Su-57 Felon

Military aircraft - Post cold war aircraft, including for example B-2, Gripen, F-18E/F Super Hornet, Rafale, and Typhoon.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4153
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post26 Jan 2020, 16:47

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..
Offline
User avatar

marsavian

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1723
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2018, 21:55

Unread post26 Jan 2020, 21:46

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.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6890
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post27 Jan 2020, 01:45

Russia needs to partner with China on a Stealth Fighter. Yet, question is will the Chinese have them??? :shock:
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6890
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post25 Mar 2020, 06:08

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/
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4153
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post25 Mar 2020, 13:48

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?
Offline

zaltys

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 30
  • Joined: 28 Jan 2011, 11:48

Unread post25 Mar 2020, 14:17

What are those bubbles in the canopy at 1:02?
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4153
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post25 Mar 2020, 15:21

zaltys wrote:What are those bubbles in the canopy at 1:02?


Good question.

Condensation?
Offline

milosh

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1127
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 23:40
  • Location: Serbia, Belgrade

Unread post25 Mar 2020, 19:28

I find it interesting they fitted R-74 missile in weapon pod, I thought it would need new missile (smaller then R-73/74).
Offline

falcon.16

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 104
  • Joined: 11 Sep 2018, 20:10
  • Location: Spain

Unread post25 Mar 2020, 20:43

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.
Offline

swiss

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 456
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2017, 14:43
Offline

falcon.16

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 104
  • Joined: 11 Sep 2018, 20:10
  • Location: Spain

Unread post26 Mar 2020, 12:31

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.
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4153
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post26 Mar 2020, 13:51

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..
Offline

milosh

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1127
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 23:40
  • Location: Serbia, Belgrade

Unread post26 Mar 2020, 18:57

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.
Offline
User avatar

underscan

Banned

  • Posts: 14
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2020, 00:40

Unread post16 Apr 2020, 18:45

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.
“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.”
Offline

hythelday

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 624
  • Joined: 25 Jul 2016, 12:43
  • Location: Estonia

Unread post16 Apr 2020, 20:01

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.
PreviousNext

Return to Modern Military Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: mtoner and 28 guests