Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #6

Isos is right in the meaning of "multirole". During cold war the aircrafts were highly specialized, but not due less computer power...it was because specialzed aircraft are simply better in their job! And old aircraft with up to date modern avionic are still very deadly. Multirole comes into play in times of cost reduction. And this was the only reason for the F-35...it was a political decision, not a solution prefered by US Military.

Old computing chips were slow and not able to process a lot of data very quickly... a modern smart wrist watch has more computing power than was used to get people to the moon, but analog computers were used that were hardwired just to do a specific job. A calculator doesn't need a super CPU just to do basic calculations and even the most ancient computer chips from the 1970s and 1980s can perform calculations faster than a person can push buttons on a calculator.

The point is that the exponential increase in processing power meant they could start to do much more than the old calculator hard wired computers, so features could be added using software instead of adding new bits of hardware.

Multirole fighters only really became possible in the late 1980s and early 1990s with processors like the 286 and 386 and 486 chips... which are pre pentium dinosaurs but the requirements of a fighter plane were not that big.... they had dedicated computers processing radar information, so from the target distance and direction and speed interception points were simple calculations, and the times needed for the target to be illuminated to guide a SARH missile like SPARROW could be calculated too and managed by a simple computer. What started to require serious processing power is digital video of ground targets and transmitting such information back to HQ instead of using wet film for recon that had to be flown back to base and developed before the intel could be used...

Most of the time a multirole aircraft is not as valuable as it sounds... accountants love them because on paper it saves money, but it often also makes them more expensive so you can afford less than you probably want.

Having said that a MiG-21 and a MiG-23 and a MiG-27 and an Su-17 could all be replaced by a MiG-29SMT... it has better weapon options than any of those aircraft, and while its single barrel 30mm cannon doesn't offer the same fire power as the 30mm gatling on the MiG-27 or the twin 30mm guns on the Fitters, and the MiG-29SMT does not have the acceleration of the MiG-27 it has weapons that exceed the performance of any carried by the older generation aircraft... it is a better dogfighter than the MiG-21, it is a better interceptor than the MiG-23 because it can carry much more potent missiles and has a better radar and IRST, and in ground attack it is as good as the MiG-27M or MiG-27K... and would be rather more effective in the swing role in that it could hit targets with TV or laser guided bombs or missiles and then defend itself with R77 and R73 AAMs in the same mission.

New 5th gen and 4++ gen aircraft are now being called omnirole where they are expected to perform a range of roles within one mission using extensive sensors and datalinks to find targets like a recon aircraft... engage enemy aircraft like a fighter, or any ground defences like a SEAD aircraft... monitor or record the results of those attacks and pass the information to HQ so it can be decided if follow up attacks are needed and then return to base for rearm and refuel.

You need a computer network with multiple computers and systems able to perform multiple different functions for that sort of thing

For a long time the military talked about C3IR... command, control, communications, intell, and recon... it was in the late 1980s they added the extra c... computers... to make it C4IR but it is a very very important addition that made a difference across the board in terms of everything.

The bubbles on the chin and on the back of the neck are the laser emitters, the optical window you see on the left of the 5-10 inscription is for the MAWS. What it specifically is in terms of thermal/UV nobody really knows for certain. The Su-35S has both IIR and laser warning receivers, so I'd be surprised if the Su-57 went away from that to just UV sensors.

Notice how the design of the laser emitters has changed from the earlier prototypes, I think there has been a full rework of Su-57's optical systems so maybe earlier information can be inaccurate.

Interesting that the bubbles are totally optically clear... previously being IR only like on the Su-24 they were opaque so they looked like white plastic you could not see through (IR light passes through like it is clear but visible light does not...).

Suggests a much wider spectrum range for detection... to include UV and IR as well as perhaps visible light to detect lasers...

In the video of the missile launch, you can see the missile attacking a target under the plane which the pilot wasn't able to see with its helmet mounted sight.

Israeli have already deceloped a helmet connected to cameras so that you can see through the the aircraft (or maumybe it was for tanks).

It makes me believe russian have similar tech on su-57.

This detector near the number on the side was not on the other prototypes i think.

The Russians were developing that technology for their attack helicopters and their new armour families.

The main problem with unmanned turrets on an armoured vehicle is that the top of the turret gives you the best view of the terrain around the tank... to the point that often the commander will direct the driver as to where they need to drive because the driver it too low down in the vehicle to see obstacles and problems ahead of the vehicle from his position way down in the hull.

With unmanned turrets all the vehicles crew are low down in the turret.

They have mentioned a thermal system for the Hind where the crew can view a continuous 360 degree of the ground around the helicopter in thermal so they can spot ground targets and also manouver and fly more safely... I would expect if they have that for the Hind then they probably have that for most of their new platforms... my understanding is that it is part of the DAS system to detect incoming missiles and threats near the vehicle... so I would expect the Su-57 would get it too.

People whine about how long these things take to get into service, but part of the reason is that these are new platforms with new systems that are complex and expensive and also very capable... a generational improvement...

BTW thanks for the pics Magnum... what a beautiful aircraft...

