They cannot afford to let one creep up on them. We are talking existential threats. They certainly won't let a technology gap undermine them anymore than they'd let an internal threat get them. They'll just evolve to fit the threats.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 25 Dec 2019, 19:26
by wrightwing
Corsair1963 wrote:
wrightwing wrote:
doge wrote:From Su-57 displayed on the ground at MAKS 2019. 8) (I recently learned about this photo.)
Can the Su-57 not close the weapons bay exactly, properly!? :doh:

That's not even Chinese level fit/finish, much less approaching F-22/35 tolerances.



The Fit and Finish of the Chinese Stealth Fighters "appears" to be quite good....


J-20

J20FFQ.jpg


J-31

J31FFQ.jpg


That wasn't my point.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 25 Dec 2019, 20:05
by milosh
wrightwing wrote:At best, the Su-57 is an LO design, and not even necessarily an all aspect one at that. There isn't enough RAM/RAS, radar blockers, or nozzle designs, that can change that. Not even the Russians have made such a ridiculous claim.


Can you point me to any statement for people working on Su-57 about its RCS?

http://www.scielo.br/pdf/jatm/v8n1/1984 ... 1-0040.pdf

We have study wrote by four leading Chinese aeronautic experts about shape:

The mean RCS value in a range
of ± 30° of the forward direction is −5.625 dBsm when exposed
to 10-GHz radar wave. In general, it is the same or even exceeds
the stealth level of modern fighters in the world.


No RAM and RAS applied. Both work quite well especially with X-band for RCS reduction.

So it is clearly VLO design, other question would Russians really build it to match VLO requirement.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 26 Dec 2019, 00:20
by Corsair1963
:lmao:

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 26 Dec 2019, 03:54
by wrightwing
milosh wrote:
wrightwing wrote:At best, the Su-57 is an LO design, and not even necessarily an all aspect one at that. There isn't enough RAM/RAS, radar blockers, or nozzle designs, that can change that. Not even the Russians have made such a ridiculous claim.


Can you point me to any statement for people working on Su-57 about its RCS?

http://www.scielo.br/pdf/jatm/v8n1/1984 ... 1-0040.pdf

We have study wrote by four leading Chinese aeronautic experts about shape:

The mean RCS value in a range
of ± 30° of the forward direction is −5.625 dBsm when exposed
to 10-GHz radar wave. In general, it is the same or even exceeds
the stealth level of modern fighters in the world.


No RAM and RAS applied. Both work quite well especially with X-band for RCS reduction.

So it is clearly VLO design, other question would Russians really build it to match VLO requirement.


I can point to statements by Russians working on the jet, stating frontal RCS of ~.5m^2, and by Indian sources who've complained about disappointing stealth levels. I haven't seen a single source ever mention all aspect VLO signature reduction. You're pulling that out of your backside.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 26 Dec 2019, 04:13
by boogieman
It seems the first production standard Su57 has crashed in Russia. Pilot is ok.

https://amp.businessinsider.com/russias ... es-2019-12

EDIT: NVM I see this has it's own thread.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 26 Dec 2019, 08:46
by Corsair1963
wrightwing wrote:
milosh wrote:
wrightwing wrote:At best, the Su-57 is an LO design, and not even necessarily an all aspect one at that. There isn't enough RAM/RAS, radar blockers, or nozzle designs, that can change that. Not even the Russians have made such a ridiculous claim.


Can you point me to any statement for people working on Su-57 about its RCS?

http://www.scielo.br/pdf/jatm/v8n1/1984 ... 1-0040.pdf

We have study wrote by four leading Chinese aeronautic experts about shape:

The mean RCS value in a range
of ± 30° of the forward direction is −5.625 dBsm when exposed
to 10-GHz radar wave. In general, it is the same or even exceeds
the stealth level of modern fighters in the world.


No RAM and RAS applied. Both work quite well especially with X-band for RCS reduction.

So it is clearly VLO design, other question would Russians really build it to match VLO requirement.


I can point to statements by Russians working on the jet, stating frontal RCS of ~.5m^2, and by Indian sources who've complained about disappointing stealth levels. I haven't seen a single source ever mention all aspect VLO signature reduction. You're pulling that out of your backside.


Clearly, from all reports India was very unimpressed with the level of Stealth on the Su-57. Which, would explain why they have completely lost interest in the type. Even after repeated attempts by Russia to get them to reconsider. Which, personally speaks volumes to me....

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 26 Dec 2019, 17:37
by milosh
Corsair1963 wrote:Clearly, from all reports India was very unimpressed with the level of Stealth on the Su-57. Which, would explain why they have completely lost interest in the type. Even after repeated attempts by Russia to get them to reconsider. Which, personally speaks volumes to me....


And then you hear Indians praising Rafale as stealth fighter which would detect first Chinese stealths and down them much earlier then they detect Rafale becuase it is armed with Meteor missiles and this isn't some fanboys said this is what IAF commander said when he was asked why India don't get stealth when China have them, he said Rafale is stealth, have much better sensors and missiles!

@weightwing


0.5m2 is mean value of PAK-FA RCS, I think in patent average RCS is 0.1 to 1m2 so mean value is 0.5m2. Lowest frontal RCS by pantent is 0.1m2 highest is 1m2.

Real number is probable lower then what is written in patent, becuase no one would publicly declare RCS value. F-22 which is operational for almost two decades still have classifed RCS value and SR-71 also.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 26 Dec 2019, 17:46
by wrightwing
milosh wrote:



@weightwing


0.5m2 is mean value of PAK-FA RCS, I think in patent average RCS is 0.1 to 1m2 so mean value is 0.5m2. Lowest frontal RCS by pantent is 0.1m2 highest is 1m2.

Real number is probable lower then what is written in patent, becuase no one would publicly declare RCS value. F-22 which is operational for almost two decades still have classifed RCS value and SR-71 also.


The F-22's (and F-35's) RCS are classified, but.... the vanilla open source figures that have been given are frontal RCS in the .0001m^2 range. To even be considered VLO, the Su-57 would need to be down to .001m^2.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 26 Dec 2019, 20:27
by milosh
wrightwing wrote:The F-22's (and F-35's) RCS are classified, but.... the vanilla open source figures that have been given are frontal RCS in the .0001m^2 range. To even be considered VLO, the Su-57 would need to be down to .001m^2.


Maybe but I think 0.01m2 would be quite good achievement, it would be problematic for non IRST equipped fighters.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 26 Dec 2019, 21:58
by wrightwing
milosh wrote:
wrightwing wrote:The F-22's (and F-35's) RCS are classified, but.... the vanilla open source figures that have been given are frontal RCS in the .0001m^2 range. To even be considered VLO, the Su-57 would need to be down to .001m^2.


Maybe but I think 0.01m2 would be quite good achievement, it would be problematic for non IRST equipped fighters.

.01m^2 is considered LO, but it would still be a challenge for fighters with large RCS values. I've never seen any Russian claims for .01m^2, though.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 28 Dec 2019, 02:36
by talkitron
Russia has sold 14 Su-57s to Algeria as well as 14 Su-34s and 14 Su-35s. It seems like Russian exports have been down lately and the overall defense spending has decreased, hitting tactical aviation as nuclear weapons are the priority. So a sale of 42 jets is a big win for Russia. The Algerian decision is described in a way that makes it seem unprofessional to me.

https://www.menadefense.net/non-classe- ... 34-bomber/

The decision was taken in the summer of 2019 after the visit of an Algerian delegation to the MAKS air show in Moscow. During this visit led by the Air Force Commander Major General Boumaiza, the Su-57 was examined from every angle, the former Algerian Mig-29 pilot was even one of the rare foreigners to try the stealth plane Russian on a simulator. It is he who would have decided on the future of acquisitions of the air force after five years of procrastination and loss of time. The rise of the Moroccan Air Force with the acquisition of 25 F-16 Vipers and the appearance of F-35s in the Italian fleet motivated Algeria’s rapid decision-making.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 28 Dec 2019, 03:24
by madrat
Seems like Algeria is all over the spectrum. After the 2008 rejection of MiG-29 they were working France hard for Rafale. So were the Rafale dreams put to bed?

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 28 Dec 2019, 06:27
by marsavian
milosh wrote:
wrightwing wrote:At best, the Su-57 is an LO design, and not even necessarily an all aspect one at that. There isn't enough RAM/RAS, radar blockers, or nozzle designs, that can change that. Not even the Russians have made such a ridiculous claim.


Can you point me to any statement for people working on Su-57 about its RCS?

http://www.scielo.br/pdf/jatm/v8n1/1984 ... 1-0040.pdf

We have study wrote by four leading Chinese aeronautic experts about shape:

The mean RCS value in a range
of ± 30° of the forward direction is −5.625 dBsm when exposed
to 10-GHz radar wave. In general, it is the same or even exceeds
the stealth level of modern fighters in the world.


No RAM and RAS applied. Both work quite well especially with X-band for RCS reduction.

So it is clearly VLO design, other question would Russians really build it to match VLO requirement.


In the real world though the Su-57 Mk 1 engine has an open engine face with no RCS reduction apart from RAM which the similar Su-35 engine has. This will keep the frontal RCS relatively high and more like Typhoon/Rafale/Super Hornet/Gripen than F-22/F-35. The Su-57 is also not stealthy from the sides. Su-57 is a pretty poor implementation of a stealth fighter considering they had the working example of F-22 to base it on.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 28 Dec 2019, 07:50
by boogieman
marsavian wrote:In the real world though the Su-57 Mk 1 engine has an open engine face with no RCS reduction apart from RAM which the similar Su-35 engine has. This will keep the frontal RCS relatively high and more like Typhoon/Rafale/Super Hornet/Gripen than F-22/F-35. The Su-57 is also not stealthy from the sides. Su-57 is a pretty poor implementation of a stealth fighter considering they had the working example of F-22 to base it on.


I was under the impression that the Su57's engines were displaced so that the compressor face is obscured from the front (a design feature found on the YF23) and that RCS reducing shrouds were to be used on production models. Not going to place TOO much weight on this source but it explains what I am talking about:



Assuming the above is true, the biggest issue I can see with Su57 frontal RCS is the IRST bulb up front. Strikes me as a really bizarre design choice if you're trying to build a VLO jet.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 28 Dec 2019, 10:29
by milosh
boogieman wrote:
I was under the impression that the Su57's engines were displaced so that the compressor face is obscured from the front (a design feature found on the YF23) and that RCS reducing shrouds were to be used on production models. Not going to place TOO much weight on this source but it explains what I am talking about:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPdKc2Ca610

Assuming the above is true, the biggest issue I can see with Su57 frontal RCS is the IRST bulb up front. Strikes me as a really bizarre design choice if you're trying to build a VLO jet.


No it isn't like YF-23 it is common mistake because Su-57 main gear is lower so plane is tilted down when on ground and then it look like engines are above intake mouths.

Su-57 intake is like X-32 in therms of stealth design (not stealthy at all):
http://www.aviationexplorer.com/boeing_ ... g_x-32.jpg

So if F-32 is stealth I really don't see why Su-57 isn't if we just talk about intake.

Of course both would need to use radar blocker but here is where Su-57 have "advantage" F-32 because of STOVL couldn't use complex blocker while Sukhoi radar blocker look fraking complex:
https://findpatent.ru/patent/262/2623031.html

It look like combination of couple of radar blockers, first some ring blocker, then mesh and then something similar to S.Hornet radar blocker.

OLS backside is composite with thick RAM so when it isn't in function its impact of RCS is small. When it is in function it increase RCS but not as folks like to calculate, they use metalic sphere as analog :roll:

@marsavian


Of course they did analyse lot of different designs, here are F-22 & F-23 combo:
https://naukatehnika.com/files/journal/ ... 47-e-6.jpg

But they decide to go with complex radar blocker. S-duct would reduce capability to carry four big missiles/bombs or two big missiles/bombs and four R-XY (short missile which replace R-77).

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 28 Dec 2019, 12:58
by boogieman
milosh wrote:No it isn't like YF-23 it is common mistake because Su-57 main gear is lower so plane is tilted down when on ground and then it look like engines are above intake mouths.

Su-57 intake is like X-32 in therms of stealth design (not stealthy at all):
http://www.aviationexplorer.com/boeing_ ... g_x-32.jpg

So if F-32 is stealth I really don't see why Su-57 isn't if we just talk about intake.

Of course both would need to use radar blocker but here is where Su-57 have "advantage" F-32 because of STOVL couldn't use complex blocker while Sukhoi radar blocker look fraking complex:
https://findpatent.ru/patent/262/2623031.html

It look like combination of couple of radar blockers, first some ring blocker, then mesh and then something similar to S.Hornet radar blocker.

OLS backside is composite with thick RAM so when it isn't in function its impact of RCS is small. When it is in function it increase RCS but not as folks like to calculate, they use metalic sphere as analog :roll:

@marsavian


Of course they did analyse lot of different designs, here are F-22 & F-23 combo:
https://naukatehnika.com/files/journal/ ... 47-e-6.jpg

But they decide to go with complex radar blocker. S-duct would reduce capability to carry four big missiles/bombs or two big missiles/bombs and four R-XY (short missile which replace R-77).


Interesting, assuming you are correct the question remains as to how effective the engine shrouds (radar blockers) and sig reduction work on the IRST bulb will prove to be. I have to say I doubt this approach will be competitive with what you see on the front aspect of the F22 or F35 from an RCS reduction point of view.

That said it may not be terribly relevant either. With a projected Russian fleet of under 100 airframes a decade from now, it looks like Flanker and Fulcrum variants will continue to form the backbone of the VVS fighter fleet for a long time to come.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 28 Dec 2019, 14:25
by marsavian
Milosh, can you point out this radar blocker on the current serial version of Su-57 ?

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 28 Dec 2019, 15:01
by mixelflick
Algerian SU-57's huh. I'll believe it when I see it.

They're going to find out that for the $, the SU-35 is a much better buy. I can only imagine the maintenance woes on their new SU-57's. There are still many bugs to be worked out, and the final production process will now have to be looked at from the ground up since the crash. I'd bet anything simple engine changes will have to occur in Russia, along with all but the most routine maintenance.

Time will tell..

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 28 Dec 2019, 22:26
by milosh
marsavian wrote:Milosh, can you point out this radar blocker on the current serial version of Su-57 ?


That is something what officials would know not me.

Btw interesting photo of crashed Su-57:
https://radar.rp.pl/wp-content/uploads/ ... ternet.jpg

They blurred intake.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 28 Dec 2019, 23:22
by talkitron
mixelflick wrote:They're going to find out that for the $, the SU-35 is a much better buy. I can only imagine the maintenance woes on their new SU-57's. There are still many bugs to be worked out, and the final production process will now have to be looked at from the ground up since the crash. I'd bet anything simple engine changes will have to occur in Russia, along with all but the most routine maintenance.


This is the main reason India is no longer buying Russian combat jets. I can guess that Algeria got a very low price on the jets as nothing else is moving off the lot for Russia right now in the combat jet space.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 28 Dec 2019, 23:32
by marsavian
milosh wrote:
marsavian wrote:Milosh, can you point out this radar blocker on the current serial version of Su-57 ?


That is something what officials would know not me.

Btw interesting photo of crashed Su-57:
https://radar.rp.pl/wp-content/uploads/ ... ternet.jpg

They blurred intake.


That's because the blocker only exists as a patent certainly in the current serial version with the -117 engine so my original post and its points still stand, Su-35 type RAM treatment is all it's got and that is frankly not good enough for a supposedly VLO aircraft which you claimed for it.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 28 Dec 2019, 23:35
by mixelflick
talkitron wrote:
mixelflick wrote:They're going to find out that for the $, the SU-35 is a much better buy. I can only imagine the maintenance woes on their new SU-57's. There are still many bugs to be worked out, and the final production process will now have to be looked at from the ground up since the crash. I'd bet anything simple engine changes will have to occur in Russia, along with all but the most routine maintenance.


This is the main reason India is no longer buying Russian combat jets. I can guess that Algeria got a very low price on the jets as nothing else is moving off the lot for Russia right now in the combat jet space.



But wait, isn't India getting up-rated MKI's? Perhaps they'll be serviced locally?

In any case, Algeria may have gotten a good price but my God, 3 different types.. and not many of each? That's going to be crazy expensive logistically, and it also won't leave many aircraft to cannibalize for spare parts. Worse, those aircraft have to go back to the Russia for engine overhauls, etc.. They should have bought as many multi-role SU-30SM as reasonable, and put the rest into pilot training. Multi-million dollar aircraft and 10 cent pilots are a bad, bad combination...

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 29 Dec 2019, 06:44
by charlielima223
milosh wrote:
OLS backside is composite with thick RAM so when it isn't in function its impact of RCS is small. When it is in function it increase RCS but not as folks like to calculate, they use metalic sphere as analog :roll:


RAM can only do so much. I can wrap a brick in RAM but it will never be as effective as a diamond with faceted shallow angles or an oval with shallow complex continuous curves.

From a purely visual perspective it always seems IMO that the PAKFA was always designed to be stealthy enough rather than stealthy as possible...

Take for instance the EOTS of the F-35. Here we see the EOTS housed in a structure desined to be as stealthy as possible as well as having radar absorbent properties.
Image
Image

Even the older F-117 tried to be as stealthy as possible. The F-117s IR imaging, nav, and tageting system on the front if the aircraft is housed and recessed. Even the housing is designed to be LO with saw toothed edging to help break radar signals.
Image
Image
Image

However the same cannot be said about the PAKFAs IRST...
Image
Image

Shaping is a major factor to obtaining optimal low RCS


Image

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 29 Dec 2019, 08:26
by knowan
Doesn't matter how much RAM they slap on it if the shape is bad, and that shape is definitely bad.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 29 Dec 2019, 12:38
by milosh
mixelflick wrote:But wait, isn't India getting up-rated MKI's? Perhaps they'll be serviced locally?


Yeap. I don't know about engines though in 2007 they didn't have facility for engine maintenance something which Chinese had.

mixelflick wrote:In any case, Algeria may have gotten a good price but my God, 3 different types.. and not many of each? That's going to be crazy expensive logistically, and it also won't leave many aircraft to cannibalize for spare parts. Worse, those aircraft have to go back to the Russia for engine overhauls, etc.. They should have bought as many multi-role SU-30SM as reasonable, and put the rest into pilot training. Multi-million dollar aircraft and 10 cent pilots are a bad, bad combination...


All three types will use same engine in mid 2020s, Type-30 fit well in any Flanker so it isn't just for Su-57. Also you mentioned India, their Super 30 upgrade is based on Su-57 tech for Su-30, so you can expect all three planes in 2020s will have similar electronics.

Also Su-57 doesn't look like chasing best possible RCS so I expect RAM isn't so expensive to maintain, if we look weather and airfields in Russia I doubt they would go with quality RAM even if they can afford it.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 30 Dec 2019, 12:01
by mixelflick
Latest on crash from The Aviationist...

“During a flight test, when the aircraft was being flown at maximum limits, there was a failure of an integrated control system. Reports differ as to whether the aircraft entered a series of uncontrolled rolls or a flat corkscrew. The malfunction began at an altitude of 10 kilometers (32,800 feet). The factory test pilot attempted to recover the aircraft during a descent of 8,000 meters (26,246 feet), but finally ejected at 2,000 meters (6,561 feet). The pilot parachuted successfully and was found an hour after the accident. Temperature at the time of the accident was 30-degrees below zero.”

A quote attributed to the unnamed Sukhoi factory test pilot was shared on Russian language social media that said:

“The stabilizers have risen in extreme opposite positions, began to rotate. Disabled the [automated control system?], switched to manual – no reaction. From 10 km to one and a half was transported – no result. Came out successfully, when landing slightly twisted my leg.”

They also strongly suspect the Algerian "buy" is BS, meant to distract attention from the crash..

https://theaviationist.com/2019/12/29/w ... sh-emerge/

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 30 Dec 2019, 22:37
by XanderCrews
milosh wrote:
Also Su-57 doesn't look like chasing best possible RCS so I expect RAM isn't so expensive to maintain, if we look weather and airfields in Russia I doubt they would go with quality RAM even if they can afford it.



