Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2?

max steel wrote:Can 40N6 missile destroy US SEAD planes ? What is the diffrnce btwn IR and Optical/laser system ?


How effective are these sead growler and hornet against iads ?.

Werewolf wrote:Hard to jam is not unjammable.

max steel wrote:

Werewolf wrote:Hard to jam is not unjammable.

What's your thought on usa sead attack by hornets and growler ng . Having DIRCMS fitted can't they be shot down via sams ?

max steel wrote:Can 40N6 missile destroy US SEAD planes ? What is the diffrnce btwn IR and Optical/laser system ?


How effective are these sead growler and hornet against iads ?.

Russia's Radical Sukhoi S-37 Fighter Plane Goes Up Against Our F-22

Russia's fabled Sukhoi Design Bureau builds the S-37, a 21st century fighter to go head-to-head with our F-22.

A bold, new combat aircraft designed by the legendary Sukhoi Design Bureau and now undergoing tests in Russia has taken aim at America's next-generation fighter, the F-22. The Russian challenge comes in the form of the single-seat Sukhoi S-37, the world's first combat aircraft to successfully exploit forward-swept wing (FSW) technology.

First word of the S-37 leaked to the West in 1997, and took Western defense analysts by surprise. Now, after more than 120 test flights at the secret Zhukovsky Flight Test Center near Moscow, it is clear that there is nothing like this bird flying anywhere in the world today. Its creator, the Sukhoi group, is considered to be Russia's premier combat aircraft producer. Sukhoi currently produces a family of topnotch operational fighters and fighter-bombers all based on the very agile and powerful Su-27 air superiority fighter. These include such models as the Su-33 aircraft carrier-based air defense fighter and the thrust-vectoring Su-37, a fighter and ground-attack aircraft. The general director of the Sukhoi Design Bureau and the Sukhoi Aviation Military-Industrial Complex, Mikhail Pogosyan, is proud of his company's success. But looking to the future, he sees the need to build a fifth-generation fighter and to find an eventual replacement for the Su-27. "The S-37 program [has] a critical importance for the development of our company," he tells Popular Mechanics.

Named Berkut, which translates to mean Golden Eagle or Royal Eagle, the S-37 bears an "S" rather than an "Su" designation because it is an experimental rather than production aircraft. Design of the aircraft, originally known as the S-32, began around 1983, and drew on many years of FSW research that had commenced in the former Soviet Union during the 1940s—initially using captured Nazi technology. The Russians were also well aware of the Grumman X-29 FSW research aircraft, as two of these single-seat, single-engine planes were being tested in America between 1984 and the early 1990s (see "The Outer Limits").

The S-37, however, is almost twice the size of the X-29, with a markedly different configuration. It has a length of 74 ft. and a wingspan of 54 ft. 10 in., with a maximum takeoff weight of just under 75,000 pounds. Power comes from two Aviadvigatel (Perm) D-30F6 turbofans, each developing 34,177 pounds of static thrust with afterburners—but without a thrust-vector ring. Together the engines give the S-37 a respectable, if unspectacular, top speed of around Mach 1.6. The aircraft may be re-engined with Sukhoi's preferred option of two Lyulka (Saturn) AL-41F turbofans with thrust vectoring, when these formidable engines—which pour out 39,350 pounds of static thrust with afterburners—become available.
Unconventional Design

The real innovations in the S-37 lie within its unconventional design. The swept-forward wing is part of a so-called "tandem triplane" arrangement, blending all-moving forward canards with the swept-forward wing, a short-span broad-chord swept horizontal tail plus outward-canted vertical tailplanes. To speed up manufacturing, some parts of the S-37 were borrowed from the Su-27 series, including the undercarriage and vertical tails, but the main flying surfaces are all new. The S-37's FSW layout meets Sukhoi's desire to create a fighter with super-maneuverability—one capable of maintaining stability and control at almost any altitude and angle of attack. Critical to achieving this is the aircraft's computerized fly-by-wire control system, probably similar to that used in the Su-35 and Su-37, which allows for the basically unstable aerodynamics of the aircraft to be under control at all times. Vital in dogfights, this system, coupled with the FSW layout, helps the S-37 reach the optimum attitude for launching missiles at short- and medium-range opponents. Pogosyan, formerly the chief designer of the S-37, points out that agility was a top priority. "We were looking for the technical solutions to increase aircraft maneuverability in close combat."