Su-57 will receive a "scout killer"

Su-57 fighters will be able to control Altius ultra-long-range unmanned aerial vehicles, which can be used not only for reconnaissance and target designation, but also for striking at enemy positions, Izvestia writes, citing sources in the military-industrial complex.

The newspaper calls this drone an unmanned "scout killer." According to the publication, Altius will receive elements of artificial intelligence that will allow the drone to bypass the enemy’s air defense systems without human intervention, destroy the necessary targets and return to the base unscathed.

In September 2019, the Russian Ministry of Defense showed a video of a joint flight of the Su-57 fighter and the Okhotnik drone.

In August 2019, military expert Dmitry Boltenkov said that the Altiuses would be the Russian response to the American strategic reconnaissance UAVs RQ-4 Global Hawk, performing regular flights near the Crimea.

Then the Russian Ministry of Defense presented a video of the first flight of the Altius-U drone.

https://vpk.name/news/387559_su-57_poluchit_razvedchika-ubiicu.html

Su-57 Chief Engineer Explains Why Russian Jet is Superior to US F-22 and F-35 Fighters

https://sputniknews.com/military/202003311078777083-su-57-chief-engineer-explains-why-russian-jet-is-superior-to-us-f-22-and-f-35-fighters/

Didn't even mention that at $40 million an aircraft you can get about three Su-57s for each F-35, and about 5 Su-57s for the price of an F-22, because current prices for each type is about $120 million per F-35 and about $200 million per F-22 and counting.

GarryB wrote:Didn't even mention that at $40 million an aircraft you can get about three Su-57s for each F-35, and about 5 Su-57s for the price of an F-22, because current prices for each type is about $120 million per F-35 and about $200 million per F-22 and counting.

Right now the Su 57 has got podded engines (underslung) which may produce a huge radar signature. Not sure how Sukhoi intends to address this issue.

Passive stealth is going to be effective for another 15 odd years. It targets X & Ku bands (fire control radars) mainly. But given the fact that Quantum Radars are on the anvil (China has already designed one) not sure how long stealth aircraft will remain potent.

It targets X & Ku bands

AFAIK Russia is using multiple bands in the new AD systems .

Right now the Su 57 has got podded engines (underslung) which may produce a huge radar signature.

And the fairies may fly around with their magic wands to hide the huge radar signature of the podded engines

Do you think they would put podded engines on a plane meant to be stealthy if podded engines couldn't be made stealthy?

Not sure how Sukhoi intends to address this issue.

Maybe by taking a photo of their bare asses with a single daffodil stuffed in each of them and sending it to you personally for making a really dumb claim without any evidence and then posting it as a real problem on an internet forum...

Passive stealth is going to be effective for another 15 odd years.

Stealth isn't effective NOW... if stealth was effective Israeli F-35s would be dropping dumb bombs on targets in Syrian airspace and not being detected let alone intercepted or shot down with missiles... the fact that they wont even come out to play suggests the idea of being invisible or safe from enemy detection or attack is just bullshit... and it is nothing to do with the lack of engine pods on the F-35.

It targets X & Ku bands (fire control radars) mainly.

Their stealth designs do limit detection range in those frequencies, which is obviously a problem when S-400 and upgraded S-300 uses sensors outside that narrow frequency band for detection and tracking... Most of their other systems use alternative systems as backup too like optical, and there is the obvious problem that a MiG-29 with a jamming pod to protect it from AMRAAM and flares to protect it from Sidewinders is vastly more manouverable than the F-35 or F-22 and could gun them both down fairly easily...

GarryB wrote:Do you think they would put podded engines on a plane meant to be stealthy if podded engines couldn't be made stealthy?

You must have discovered something about podded engines that engineers, designers the world over have not discovered yet.

How can podded engines be made stealthy? Stealthy designs do not use podded engines. Instead the engines are contained within the fuselage to minimize radar cross section. The exposed compressor blades in the podded engine reflects radar waves, which is not good.

Also, the air intake for supersonic aircraft needs to be relatively long, to reduce the airspeed to subsonic before it reaches the engine. It may contain internal moving parts, and/or use the geometry of the airframe ahead of the intake to control the position of the shock waves as the airflow slows down. A podded engine design would make those features impractically big and heavy.

GarryB wrote:Stealth isn't effective NOW... if stealth was effective Israeli F-35s would be dropping dumb bombs on targets in Syrian airspace and not being detected let alone intercepted or shot down with missiles

No wreckage of any F 35 was found. There is no evidence to suggest that an F 35 was shot down.

You must have discovered something about podded engines that engineers, designers the world over have not discovered yet.

I assume when you are talking about designers the world over you are not including the engineers that designed and built the Su-57?

Those Russian engineers are damn good... on their first go they invented stealth fighters that were not even black... and not faceted like the F-117 had to be...

How can podded engines be made stealthy? Stealthy designs do not use podded engines. Instead the engines are contained within the fuselage to minimize radar cross section. The exposed compressor blades in the podded engine reflects radar waves, which is not good.

Most jet engine blades are ceramic these days anyway and would be radar invisible. Secondly, the Su-35 has an air intake blocker that is used when the under carriage is down to prevent foreign object damage (ingestion) with the engines... could it be possible they use something like that to prevent FOD but also to reduce RCS when needed?