Quality RAM is easier to Maintain. :wink:

Youve fallen for the trope that the more sophisticated and advanced the skin is, the more babying it needs. its the opposite.

F-117 maintainers in 1995 would do a backflip if they could see the F-35s skin

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 31 Dec 2019, 14:37
by mixelflick
XanderCrews wrote:
milosh wrote:
Also Su-57 doesn't look like chasing best possible RCS so I expect RAM isn't so expensive to maintain, if we look weather and airfields in Russia I doubt they would go with quality RAM even if they can afford it.



Quality RAM is easier to Maintain. :wink:

Youve fallen for the trope that the more sophisticated and advanced the skin is, the more babying it needs. its the opposite.

F-117 maintainers in 1995 would do a backflip if they could see the F-35s skin


I wonder if Russian industry can build to sufficient margins (for stealth) if the order is small enough? It's pretty clear they can't mass produce fighters with the extreme tolerances necessary for VLO aircraft. Lockheed pumped out 131 or so F-35's in 2019, and that'll go up to 141 in 2020. So around 11 or so aircraft a month. If the Russians hold true to 76 by 2028, that's less than 1 airframe a month. Call it one every 6 weeks.

If they're more or less making each one by hand (so to speak), is there a likelihood those extreme tolerances necessary for stealth could be achieved?

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 31 Dec 2019, 21:14
by milosh
mixelflick wrote:If they're more or less making each one by hand (so to speak), is there a likelihood those extreme tolerances necessary for stealth could be achieved?


Yes it is possible, F-117 is build by hand and F-22 didn't had production rate nowhere near F-35 so it use lot less automation then F-35.

@XanderCrews

You are talking about fibermat which is used on F-35. F-22, B-2 and F-117 use more sensitive RAM. I doubt Russia is capable to make fibermat. So they will use more sensitive RAM so I expect they will choice more rugged and less efficient RAM.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 25 Jan 2020, 03:32
by marsavian
Future Of Su-57 Next-Generation Engine Uncertain

https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/ ... -uncertain

Piotr Butowski January 06, 2020

GDANSK, Poland—As new details about a next-generation engine for Russia’s premier Su-57 fighter emerge, new concerns are apparent as well.

On Dec. 6, the head of Rostec Corp.’s aviation cluster, Anatoly Serdyukov, provided an update on the state of work on the new-generation Lyulka “izdeliye 30” (product 30) turbofan engine intended for the final modification of the Su-57 fighter, the so-called “second-stage” aircraft. Su-57 fighters currently fly with Lyulka AL-41F-1 (izdeliye 117) engines.

Izdeliye 30 is the first all-new engine for tactical combat aircraft developed in Russia for several decades. The previous Lyulka AL-31F engine entered production together with the Su-27 Flanker fighter in 1981. All subsequent engines, including the AL-41F-1 for the first Su-57s, are upgrades of the base AL-31F.

The clean-sheet design offers a thrust increase, lighter weight, a smaller number of elements and lower operating costs. In December 2014, Russia’s United Engine Corp. CEO Vladislav Masalov said the new engine will be “17-18% more effective” than the current one. If this refers to full thrust, the new izdeliye 30 should provide 17 tons compared to 14.5 tons for AL-41F-1. The engine’s thrust-to-weight ratio is to be more than 10:1.

Thanks to glass-fiber plastic inlet guide vanes, the new engine fan would reduce the radar cross section in a front view.

“Bench tests of the future engine are being continued. The engine optimization on a flying testbed is being conducted,” Serdyukov said. “In October, another flight was executed aimed at checking the engine characteristics at various flight modes. Operation of the thrust-vectoring nozzle was checked, as well as operation of the oil system at negative G loads. In total, the flying testbed executed 16 flights.”

The flying engine testbed, the Su-57’s second prototype T-50-2LL, replaced the port engine with a prototype of the izdeliye 30. It performed the first flight on Dec. 5, 2017.

But 16 test flights in two years is not an impressive test pace, especially considering how important this engine is for the Russians.

Serdyukov concluded his remarks with the following: “The issue of the use of this engine on airplanes is currently under consideration.” This statement suggests that it is not yet assured that the Su-57 will receive the new engines in the foreseeable future.

Though there is no official information on the topic, the next-generation engine program faces serious obstacles. The main one is the lack of modern materials that would enable the planned engine characteristics. Replacing planned materials with those that are available is likely to adversely affect the engine’s weight and performance.


The first series-production Su-57 fighter was to be handed over to the Russian Defense Ministry in December 2019, but it crashed Dec. 24 during a handover flight in Komsomolsk-on-Amur. In total, the ministry ordered 74 Su-57s—the first two aircraft for testing and then six operational squadrons of 12 fighters each—with delivery by the end of 2027.

During the Army 2018 exhibition, Deputy Defense Minister Alexey Krivoruchko claimed that from 2023 the Su-57s will be delivered in a “second-stage” configuration, with the new engines. But in a statement to the Russian Defense Ministry newspaper Krasnaya Zvezda in December 2019, Krivoruchko corrected this deadline: Deliveries of the first-stage aircraft will last until the “mid-2020s.”

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 26 Jan 2020, 16:47
by mixelflick
The commentary/focus on the new engines is telling. I'm assuming the production bird that crashed was flying with the old engines, but perhaps not? It was mentioned the aircraft was performing an "engine check" at the time of the crash. It seems unlikely, but is it possible this aircraft was flying with 1 of the new, "2nd stage" engines? Regardless, it sounds like they've run into significant problems, which could mean one of the following things..

1.) There will be delays well beyond what they had hoped. It sounds like they wanted to have it operational in 2023, but now the timeline is "mid 2020's". Anyone who follows Russian estimates of engines/airframes and their IOC dates shouldn't find this very suprising..

2.) The entire SU-57 program is going through a deep dive/soul searching phase, questioning whether 76 airframes being built will do much beyond what just more SU-35's would.

It may be that they decide to continue pushing the new engine, but the production Felon is off. They'll focus instead on getting the new engine in their SU-27SM2's and 3's, SU-30's and SU-35's. Doing so would provide a huge performance boost to an already hugely capable aircraft. Plus, at least a few of those production lines is still open.

Tough call, but whatever's going on - it's not good news for the SU-57..

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 26 Jan 2020, 21:46
by marsavian
Su-57 is still not production ready even if they claim it is. Tom Cooper reckoned last year the avionics/armament testing is still incomplete. The recent crash shows at least a faulty FCS if not worse aerodynamic defects. The new engine is not commercially producible so is a prototype itself. Meanwhile every single one of the 400+ F-35 will be brought up to IOC 3F standard so the US has produced 600+ active stealth fighters and Russia has yet to produce one in the same time period and their version relies on engine fan RAM in the first iteration and composite inlet guide vanes in the second and neither are as effective as a serpentine inlet in stealth. The J-20 is more finished than the Su-57 and that's still a WIP.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 27 Jan 2020, 01:45
by Corsair1963
Russia needs to partner with China on a Stealth Fighter. Yet, question is will the Chinese have them??? :shock:

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 25 Mar 2020, 06:08
by Corsair1963
Pilots of the Russian Aerospace Forces have fully mastered the flight modes of Su-57 aircraft including the extreme altitude, speed and g-load.

While performing the flight tasks, pilots have worked out the individual and group piloting, group co-ordination on the flight level, low and extreme low altitude flights and also the combat use of aircraft's armament.

At the final stage of the training, the pilots practiced air-to-air combat elements involving super-maneuverable modes of the aircraft.

Su-57 is the 5th-gen fighter jet designed for engaging ground, air and naval targets. The aircraft is equipped with armament placed into internal bays, the newest onboard hardware and provided with a stealth-tech radar-absorbent coating.

Within the State Defence Procurement, Russian ASF are to receive 76 aircraft of this type.


https://business.facebook.com/mod.mil.r ... 749041408/

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 25 Mar 2020, 13:48
by mixelflick
The climbing missile shot is interesting. You can see the (archer?) peeking out of the side weapons bay, just prior to launch. So too though, were the large gaps between panels on the underside of the aircraft.

Let's assume all the weapons testing and integration is done. We'll also assume all the avionics work as advertised. They still had the first production version crash, and its still unclear as to why. Is it the flight control software? A control surface anomoly? Something else??

Good luck pumping out new production aircraft without finding and fixing that issue. I sure wouldn't want to be flying it, but I'm not so certain their pilots have a choice. They need to get 76 aircraft right, and so far I can only see problems with these prototypes featured in the video. Every time there's a setback, we get a new video of the prototypes flying around and the narrative is that full scale production is upon us.

If that's true, where are the operation units flying this thing?

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 25 Mar 2020, 14:17
by zaltys
What are those bubbles in the canopy at 1:02?

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 25 Mar 2020, 15:21
by mixelflick
zaltys wrote:What are those bubbles in the canopy at 1:02?


Good question.

Condensation?

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 25 Mar 2020, 19:28
by milosh
I find it interesting they fitted R-74 missile in weapon pod, I thought it would need new missile (smaller then R-73/74).

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 25 Mar 2020, 20:43
by falcon.16
Pictures are very bad, it does not show nothing more than a missile being fired, but not any evidence about if it was from internal side bay.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 25 Mar 2020, 22:44
by swiss

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 26 Mar 2020, 12:31
by falcon.16
swiss wrote:https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/32742/this-is-a-video-clip-of-an-su-57-firing-a-missile-from-its-side-weapon-bay-or-is-it


I am not surprised.

Really If the russians have used an air to air missile from its internal bays, we will have good pictures and videos without any doubt.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 26 Mar 2020, 13:51
by mixelflick
I know they're a Kremlin mouth piece, but how exactly do Russian Air Force pilots start "flying SU-57's" when.... the first production version crashed on its maiden flight? (Christmas eve, 2019).

https://militarywatchmagazine.com/artic ... e-ministry

This is getting ridiculous. Russia is putting out video/news stories to make us forget not a single production aircraft has been fielded, let alone a squadron or two of the type. So instead they give use more videos of the prototypes zipping around. Really? The accident investigation has been wrapped up and they've delivered several production aircraft since the crash? How many could that be? Two? Three? Maybe...? More like ZERO, assuming of course they don't want them crashing too.

Do they think other countries are fooled by this? For anyone who's been following the program, it's clear the SU-57 is still FAR from being ready for prime time..

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 26 Mar 2020, 18:57
by milosh
swiss wrote:https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/32742/this-is-a-video-clip-of-an-su-57-firing-a-missile-from-its-side-weapon-bay-or-is-it


I did frame by frame in vlc and missile emerging below wing and then it is fired so it is probable test fire from side weapon bay. So no fixed pylon maybe no bay doors but I really doubt that.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 16 Apr 2020, 18:45
by underscan
I found this information from two weeks ago.

https://naukatehnika.com/chto-takoe-ana ... yandex.com

The new metamaterial is completely transparent to electromagnetic waves due to the excitation of “anapoles” in them. Russian and Italian scientists have developed technology to mask military equipment. The metamaterial has an artificially created periodic structure. Using the idea of ​​dipole moments, it was possible to develop a generalized invisibility theorem and turn it into a mathematical model

Anapol (from Greek an - negative particle and polos - pole) is a non-radiating source or scatterer that is capable of emitting vector potentials in the absence of radiated electromagnetic fields, as well as scattering vector potentials in the absence of fields.

Thanks to this, you can get a unique opportunity to hide various objects, more precisely to shield them from electromagnetic fields and to obtain devices for hidden data transmission.

Moreover, data transmission is possible due to modulation of the vector potential, and the usual propagation of electromagnetic waves (light) in the system will be absent. Moreover, this may mean that we simply do not see many objects and sources in nature, because they do not interact with electromagnetic fields, but interact exclusively with potentials! Modern methods of stealth masking are aimed at ensuring that the wave reflected from the object is absorbed by the masking coating, minimizing the response to the radar. However, the coating alone is not capable of reducing this response to complete zero due to a combination of factors: surface geometry, high speed of movement, progressive highly sensitive location methods, and the inefficiency of stealth coating absorption.

An international team of scientists from NUST “MISiS” and the Polytechnic University of Turin (Italy), in the framework of cooperation on the ANASTASIA project, have proposed a fundamentally new variant of stealth masking, which will allow the radar signal directed to the object not to be reflected, not absorbed, but simply to pass through, as if no no object. This method of masking is based not on creating a masking coating, but on changing the configuration of the entire system of the object.

“The stealth disguise used today is far from perfect. Such a coating is expensive, and for more efficient operation it needs the most even surface - as a result, in airplanes, for example, you have to sacrifice the aerodynamic characteristics of the device. In this case, the absorbed signal still creates a “shadow” - a small response that can be detected by more advanced location systems. The task of our team was to “teach” the objects not to reflect the signal, but to let it pass through through the excitation of the special state of electromagnetic fields, ”comments Alexei Basharin, project manager from NUST MISiS. According to the developed theory, the electric moment excited in the system when the radar signal hits it is compensated by the toroidal moment. This effect can be achieved through the use of metamaterial - a material with an artificially created periodic structure. However, there are also other dipole moments that arise both in the object to be hidden and in the coating. And how to hide such systems was not entirely clear.

“The invisibility of the object was predicted by the Devaney-Wolfe theorems. We, in turn, developed this idea for dipole moments, which like bricks form the response of a stealth object and developed a generalized invisibility theorem for them and turned it into a mathematical model, ”adds Alexei Basharin.

It is noteworthy that the technology can extend to objects of any size: not only for large military equipment, but also for micro and nanoscale electronics. A clear breakthrough will be the use of the described metamaterials as elements of the qubits of quantum computers, the interaction of which is carried out not due to fields, but due to potentials.


So instead of 4 there are 5 ways to reduce radar signature which is.

1. Reflect radio waves away from the radar source instead of directly at it.

2. absorb radio waves.

3. EW to suppress incoming radio waves which will have a week radio wave return.

4. Applying plasma through generation or speed and altitudes which deteriorate radio waves.

5. Transparency or being like a ghost to radio waves if I was reading this article properly.

Has this been mentioned before or is it considered a new method for stealth? Because most of time on aviation forums and other media sites always talk about the 4 points but not the 5th one.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 16 Apr 2020, 20:01
by hythelday
But is it more efficient than the world-famous plazma stealth from the depths of super secret NIIs?

More importantly, can it defend an object from ROFAR systems?

That's the kind of info we are looking you, underscan, to provide us.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 16 Apr 2020, 20:07
by underscan
hythelday wrote:But is it more efficient than the world-famous plazma stealth from the depths of super secret NIIs?

More importantly, can it defend an object from ROFAR systems?

That's the kind of info we are looking you, underscan, to provide us.


Are you feeling OK?

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 16 Apr 2020, 20:11
by hythelday
underscan wrote:
hythelday wrote:But is it more efficient than the world-famous plazma stealth from the depths of super secret NIIs?

More importantly, can it defend an object from ROFAR systems?

That's the kind of info we are looking you, underscan, to provide us.


Are you feeling OK?


I've got a fever. And the only prescription is... more posts about ROFAR and other vaporware.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 16 Apr 2020, 21:14
by botsing
hythelday wrote:I've got a fever. And the only prescription is... more posts about ROFAR and other vaporware.

:mrgreen:

It's amazing what some people want to believe.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 16 Apr 2020, 21:23
by wrightwing
botsing wrote:
hythelday wrote:I've got a fever. And the only prescription is... more posts about ROFAR and other vaporware.

:mrgreen:

It's amazing what some people want to believe.

The next generation technology is Liedar. It can detect everything from any distance. :mrgreen:

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 16 Apr 2020, 23:24
by jessmo112
I prefer Blondedar. It can detect pretty blonde women from, 50+ kilometers. Giving me 1st look.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 16 Apr 2020, 23:46
by charlielima223
I remember seeing an early NatGeo (when they actually did good documentaries) or Discovery channel episode about stealth, the past, present, and possible future. In that episode they talked about advanced meta-materials that could potentially bend radio waves.

I am pretty sure in some undisclosed lab somewhere they are working on crazy materials and some other super secret squirrelly stuff. I think the biggest hurdle is a multiple of factors; development process, manufacturing process, cost, product durability.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 17 Apr 2020, 17:17
by mixelflick
hythelday wrote:But is it more efficient than the world-famous plazma stealth from the depths of super secret NIIs?

More importantly, can it defend an object from ROFAR systems?

That's the kind of info we are looking you, underscan, to provide us.


Plasma stealth, check.

ROFAR system, check.

Aware me on "super secret NIIs"?

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 17 Apr 2020, 18:02
by hythelday
mixelflick wrote:
hythelday wrote:But is it more efficient than the world-famous plazma stealth from the depths of super secret NIIs?

More importantly, can it defend an object from ROFAR systems?

That's the kind of info we are looking you, underscan, to provide us.


Plasma stealth, check.

ROFAR system, check.

Aware me on "super secret NIIs"?


NII is Russian acronym for "scientific research institute". A R&D facility.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 18 Apr 2020, 13:30
by mixelflick
This program makes little sense to me....

* The SU-35 (as it stands today) delivers 90% of the capability of the SU-57, for far less cost
* Other than China (which already has a stealth fighter), it's difficult to envision what foreign military will be able to afford it
* By the time any appreciable number are in service (2028 - MAYBE), the world will be flush with true stealth fighters (F-35)
* The CPFH of this thing is going to be astronomical, as is arming it.
* The engine, avionics and weapons currently being tested can be ported over to the SU-30/35 fleet, delivering everything except the SU-57's (allegedly) stealth properties
* By the time its fully mature as a weapons system (2030 - MAYBE), sixth gen designs will be taking to the air. And no matter what Russia says, the SU-57 isn't going to be a "6th gen" platform.

That and it'll siphon money away from other ambitious programs they're bragging about. Developing a mach 4 (or whatever) follow on to the Mig-31 will be uber-spendy. Ditto for a carrier born STOVL fighter, which they keep mentioning will equip its "light" aircraft carriers. How about new build TU-160's? Those aren't gong to be free. Nor will the rumored PAK-DA "Stealth" bomber. And the Hunter drone? The newer (supposedly miniaturized) hypersonic weapons? New Mig-35's?? Upgraded SU-34's? The AN-124 isn't going to last forever, and reports of Antonov working on an even larger successor keep surfacing.

Where will the rubles come from, outer space?

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 18 Apr 2020, 17:03
by milosh
mixelflick wrote:This program makes little sense to me....

* The SU-35 (as it stands today) delivers 90% of the capability of the SU-57, for far less cost


You need to do better analyse of costs,o nly real cost of Su-57 is airframe and FCS, everything else is used or will be used on other fighters and bombers.

mixelflick wrote:That and it'll siphon money away from other ambitious programs they're bragging about. Developing a mach 4 (or whatever) follow on to the Mig-31 will be uber-spendy.


MiG-41 is what MiG is try to sell, argument for it was possible SR-72 but for now SR-72 is just proposal. So no point for MiG-41. MiG-31 is old, one crashed day ago so they need replacement, Su-57 is only thing they have to replace MiG-31. They have around 80 MiG-31B which aren't be upgraded but so 76 Su-57 which are mentioned will be decent replacement for them in late 2020s.

I doubt Su-57 will replace Su-27, for that they have uber cheap Su-35.

mixelflick wrote:Where will the rubles come from, outer space?


That is why real production of Su-57 is only planned for second half of next decade, when as I said older MiG-31 would need to be retired.

Btw PAK-DA I really doubt we will see.

I don't see point of such plane. Tu-160 with new RAM and KH-101 missiles is undetecable for NORAD in fact NORAD commander said not so ago Tu-95 with KH-101 can't be detected from useful launch range and Tu-160 is lot smaller target even without RAM upgrade.

Second problem with PAK-DA are air breath hypersonics. Slow planes are unusable for such weapons. Tu-160 have massive weapon bays so it can nice number of not so small ramjet scramjet hypersonics and can reach Mach 2 which is need to use ramjet without need for solid booster.