The S-37's forward-swept, slightly tapered wing has leading-edge flaps and trailing-edge flaps and ailerons. Compared to a normal swept-back wing, the FSW potentially has better lift, good antispin and stall resistance, and allows a shorter takeoff run. At transonic speeds (around Mach 0.8 to Mach 1.3), it has a better lift-to-drag ratio than a conventional wing. During flight, airflow is directed inward across the wing's section, thus preventing aileron and tip stall at higher angles of attack, and allowing better control response at high angles of attack. That's great for dogfighting. The key to all this is the use of up to 90 percent composite materials in the wing's structure. Sukhoi has made a major breakthrough in the use of advanced composites in the S-37's wing, and these have proven able to cope with the considerable bending and structural loading on this type of wing during close-in maneuvering across a wide speed range.

The FSW concept is very different from plans we've seen for the stealthy F-22 Raptor, its potential American rival (see "21st Century Fighter," Dec. 1999). Although the S-37 does have some stealth design features, and may be covered with radar-absorbent coatings, low detectability is secondary to the maneuverability created by the FSW.
Secret Flight Tests

The S-37 first flew in September 1997 at the Russian experimental base at Zhukovsky near Moscow. Test flights have been successful so far, with Sukhoi claiming that the S-37 has made more than 120 flights. But many questions remain.

Will it remain simply as a proof-of-concept aircraft, with no actual production S-37 ever made? Will its radical technology be used in forthcoming Russian fighter designs, perhaps to meet the Russian air force's future heavy fighter requirements? Or will it form the basis of the already-rumored S-54 light fighter, a possible Russian rival to America's Joint Strike Fighter? It can certainly be said that a production model of the S-37 would be a match for any Western fighter.

The S-37's big rival in Russia is the MiG 1.44. This experimental twin-engined fighter first flew, after many lengthy delays, in February 2000. Most Western observers believe that the MiG design, and not the S-37, will ultimately lead to a production fighter. However, Sukhoi has a possible trump card. The new Russian president, Vladimir Putin, is particularly friendly toward Sukhoi, and his planned reforms of Russia's aircraft industry could benefit Sukhoi. Pogosyan tells PM he is upbeat: "We have a good design and scientific organization, which enables us to successfully compete with the West."

Much of the S-37 program remains veiled in secrecy, but its potentially world-beating design truly extends the boundaries of state-of-the-art fighter technology.

This story originally appeared in the January 2001 issue of Popular Mechanics.

Batajnica wrote:I think that there are many step to hit F22,Russia air force so.

I am Chinese ,know the PLAA`s tactics and air defence system

with the VHF radar and many of rada systemes or photoelectric detection systemes on the borad area

kvs wrote:

Batajnica wrote:I think that there are many step to hit F22,Russia air force so.

I am Chinese ,know the PLAA`s tactics and air defence system

with the VHF radar and many of rada systemes or photoelectric detection systemes on the borad area

Stealth has become a myth.   It was a 1960s solution to the primitive monochrome radars of that period.   One could design an
aircraft to avoid a single such primitive radar but not a network of them.   So from day one this wunderwaffe was limited.  
Modern multi-spectrum detection systems completely defeat stealth.    This is not even understood or known by stealth
fanboys.   So no, the F-22 and B-2 are not "invisible" to Russian detection systems.  

Singular_Transform wrote:It is an interesting topics.

The target of "stealth" is to avoid the horizontal detection of airplane in the cm wavelength range

It is important  because the passive seeker head of the SA or AA rockets is too small to fit anything with longer wavelenght . Example the old, 70s vintage air defence system can see the stealth planes, but it can't illuminate them for the sam rockets.

But example a big arirplane (like su 2x/3x ) big enough to fit a meter wavelength 4-6 elements passive (active? ) radar, that can pinpoint the position of the stealth plane by few km accuracy .

However the shaping has a few interesting implications.

The aircraft not absorbing the radar waves, but reflecting them upwards on the uppor surface of the plane, and back/down on the down surface.

Additionally , the stealth plane is visible for the X band radars from above , at least in 45 degree, but maybe in a wider cone.

Means that if you have a ballistic SAM that going up to above 100 km then it can detect see the illumination of the X band radars perfectly, and can hit the target.


Or you can use dual / triple channel rockets, that use IR/UV to pinpoint the target, and using active guidance from long wave radars to get close to the target say at least 10km  distance.