And if that is what you are complaining about most western jets have fan blades visible from the front... how unstealthy is that?

Also, the air intake for supersonic aircraft needs to be relatively long, to reduce the airspeed to subsonic before it reaches the engine. It may contain internal moving parts, and/or use the geometry of the airframe ahead of the intake to control the position of the shock waves as the airflow slows down. A podded engine design would make those features impractically big and heavy.

Even ignoring the fact that that is bullshit, what difference does it make whether the engine pods are exposed or built in to the aircraft shape as to the air intake length and contents?

To reduce the speed of air in to the intake all it needs is for the ramps that open up and maximise airflow for low speeds like takeoff can also close to greatly reduce the flow of air going in to the engines...

No wreckage of any F 35 was found. There is no evidence to suggest that an F 35 was shot down.

Of course there is no wreckage found because those fucking pussies won't fly within 300km of an S-400 system without pissing their pants and running away like little faggots.

They just added radar blocker. S shaped engines make the design complicated dpecially if you need weapon bays.

Don't be silly... are you suggesting that mounting the engines apart allowing proper differential thrust vectoring to greatly enhance the effect of thrust vectoring manouvering also with the enormous advantage of allowing full length weapon bays between the engines so not just stupid air to air missiles can be carried but also much bigger weapons like air to ground missiles and long range anti ship missiles could be carried in a more stealthy semi conformal load out to allow enormous weapons to be carried with a minor reduction in stealth...

That is almost like giving up a tiny bit of stealth in return for making the aircraft much more multipurpose and flexible and ultimately useful.... boy are they going to be ripped to shreds by internet fanboys who believe what they say in the west about everything... that is why the west leads in everything... because they are pure and right and perfect... not because they are underhanded  who think this is war and any bullshit is justified.


PS I realise this reply might appear a little angry, but you are suggesting Russian designers are idiots...

S shaped air intakes negatively effects engine performance... nothing is for free... and also another way to reduce the airflow and air speed to the engines would be to have various doors and screens in the intake tube to slow it down...

GarryB wrote:
Most jet engine blades are ceramic these days anyway and would be radar invisible. Secondly, the Su-35 has an air intake blocker that is used when the under carriage is down to prevent foreign object damage (ingestion) with the engines... could it be possible they use something like that to prevent FOD but also to reduce RCS when needed?

But Su 57 unlike the Su 35 doesn't have super cruise engines.

Most Long - medium range AAM's will follow a "Low-high-low" profile - ie. from their fired altitude (low), immediately climb to a much higher altitude (high) and then dive down on their target from height trading altitude for speed since by this time the rocket motors have burnt out during the climb phase (low) - ie. they coast to target. The only exception are missiles like the MBDA Meteor which have a turbofan motor giving them power flight all the way until impact with the target. This gives them much higher pk with a single engagement. Modern short range AAM's are extremely manuveorable (50 g+ turns), have a high bore-sight (90 degrees+ from the central line) and using IIR (Image Infra-Red) together with a UV co-linked system which collectively are extremely difficult to fool with flares and other decoys. This tends to give them extremely high pk's (0.9+) even against a highly manuveorable jets like the Su-27 series (read Su-35) and Su-57.

Thus a Su-35 and Su-57 may dodge a single AIM-9X or Phyton-5 (less than 50 - 50 chance), but after that he will be either very slow or low in height or both. The second AAM launched will then most likely get him. If such misslles are salvoed in a volley, the opponent is pretty much toast. Add to that a Helmet Mount Display sighting system (HMD helmet) and the shooting pilot can look anywhere (even back over his shoulder), shooting his missile at any angle from the plane towards the opponent. Given that these modern short range AAM's are all-aspect (ie. do not need to be fired from behind an opponent, but also from front with a high pk value) this all combines to mean that when two so equipped jets get into a short range fight are likely to mutually down each other within the first 10-15 seconds - no matter how manuveorable they are. Hence USA and NATO's focus on BVR (Beyond Visual Range) and stealth. This combination really works

Isos wrote:In the video of the missile launch, you can see the missile attacking a target under the plane

Missile attacking a target that was below the aircraft? Which video is this? Please share the link.

Isos wrote:They just added radar blocker. S shaped engines make the design complicated dpecially if you need weapon bays.

Do you have any picture of a SU 57 with these radar blockers? I mean the entire picture. Thanks.

Isos wrote:Missile fire at 1:20.

Thanks. But the missile seems to be on an upward trajectory not a downward trajectory. So it's hitting something at an altitude higher than where the Su 57 is currently at. Am I missing something?

Isos wrote:I posted one in my previous post. Do you see it ? You can find it on google. I also found once the patent made by sukhoi.

Oh you posted a full picture of an Su 57 with radar blockers already? I didn't notice. Will search.

Isos wrote:Here is the radar blocker :

Yes. I've seen that. But that seems to be an artist's rendition. I was wondering if you have an image of the entire aircraft that shows the radar blockers. I did carry out a Google search but couldn't find one.