In fact Tu-160M2 is quite similar to never happen B-1R. It is quite fast but also have small RCS.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 18 Apr 2020, 19:24
by underscan
mixelflick wrote:This program makes little sense to me....

* The SU-35 (as it stands today) delivers 90% of the capability of the SU-57, for far less cost
* Other than China (which already has a stealth fighter), it's difficult to envision what foreign military will be able to afford it
* By the time any appreciable number are in service (2028 - MAYBE), the world will be flush with true stealth fighters (F-35)
* The CPFH of this thing is going to be astronomical, as is arming it.
* The engine, avionics and weapons currently being tested can be ported over to the SU-30/35 fleet, delivering everything except the SU-57's (allegedly) stealth properties
* By the time its fully mature as a weapons system (2030 - MAYBE), sixth gen designs will be taking to the air. And no matter what Russia says, the SU-57 isn't going to be a "6th gen" platform.

That and it'll siphon money away from other ambitious programs they're bragging about. Developing a mach 4 (or whatever) follow on to the Mig-31 will be uber-spendy. Ditto for a carrier born STOVL fighter, which they keep mentioning will equip its "light" aircraft carriers. How about new build TU-160's? Those aren't gong to be free. Nor will the rumored PAK-DA "Stealth" bomber. And the Hunter drone? The newer (supposedly miniaturized) hypersonic weapons? New Mig-35's?? Upgraded SU-34's? The AN-124 isn't going to last forever, and reports of Antonov working on an even larger successor keep surfacing.

Where will the rubles come from, outer space?


You have made some great points but their could have been possible changes done to the aircraft. Such examples are that it was using the same old computer the Su-35 was using but they have supposedly replaced that with a newer computer, newer navigation system(strap on INS) new comms, 360 radar view I am assuming https://iz.ru/703590/sergei-valchenko-a ... adar-su-57 since I believe before they said 240 degree radar view. But even if upgraded we have made upgrades as well so that still gives us a technological gap that is still ahead of them atleast by 10 years with their major EW and radar companies have admitted to.

Some users here are bringing up ROFAR but they have yet to start mass production of photonic integrated circuits until the mid 2020s that is being very optimistic if their government greenlights the production and if they did it will take even more time to start production on radars to have those modules. I am assuming that the U.S. would either begin radar production of such circuits before they will https://www.globenewswire.com/news-rele ... ustry.html

I am sure some users have already witnessed news sources of internal mini-kinzhal variant on december 2018 and another claim last fabruary that a ammunition was created. The Zircon started on 2012 and is expected to be in service by 2022 and considering this is a more difficult ambition than the Zircon so the time frame i am looking at is 2030 if it is considered successful or not.

Than they are making it sound like stealth transparancy is better than stealth absorption or stealth reflecting away from source radar claim. But at the end of the article they still have to make a quantum computer with this in order to make a breakthrough 1st and time is required after that breakthrough to make it operational on stealth aircraft anyways. They seem to be a computer savy country according to their rankings here https://www.acm.org/icpc-winners but this requires more difficulty to achieve nonetheless.

I am with the majority here to not expect much on grandiose achievements until atleast the next minimum of 10 years.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 19 Apr 2020, 07:20
by weasel1962
Simple marketing. One needs to continually develop new products otherwise the market will lose interest and revenues will decline. The latter happened with Mig. Sukhoi at least is staying ahead of the game.

The F-35 targeted market is completely different to that of sukhoi. Bear in mind that even China buys Su-35 even as it develops its own J-20. With China not exporting its J-20, the marketing line offers anyone else a Su-57 (albeit only far fewer non-F-35 countries have a high-end requirement).

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 19 Apr 2020, 10:20
by milosh
underscan wrote:I am sure some users have already witnessed news sources of internal mini-kinzhal variant on december 2018 and another claim last fabruary that a ammunition was created. The Zircon started on 2012 and is expected to be in service by 2022 and considering this is a more difficult ambition than the Zircon so the time frame i am looking at is 2030 if it is considered successful or not.


Kinzhal is lot less advanced design then Zircon, it is air launch Iskander, Zircon is air breath scramjet.

Mini Kinzhal is easy to be done but you will have much smaller payload, what is point of that? Kinzhal fit well as Kh-32 replacement, upgraded Tu-22 will carry four Kinzhals instead two Kh-32, Kh-32 is lot easier target for air defense.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 19 Apr 2020, 16:04
by underscan
milosh wrote:
underscan wrote:I am sure some users have already witnessed news sources of internal mini-kinzhal variant on december 2018 and another claim last fabruary that a ammunition was created. The Zircon started on 2012 and is expected to be in service by 2022 and considering this is a more difficult ambition than the Zircon so the time frame i am looking at is 2030 if it is considered successful or not.


Kinzhal is lot less advanced design then Zircon, it is air launch Iskander, Zircon is air breath scramjet.

Mini Kinzhal is easy to be done but you will have much smaller payload, what is point of that? Kinzhal fit well as Kh-32 replacement, upgraded Tu-22 will carry four Kinzhals instead two Kh-32, Kh-32 is lot easier target for air defense.


No it is still a pain in the a$$ to downsize and try to keep your smaller missile to have the same speed and range characteristics as the previous huge missile. I have heard of improvements of particle additives that can increase the thrust drastically but that would take awhile to implement successfully to a new missile design. I am sure the JSM or SiAW missile based on AARGM-ER still have sufficient payload against adversary IADS even though they are smaller than a MRBM or SRBM.

I am looking at 10 years minimum at that new radar and missile claim if they are going to have success or not. And that stealth transparency claim at 15 to 20 years minimum because they have to make the error correction for qubits successful which they said their requirement is a minimum of 10 years(that anapole meta-material are to be elements of the qubits according to that last artice) https://tass.com/science/1111769. And once that is successful next are tests and modifications of it being done on aircrafts. I believe the U.S. has a better lead on quantum computers and have started this stealth method before the Russians anyways.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 19 Apr 2020, 16:50
by mixelflick
You know, the great irony is really like the SU-57. I've been rooting for it so to speak for 10 years now. The only problem is that every single IOC projection date has come and gone, and major issues remain..

ISSUE #1: Underpowered engines

Without the new engine, I've heard everything from "well, it can supercruise but only at about mach 1.2" to "The SU-57 won't be able to super-cruise without it...". I happen to believe it can supercruise with the current engine, but that could be anything from mach 1.0 in a dive to mach 1.2 to mach 2.0 in level flight. Hard to say, other than I don't think they'd be pushing for this new engine as hard as they are, unless some serious performance decriments exist... flying without it.

ISSUE #2: Sub-par stealth

It's clear it'll be stealthier than previous Russian designs, but it's also likely quite a bit less stealthy than an F-117. The publicly available RCS estimates aren't that great, something on the order of a clean Super Hornet. I happen to believe they've settled for some RCS reduction measures, but coming up short will put a heavier emphasis on E/W and jamming. The issue being, what foreign customer is going to pay a premium for a "quasi stealth" aircraft? I wouldn't...

ISSUE #3: Weapons integration

The weapons that will give this baby a real advantage all seem to be vaporware/too costly for foreign operators to use. Until it gets cleared for all these hypersonic, super long range AAM's, I have my doubts the R-77M will carry the day. Where is that missile, anyway? The supposed R-37 hypersonic "AWACS killer"? Until we see these in use other than on sputnicknews or militarywatchmag, I have to assume the R-27ER will be its fallback weapon. And if you look at the stats, that missile - sucks. In fact, I haven't seen a credible missile shot from this thing yet. That "cruise missile" shot in Syria? Laughable. The most recent video of an Archer fired from the side weapons bay? Looks fishy as hell IMO...

Not a single credible video/other picture of any BVR AAM being fired, anywhere..

ISSUE #4: The Crash

This is the most worrisome... Sure, crashes happen in almost every fighter development program. But this was the very first production model, fresh out of the factory. That means an accident investigation must take place, to find the cause of the accident and correct it. They absolutely have to do that before pumping out more production models, yet that's exactly what they're saying they're going to do*. I might buy that if this was some 3rd rate air force, but the Russians aren't stupid - they HAVE to understand the implications of doing something like that - or not.

Until that's done and fixed, this "killer in the sky" has been neutered

My 5 cents...

* https://militarywatchmagazine.com/artic ... ed-in-2020

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 20 Apr 2020, 05:00
by Corsair1963
The Su-57 is nothing short of a colossal failure. No other way you can put it....


Honestly, it won't be factor in future conflicts...... :?

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 20 Apr 2020, 13:20
by madrat
Colossal? I think that's a bit dramatic.

If anything it is great that Russians aren't getting behind it otherwise we'd have to push a 6th generation much too soon.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 20 Apr 2020, 15:00
by mixelflick
madrat wrote:Colossal? I think that's a bit dramatic.

If anything it is great that Russians aren't getting behind it otherwise we'd have to push a 6th generation much too soon.


You know it's funny... When the order went from a dozen airframes to 76, there was lots of speculation as to why? One of the more persistent rumors was that the Russians got info our 6th gen fighter was further along than originally thought. So who knows which is correct. What is clear is that the perception of an enemies progress can accelerate fighter development (F-15, response to Mig-25), or curtail investments in such (F-22 cancelled, with Gates not thinking Russia/China would jump into stealth game anytime soon).

The Russians may finally be getting cold feet though..

As recently as last week, reports have re-surfaced that Mig is designing a lighter "compliment" to the Felon - https://www.defenseworld.net/news/26759 ... p2orshKjIU

This time, they might actually be serious about it. The article goes on to say that it would use components of the SU-57, and a compressed developmental timeline might be possible "a few years". If production schedules don't slip again, Russia will have just 76 SU-57's by 2028. Don't hold your breath, I think even the Russians know this is overly optimistic. I'd go so far as to say if there are no foreign orders in the next 2 years, this program is dead. At that point, they may actually go with Mig's design, and lord knows Mig could use a win like that.

Time will tell...

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 21 Apr 2020, 02:11
by Corsair1963
madrat wrote:Colossal? I think that's a bit dramatic.

If anything it is great that Russians aren't getting behind it otherwise we'd have to push a 6th generation much too soon.



I wouldn't consider "colossal" as to dramatic in this case. As Russia has given the future Non-Western Fighter Market pretty much to the Chinese! So, what would you call it....

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 21 Apr 2020, 02:20
by Corsair1963
mixelflick wrote:
You know it's funny... When the order went from a dozen airframes to 76, there was lots of speculation as to why? One of the more persistent rumors was that the Russians got info our 6th gen fighter was further along than originally thought. So who knows which is correct. What is clear is that the perception of an enemies progress can accelerate fighter development (F-15, response to Mig-25), or curtail investments in such (F-22 cancelled, with Gates not thinking Russia/China would jump into stealth game anytime soon).

The Russians may finally be getting cold feet though..

As recently as last week, reports have re-surfaced that Mig is designing a lighter "compliment" to the Felon - https://www.defenseworld.net/news/26759 ... p2orshKjIU

This time, they might actually be serious about it. The article goes on to say that it would use components of the SU-57, and a compressed developmental timeline might be possible "a few years". If production schedules don't slip again, Russia will have just 76 SU-57's by 2028. Don't hold your breath, I think even the Russians know this is overly optimistic. I'd go so far as to say if there are no foreign orders in the next 2 years, this program is dead. At that point, they may actually go with Mig's design, and lord knows Mig could use a win like that.

Time will tell...



Honestly, don't see anyone interested in the Su-57. Except "maybe" somebody like Algeria or Vietnam and neither of them could afford it....Hell, not even sure about the latter. As Vietnam has been very slowing moving towards the West. So, Russia couldn't even count on them!

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 21 Apr 2020, 14:17
by mixelflick
Russia will still buy (some), as it's a favorite of Vlad and more a national vanity project than anything. If they DON'T build at least a few, it's the tell tale sign of Russia's fall in the world of military aviation. I do agree with the prior poster regarding the fact Russia has ceded the international stealth fighter market to the Chinese - the SU-57 more or less guarantees that.

If Mig were smart, they'd self fund (if necessary) a smaller, more economical LO design. So what if it can't fly as fast or as high? None of that matters if nobody can afford it, and it certainly looks that way for the SU-57. I'm betting a stealthed up Mig-29 (clean sheet design though) is going to cost a lot less than a stealthed up Flanker, which is what Sukhoi has in the SU-57. Drop the damned Mig-41 nonsense (who, other than Russia is going to afford that?) and pour everything you have into the new LO Mig.

They've got a ton of nation/states out there with Mig-29's that need replacing. This plan would leverage that, because few if any of them can replace those Mig-29s with SU-57's (or even SU-35's, for that matter)...

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 21 Apr 2020, 14:35
by jessmo112
38407ebf3d98cdf1eda52e0af94a6d7e.jpg
Mig-41
So are we talking about a Russian style J-31 or a toned down mig-41? The plane will likely be a medium weight class fighter. No one, not even the Americans have been able to build light LO design.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 21 Apr 2020, 15:11
by hythelday
mixelflick wrote:If Mig were smart, they'd self fund (if necessary) a smaller, more economical LO design.


How can a state owned MiG "self-fund" anything? Every time you post on these matters you say this, every time me and others point this out, and everytime you ignore this. MiG isn't doing anything they are not told by UAC to do.

mixelflick wrote:So what if it can't fly as fast or as high? None of that matters if nobody can afford it, and it certainly looks that way for the SU-57. I'm betting a stealthed up Mig-29 (clean sheet design though) is going to cost a lot less than a stealthed up Flanker, which is what Sukhoi has in the SU-57. Drop the damned Mig-41 nonsense (who, other than Russia is going to afford that?) and pour everything you have into the new LO Mig.


You and others have suggested that Fulcrum somehow is more economical than the Flanker, yet there is no data to corroborate that, the contrary is actually quite true. The quality of Fulcrums is quite well known from the Finnish comp (and how EXPENSIVE it was to operate given it's laborous MX and short service life), Indian troubles and the fact that Algeria refused to accept squadrons worth of Fulcrums (and exchanged them for Flankers) in what was to be MiGs biggest export contract since India. People continuously disregard the fact that Flankers were more widely exported than Fucrums and have the benefit of being a much better multirole fighter, not least because they have a habit of being improved upon by Western tech.

mixelflick wrote:They've got a ton of nation/states out there with Mig-29's that need replacing. This plan would leverage that, because few if any of them can replace those Mig-29s with SU-57's (or even SU-35's, for that matter)...


Would that be Myanmar or Sudan? No, there aren't "a ton of nations". India is they only major export success for Fulcrums (probably because Flanker was not available), but they are not interested in those anymore. Algeria told MiG to stick it and went with a bunch of Flankers instead - as mentioned above. The only one crazy enough to actually buy a decent number was Egypt - and I will be damned if it was for some logical reason. It remains to be seen how much end up being delivered. The rest mostly received them as aid from Soviets or purchased second hand birds (ie Peru, Algeria first batch, Poland, Sudan, Azerbaijan, Chad). Some nations were even more creative. Iran got 5 Iraqi ones for free during Desert Storm, which is more than the massive reported export deal of four Fulcrums to Mongolian Air Force in 2011 (which apparently did not happen at all, instead Russians gave Mongolian Air Force two UBs free of charge last year) and equals a massive success of Sri Lanka Air Force contract, which, according to Russian wiki "are delivered" but sadly in real life they are not, as evidenced by Sri Lanka Air Force website and news. Hungary recieved a bunch of Fulcrums as "debt-relief" from Russia in 1993 and decided to get rif of those ASAP and went for Gripens (The record in this regard belongs to Romanian Fulcrums, which were received brand new in 1989 and removed from service in 2003, while RoAF decided to keep MiG-21s flying). Tells you a lot about Fulcrums.

So please stop with this "stealthy Fulcrum was the way to go" theory. It's rubbish.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 22 Apr 2020, 01:32
by weasel1962
1. Interesting to note 27 nations still using ~800 Mig-29 which makes it , on paper, the 5th highest numbers of fighter type in global service after the F-16, F-15, F-18 and Sukhoi.

These include:
Algeria (32), Azerbaijan (12), Bangladesh (8), Belarus (39), Bulgaria (15), Cuba (3), Egypt (15), Eritrea (5), India (111), Iran (20), Kazakhstan (26), Myanmar (31), North Korea (35), Peru (9), Poland (29), Russia (285), Serbia (9), Slovakia (11), Sudan (11), Syria (20), Turkmenistan (24), Ukraine (21), Uzbekistan (39) and Yemen (24).

2. The UAC have approved and funded the development of the Mig-41.

3. Off paper, agree completely with comments that there doesn't appear to be a market for the Mig-41 among current and former Mig-29 users.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 22 Apr 2020, 02:32
by Corsair1963
weasel1962 wrote:1. Interesting to note 27 nations still using ~800 Mig-29 which makes it , on paper, the 5th highest numbers of fighter type in global service after the F-16, F-15, F-18 and Sukhoi.

These include:
Algeria (32), Azerbaijan (12), Bangladesh (8), Belarus (39), Bulgaria (15), Cuba (3), Egypt (15), Eritrea (5), India (111), Iran (20), Kazakhstan (26), Myanmar (31), North Korea (35), Peru (9), Poland (29), Russia (285), Serbia (9), Slovakia (11), Sudan (11), Syria (20), Turkmenistan (24), Ukraine (21), Uzbekistan (39) and Yemen (24).

2. The UAC have approved and funded the development of the Mig-41.

3. Off paper, agree completely with comments that there doesn't appear to be a market for the Mig-41 among current and former Mig-29 users.



You see any of those Mig-29 customers likely interested in the Su-57??? :|

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 22 Apr 2020, 02:41
by Corsair1963
jessmo112 wrote:
38407ebf3d98cdf1eda52e0af94a6d7e.jpg
So are we talking about a Russian style J-31 or a toned down mig-41? The plane will likely be a medium weight class fighter. No one, not even the Americans have been able to build light LO design.



Let's break this down....

1.) The Su-57 is pretty much a failure and won't be acquired in any numbers.

2.) Another "new" 5th Generation Fighter isn't forthcoming. Plus, it would arrive to late to be any use...

3.) A new 6th Generation Fighter Program. If, started today wouldn't arrive for at least 20+ years.


So, what is the solution for the RuAF then???

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 22 Apr 2020, 16:44
by mixelflick
If Mig is going to be dictated to as to what they can (and can't) do, why keep them around at all as a design bureau? The state and others should just stop referring to their fighter aircraft as Mig or SU, developing some other acronym.

There are indeed many Mig-29 foreign operators, as detailed in the previous list. Mig-29 price is $23.8 million, and SU-27 is $41.2 million, both per this link - https://militarymachine.com/most-expens ... tary-jets/. $16-17 million difference is a lot of scratch, if you ask me. Couldn't find reliable cost per flight hour numbers, but I fail to see how the Sukhoi is going to be appreciably cheaper.

You cite an example of Mig-29's being returned for Sukhois due to shoddy workmanship. That's one example. Another is India and its ongoing issues with its Flanker engines. They aren't exactly enamored with them. Indian pilots speak highly of the their Mig-29's though - https://hushkit.net/?s=mig-29. It's also interesting the Indians went for the Mig-29K vs the SU-33 or any other Flanker when it came to equipping their carrier. You can bet if there was a smaller, less costly Russian LO design they'd look hard at it. Navalised SU-57's? Please. The cost is already astronomical, and it's only going higher for a carrier based version.

A stealth design from the Mig (or state, whatever you wanna call it) burea is indeed what's necessary for Russia to have any hope of having a successful LO program. The SU-57 is way too big, too expensive and too riddled with issues to fill that role. Replacing Flankers worldwide is getting too pricey, and even if countries could afford to trade their SU-27's for SU-35's, every day that ticks by they get more obsolete in the 5th gen world.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 22 Apr 2020, 16:55
by mixelflick
jessmo112 wrote:
38407ebf3d98cdf1eda52e0af94a6d7e.jpg
So are we talking about a Russian style J-31 or a toned down mig-41? The plane will likely be a medium weight class fighter. No one, not even the Americans have been able to build light LO design.