If anyone check the new gen S-400 rockets then it is quite clear they either using short range dual seeker design, or long range ballistic design. So it attack the planes from above , with passive or active X seeker head.

Even if B-2 was made out of stainless steel, it would still have about... 100 times less RCS than Tu-95, i really hope you are aware of that... Bear is turboprop, its reflecting so much back to reciever that it looks like flying building.

Sure, you sacrifice speed, and you gain range, loitering, stealth... let alone fact that B-2 in terms of avionics is about...lightyears than any other bomber in existence, might even keep being so till replacement arrives.

There is no perfect answer, something needs to be sacrificed. I personally prefer to sacrifice speed out of all above listed.

Isos wrote:

Even if B-2 was made out of stainless steel, it would still have about... 100 times less RCS than Tu-95, i really hope you are aware of that... Bear is turboprop, its reflecting so much back to reciever that it looks like flying building.

Sure, you sacrifice speed, and you gain range, loitering, stealth... let alone fact that B-2 in terms of avionics is about...lightyears than any other bomber in existence, might even keep being so till replacement arrives.

There is no perfect answer, something needs to be sacrificed. I personally prefer to sacrifice speed out of all above listed.

Who cares if it's supposed to lunch cruise missiles from 3000 km, it doesn't need stealth. If it's supposed to lunch unguided bombs from 5km from the target it will be seen by the air defence and shoot down.

Militarov wrote:

Isos wrote:

Even if B-2 was made out of stainless steel, it would still have about... 100 times less RCS than Tu-95, i really hope you are aware of that... Bear is turboprop, its reflecting so much back to reciever that it looks like flying building.

Sure, you sacrifice speed, and you gain range, loitering, stealth... let alone fact that B-2 in terms of avionics is about...lightyears than any other bomber in existence, might even keep being so till replacement arrives.

There is no perfect answer, something needs to be sacrificed. I personally prefer to sacrifice speed out of all above listed.

Who cares if it's supposed to lunch cruise missiles from 3000 km, it doesn't need stealth. If it's supposed to lunch unguided bombs from 5km from the target it will be seen by the air defence and shoot down.

Pilots care. You do not operate in vacoom, when you take off from Murmansk area and fly pass Sweden (lets go with it for purpose of explaining), they will see you flying Bear probably on EWRs stationed 3.000km away. Its not like you are evading SHORADs placed randomly somewhere, you are evading hundreds of radars, hundreds of aircraft.

Today, "meter" radars will probably detect B-2 on fairly reasonable range if conventional mission is in question, and then what? What will you launch aganist it when its appearing and disappearing on your guidance radar, when its jamming you...because your guidance radars are of far lower frequency, you know its there but you do not have the sling.

You launch fighters but you do not know if its followed by other stealth fighters or its alone, or if its even there where you see it or its you being spoofed and its actually 70km in other direction. Stealth is nasty business, our AD knows it very well.

Also why do you then need speed if you are launching cruise missiles from 3000km ? Speed is not an answer anymore, air defence systems became far more dangerous than they were 40 years ago.

Also B-2 is not all that slow either.

Also why do you then need speed if you are launching cruise missiles from 3000km Smile? Speed is not an answer anymore, air defence systems became far more dangerous than they were 40 years ago.

Militarov wrote:





Today, "meter" radars will probably detect B-2 on fairly reasonable range if conventional mission is in question, and then what? What will you launch aganist it when its appearing and disappearing on your guidance radar, when its jamming you...because your guidance radars are of far lower frequency, you know its there but you do not have the sling.

You launch fighters but you do not know if its followed by other stealth fighters or its alone, or if its even there where you see it or its you being spoofed and its actually 70km in other direction. Stealth is nasty business, our AD knows it very well.

Singular_Transform wrote:

Militarov wrote:





Today, "meter" radars will probably detect B-2 on fairly reasonable range if conventional mission is in question, and then what? What will you launch aganist it when its appearing and disappearing on your guidance radar, when its jamming you...because your guidance radars are of far lower frequency, you know its there but you do not have the sling.

You launch fighters but you do not know if its followed by other stealth fighters or its alone, or if its even there where you see it or its you being spoofed and its actually 70km in other direction. Stealth is nasty business, our AD knows it very well.

The B-2 will get 4-16 40N6 missile.

The active homing long range missiles has been desinged for the b2s I presume.

it needs 10 km box , and it will found the aircraft in that box on its own.