More akin to a Russian J-31. The Mig-41 I see as wholly impractical, even for Russia.

I don't think anyone is envisioning a truly "light" LO design. Way, way too many design compromises insofar as range, payload, operational ceiling etc. It would be like building an F-35 with F-5E like performance. Stealth? Sure. But when you can't carry enough fuel/weapons a significant distance, why bother?

You wind up with... a Gripen :mrgreen:

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 22 Apr 2020, 17:47
by milosh
mixelflick wrote:You cite an example of Mig-29's being returned for Sukhois due to shoddy workmanship. That's one example. Another is India and its ongoing issues with its Flanker engines. They aren't exactly enamored with them. Indian pilots speak highly of the their Mig-29's though - https://hushkit.net/?s=mig-29. It's also interesting the Indians went for the Mig-29K vs the SU-33 or any other Flanker when it came to equipping their carrier. You can bet if there was a smaller, less costly Russian LO design they'd look hard at it.


Agian that nonsense about Indian problem with AL-31, it is heavy BS. Indians are only which had that problem so Saturn send inspection and they find out it was Indian mistake I think they used different oil for engine.

There is nothing strange selecting MiG-29K over Su-33, Indian modified Kiev class carrier isn't big carrier:

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 22 Apr 2020, 18:01
by hythelday
mixelflick wrote:If Mig is going to be dictated to as to what they can (and can't) do, why keep them around at all as a design bureau? The state and others should just stop referring to their fighter aircraft as Mig or SU, developing some other acronym.


Great advice, as always. Go write to the UAC.

mixelflick wrote:There are indeed many Mig-29 foreign operators, as detailed in the previous list.

The only ones who BOUGHT NEW BUILD Fulcrums from Russia are 1) India (most of them MiG-29K, which India pretty much funded. The odd number of new air force Fulcrums of air force variety were bought to replace lost stock) 2) Egypt (none yet delivered) 3) maybe Yemen, but there are no concrete numbers 4) Maybe Malaysia, but I wouldn't bet on that. Flanker is a much more successful fighter both domestically as well as well as on export, despite the fact that it is a large, and according to you more expensive fighter.

mixelflick wrote:Mig-29 price is $23.8 million, and SU-27 is $41.2 million, both per this link - https://militarymachine.com/most-expens ... tary-jets/. $16-17 million difference is a lot of scratch, if you ask me. Couldn't find reliable cost per flight hour numbers, but I fail to see how the Sukhoi is going to be appreciably cheaper.


Got any more rubbish blog links to back up your theories? I have already explained to you, several times in the past, the perils of "eye-balling" cost of Russian fighter contracts based on public info.

mixelflick wrote:You cite an example of Mig-29's being returned for Sukhois due to shoddy workmanship. That's one example. Another is India and its ongoing issues with its Flanker engines. They aren't exactly enamored with them. Indian pilots speak highly of the their Mig-29's though - https://hushkit.net/?s=mig-29.


Indian pilots speak highly of their aircraft? What a surprise? Did you know MiG-21 Bison could wipe the floor with an entire USAF if they wanted to? They did exactly that on that one exercise. You know, the one they talk a lot about.

mixelflick wrote:It's also interesting the Indians went for the Mig-29K vs the SU-33 or any other Flanker when it came to equipping their carrier. You can bet if there was a smaller, less costly Russian LO design they'd look hard at it. Navalised SU-57's? Please. The cost is already astronomical, and it's only going higher for a carrier based version.


You could stop for a second to think why India chose a smaller plane for modified Kiev-class. Maybe research a little into Russian (or should I say late Soviet) naval aviation, and the proposed air groups sizes for Kuznetsov: how many Flankers vs how many Fulcrums could be carried. Then suddenly the mystery of why they went with Fulcrum would not be a mystery.

mixelflick wrote:A stealth design from the Mig (or state, whatever you wanna call it) burea is indeed what's necessary for Russia to have any hope of having a successful LO program. The SU-57 is way too big, too expensive and too riddled with issues to fill that role. Replacing Flankers worldwide is getting too pricey, and even if countries could afford to trade their SU-27's for SU-35's, every day that ticks by they get more obsolete in the 5th gen world.


Your entire argument that Russia needs a "small LO fighter" to be successful is rubbish and is entirely unjustified.
1) Russia itself, first and foremost, is not interested in the "small, less capable but economic" fighters because they do not suite Russian needs. Russia will not develop an entirely different fighter "just for export".
2) A bulk of foreign Fulcrum fleet is hand-me-down from WarPac era. In the recent history, and by this I mean past 30 years, Flanker was the chief export success for Russia. This was the plane of choice for most customers. More importantly, those were new-build planes, not refurbished ex-Soviet surplus, and foreign interest (and HARD CASH) paid for them helped along the development of more advanced versions for the Russian Air Force, Su-30MKI being the genesis of all of this (btw Su-30MKI alone amouts for more Flanker exports that Russia-era Fulcrums).
3) Flankers are desired because they are capable while being not much more expensive to run (if at all) than a Fulcrum. A small Russian fighter would be neither economical, nor effective. What small but powerful and reliable engine are they going to put into small airframe? What small, but powerful and effective radar are going to put into Russian small fighter? Etc. Russia did not build their version of F-16 because they didn't have the tech. And Fulcrum is a MX nightmare ($$$).

Your theory that picking Flanker over Fulcrum as a fighter to develop was a strategic mistake is rubbish.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 23 Apr 2020, 00:47
by weasel1962
What happens when one gives anyone incl Sukhoi a monopoly? The whole purpose of UAC (besides facilitating bungs) is to manage the whole Russian aircraft industry a little better. I think having Mig around is about competition. Russia is still a buyer.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 23 Apr 2020, 03:35
by madrat
What kind of argument is 'Your entire argument that Russia needs a "small LO fighter" to be successful is rubbish and is entirely unjustified'? You did not have any better argument in your points than mixelflick.

For your information the Russians no longer controlled the Su-33 development as it was centered around the Crimean peninsula. The carrier was built there. The training was conducted there at NITKA. The Ukraine transferred one of the prototypes to China. The exclamation point was when China poached the engineering talent around the Crimean test site. The only realistic route for Russia to improve it was to turn it into an Su-35S Super Flanker off shoot. MiG-29K exists because it was a monetary decision. It wasn't old recycled Soviet junk. It wasn't some kind of drawback in capability. MiG-29K was much more mature technology than what was available in the Su-33.

Honestly, some of the pointed arguments around here sound more like trolling than honest discussion. Attacking mixelflick was cancerous to the forum and I hope you people - you know who you are - check yourself.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 23 Apr 2020, 05:16
by hythelday
madrat wrote:What kind of argument is 'Your entire argument that Russia needs a "small LO fighter" to be successful is rubbish and is entirely unjustified'? You did not have any better argument in your points than mixelflick.


Read last paragraph in my last post. It has numbered arguments 1), 2), and 3). You can counter them, instead of vague hints that I don't have an argument.

madrat wrote:For your information the Russians no longer controlled the Su-33 development as it was centered around the Crimean peninsula. The carrier was built there. The training was conducted there at NITKA. The Ukraine transferred one of the prototypes to China. The exclamation point was when China poached the engineering talent around the Crimean test site. The only realistic route for Russia to improve it was to turn it into an Su-35S Super Flanker off shoot. MiG-29K exists because it was a monetary decision. It wasn't old recycled Soviet junk. It wasn't some kind of drawback in capability. MiG-29K was much more mature technology than what was available in the Su-33.


I am at a loss as to what are you trying to say here. The Russians no longer controlled Su-33 development, but could still control MiG-29K development? Because it was not trialed at NITKA? What?

madrat wrote:Honestly, some of the pointed arguments around here sound more like trolling than honest discussion. Attacking mixelflick was cancerous to the forum and I hope you people - you know who you are - check yourself.


No, I will not, because his theory that Russia would have been better off with a small LO platform instead T-50 is unjustified rubbish.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 23 Apr 2020, 05:24
by Corsair1963
Russia is no longer a "Super Power" and can't hope to keep up with China and the US on a one for one basis. Clearly, developing two Stealth Fighters (Hi/Low or Heavy/Light) was out of the question....

So, clearly developing a mid-sized stealth fighter along the lines of the J-31 and F-35. Which, could be mass produced and sold in respectable numbers. Would have been the most viable option. (and most likely to succeed)

Instead they developed the PAK-FA (Su-57) that flopped and blew it all.....

:shock:

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 23 Apr 2020, 07:28
by weasel1962
hythelday wrote:Your entire argument that Russia needs a "small LO fighter" to be successful is rubbish and is entirely unjustified.
1) Russia itself, first and foremost, is not interested in the "small, less capable but economic" fighters because they do not suite Russian needs.


It took 12 years from unveiling to first delivery for the Mig-35, which has been inducted into Russian service despite the success of the Sukhoi and zero exports. Same will happen with the Mig-41.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 23 Apr 2020, 14:57
by mixelflick
madrat wrote:What kind of argument is 'Your entire argument that Russia needs a "small LO fighter" to be successful is rubbish and is entirely unjustified'? You did not have any better argument in your points than mixelflick.

For your information the Russians no longer controlled the Su-33 development as it was centered around the Crimean peninsula. The carrier was built there. The training was conducted there at NITKA. The Ukraine transferred one of the prototypes to China. The exclamation point was when China poached the engineering talent around the Crimean test site. The only realistic route for Russia to improve it was to turn it into an Su-35S Super Flanker off shoot. MiG-29K exists because it was a monetary decision. It wasn't old recycled Soviet junk. It wasn't some kind of drawback in capability. MiG-29K was much more mature technology than what was available in the Su-33.

Honestly, some of the pointed arguments around here sound more like trolling than honest discussion. Attacking mixelflick was cancerous to the forum and I hope you people - you know who you are - check yourself.


He really doesn't bother me, honestly. That much venom usually means something isn't right at home, perhaps he lost his job or a friend during this COVID thing? Maybe both?? You just don't know nowadays. Could use some anger management classes though, that's for sure. I hope he gets better, but its going to be a long road..

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 11 May 2020, 16:05
by mixelflick
Update as of 3 days ago.. Now they're saying the first batch of SU-57's with arrive "by the mid 2020's" with 4th gen engines. Aircraft with 5th gen engines however, will only be delivered "after the mid-2020's".

https://www.aerotime.aero/ina.hladyshav ... -mid-2020s

"Deputy Minister of Defence of Russian Federation Alexei Krivoruchko specified that deliveries would be carried out in two steps. For the first set of deliveries, planned to be completed by the middle of the 2020s, Su-57 jets would be equipped with fourth-generation engines.

"In the second stage, after the completion of tests, supplies of the engine and fifth-generation power units with increased fuel efficiency and lower life cycle costs will begin," Krivoruchko explained. Deliveries of Su-57 fighters with the fifth-generation engines will begin after the mid-2020s..."

I don't know whether to laugh or cry for them, to be honest. I've never seen so many date estimates come and go as I have on this program. From its first flight, they've painted a rosy picture. First it was going to be in service by 2013. Then every year after that came new guidance. The last estimate was given after the first production version crashed late last year. Despite the crash, they said deliveries would remain on track with new examples being delivered in 2020.

That sounds iffy now (at best).The program might not be on life support, but sounds like its in critical condition. I wonder if the the SU-57 will eventually be a casualty of chronically low oil prices, COVID 19 and too much vodka.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 11 May 2020, 16:22
by milosh
Not that simple at all.

In 2010s, Sukhoi CEO Pogosyan wanted to sell Su-57 with 117 to RuAF. Saturn CEO Chepkin praised 117 as 5gen by its parameters but 117 couldn't deliver what RuAF want and that is similar cruising capability at Mach 2 as MiG-31. As I already explain RuAF isn't so interested in Su-57 as Su-27 replacement but it is very interested as MiG-31 replacement.

That would need beast of engine, something like F119 but smaller, it would be more like F120 in dimensions. This is why we believed it would be variable cycle but it was confirmed it will not be. So they need create really astonishing engine to achieve what RuAF want.

Btw you have info about AL-51 from year or more ago where they said engine will be ready for serial production at 2025 at best (Russian newspaper close to government) so this statement only confirm that.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 11 May 2020, 16:28
by loke
mixelflick wrote:
I don't know whether to laugh or cry for them, to be honest. I've never seen so many date estimates come and go as I have on this program.

Hmm the Indian Tejas LCA program still holds the world record IMHO... of course it is still early days and the Su-57 program may still win this competition but as of today I would say the Tejas program has a significant lead over the Su-57 program.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 11 May 2020, 20:14
by skyward
loke wrote:
mixelflick wrote:
I don't know whether to laugh or cry for them, to be honest. I've never seen so many date estimates come and go as I have on this program.

Hmm the Indian Tejas LCA program still holds the world record IMHO... of course it is still early days and the Su-57 program may still win this competition but as of today I would say the Tejas program has a significant lead over the Su-57 program.


Comparing India vs Russia fighter program is even more laughable.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 20 May 2020, 23:39
by nutshell
skyward wrote:
loke wrote:
mixelflick wrote:
I don't know whether to laugh or cry for them, to be honest. I've never seen so many date estimates come and go as I have on this program.

Hmm the Indian Tejas LCA program still holds the world record IMHO... of course it is still early days and the Su-57 program may still win this competition but as of today I would say the Tejas program has a significant lead over the Su-57 program.


Comparing India vs Russia fighter program is even more laughable.


Both have the tendency to not deliver tbh.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 21 May 2020, 19:43
by falcon.16
milosh wrote:Not that simple at all.

In 2010s, Sukhoi CEO Pogosyan wanted to sell Su-57 with 117 to RuAF. Saturn CEO Chepkin praised 117 as 5gen by its parameters but 117 couldn't deliver what RuAF want and that is similar cruising capability at Mach 2 as MiG-31. As I already explain RuAF isn't so interested in Su-57 as Su-27 replacement but it is very interested as MiG-31 replacement.

That would need beast of engine, something like F119 but smaller, it would be more like F120 in dimensions. This is why we believed it would be variable cycle but it was confirmed it will not be. So they need create really astonishing engine to achieve what RuAF want.

Btw you have info about AL-51 from year or more ago where they said engine will be ready for serial production at 2025 at best (Russian newspaper close to government) so this statement only confirm that.


Current engines, only have marginal supercruise, 1.2 or 1.3M i think have read it. Russia wants get at least around 1.5M, 1.6M supercruise. Forget 2.0M.

But it seems have some problems with materials on new engines told Piotr Butowski. I think this journalist know wells what happend inside program.

https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/ ... -uncertain

Though there is no official information on the topic, the next-generation engine program faces serious obstacles. The main one is the lack of modern materials that would enable the planned engine characteristics. Replacing planned materials with those that are available is likely to adversely affect the engine’s weight and performance.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 22 May 2020, 16:24
by mixelflick
falcon.16 wrote:
milosh wrote:Not that simple at all.

In 2010s, Sukhoi CEO Pogosyan wanted to sell Su-57 with 117 to RuAF. Saturn CEO Chepkin praised 117 as 5gen by its parameters but 117 couldn't deliver what RuAF want and that is similar cruising capability at Mach 2 as MiG-31. As I already explain RuAF isn't so interested in Su-57 as Su-27 replacement but it is very interested as MiG-31 replacement.

That would need beast of engine, something like F119 but smaller, it would be more like F120 in dimensions. This is why we believed it would be variable cycle but it was confirmed it will not be. So they need create really astonishing engine to achieve what RuAF want.

Btw you have info about AL-51 from year or more ago where they said engine will be ready for serial production at 2025 at best (Russian newspaper close to government) so this statement only confirm that.


Current engines, only have marginal supercruise, 1.2 or 1.3M i think have read it. Russia wants get at least around 1.5M, 1.6M supercruise. Forget 2.0M.

But it seems have some problems with materials on new engines told Piotr Butowski. I think this journalist know wells what happend inside program.

https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/ ... -uncertain

Though there is no official information on the topic, the next-generation engine program faces serious obstacles. The main one is the lack of modern materials that would enable the planned engine characteristics. Replacing planned materials with those that are available is likely to adversely affect the engine’s weight and performance.


If they're hell bent on upper end of the super-cruise range (mach 1.5 or more), it will likely consume them. Because it sure sounds like they're going to spend a hell of a lot of $ for what, .2 or .3 more mach? Now, if that comes along with a significant reduction in RCS and/or IR signature, that's one thing. But quite another to spend so much time/money to get a bit more speed. It would be like LM/Pratt re-designing the F-35 to bump its super-cruise up a bit more..... for what? Adds a hell of a lot more expense, for a little more capability. Makes no sense...

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 22 May 2020, 23:14
by falcon.16
mixelflick wrote:
falcon.16 wrote:
milosh wrote:Not that simple at all.

In 2010s, Sukhoi CEO Pogosyan wanted to sell Su-57 with 117 to RuAF. Saturn CEO Chepkin praised 117 as 5gen by its parameters but 117 couldn't deliver what RuAF want and that is similar cruising capability at Mach 2 as MiG-31. As I already explain RuAF isn't so interested in Su-57 as Su-27 replacement but it is very interested as MiG-31 replacement.

That would need beast of engine, something like F119 but smaller, it would be more like F120 in dimensions. This is why we believed it would be variable cycle but it was confirmed it will not be. So they need create really astonishing engine to achieve what RuAF want.

Btw you have info about AL-51 from year or more ago where they said engine will be ready for serial production at 2025 at best (Russian newspaper close to government) so this statement only confirm that.


Current engines, only have marginal supercruise, 1.2 or 1.3M i think have read it. Russia wants get at least around 1.5M, 1.6M supercruise. Forget 2.0M.

But it seems have some problems with materials on new engines told Piotr Butowski. I think this journalist know wells what happend inside program.

https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/ ... -uncertain

Though there is no official information on the topic, the next-generation engine program faces serious obstacles. The main one is the lack of modern materials that would enable the planned engine characteristics. Replacing planned materials with those that are available is likely to adversely affect the engine’s weight and performance.


If they're hell bent on upper end of the super-cruise range (mach 1.5 or more), it will likely consume them. Because it sure sounds like they're going to spend a hell of a lot of $ for what, .2 or .3 more mach? Now, if that comes along with a significant reduction in RCS and/or IR signature, that's one thing. But quite another to spend so much time/money to get a bit more speed. It would be like LM/Pratt re-designing the F-35 to bump its super-cruise up a bit more..... for what? Adds a hell of a lot more expense, for a little more capability. Makes no sense...


Russians does not consider to current engine like 5th generation, because not good IR emissions. For this they need the new engine, not only because will be faster, will be lighter and better management of IR emissions.
But Butowski tell that they have problems with the development, maybe they will have to get a more basic version of the new engine.

A new engine needs many years of development and new engine is not an evolution, they was very optimistic with the previous dates for full production of the new engines.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 23 May 2020, 09:30
by jessmo112
hythelday wrote:
mixelflick wrote:If Mig is going to be dictated to as to what they can (and can't) do, why keep them around at all as a design bureau? The state and others should just stop referring to their fighter aircraft as Mig or SU, developing some other acronym.


Great advice, as always. Go write to the UAC.

mixelflick wrote:There are indeed many Mig-29 foreign operators, as detailed in the previous list.

The only ones who BOUGHT NEW BUILD Fulcrums from Russia are 1) India (most of them MiG-29K, which India pretty much funded. The odd number of new air force Fulcrums of air force variety were bought to replace lost stock) 2) Egypt (none yet delivered) 3) maybe Yemen, but there are no concrete numbers 4) Maybe Malaysia, but I wouldn't bet on that. Flanker is a much more successful fighter both domestically as well as well as on export, despite the fact that it is a large, and according to you more expensive fighter.

mixelflick wrote:Mig-29 price is $23.8 million, and SU-27 is $41.2 million, both per this link - https://militarymachine.com/most-expens ... tary-jets/. $16-17 million difference is a lot of scratch, if you ask me. Couldn't find reliable cost per flight hour numbers, but I fail to see how the Sukhoi is going to be appreciably cheaper.


Got any more rubbish blog links to back up your theories? I have already explained to you, several times in the past, the perils of "eye-balling" cost of Russian fighter contracts based on public info.

mixelflick wrote:You cite an example of Mig-29's being returned for Sukhois due to shoddy workmanship. That's one example. Another is India and its ongoing issues with its Flanker engines. They aren't exactly enamored with them. Indian pilots speak highly of the their Mig-29's though - https://hushkit.net/?s=mig-29.


Indian pilots speak highly of their aircraft? What a surprise? Did you know MiG-21 Bison could wipe the floor with an entire USAF if they wanted to? They did exactly that on that one exercise. You know, the one they talk a lot about.

mixelflick wrote:It's also interesting the Indians went for the Mig-29K vs the SU-33 or any other Flanker when it came to equipping their carrier. You can bet if there was a smaller, less costly Russian LO design they'd look hard at it. Navalised SU-57's? Please. The cost is already astronomical, and it's only going higher for a carrier based version.


You could stop for a second to think why India chose a smaller plane for modified Kiev-class. Maybe research a little into Russian (or should I say late Soviet) naval aviation, and the proposed air groups sizes for Kuznetsov: how many Flankers vs how many Fulcrums could be carried. Then suddenly the mystery of why they went with Fulcrum would not be a mystery.

mixelflick wrote:A stealth design from the Mig (or state, whatever you wanna call it) burea is indeed what's necessary for Russia to have any hope of having a successful LO program. The SU-57 is way too big, too expensive and too riddled with issues to fill that role. Replacing Flankers worldwide is getting too pricey, and even if countries could afford to trade their SU-27's for SU-35's, every day that ticks by they get more obsolete in the 5th gen world.


Your entire argument that Russia needs a "small LO fighter" to be successful is rubbish and is entirely unjustified.
1) Russia itself, first and foremost, is not interested in the "small, less capable but economic" fighters because they do not suite Russian needs. Russia will not develop an entirely different fighter "just for export".
2) A bulk of foreign Fulcrum fleet is hand-me-down from WarPac era. In the recent history, and by this I mean past 30 years, Flanker was the chief export success for Russia. This was the plane of choice for most customers. More importantly, those were new-build planes, not refurbished ex-Soviet surplus, and foreign interest (and HARD CASH) paid for them helped along the development of more advanced versions for the Russian Air Force, Su-30MKI being the genesis of all of this (btw Su-30MKI alone amouts for more Flanker exports that Russia-era Fulcrums).
3) Flankers are desired because they are capable while being not much more expensive to run (if at all) than a Fulcrum. A small Russian fighter would be neither economical, nor effective. What small but powerful and reliable engine are they going to put into small airframe? What small, but powerful and effective radar are going to put into Russian small fighter? Etc. Russia did not build their version of F-16 because they didn't have the tech. And Fulcrum is a MX nightmare ($$$).

Your theory that picking Flanker over Fulcrum as a fighter to develop was a strategic mistake is rubbish.


If you will allow me to enter into this amazing discussion I have a few questions for you?

1. If Russia needed the Mig then why not now?

2. Doesnt Russia have vast territory to defend, And could use a decently priced point defence fighter? Could they afford a force of all heavy fighters During the Soviet era?
If they didnt buy all flankers and foxbats then, what makes you think they can do it now?

3. As long as you have former clients that have hundreds of these planes, why would you NOT want to replace them?

4. And finally How hard is it to take an F-35 planform and put 2 Su-27 engines in it? How hard would it be to throw some stealth coatings on it, and an internal IRST and call it a day. Again I consider myself ignorant, I am at my worst an armchair enthusiast, at my best a aviation blog
Groupie.If my questions show my ignorance please excuse me.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 23 May 2020, 10:18
by milosh
jessmo112 wrote:1. If Russia needed the Mig then why not now?

2. Doesnt Russia have vast territory to defend, And could use a decently priced point defence fighter? Could they afford a force of all heavy fighters During the Soviet era?
If they didnt buy all flankers and foxbats then, what makes you think they can do it now?

3. As long as you have former clients that have hundreds of these planes, why would you NOT want to replace them?

4. And finally How hard is it to take an F-35 planform and put 2 Su-27 engines in it? How hard would it be to throw some stealth coatings on it, and an internal IRST and call it a day. Again I consider myself ignorant, I am at my worst an armchair enthusiast, at my best a aviation blog
Groupie.If my questions show my ignorance please excuse me.


USSR bought lot of MiG-29 because they cost lot less then Su-27. But today things are changed, Flankers are in fact cheaper then Fulcrums. Massive production lead to that, here is nice example:

This is Su-30 production line (from 2006)
https://youtu.be/XIxr4PDT544?t=61

And is how MiG make newest MiG-29 variants ( from 2016)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcDVDxuK3Wg

MiG had chance to offered Su-57 alternative, one engined AL-51 fighter something like stealthy scaled up F-16XL but they didn't, they pushed medium stealth based on MiG-35, it wouldn't be much cheaper then Su-57 and it would be noticeable less capable.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 23 May 2020, 12:23
by jessmo112
milosh wrote:
jessmo112 wrote:1. If Russia needed the Mig then why not now?

2. Doesnt Russia have vast territory to defend, And could use a decently priced point defence fighter? Could they afford a force of all heavy fighters During the Soviet era?
If they didnt buy all flankers and foxbats then, what makes you think they can do it now?

3. As long as you have former clients that have hundreds of these planes, why would you NOT want to replace them?

4. And finally How hard is it to take an F-35 planform and put 2 Su-27 engines in it? How hard would it be to throw some stealth coatings on it, and an internal IRST and call it a day. Again I consider myself ignorant, I am at my worst an armchair enthusiast, at my best a aviation blog
Groupie.If my questions show my ignorance please excuse me.


USSR bought lot of MiG-29 because they cost lot less then Su-27. But today things are changed, Flankers are in fact cheaper then Fulcrums. Massive production lead to that, here is nice example:

This is Su-30 production line (from 2006)
https://youtu.be/XIxr4PDT544?t=61

And is how MiG make newest MiG-29 variants ( from 2016)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcDVDxuK3Wg

MiG had chance to offered Su-57 alternative, one engined AL-51 fighter something like stealthy scaled up F-16XL but they didn't, they pushed medium stealth based on MiG-35, it wouldn't be much cheaper then Su-57 and it would be noticeable less capable.


Thats a good point, but dont you think its a little infair to compare soviet era Mig-29s to a modern design?
Also there is no way a modern day Mig-29 replacement would cost MORE than the Su-57. On the other hand they are Russian. Procurement hasnt been exactly smooth lately.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 25 May 2020, 15:35
by mixelflick
This is rich: https://www.popularmechanics.com/milita ... -unmanned/

Russians now flying "unmanned" SU-57's, LOL.

Let's see if I understand this correctly... Your first production version crashes on Christmas Eve, 2019. Less than 6 months later, you're flying it autonomously? I've heard nothing insofar as accident investigation findings. Speculation on everything from flight control software to the vertical stabilizers as the cause but no official findings and..... you're now flying without pilots?

I thought that was the realm of the "Hunter"? None of this makes sense, and it smacks of typical Russian hyperbole and exaggeration. For God's sake give it a rest, they're WAY past losing credibility with respect to IOC dates etc..

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 26 May 2020, 19:37
by hythelday
jessmo112 wrote:
If you will allow me to enter into this amazing discussion I have a few questions for you?

1. If Russia needed the Mig then why not now?


I didn't say Russia needed MiG. I don't know why do they keep them around. Maybe they have some more secret work going on. Maybe it is institutional pride. Maybe they still hope to score some MiG-35 sales. Maybe they are useful to ferment some R&D ideas. As a matter of fact, I don't know the exact structure of MiG as of now, it could be 10,000 people or 100. Perhaps Milosh is more up to date with that.

jessmo112 wrote:
2. Doesnt Russia have vast territory to defend, And could use a decently priced point defence fighter? Could they afford a force of all heavy fighters During the Soviet era?
If they didnt buy all flankers and foxbats then, what makes you think they can do it now?


This question is multifold:
Russia does have a vast territory to defend. So vast in fact, that "a point defence fighter" and "vast Russian territory" are mutually exclusive. Fulcrum simply does not cut it. Point defence implies existence of a well developed infrastructure of bases. An infrastructure that does not exist, nor is possible to be built given Russian realities. Besides, there is a "Gripen fallacy" in this logic. Fulcrum may be "decently priced", but you need larger numbers. Fulcrum is MX nightmare (most expensive option in Finnish competition in 1992, remember that) + aformentioned basing. The reality is that cost vs performance ratio does not favor Fulcrum over Flanker, and by a large margin.

As for the second part of your question: Fulcrum has been approved for development later than the Flanker but entered service before it, chiefly because of shortcoming of the initial Flanker which needed a redesign after initial prototypes were flown. However, the Soviets did in fact in a way have an air force of only Foxbats and Flankers - the PVO Aviation. PVO Aviation never bought Fulcrums. As a matter of fact a PVO version was never developed. It is true that PVO had some shorter range fighters, like Su-15 or versions of MiG-23, but PVO Aviation was chiefly interested in big, high performance (both range and capable radar) fighters abd they continued to take in MiG-31 and Su-27P fighters at slower rate and disregarded MiG-29 completely. MiG-29 was a VVS fighter, because VVS needed far larger numbers of fighters, and not necessarily as capable.
The Russian Air force had less funds at its disposal (especially in the nineties), it is true. So what do you think they did with their funds? They maximized the bang they get for their buck - and went on to procure more Flankers than Fulcrums. Today there exists no air force that has a "high-low" mix of Flankers an Fulcrums. Every air force that has a mix of Flankers and Fulcrums has more Flankers in service, and usually even more Flankers on order. I will touch upon that later. The Russian air force, that supposedly is looking for "reasonably priced" fighter, is also an operatior of a large number of Su-34 attack aircraft, which is neither cheap nor light, however is very capable and thus desirable. According to FlightGlobal's 2020 data, Russian Air Force has 429 Flankers (52 on order) and 251 Fulcrums (34 on order). That's a ratio of about 7:4 in favor of a heavier fighter (ratio of 3:2 ordered). The ratio is almost 9:4 if one counts 120+ Fullbacks as a variant of Flanker. There are another 130+ Foxbats in Russian service, meaning that Russian Air Force flies almost three heavy fighters for one Fulcrum. There are more Flankers than Fulcrums in service with Russian Naval Aviation too. I do not merely think that Russia can afford heavy fighters and that it clearly prefers the type over Fulcrum. It is, in fact, what what Russia does, as do many other countries.

jessmo112 wrote:3. As long as you have former clients that have hundreds of these planes, why would you NOT want to replace them?


Again: look up "clients with hundreds of planes". Who are those exactly? Cuba? Kyrgyzstan? Yemen? Sudan?
The large number of Fulcrums produced, and exported, is explained by the simple facts that 1) Fulcrum entered mass production earlier 2) Fulcrum was the only Soviet 4th generation fighter to be exported. 3) A lot of second hand Fulcrums were available for bargain sales after collapse of USSR. Most current Fulcrum operators fly second hand fighters.
There simply aren't enough clients for Fulcrum today. Those who can buy Western jets - buy Western jets. Those who can afford to buy Russian jets prefer Flankers. And no, one cannot "upgrade" Soviet MiG-29s to the MiG-35 standard (or even lower tier sometimes) - the differences are just too great.
The countries that bought new built Fulcrums fróm Russia (post 1990) amout to the staggering list of five:
1) Russian Air Force and Navy land-based aviation (what a surprise).
2) Indian Navy. Indian Navy bought (and funded the development of a more modern version of) MiG-29K, not because it is capable, but because it is the only fighter that fits Vikramaditya. FYI Vikramaditya is a rebuilt Kiev-class carrier. A carrier that was based on Moskva-calss ASW helicopter cruiser and was meant to use Forger VTOL planes. Look up the size of the hangar on that ship and read about flight ops on those type of ships. Indian Air Force is supposedly in talks about the new batch of Fulcrums (initial batch was purchased from late USSR, look up reason 2) for Fulcrum export success), but before you decide on whether Fulcrum's amazing value for money merits that I urge you to look up the numbers of Fulcrums lost in accidents. Indian Air Force also operates almost four times as many Flankers as it does Fulcrums. No low-high mix here.
3) Algeria. Algeria bought first batch of its Fulcrums second hand (look up reason number 3) for Fulcrum export success) from Russia and Belarus, and wanted some more. They have famously cancelled their order after initial "new" Fulcrums were delivered, and instead requested Flankers in sxchange, at the rate of 1:1. Algeria now operates more Flankers (brand new MKA that it bought from Russia) vs 32 second hand Fulcrums (which at best yielded some maintnance money for Russia, if even that).
4) Malaysia. Malaysia bought some 18, allegedly brand new (I remain sceptical that Russia in 1995 could build 18 brand new fighter in less than two years, most likely those were low mileage refurbished birds), "special Malaysian edition" Fulcrums from Russia in 1995. And proceeded to retire them from service around 2017, after floating ideas of mothballing those as early as 2010. Malaysia is now thinking whether to buy second hand Kuwaiti F/A-18 or some rand new Flankers to augment their fleet. That's right, another nation that got rid of "cheap" Fulcrums because it can't afford it and wants to get "expensive" Flankers.
5) Egypt. Egypt signed a contract for 46 Fulcrums in 2014. This, so far, is probably the biggest success of the Fulcrum, in a country that buys weapons chiefly as a diplomatic measure, and a country that is also reportedly negotiating the purchase of... some Flankers. See the pattern here?

As for another countries:
Azerbaijan - 12x second hand from Ukraine and Belarus.
Bangladesh - 8x fighters (most likely ex-Soviet surplus). A lucrative customer!
Belarus - 39x, inherited from USSR or donated from Russian surplus. Also has Flankers (!) on order, probably on Russian credit as a political leverage.
Bulgaria - 13x, inherited from WarPac days. Chose F-16s as replacement.
Cuba - 3x, late Soviet export. I bet they paid a 100% fair market price for those. A lucrative customer!
Eritrea - 5x second-hand/surplus. A lucrative customer!
Iran - supposedly 20. Mostly second-hand ex-Soviet surplus they managed to smuggle into the country in the early 1990s, but some ex-Iraqi birds from 1991 exodus. They can't buy new fighters because of the sanctions... but my money is that if they could, they would go for Flankers.
Kazakhstan - 25x Fulcrums inherited from Soviet Union, as well as some MiG-31s and Su-27. Guess which one of those three Kazakhstan bought some more, from modern Russia? 16x Su-30 of course, with more on the books.
Myanmar - 31x, 10 bought second hand from Belarus, and 20 from Russia in 2009, though I don't know if new or refurbished. Let's count them as a lucrative customer!
North Korea - 35x late Soviet export/early Russia shady business practices. No comments regarding the Best Korea as potential lucrative customer.
Peru - 7x, second-hand bought from, you guessed, Belarus.
Poland - inherited Fulcrums from WarPac days and bought some East German surplus of the same source. Now a F-35 club member.
Serbia - inherited from Yugoslavia. Late Soviet export (see reason #2), probably one of the few countries that actually paid for them as opposed to buying them using Soviet "credit". Some second-hand donated/purchased from Russia.
Slovakia - inherited Fulcrums from Czechoslovakia which ingerited those from WarPac era. Chose F-16s as replacement.
Sudan - a dozen second-hand Fulcrums, most likely bought on the reliable semi-official black market of Belarus/Ukraine/Russia in the 1990s. A potential customer!
Syria - 20x listed, most likely much less operational. Late Soviet export. No doubt paid in full with pure gold.
Turkmenistan - 24x, inherited from USSR. A lucrative customer!
Ukraine - some 20x. Not a likely customer TBH.
Uzbekistan - 39x total airframes, Soviet inheritance.
Yemen - 32x. A bit sceptical regarding this one as a potential customer.
My Boi Haftar - apparently got 6x Soviet surplus Fulcrums from Russia just a couple of days ago. I suspect they will act as chief actors is more TAI Anka promo videos quite soon.

As you can see, Fulcrum does not sell particularly well, unlike Flanker - the second most common fighter in the world right now, with more than 1000 built. More than F-15, more than Eurofighter. Absolute majority was built and exported by modern Russia, not given away as military aid by USSR. There must be a reason for it, don't you think? The short answer is that Fulcrum is simply not a good plane, in all the meanings of this word.

jessmo112 wrote:4. And finally How hard is it to take an F-35 planform and put 2 Su-27 engines in it? How hard would it be to throw some stealth coatings on it, and an internal IRST and call it a day. Again I consider myself ignorant, I am at my worst an armchair enthusiast, at my best a aviation blog
Groupie.If my questions show my ignorance please excuse me.


And what would be the benefit of such a plane? An even shorter range than a Fulcrum already? Inability to carry big, albeit powerful Russian radars? Inability to have a large internal weapon bay? Inability to carry even bigger weapons externally? What are you trying to achieve? MiG-29 does not suffer from lack of thrust-to-weight, its all the other virtues that it lacks.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 26 May 2020, 20:31
by jessmo112
Touche, these are all very well argued points.
The world waits in anticipation of what the next generation of fighters for tin-pot dictators will look like.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 27 May 2020, 01:41
by Corsair1963
hythelday wrote:
This question is multifold:
Russia does have a vast territory to defend. So vast in fact, that "a point defence fighter" and "vast Russian territory" are mutually exclusive. Fulcrum simply does not cut it. Point defence implies existence of a well developed infrastructure of bases. An infrastructure that does not exist, nor is possible to be built given Russian realities. Besides, there is a "Gripen fallacy" in this logic. Fulcrum may be "decently priced", but you need larger numbers. Fulcrum is MX nightmare (most expensive option in Finnish competition in 1992, remember that) + aformentioned basing. The reality is that cost vs performance ratio does not favor Fulcrum over Flanker, and by a large margin.

As for the second part of your question: Fulcrum has been approved for development later than the Flanker but entered service before it, chiefly because of shortcoming of the initial Flanker which needed a redesign after initial prototypes were flown. However, the Soviets did in fact in a way have an air force of only Foxbats and Flankers - the PVO Aviation. PVO Aviation never bought Fulcrums. As a matter of fact a PVO version was never developed. It is true that PVO had some shorter range fighters, like Su-15 or versions of MiG-23, but PVO Aviation was chiefly interested in big, high performance (both range and capable radar) fighters abd they continued to take in MiG-31 and Su-27P fighters at slower rate and disregarded MiG-29 completely. MiG-29 was a VVS fighter, because VVS needed far larger numbers of fighters, and not necessarily as capable.

The Russian Air force had less funds at its disposal (especially in the nineties), it is true. So what do you think they did with their funds? They maximized the bang they get for their buck - and went on to procure more Flankers than Fulcrums. Today there exists no air force that has a "high-low" mix of Flankers an Fulcrums. Every air force that has a mix of Flankers and Fulcrums has more Flankers in service, and usually even more Flankers on order. I will touch upon that later. The Russian air force, that supposedly is looking for "reasonably priced" fighter, is also an operatior of a large number of Su-34 attack aircraft, which is neither cheap nor light, however is very capable and thus desirable. According to FlightGlobal's 2020 data, Russian Air Force has 429 Flankers (52 on order) and 251 Fulcrums (34 on order). That's a ratio of about 7:4 in favor of a heavier fighter (ratio of 3:2 ordered). The ratio is almost 9:4 if one counts 120+ Fullbacks as a variant of Flanker. There are another 130+ Foxbats in Russian service, meaning that Russian Air Force flies almost three heavy fighters for one Fulcrum. There are more Flankers than Fulcrums in service with Russian Naval Aviation too. I do not merely think that Russia can afford heavy fighters and that it clearly prefers the type over Fulcrum. It is, in fact, what what Russia does, as do many other countries.


Again: look up "clients with hundreds of planes". Who are those exactly? Cuba? Kyrgyzstan? Yemen? Sudan?
The large number of Fulcrums produced, and exported, is explained by the simple facts that 1) Fulcrum entered mass production earlier 2) Fulcrum was the only Soviet 4th generation fighter to be exported. 3) A lot of second hand Fulcrums were available for bargain sales after collapse of USSR. Most current Fulcrum operators fly second hand fighters.
There simply aren't enough clients for Fulcrum today. Those who can buy Western jets - buy Western jets. Those who can afford to buy Russian jets prefer Flankers. And no, one cannot "upgrade" Soviet MiG-29s to the MiG-35 standard (or even lower tier sometimes) - the differences are just too great.
The countries that bought new built Fulcrums fróm Russia (post 1990) amout to the staggering list of five:
1) Russian Air Force and Navy land-based aviation (what a surprise).
2) Indian Navy. Indian Navy bought (and funded the development of a more modern version of) MiG-29K, not because it is capable, but because it is the only fighter that fits Vikramaditya. FYI Vikramaditya is a rebuilt Kiev-class carrier. A carrier that was based on Moskva-calss ASW helicopter cruiser and was meant to use Forger VTOL planes. Look up the size of the hangar on that ship and read about flight ops on those type of ships. Indian Air Force is supposedly in talks about the new batch of Fulcrums (initial batch was purchased from late USSR, look up reason 2) for Fulcrum export success), but before you decide on whether Fulcrum's amazing value for money merits that I urge you to look up the numbers of Fulcrums lost in accidents. Indian Air Force also operates almost four times as many Flankers as it does Fulcrums. No low-high mix here.
3) Algeria. Algeria bought first batch of its Fulcrums second hand (look up reason number 3) for Fulcrum export success) from Russia and Belarus, and wanted some more. They have famously cancelled their order after initial "new" Fulcrums were delivered, and instead requested Flankers in sxchange, at the rate of 1:1. Algeria now operates more Flankers (brand new MKA that it bought from Russia) vs 32 second hand Fulcrums (which at best yielded some maintnance money for Russia, if even that).
4) Malaysia. Malaysia bought some 18, allegedly brand new (I remain sceptical that Russia in 1995 could build 18 brand new fighter in less than two years, most likely those were low mileage refurbished birds), "special Malaysian edition" Fulcrums from Russia in 1995. And proceeded to retire them from service around 2017, after floating ideas of mothballing those as early as 2010. Malaysia is now thinking whether to buy second hand Kuwaiti F/A-18 or some rand new Flankers to augment their fleet. That's right, another nation that got rid of "cheap" Fulcrums because it can't afford it and wants to get "expensive" Flankers.
5) Egypt. Egypt signed a contract for 46 Fulcrums in 2014. This, so far, is probably the biggest success of the Fulcrum, in a country that buys weapons chiefly as a diplomatic measure, and a country that is also reportedly negotiating the purchase of... some Flankers. See the pattern here?

As for another countries:
Azerbaijan - 12x second hand from Ukraine and Belarus.
Bangladesh - 8x fighters (most likely ex-Soviet surplus). A lucrative customer!
Belarus - 39x, inherited from USSR or donated from Russian surplus. Also has Flankers (!) on order, probably on Russian credit as a political leverage.
Bulgaria - 13x, inherited from WarPac days. Chose F-16s as replacement.
Cuba - 3x, late Soviet export. I bet they paid a 100% fair market price for those. A lucrative customer!
Eritrea - 5x second-hand/surplus. A lucrative customer!
Iran - supposedly 20. Mostly second-hand ex-Soviet surplus they managed to smuggle into the country in the early 1990s, but some ex-Iraqi birds from 1991 exodus. They can't buy new fighters because of the sanctions... but my money is that if they could, they would go for Flankers.
Kazakhstan - 25x Fulcrums inherited from Soviet Union, as well as some MiG-31s and Su-27. Guess which one of those three Kazakhstan bought some more, from modern Russia? 16x Su-30 of course, with more on the books.
Myanmar - 31x, 10 bought second hand from Belarus, and 20 from Russia in 2009, though I don't know if new or refurbished. Let's count them as a lucrative customer!
North Korea - 35x late Soviet export/early Russia shady business practices. No comments regarding the Best Korea as potential lucrative customer.
Peru - 7x, second-hand bought from, you guessed, Belarus.
Poland - inherited Fulcrums from WarPac days and bought some East German surplus of the same source. Now a F-35 club member.
Serbia - inherited from Yugoslavia. Late Soviet export (see reason #2), probably one of the few countries that actually paid for them as opposed to buying them using Soviet "credit". Some second-hand donated/purchased from Russia.
Slovakia - inherited Fulcrums from Czechoslovakia which ingerited those from WarPac era. Chose F-16s as replacement.
Sudan - a dozen second-hand Fulcrums, most likely bought on the reliable semi-official black market of Belarus/Ukraine/Russia in the 1990s. A potential customer!
Syria - 20x listed, most likely much less operational. Late Soviet export. No doubt paid in full with pure gold.
Turkmenistan - 24x, inherited from USSR. A lucrative customer!
Ukraine - some 20x. Not a likely customer TBH.
Uzbekistan - 39x total airframes, Soviet inheritance.
Yemen - 32x. A bit sceptical regarding this one as a potential customer.
My Boi Haftar - apparently got 6x Soviet surplus Fulcrums from Russia just a couple of days ago. I suspect they will act as chief actors is more TAI Anka promo videos quite soon.

As you can see, Fulcrum does not sell particularly well, unlike Flanker - the second most common fighter in the world right now, with more than 1000 built. More than F-15, more than Eurofighter. Absolute majority was built and exported by modern Russia, not given away as military aid by USSR. There must be a reason for it, don't you think? The short answer is that Fulcrum is simply not a good plane, in all the meanings of this word.


That all maybe true but going forward. What does it really mean for either type? As 5th Generation Fighters are coming on fast and will "totally dominate" the fighter market post 2030.

This while Russia only has the less than successful Su-57 Felon... :?

Looks to me that China is the big winner here. As who else is going to offer Stealth Fighters to countries that don't have access or can't afford Western Stealth Fighters. As a matter of fact your list offers several good examples.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 27 May 2020, 02:20
by XanderCrews
@hythelday

Image

what a post

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 27 May 2020, 03:05
by madrat
Any Fulcrum aimed at PVO would have been a larger build, so you really never saw the two compete. VVS got their design. PVO got their design. VMF (AV-MF) tried both.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 27 May 2020, 13:46
by mixelflick
How the Mig-29/SU-27 series wound up is quite ironic...

When the Mig debuted, it greatly concerned a number of Western analysts. And rumor has it when the NATO reporting name of "Fulcrum" was issued, it pleased Mig tremendously. Here was an aircraft that (at least on the surface), could "keep up" with American F-15's and 16's in the thrust to weight ratio, turning fight realm. It also boasted the Archer, delivering a further clear cut advantage in dogfights. It was produced great numbers for Russia, and also equipped Warsaw Pact nations directly opposing NATO countries. For its assigned role, it would have no doubt been very effective.

Meanwhile, the SU-27 stumbled. An almost complete re-design was warranted, and not many reached front line units prior to the USSR crumbling. It's capabilities were largely theoretical, but also considerable - to the point where advanced models have been said to be at least the equal of the F-15 in some parts of the envelope. Still, it was far bigger, more complex and more expensive than the Mig. You'd think (with the exception of China), fewer of them would have sold vs. the Mig-29.

Yet today, the Mig is held in very low regard - at least in some corners of the world. This, likely given its combat record - it ain't pretty. The Flanker OTOH found nice homes in China and India, with other nations following suite (just buying less). It's apparently Peter Goon's favorite airframe, LOL. Over 1,000 have been produced (that was a new one on me).

And the SU-57? Looks dead in the water although as we've just seen, looks can be deceiving...

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 27 May 2020, 16:56
by zero-one
mixelflick wrote:How the Mig-29/SU-27 series wound up is quite ironic...


Well if you notice how things unfolded. what went wrong for the Fulcrum.

1. It achieved no kills in major conflicts and was beaten in a dogfight a number of times by the aircraft it was designed to beat in a dogfight. Even USAF pilots were advised to stay away from it if possible.

2. after the war it was beaten again in Serbia

3. Its bigger, better counterpart the Flanker, had it's issues fixed and was being offered at low prices as well.

For a lot of countries, the Flanker is an F-15, a high end air superiority fighter, and in fact you could say that it is generally better than an F-15C except for Avionics and weapons (According to Col. Fornlof, the Su-30MKI is a tad bit better than USAF F-15s and F-16)

Having a heavy fighter is a sign of national prestige, only the richest countries have them. But now Angola can get 12 units for $1 Billion. by comparison the Philippines is negotiating for 12 F-16 block 70s for 1.1 Billion .

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 28 May 2020, 15:55
by mixelflick
zero-one wrote:
mixelflick wrote:How the Mig-29/SU-27 series wound up is quite ironic...


Well if you notice how things unfolded. what went wrong for the Fulcrum.

1. It achieved no kills in major conflicts and was beaten in a dogfight a number of times by the aircraft it was designed to beat in a dogfight. Even USAF pilots were advised to stay away from it if possible.

2. after the war it was beaten again in Serbia

3. Its bigger, better counterpart the Flanker, had it's issues fixed and was being offered at low prices as well.

For a lot of countries, the Flanker is an F-15, a high end air superiority fighter, and in fact you could say that it is generally better than an F-15C except for Avionics and weapons (According to Col. Fornlof, the Su-30MKI is a tad bit better than USAF F-15s and F-16)

Having a heavy fighter is a sign of national prestige, only the richest countries have them. But now Angola can get 12 units for $1 Billion. by comparison the Philippines is negotiating for 12 F-16 block 70s for 1.1 Billion .


Yes, all valid point. Although I'd suggest that points #1 and 2 hastened its true demise in the minds of foreign customers. China seems to be coming out of this looking real good, having passed on the Mig-29 entirely and embracing multiple Flanker models. Someone should have gotten the memo, provided they were watching what the Iranians did. I've read where they received a small initial batch of Mig-29's, but never bought any more. Reason being, they pitted it against their F-14's and reportedly found it far inferior.

So here we have an aircraft that SHOULD have been able to best the F-14, 15 and 16 given its timing/design goals, but for various reasons - couldn't. Now if those had been Flankers flying in DS/the middle east and elsewhere - things may have been different. As it turned out though, that didn't need to happen - the Flanker won by default. Meaning it didn't need to shoot down American teen series craft, it was SPECULATED it could have done so. Besides, there was no other Russian offering that looked remotely capable of doing so. At least in the fourth generation..

The Mig-25 DID down an F/A-18C (Speicher's), so I'm surprised foreign operators didn't solicity orders shortly after that. Problem being, I believe the Mig-25 was long out of production then (I could be wrong). Frankly, I would have thought more middle eastern air arms would have pressed for the Mig-31. Egypt comes to mind..

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 28 May 2020, 20:19
by milosh
Corsair1963 wrote:Looks to me that China is the big winner here. As who else is going to offer Stealth Fighters to countries that don't have access or can't afford Western Stealth Fighters. As a matter of fact your list offers several good examples.


Su-30 users in world:
Image

Most of users have problems with China. So only big buyer of J-31 could be Algeria.

On other hand if you look how many Su-30 were sold and most of users will want best possible upgrade in future I expect Sukhoi will in fact made more money through upgrading Flanker fleet, then Shenyang with its J-31 export.

Arab oil rich states could be market for Chinese but that wasn't Russian market so no change for Russians there.

Btw I agree it was mistake not having backup one engined stealth as alternative to Su-57 but Sukhoi controled UAC and didn't allow any alternative to be pushed in fact even when UAE was considering medium stealth cooperation with UAC, UAC was clear first to finish Su-57 then we can start working on smaller stealth, and Su-35 is super duper so UAE could buy it.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 29 May 2020, 12:04
by hornetfinn
mixelflick wrote:The Mig-25 DID down an F/A-18C (Speicher's), so I'm surprised foreign operators didn't solicity orders shortly after that. Problem being, I believe the Mig-25 was long out of production then (I could be wrong). Frankly, I would have thought more middle eastern air arms would have pressed for the Mig-31. Egypt comes to mind..


MiG-25 did do that, but one isolated incident isn't much of a proof about the capability of the jet. In the right conditions, almost any fighter can shoot down another fighter. For example MiG-17s have shot down F-4s and A-1 Skyraiders shot down MiG-17s. In that incident it seems like Speicher and other pilots didn't even know they were under attack. I do think it was probably the most dangerous 3rd gen fighter in the Soviet Union, but probably also rather expensive and laborous to maintain. By then there was MiG-29 around, which was cheaper and more versatile platform as it was much more maneuverable and had things like HMS and R-73 for WVR combat.

Soviet Union switched from producing MiG-25s to MiG-31s fully in 1984 or so. So new built MiG-25s were unavailable and fall of Soviet Union didn't help either. MIG-31 was probably not available to many countries due to security concerns and it's likely very expensive to buy and maintain.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 29 May 2020, 14:05
by mixelflick
hornetfinn wrote:
mixelflick wrote:The Mig-25 DID down an F/A-18C (Speicher's), so I'm surprised foreign operators didn't solicity orders shortly after that. Problem being, I believe the Mig-25 was long out of production then (I could be wrong). Frankly, I would have thought more middle eastern air arms would have pressed for the Mig-31. Egypt comes to mind..


MiG-25 did do that, but one isolated incident isn't much of a proof about the capability of the jet. In the right conditions, almost any fighter can shoot down another fighter. For example MiG-17s have shot down F-4s and A-1 Skyraiders shot down MiG-17s. In that incident it seems like Speicher and other pilots didn't even know they were under attack. I do think it was probably the most dangerous 3rd gen fighter in the Soviet Union, but probably also rather expensive and laborous to maintain. By then there was MiG-29 around, which was cheaper and more versatile platform as it was much more maneuverable and had things like HMS and R-73 for WVR combat.

Soviet Union switched from producing MiG-25s to MiG-31s fully in 1984 or so. So new built MiG-25s were unavailable and fall of Soviet Union didn't help either. MIG-31 was probably not available to many countries due to security concerns and it's likely very expensive to buy and maintain.


Yes, I'll concede one incident isn't indicative about the capability of a jet. However, Iraqi Mig-25's put up a hell of a fight before succumbing to USAF Eagles, and in at least one instance outran them (and their Sparrows). It was clear the Mig-25 was the best Iraqi performer (air to air) of the war, and was no easy mark.

If you'll check the accounts of (Dawood?) Iraqi pilot who downed Speicher's F/A-18, its pretty clear that F/A-18 squadron knew they were under attack. In fact, if I'm not mistaken Speicher's wingman (or perhaps an E-2C) tried to warn him a Foxbat was in the area, closing in. Problem being, his ECM reportedly malfunctioned and the AA-6 that hit him did so with incredible force, shearing off his wing tank (and I think other weapons he was carrying). The poor A-6 that the Iraqi Foxbat then ran down certainly knew he was under attack, saved when the Iraqi GCIO told Dawood not to fire - for fear of fratricide.

It was expensive to maintain yes, but in the end you usually get what you pay for. It was big, fast, with a good radar and obviously effective missiles. Not a dogfighter, but here it was dogfighting with F-15C's and giving them fits after it decoyed both Sidewinders and Sparrows. I dunno... to me it did exceptionally well, especially considering all of the advantages coalition airpower had over it/its pilots.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 29 May 2020, 19:29
by milosh
It look like China is interesting to get next Su-57 engine:
https://bulgarianmilitary.com/2020/05/2 ... an-engine/

I can't find source they used for article though.

But if that is true it look like they bite more then they can chew with WS-15.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 29 May 2020, 23:59
by madrat
The IAF could conceivably fend off J-20 with MiG-31M. At least with better odds than using Su-30MKI. Not for MiG-31M dogfight ability, but rather for its ability to sift through massive airspace with four ship sweeps. There is no substitute for radar diameter, and that goes for R-37. The R-40Tx also would be superior to anything China has if trying to engage via a heat seeker. Lack of IIR will always be a shortcoming, but the airframe kinetic performance delta helps provide an insurmountable edge of used properly.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 01 Jun 2020, 01:05
by Corsair1963
madrat wrote:The IAF could conceivably fend off J-20 with MiG-31M. At least with better odds than using Su-30MKI. Not for MiG-31M dogfight ability, but rather for its ability to sift through massive airspace with four ship sweeps. There is no substitute for radar diameter, and that goes for R-37. The R-40Tx also would be superior to anything China has if trying to engage via a heat seeker. Lack of IIR will always be a shortcoming, but the airframe kinetic performance delta helps provide an insurmountable edge of used properly.




No they couldn't........ :doh:

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 01 Jun 2020, 01:21
by Corsair1963
milosh wrote:It look like China is interesting to get next Su-57 engine:
https://bulgarianmilitary.com/2020/05/2 ... an-engine/

I can't find source they used for article though.

But if that is true it look like they bite more then they can chew with WS-15.



Most believe China acquired the Su-35. Just to gain access to the aircraft and it's technology. Which, it could compare or possibly incorporate into future Chinese Designs. This could (likely) be the same case with the izdeliye 30.


In short it doesn't mean China is having major problems with the WS-15.


Hell, the US would be happy to take a look at the J-20 and/or Su-57. (or any of their components) If, either China or Russia would sell them one...doesn't mean either are better than the F-22/F-35.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 01 Jun 2020, 01:28
by madrat
MiG-31M gives the Russians a better coverage sweep with four such aircraft than any of their dedicated AWACS equivalents. The biggest advantage is the MiG-31M is better able to defend itself from an attack. Downside is the obvious cost to keep them airborne.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 01 Jun 2020, 01:31
by Corsair1963
madrat wrote:MiG-31M gives the Russians a better coverage sweep with four such aircraft than any of their dedicated AWACS equivalents. The biggest advantage is the MiG-31M is better able to defend itself from an attack. Downside is the obvious cost to keep them airborne.



That won't be much help against Stealth Fighters and Bombers. Isn't the Mig-31M an "interceptor".... :|

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 02 Jun 2020, 14:35
by mixelflick
Corsair1963 wrote:
madrat wrote:MiG-31M gives the Russians a better coverage sweep with four such aircraft than any of their dedicated AWACS equivalents. The biggest advantage is the MiG-31M is better able to defend itself from an attack. Downside is the obvious cost to keep them airborne.



That won't be much help against Stealth Fighters and Bombers. Isn't the Mig-31M an "interceptor".... :|


It won't be much help, because this is where the stealth/non-stealth divide occurs. If we accept the premise that stealth aircraft are more survivable than non-stealth aircraft, there is no argument for the Mig-31. The J-20 will simply see it first, shoot it first and kill it first. Now its possible the J-20's stealth is sub-par, but even so... it's going to be a lot harder to see than a Mig-31. And the BVR missiles the Chinese will be using ain't chopped liver - they're routinely described as very capable.

Provided the J-20 has even a reasonably low RCS, it shouldn't matter how many square miles a 4 ship Foxbat flight can search. They won't find anything. It also won't matter how many super duper hypersonic air to air missiles the Mig-31 carries. Nor will it matter how fast it can fly. Hurtling at mach 2.8 towards.... nothing is only going to waste lots of Foxbat gas. And by the time it realizes its under attack from PL-15's/21's, those big hypersonic missiles will only serve to weigh it down. There will be no "out maneuvering" them in a Foxbat with supersonic, hypersonic (or even zero) weapons being carried.

Splash 4 Foxbats

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 03 Jun 2020, 01:50
by madrat
Luckily Foxbats were not in the equation.

Basically you're trying to say, the war is lost before it begins.

I'm sorry, but just having some stealth does not eliminate all fourth generation aircraft on either side. I'm talking about expanding situational awareness. You two are talking about using interceptors as fighters. So you're talking apples when I am talking oranges. Until the vast majority of sorties are stealth, you still must counter the 4th generation stuff, too.

In an emergency, India will always have an outside source for stealth counters. The U.S. would never let them fight a losing war only to destabilize the whole Asian continent.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 05 Jun 2020, 14:00
by mixelflick
"Expanding situational awareness" is a good thing for any fighter pilot. But the amount of SA any 4th gen fighter is going to have will always be inferior to the 5th gen. Superior SA is a hallmark of 5th gen designs, as is lower RCS. The combination of the two is what will lead to a 5th gen winning in virually every case.

A four ship of Foxhounds will have lots of SA, but what good does it do when he can't see the 5th gen pilot, or consequently defend themselves (until its too late)? Anyway, we're getting off topic.

There hasn't been much (real) news about the SU-57 since the crash. A bogus report about Angola ordering some, another about it flying "without a pilot" and announcements from the Russian gov't they're still going through with mass production. I don't know how you do that though, without first determining the cause of the accident. Doesn't sound like pilot error, so if not - it's the plane.

Imagine producing 10 or so before discovering they all have the same flight software (or whatever) flaw. And God forbid there's another crash. This time, the pilot was lucky and got out. Next time, he might not be that fortunate...

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 05 Jun 2020, 15:59
by madrat
You do realize that MiG-31 operates from altitudes that make it extremely difficult to touch? If the Chinese could get close enough to tag a MiG-31 then they can certainly sweep any AWACS out of the sky. So once again, your solution is to give up? Stealth counterparts are a long way out for India. They need stopgap measures now.

The reality is that China has a tiny force of J-20. Not enough to wipe India Air Force assets completely from the sky in one swoop, but enough to inflict some painful losses. But history suggests victory goes to the bold, acting with confidence and minimizing risk through thorough planning. India needs a bold long term strategy to counter China's stealth program. It cannot afford to wait until a crisis to make bold moves. You maintain peace by showing resolve, which makes the moves in the mountains of the Chinese-India border critical for India right now,

In the long term they will need something superior to J-20. China needs it's fourth generation assets and long range aviation to provide the bulk of its capability in the short term. These same assets are highly vulnerable to both detection and long range missiles. It's the one platform that even J-20 cannot touch when operated at its true potential. Three dozen MiG-31M is a bold move and it is much more of a threat to China than the 36 Rafale they bought. By choosing something off the shelf they can shore up some of the holes in their border now to extend the life of current assets.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 08 Jun 2020, 15:23
by mixelflick
Sure, the Foxhound is capable of great speed and altitude. But it's nothing a PL-15 or 21 can't touch. Those are newer missiles that undoubtedly have capabilities beyond the Phoenix, which as an example was used almost 40 years ago to down similarly high flying Foxbats.

OTOH, I don't espouse giving up LOL. But boy is India in a pickle on this one. Without a low RCS fighter of their own, they're going to get creamed in air to air. So it'll have to be some sort of innovative tactics, such as dragging J-20's into a nest of SAM's or some other ambush. I rather doubt the SU-35's radar can detect stealth jets, despite the PR put out by the Kremlin. And that assumes they'll retro-fit that radar into SU-30MKI's. Assuming it can though, I don't think the Indians can put a weapon on it. The R-77 is dubious, as evidence by the Indians wanting to design something of their own. But if that missile turns out like Tejas, they can forget that. And I don't believe the fairy tale about R-37 hypersonic missile with intercontinental range.

So yeah, it's bad. They're in a much, much worse place than Canada..

Re: Su-57 Felon

Unread postPosted: 08 Jun 2020, 19:15
by madrat
I don't think the small fins of the PL-15 or PL-21 would be very optimal for touching a MiG-31.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 08 Jun 2020, 20:16
by milosh
mixelflick wrote:I rather doubt the SU-35's radar can detect stealth jets, despite the PR put out by the Kremlin. And that assumes they'll retro-fit that radar into SU-30MKI's. Assuming it can though, I don't think the Indians can put a weapon on it. The R-77 is dubious, as evidence by the Indians wanting to design something of their own. But if that missile turns out like Tejas, they can forget that. And I don't believe the fairy tale about R-37 hypersonic missile with intercontinental range.

So yeah, it's bad. They're in a much, much worse place than Canada..


You don't need better fighter to achieve air superiority.

Germans had jets in 1945 and which had similar impact as stealth today. But what good they had with jets?

Allies attacked Me-262 airfields!

IAF can do the same. China don't have many airfields near India and even those they have aren't some advanced ones. India on other hand have Su-30 armed with Brahmos-1, soon it will have Brahmos-M (smaller RCS and better range, shorter with smaller mass new solid fuel and materials composite vs aluminium) two or three will be carried by Su-30MKI, one by Rafale/M2000/MiG-29.

So in case of war China will need to rely on tankers and tanker fleet is small and with very questionable capabilities.

R-37 range is 200km for export version and 300km for domestic one. Missile is ~3 time heavier then basic R-77 and have dual pulse engine so those are realistic ranges especially against big non agile targets like Chinese tankers.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 08 Jun 2020, 23:15
by Corsair1963
milosh wrote:
mixelflick wrote:I rather doubt the SU-35's radar can detect stealth jets, despite the PR put out by the Kremlin. And that assumes they'll retro-fit that radar into SU-30MKI's. Assuming it can though, I don't think the Indians can put a weapon on it. The R-77 is dubious, as evidence by the Indians wanting to design something of their own. But if that missile turns out like Tejas, they can forget that. And I don't believe the fairy tale about R-37 hypersonic missile with intercontinental range.

So yeah, it's bad. They're in a much, much worse place than Canada..


You don't need better fighter to achieve air superiority.

Germans had jets in 1945 and which had similar impact as stealth today. But what good they had with jets?

Allies attacked Me-262 airfields!

IAF can do the same. China don't have many airfields near India and even those they have aren't some advanced ones. India on other hand have Su-30 armed with Brahmos-1, soon it will have Brahmos-M (smaller RCS and better range, shorter with smaller mass new solid fuel and materials composite vs aluminium) two or three will be carried by Su-30MKI, one by Rafale/M2000/MiG-29.

So in case of war China will need to rely on tankers and tanker fleet is small and with very questionable capabilities.

R-37 range is 200km for export version and 300km for domestic one. Missile is ~3 time heavier then basic R-77 and have dual pulse engine so those are realistic ranges especially against big non agile targets like Chinese tankers.


:lmao:

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 08 Jun 2020, 23:35
by madrat
Corsair1963 wrote: :lmao:

I guess an actual discussion escaped your post. Please don't abuse the quote button like that.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 08 Jun 2020, 23:54
by Corsair1963
madrat wrote:
Corsair1963 wrote: :lmao:

I guess an actual discussion escaped your post. Please don't abuse the quote button like that.



Absurd to suggest India could win any conflict with China without "Air Superiority". :doh:

Re: Su-57 Felon

Unread postPosted: 09 Jun 2020, 02:47
by madrat
Who in modern times - other than the United States - has displayed anything resembling Air Superiority during an armed conflict? The U.S. is pretty unique in that regard.

Re: Su-57 Felon

Unread postPosted: 09 Jun 2020, 05:24
by Corsair1963
madrat wrote:Who in modern times - other than the United States - has displayed anything resembling Air Superiority during an armed conflict? The U.S. is pretty unique in that regard.



You can't win on Land, Sea, or in the Air without "Air Superiority". 8)

Re: Su-57 Felon

Unread postPosted: 09 Jun 2020, 17:15
by madrat
Russia didn't bother with it over Georgia. Didn't affect the results at all.

Re: Su-57 Felon

Unread postPosted: 09 Jun 2020, 19:18
by milosh
madrat wrote:Russia didn't bother with it over Georgia. Didn't affect the results at all.


WW2 bloody lesson. USSR in 1930s did focus on massive air force and so on air superiority then Germans wipe out most of their airforce and airfields in first months of war. So Soviet generals go to table and think new strategy, bloody one but effective.

Germans had decisive air superiority in operation Typhoon, also in operation Fall Blau and we can say even in operation Citadel.

First time Soviets have deceive air superiority was in operation Bagration in which they annihilated army group center.

Re: Su-57 Felon

Unread postPosted: 09 Jun 2020, 21:38
by marauder2048
madrat wrote:Russia didn't bother with it over Georgia. Didn't affect the results at all.


They did but without meaningful results. There just wasn't a classic SEAD effort.

Re: Su-57 Felon

Unread postPosted: 09 Jun 2020, 21:44
by marauder2048
milosh wrote:
Germans had decisive air superiority in operation Typhoon, also in operation Fall Blau and we can say even in operation Citadel.


The Germans certainly didn't have air superiority at Stalingrad or later in 1943 when the Russians were able to
lift the siege of Leningrad.

The German fighters disappearing in order defend against Overlord and the strategic leveling of Germany might
have a lot to do with Bagration.

Re: Su-57 Felon

Unread postPosted: 09 Jun 2020, 22:14
by gideonic
milosh wrote:
madrat wrote:Russia didn't bother with it over Georgia. Didn't affect the results at all.


WW2 bloody lesson. USSR in 1930s did focus on massive air force and so on air superiority then Germans wipe out most of their airforce and airfields in first months of war. So Soviet generals go to table and think new strategy, bloody one but effective.

Germans had decisive air superiority in operation Typhoon, also in operation Fall Blau and we can say even in operation Citadel.

First time Soviets have deceive air superiority was in operation Bagration in which they annihilated army group center.


On the off chance that you're actually interested in learning something (rather than citing soviet propaganda) I really suggest you read (in russian) Mark Solonin: На мирно спящих аэродромах ISBN 5-699-15695-X. He sheds some light on the absurdity whole issue quite thorougly (and unlike Suvorov actually knows his stuff and is an aviation engineer by degree. Therefore unlike Suvorov he and is being totally ignored by Russian mainstream historians)

Here is a summary in English on his webpage: (unfortunately English translation is abysmal, the original text is very well written in Russian):

http://www.solonin.org/en/book_airfields

There are free chapters listed at the end of the article that still give a good overview. The reason for German domination quite different from what's usually circulated around, Having been born in the Soviet Union (and remembering what it actually felt to live in the monstrosity) I'd say they are multiple times more believable than the "official party-line".

The book is not very long, but is very well written (as long as you read in russian), has good citation, even if you disagree 100% will still broaden your view on the subject.

Let me quote a few parts of the subpar translation here (Chapter 1):
This monograph was only published in the end of 1992 under authority of the General Staff of the then "United Armed Force of the CIS" with a label surprisingly modest for works of this scale ("for official use only"). Chief of the scientific team is Doctor of Military Science senior researcher Major General V.P.Nelasov. There are hundreds of links to CAMD (Central Archive of the Ministry of Defense) holdings in the end of the book. So, the authors let fall an interesting phrase on page 151 in a subclause:

"…of the 250 thousand air missions made by Soviet air forces in the first three months of war…"

Two hundred fifty thousand air missions in three months.

We are talking of destroyed air forces, aren't we?

This fact is from official document from the central archive ... for comparison:
Cognition comes through comparison. To see the true value of the figures above, let's recall that French air fighters made about 10 thousand missions in the five weeks of May and June, 1940 (that is, almost all the period of war and defeat of France) (21). German fighters made approximately 8 thousand air missions in the first three weeks of the "battle for England". German bombers only made 22 thousand air missions in the three most dramatic months of the colossal battle in the skies of Britain (August, September and October of 1940) (78).


Chapter 27
The problem is that the "destroyed on the airfield" words can conceal events which would be very different. For example, enemy bombers strike at an airfield "in peaceful sleep". That's something that should never happen in military air forces, because not a single air unit ever "sleeps peacefully" – each of them has a duty officer, an orderly man, guards and so on. It is even far less possible that anything like that could happen in air force fighter regiments of western border districts, with all the necessary instructions to raise combat readiness, to deconcentrate and mask aircrafts, etc. received on June 18-21, 1941. Moreover: almost all of them were alerted at 2 or 3 in the morning on the 22nd of June. If the reality was different from what it should have been, then it should be admitted that the reason for the defeat was not a "sudden enemy attack", but rather criminal negligence of the command.
...
It's extremely important to note that overplaying achievements of German air forces was convenient for both opposing sides! It's obvious that it was more convenient for the Germans – starting with an air regiment commander and up to Dr. Göbbels himself – to tell stories about a "devastating blow of Luftwaffe" than stories of a rear sergeant-major. It's obvious that commanders of Western front air regiments which had been defeated and "redeployed" 500 and more kilometers deep rearwards did not want to admit having abandoned tens and hundreds of working combat airplanes on empty airfields. In a situation when the battlefield was taken by the enemy and higher command had no practical way to check the trustworthiness of their reports, the "materiel was destroyed on the airfield with consecutive strikes of large enemy air units" formula was most convenient. It's obvious that Soviet "historians", with their academic ranks and positions given to them for vivid depictions of "unprecedented mass heroism", did not check trustworthiness of these reports.


How aircraft went MIA in 1942:
Figures for fighters are just as well surprising. Half (47.4%, to be exact) of all air missions made by Soviet fighters were guarding land troops and rear targets – that is, something happening at the sight of tens of thousands of people. 37% of total air missions made by fighters were covering up strike aircrafts – that is, the very Pe-2s and Il-2s at the front line. The only situation when a couple (a "wing") of fighters could disappear without a trace is a "free hunt" in the enemy's operative rears. These missions were only 2.7% of the total number of missions – which would probably be the ratio of fighters "failing to return" in the loss structure. In fact, it turned out to be 10 or 20 times as high.

What was that? The author does not have any answer to that question. For lack of anything better, I'd like to offer my reader a hypothesis. Namely: the slushy "failed to return from combat mission" formula was a euphemism that replaced the 1941 euphemism of similar credibility in the 1942 reports: "destroyed by enemy strike on the home airfield". This wily figure was used to "make ends meet" in reports, masking negligence of the command, the terrifying accident ratio, as well as the phenomenon which Stalin called "latent desertion" in simple and plain words in the order he signed. The most convincing argument for the hypothesis that the great number of aircrafts "missing in action" is not a fundamental war law is the time history of this figure (see Annex 9). With aircrafts "failing to return from combat mission" making up 70% of total combat losses in 1942, this figure decreases to 25% in 1944 and to 23% in 1945...


Last Chapter:
13. The "sudden attack" myth which had been cultivated in Soviet historiography for years is fictitious from soup to nuts. Apart the fact that all field manuals effective in the air forces at that time provided a system of measures which made "sudden strike" at home airfields impossible, all the Western districts, all the troops of military air forces were ordered to get themselves fully operational before the war.

14. The very first days of war made it obvious that Soviet air forces were not capable of effective air combat. The great flying stock was being used "with the efficiency of a steam locomotive" - few air missions, lack of coordination and communications with land troops, unsatisfactory operation of the materiel and technical supply system, weakness and lack of will in the staffs. Panic rearward "re-deployment" started in the areas of the front (Byelorussia, Baltic states) where enemy land troops made their main blow – and it was actually mass desertion.

15. Lack of action (of stampede) of Soviet air forces let the enemy bomb formations of Red Army land troops almost unpunished, which was yet another reason for panic retreat - which, in its turn, gave air force commanders another impulse to make a decision for an urgent "re-deployment". That’s how a system with "positive feedback" formed with lightning speed, which finally resulted in most part of the flying stock at Western, North-Western (and partly South-Western) fronts being left on airfields.


Unfortunately this is just a shadow of the original works (and lacks all good citation that he has in multiple other books as well) so it comes off a little like a poorly written conspiracy theory. This is really unfortunate as the data is really thorougl the original well written and sources directly from Russian national archives.

TL;DR: The reasons for soviet loss in the summer of 1941 had very little to do German superiority or a surprise attack, rather there was a univeral lack of will to fight for the regime, which only really changed once it became apparent, that however bad Stalin was, what Hitler had in store was even worse. The much cited "destroyed airforce" flew 250 000 sorties in the first three months of the war (with the main focus of just flying around randomly and avoiding the enemy at all cost, not flying meant capital punishment, facing germans meant possible death)

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 09 Jun 2020, 22:18
by ricnunes
mixelflick wrote:Yes, I'll concede one incident isn't indicative about the capability of a jet. However, Iraqi Mig-25's put up a hell of a fight before succumbing to USAF Eagles, and in at least one instance outran them (and their Sparrows). It was clear the Mig-25 was the best Iraqi performer (air to air) of the war, and was no easy mark.


Yes indeed. A (Iraqi) Mig-25 also managed to damage a F-15C and actually won this same engagement where a flight of two Mig-25s forced a flight of two F-15Cs (one of them damaged) to retreat.
So yes, I fully agree that the Mig-25 was Iraq's best performer during DS. However it's curious that during the Iraq-Iran war this didn't seem to be the case where Iraqi Mirage F-1s and even Mig-21s armed with French Missiles seem to have performed better, if I'm not mistaken.


mixelflick wrote:If you'll check the accounts of (Dawood?) Iraqi pilot who downed Speicher's F/A-18, its pretty clear that F/A-18 squadron knew they were under attack. In fact, if I'm not mistaken Speicher's wingman (or perhaps an E-2C) tried to warn him a Foxbat was in the area, closing in. Problem being, his ECM reportedly malfunctioned and the AA-6 that hit him did so with incredible force, shearing off his wing tank (and I think other weapons he was carrying). The poor A-6 that the Iraqi Foxbat then ran down certainly knew he was under attack, saved when the Iraqi GCIO told Dawood not to fire - for fear of fratricide.


That was not exactly the case.
It was not clear that the (entire) F/A-18 flight/squadron was under attack. What happened was that one of the F/A-18's from the same flight as Speicher (it wasn't a wingman but rather someone from another section of the same flight) detected the Mig-25 quite before it was able to attack Speicher and this same F/A-18 pilot asked permission to AWACS (which was an USAF E-3) since it was the only way that he could attack an enemy aircraft in BVR during DS (since the F/A-18 lacked a NCTR mode at the time) but never got any reply from the AWACS. This same pilot VID the aircraft as a Mig-25 when it passed near his F/A-18 and this because the Mig-25 was flying with the AB "turned on" (since this happened during the night).
Had this F/A-18 got the permission from the AWACS to attack the incoming Mig-25 then this same Mig would never be able to attack Speicher's aircraft. But that's war...
After this it seemed that the Iraqi Mig-25 was able to surprise Speicher and ultimately shot him down (where the failure of his aircraft's ECM suite may have helped).


mixelflick wrote:It was expensive to maintain yes, but in the end you usually get what you pay for. It was big, fast, with a good radar and obviously effective missiles. Not a dogfighter, but here it was dogfighting with F-15C's and giving them fits after it decoyed both Sidewinders and Sparrows. I dunno... to me it did exceptionally well, especially considering all of the advantages coalition airpower had over it/its pilots.


Yes, I agree with the above.
The Soviets back then and even the Russians today were and are way behind the US in terms of miniaturization of electronic components so the only way for the Soviets/Russians to be able to develop radars that can 'compete' with US ones is to build bigger but in order to equip fighter aircraft with bigger radars bigger fighter aircraft are needed and IMO that's where the Mig-25 and later the Mig-31 came up. As already mentioned in this thread the Flanker series are or seem to be much better than the Fulcrum family something that IMO is also related to the size of each aircraft where the Flankers due to their much bigger size compared to the Fulcrum are able to carry bigger and therefore better and more powerful radars.

Also IMO, I believe that the Mig-31M is or could be a quite dangerous aircraft against current 4th gen aircraft. I can only imagine how much more dangerous a lower-RCS or 'stealthy' sort of Mig-31 would be. I wonder if the J-20 could be some sort of such aircraft?

Re: Su-57 Felon

Unread postPosted: 10 Jun 2020, 01:54
by weasel1962
The Chinese put HOBS PL-10s (AIM-9X equivalent) on the J-20s. The J-20s are training to dogfight, if needed.

I don't know about the effectiveness of AA9s but the other russki BVRs don't exactly have a record of success.

Re: Su-57 Felon

Unread postPosted: 10 Jun 2020, 02:52
by madrat
gideonic-

Nice argument. I've never heard that argument before. It would put a spin on the early days of the invasion.

Re: Su-57 Felon

Unread postPosted: 10 Jun 2020, 04:58
by wrightwing
weasel1962 wrote:The Chinese put HOBS PL-10s (AIM-9X equivalent) on the J-20s. The J-20s are training to dogfight, if needed.

I don't know about the effectiveness of AA9s but the other russki BVRs don't exactly have a record of success.

I'm not sure the PL-10 is an AIM-9X equivalent. It likely falls somewhere between AIM-9M and R-73, but the rest of the statement is accurate.

Re: Su-57 Felon

Unread postPosted: 10 Jun 2020, 11:22
by weasel1962
AIM-9X equivalent in terms of role, not about effectiveness/performance. Unofficially the PL-10 has been claimed to have a 90 degree off boresight angle with a marketed short range of 20 km (for the 10E export version), the numbers are taken with the usual dose of salt. Don't think there is enough to make a decent comparison but that's the context of the post.

Re: Su-57 Felon

Unread postPosted: 10 Jun 2020, 13:41
by madrat
marauder2048 wrote:
madrat wrote:Russia didn't bother with it over Georgia. Didn't affect the results at all.


They did but without meaningful results. There just wasn't a classic SEAD effort.


How can you say they did? Georgia flew sorties largely uncontested on the first day. If they had more SAM's they would have been able to get another sortie up. The problem was they abandoned the air war just they walked away from getting pummeled by 50 divisions of armor and motorized rifle companies. The Russians failed to operate at night and lacked reconn assets to actually get the job done in a limited engagement, hence the overwhelming land force demonstration.

Re: Su-57 Felon

Unread postPosted: 11 Jun 2020, 02:13
by marauder2048
madrat wrote:
marauder2048 wrote:
madrat wrote:Russia didn't bother with it over Georgia. Didn't affect the results at all.


They did but without meaningful results. There just wasn't a classic SEAD effort.


How can you say they did? Georgia flew sorties largely uncontested on the first day. If they had more SAM's they would have been able to get another sortie up. The problem was they abandoned the air war just they walked away from getting pummeled by 50 divisions of armor and motorized rifle companies. The Russians failed to operate at night and lacked reconn assets to actually get the job done in a limited engagement, hence the overwhelming land force demonstration.


The Georgians stopped flying after the first day as a consequence of the Russians repeatedly attacking airfields.
Even the Georgian helicopters weren't much active beyond day 3.

I think most of the Russian fixed-wing losses were due to fratricide.

Re: Su-57 Felon

Unread postPosted: 11 Jun 2020, 02:58
by weasel1962
The links below might help.

https://mwi.usma.edu/wp-content/uploads ... of-War.pdf
https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/130048/pub1069.pdf
http://airpower.airforce.gov.au/APDC/me ... t-2008.pdf

P.s.
Russian air did operate at night (not talking about effectiveness)
It wasn't 50 divisions
Only 1 loss was attributed to fraticide

Re: Su-57 Felon

Unread postPosted: 11 Jun 2020, 03:58
by marauder2048
My personal favorite is "The Tanks of August" (attached) and not just because David Glantz wrote the foreword.

They attribute only two Russian fixed-wing losses to hostile fire. The rest was more likely attributable to either
Russian or South Ossetian fire.

Re: Su-57 Felon

Unread postPosted: 11 Jun 2020, 06:59
by weasel1962
Agreed. The Tank of August articles appear to be a respectable source. The article by Anton Lavrov from pg 99 is a well written account of the losses which as suggested would be 2 losses from fraticide.

The reason why I posted the Australian pathfinder article was their de-emphasis from the numbers to focus on the issues.

Re: Su-57 FELON

Unread postPosted: 11 Jun 2020, 15:00
by mixelflick
ricnunes wrote:
mixelflick wrote:Yes, I'll concede one incident isn't indicative about the capability of a jet. However, Iraqi Mig-25's put up a hell of a fight before succumbing to USAF Eagles, and in at least one instance outran them (and their Sparrows). It was clear the Mig-25 was the best Iraqi performer (air to air) of the war, and was no easy mark.



Yes indeed. A (Iraqi) Mig-25 also managed to damage a F-15C and actually won this same engagement where a flight of two Mig-25s forced a flight of two F-15Cs (one of them damaged) to retreat.
So yes, I fully agree that the Mig-25 was Iraq's best performer during DS. However it's curious that during the Iraq-Iran war this didn't seem to be the case where Iraqi Mirage F-1s and even Mig-21s armed with French Missiles seem to have performed better, if I'm not mistaken.

That engagement then, must have been taken apart/analyzed by US intelligence like few others. I'm not aware we have any captured Mig-25's like we do Fulcrums/Flankers. But I bet the speeds involved could have been replicated by drones or F-22's out around Tonopah, S-4 etc.. wherever such testing goes on. But who knows, perhaps it wasn't the Foxbat's speed that allowed it to prevail in that engagement. On the Iraqi F1's/Mig-21's performing better, I'd guess they just didn't want to risk as many Foxbats/have as many to set traps, etc.. That could have accounted for their superior performance as well..

mixelflick wrote:If you'll check the accounts of (Dawood?) Iraqi pilot who downed Speicher's F/A-18, its pretty clear that F/A-18 squadron knew they were under attack. In fact, if I'm not mistaken Speicher's wingman (or perhaps an E-2C) tried to warn him a Foxbat was in the area, closing in. Problem being, his ECM reportedly malfunctioned and the AA-6 that hit him did so with incredible force, shearing off his wing tank (and I think other weapons he was carrying). The poor A-6 that the Iraqi Foxbat then ran down certainly knew he was under attack, saved when the Iraqi GCIO told Dawood not to fire - for fear of fratricide.


That was not exactly the case.
It was not clear that the (entire) F/A-18 flight/squadron was under attack. What happened was that one of the F/A-18's from the same flight as Speicher (it wasn't a wingman but rather someone from another section of the same flight) detected the Mig-25 quite before it was able to attack Speicher and this same F/A-18 pilot asked permission to AWACS (which was an USAF E-3) since it was the only way that he could attack an enemy aircraft in BVR during DS (since the F/A-18 lacked a NCTR mode at the time) but never got any reply from the AWACS. This same pilot VID the aircraft as a Mig-25 when it passed near his F/A-18 and this because the Mig-25 was flying with the AB "turned on" (since this happened during the night).
Had this F/A-18 got the permission from the AWACS to attack the incoming Mig-25 then this same Mig would never be able to attack Speicher's aircraft. But that's war...
After this it seemed that the Iraqi Mig-25 was able to surprise Speicher and ultimately shot him down (where the failure of his aircraft's ECM suite may have helped).

Sounds like there were several missed opportunities then. But as you say, that's war. The whole scenario sounds like the very definition of "fog of war". Hopefully, the F-35's DAS prevents similar events from happening in the future. It has to be confusing enough during the day. At night? Crazy. It's a testament to the pilots skill and bravery (on both sides) they were able to perform as well as they did.

mixelflick wrote:It was expensive to maintain yes, but in the end you usually get what you pay for. It was big, fast, with a good radar and obviously effective missiles. Not a dogfighter, but here it was dogfighting with F-15C's and giving them fits after it decoyed both Sidewinders and Sparrows. I dunno... to me it did exceptionally well, especially considering all of the advantages coalition airpower had over it/its pilots.


Yes, I agree with the above.
The Soviets back then and even the Russians today were and are way behind the US in terms of miniaturization of electronic components so the only way for the Soviets/Russians to be able to develop radars that can 'compete' with US ones is to build bigger but in order to equip fighter aircraft with bigger radars bigger fighter aircraft are needed and IMO that's where the Mig-25 and later the Mig-31 came up. As already mentioned in this thread the Flanker series are or seem to be much better than the Fulcrum family something that IMO is also related to the size of each aircraft where the Flankers due to their much bigger size compared to the Fulcrum are able to carry bigger and therefore better and more powerful radars.

Also IMO, I believe that the Mig-31M is or could be a quite dangerous aircraft against current 4th gen aircraft. I can only imagine how much more dangerous a lower-RCS or 'stealthy' sort of Mig-31 would be. I wonder if the J-20 could be some sort of such aircraft?


Interesting you should mention the miiaturization of electronic components.. as I just re-read a chapter about the SU-27's development where the chief designer didn't think it could compete with the F-15 for that very reason: Soviet avionics were too heavy/bulky. The solution wasn't elegant but I suppose got the job done - make the airframe bigger, and squeeze as much thrust out of the engines as possible.

I honestly don't think the J-20 will turn out to be a stealthy Mig-31, but time will tell...

Re: Su-57 Felon

Unread postPosted: 12 Jun 2020, 02:13
by weasel1962
The chinese are different from the soviets in that respect. The gap between Chinese IT hardware manufacturing and western isn't that big. One of the main obstacles would be design. If one looks at all the civilian partnerships (almost every major US/European player), they have a clear understanding of civilian aviation avionics from a design standpoint. From a military standpoint, they'd get quite a fair bit from Pakistan (and Israel etc) to at least know the capabilities of 2nd tier warplanes which will definitely filter into their warplanes.

If one looks at the digitized cockpit of PLAAF aircraft (J-10C attached), its a lot cleaner (and modern) than those Russki ones. Then it comes as no surprise why the chinese took the trouble to localize production of their sukhois.
J-10C cockpit.jpeg


Corporate profits came first. It may be a bit too late to roll back those technologies transferred.

Re: Su-57 Felon

Unread postPosted: 12 Jun 2020, 03:23
by madrat
I hope it's the same guys doing QA for the PLAAF as wish.com!

Re: Su-57 Felon

Unread postPosted: 12 Jun 2020, 08:31
by hornetfinn
China has comparatively a lot more modern and far bigger electronics industry than Soviet Union had but they do have some rather serious shortcomings compared to Western countries. For example they import huge number of electronics components from other countries (like Taiwan and South Korea). They simply lack the capabilities to produce truly modern components themselves and have to buy those from outside. They are working hard to change this and have produced some fairly impressive products totally domestically. But they are still quite a bit behind in many areas and their most advanced products tend to be based on Western technology. I don't think they can produce competitive specialized advanced components like DSPs, thermal imaging detectors or T/R modules for AESA radars. That's not to say that they couldn't produce capable systems, but they are more than likely less capable than similar Western products.

I think Russia has similar problems with electronics and Su-57 seems to be quite a lot behind compared to F-22 and F-35. Su-57 main radar has less T/R modules than AN/APG-81, let alone AN/APG-77. I'd say that it's rather likely that those modules are individually also less capable than those used in AN/APG-81. It also doesn't have imaging infrared MLD/MAWS but rather very simple and short ranged UV based one. But naturally there are a lot of other fighter aircraft out there that it can definitely compete with even when it comes to avionics. For Western aircraft that includes even the latest variants of Super Hornet, Eurocanards, F-16 and F-15. Then there are the J-20 that it might well be competitive with when it comes to avionics.

Re: Su-57 Felon

Unread postPosted: 12 Jun 2020, 16:26
by mixelflick
So really, it boils down to this...

Will the Russians be able to mass produce a quasi-stealth fighter, with 3rd rate avionics and a questionable second stage engine? And if the answer to that question is yes, who besides Russia is going to pay top dollar for it??

India probably needs a good stealth fighter the most, and they're not buying them so.... The SU-57 as it stands looks to be a Vladimir Putin vanity project. Nothing more, nothing less. It seems as if the SU-35 was as far as Russian aviation could go, in developing a finished product that appeals to foreign customers.

If you were a former or current Russian arms client, would you buy the SU-57 (as is)?

Re: Su-57 Felon

Unread postPosted: 12 Jun 2020, 17:49
by milosh
madrat wrote:gideonic-

Nice argument. I've never heard that argument before. It would put a spin on the early days of the invasion.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kh7KmtwLUbw

Re: Su-57 Felon

Unread postPosted: 12 Jun 2020, 18:55
by falcon.16
mixelflick wrote:So really, it boils down to this...

Will the Russians be able to mass produce a quasi-stealth fighter, with 3rd rate avionics and a questionable second stage engine? And if the answer to that question is yes, who besides Russia is going to pay top dollar for it??

India probably needs a good stealth fighter the most, and they're not buying them so.... The SU-57 as it stands looks to be a Vladimir Putin vanity project. Nothing more, nothing less. It seems as if the SU-35 was as far as Russian aviation could go, in developing a finished product that appeals to foreign customers.

If you were a former or current Russian arms client, would you buy the SU-57 (as is)?


Russia need the Su-57, Russia can not go to the international market and buy a 5th generation fighter. For this, it is not important how much good will be the Su-57, Russia has not other option, and they must not buy J-20´s, it would be devastating for its aeronautical industry.

For this i am not agree is a Putin vanity proyect, Su-57 it's a matter of survival of your industry.

Re: Su-57 Felon

Unread postPosted: 12 Jun 2020, 19:33
by milosh
hornetfinn wrote:I think Russia has similar problems with electronics and Su-57 seems to be quite a lot behind compared to F-22 and F-35. Su-57 main radar has less T/R modules than AN/APG-81, let alone AN/APG-77. I'd say that it's rather likely that those modules are individually also less capable than those used in AN/APG-81.


N036 have also side antennas which take spaces and main antenna isn't noticeable bigger then APG-81.

Re: Su-57 Felon

Unread postPosted: 12 Jun 2020, 23:27
by charlielima223
milosh wrote:
hornetfinn wrote:I think Russia has similar problems with electronics and Su-57 seems to be quite a lot behind compared to F-22 and F-35. Su-57 main radar has less T/R modules than AN/APG-81, let alone AN/APG-77. I'd say that it's rather likely that those modules are individually also less capable than those used in AN/APG-81.


N036 have also side antennas which take spaces and main antenna isn't noticeable bigger then APG-81.


How useful are those side antennas are... really? F-22 was supposed to have side looking arrays but those were dropped. F-35 doesnt have them and Eurocanards seem to prefer mechanically steerable arrays (Captor-E for example). Not saying Russian fighter designs should just follow the crowd, but there must be a good reason why no other current fighter jet has side looking radar arrays.
As hornetfinn was mentioning, it isnt the size of the radar on the Su-57, rather it is how advance it is. Others have noted on many topics of apparent lack of advance technology (specifically in electronics and computers) that Russian industry has. The Su-57 may very have an AESA radar but others (including myself) here are questioning just how good it really is or will be.

Re: Su-57 Felon

Unread postPosted: 13 Jun 2020, 16:15
by milosh
charlielima223 wrote:How useful are those side antennas are... really? F-22 was supposed to have side looking arrays but those were dropped. F-35 doesnt have them and Eurocanards seem to prefer mechanically steerable arrays (Captor-E for example). Not saying Russian fighter designs should just follow the crowd, but there must be a good reason why no other current fighter jet has side looking radar arrays.


Quite useful for Russians. They still have problems with IIR sekeer for IR missiles and Vympel showed mini radar AAM similar concept as Peregrine. So it could be they are going with radar guided missile instead R-73/R-74 (in future).

Having side arrays would be quite beneficial for such missile if would allow HOBS and LOAL capability which would be impossible with fixed array and in case of rotating AESA/PESA it is easier but with rotating radar in direction of target to guide missile you can't scan nice part of sky nor guide missiles against targets which are opposite from target you are attacking.

charlielima223 wrote:As hornetfinn was mentioning, it isnt the size of the radar on the Su-57, rather it is how advance it is. Others have noted on many topics of apparent lack of advance technology (specifically in electronics and computers) that Russian industry has. The Su-57 may very have an AESA radar but others (including myself) here are questioning just how good it really is or will be.


And did I say they aren't behind? I only point out what is problem when comparing N036 and APG-81. Even if N036 have same modules you can't expect to maximise space usage for main radar as in case of APG-81.

Re: Su-57 Felon

Unread postPosted: 16 Jun 2020, 19:41
by charlielima223
milosh wrote:
Quite useful for Russians. They still have problems with IIR sekeer for IR missiles and Vympel showed mini radar AAM similar concept as Peregrine. So it could be they are going with radar guided missile instead R-73/R-74 (in future).

Having side arrays would be quite beneficial for such missile if would allow HOBS and LOAL capability which would be impossible with fixed array and in case of rotating AESA/PESA it is easier but with rotating radar in direction of target to guide missile you can't scan nice part of sky nor guide missiles against targets which are opposite from target you are attacking.


I think more advanced or modern western fighter aircraft got around the issue with a combination of better IR seekers and data-link. What one aircraft sensor sees, all the others in the flight see as well and can use sensors from other aircraft to guide the missile. Essentially one aircraft acts as the spotter and the other is the shooter.

Re: Su-57 Felon

Unread postPosted: 17 Jun 2020, 16:41
by mixelflick
Not much news since the Christmas Eve crash. They put out a few saving face stories shortly thereafter, but its anyone's guess as to what's going on right now. Still no cause cited from the accident investigation (let's hope they're doing one).

Beautiful piece of engineering, but clearly still a lot of bugs to be worked out..

Re: Su-57 Felon

Unread postPosted: 17 Jun 2020, 16:57
by milosh
mixelflick wrote:Not much news since the Christmas Eve crash. They put out a few saving face stories shortly thereafter, but its anyone's guess as to what's going on right now. Still no cause cited from the accident investigation (let's hope they're doing one).

Beautiful piece of engineering, but clearly still a lot of bugs to be worked out..


New VVS commander doesn't help either, he isn't fighter fan, he isn't pilot at all, army man and when you ask army man which fighter is best fighter, he would say bomber :D

New commander favors drones, pgm and bombers. S-70 can be consider his pet project.

Re: Su-57 Felon

Unread postPosted: 18 Jun 2020, 18:01
by mixelflick
milosh wrote:
mixelflick wrote:Not much news since the Christmas Eve crash. They put out a few saving face stories shortly thereafter, but its anyone's guess as to what's going on right now. Still no cause cited from the accident investigation (let's hope they're doing one).

Beautiful piece of engineering, but clearly still a lot of bugs to be worked out..


New VVS commander doesn't help either, he isn't fighter fan, he isn't pilot at all, army man and when you ask army man which fighter is best fighter, he would say bomber :D

New commander favors drones, pgm and bombers. S-70 can be consider his pet project.


But even he is over-ruled by my boy Vlad, who loves the SU-57 (despite all of its problems)...

Re: Su-57 Felon

Unread postPosted: 18 Jun 2020, 18:20
by milosh
mixelflick wrote:But even he is over-ruled by my boy Vlad, who loves the SU-57 (despite all of its problems)...


I really don't think Su-57 is something Vlad is proud of. Russia is quite late in 5gen fighter game so even if they start mass production in early 2020s it isn't nothing to hyped about, I would say J-20 took all the glore :D

But with heavy UCAV they have something to bargain about. We are first, it is AI etc. And to be frank UCAV and PGM is what they need lot more then small number of 5gen fighters.

Re: Su-57 Felon

Unread postPosted: 19 Jun 2020, 15:36
by mixelflick
milosh wrote:
mixelflick wrote:But even he is over-ruled by my boy Vlad, who loves the SU-57 (despite all of its problems)...


I really don't think Su-57 is something Vlad is proud of. Russia is quite late in 5gen fighter game so even if they start mass production in early 2020s it isn't nothing to hyped about, I would say J-20 took all the glore :D

But with heavy UCAV they have something to bargain about. We are first, it is AI etc. And to be frank UCAV and PGM is what they need lot more then small number of 5gen fighters.


You raise an interesting question...

Why bother with the SU-57 at all, if an evolved "Hunter" drone can do the job better? It will certainly be more stealthy, getting them into the VLO game. It probably won't be as fast, but it's a BIG bird that'll likely carry a lot of fuel. And let's not forget minimal drag, assuming they carry all fuel and weapons internally. I see it as a matter of timing. If the Hunter matures as a platform in say, 5 years and the SU-57's new engine is faltering, it would make more sense to produce Hunters.

Russian aviation is at a critical juncture: Do they get into the 5th gen game way late, or skip it altogether and focus moreso on AI drones to do the deed? Considering the crash, ongoing engine and other troubles.. the future of the SU-57 is looking bleak. Only a big order from a foreign customer can save the day IMO.

Unfortunately for the Russians, I don't think China's going to want or need it. India does need it, but thus far doesn't want it. Given their options though for stealthy alternatives, they may not have a choice..