Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #6

Since it entered service the AS-11 missile could not be carried by just any aircraft.... only a select few were able to carry and use it, and it came with a targeting pod that detected the target signals and triangulated the target location before launch.

If the target turned off their radar signal mid flight the missile will still land amongst the target vehicles and with a 150kg HE frag warhead likely have damaged the antenna effectively enough.

Hole wrote:

It would be cool if future versions of the Su-57 had the 2 main bomb bays be unified in to one large bomb bay for much longer munitions, but also have optional modular munition place holders that would naturally be of shorter length with shorter bomb bay doors for smaller munitions.

The smaller munition place holder would be necessary because it would ideally block off the rest of the internal space from compromising the RCS, additionally the smaller munitions means they would have shorter range and the Su-57 would have to launch them closer to the target and would be more susceptible to be detected by tactical level radars, so it would have a radar blocker near the end of the munition place holders length (the end extending to other side of the bombay). The unified bay munitions would have much greater range than the former, and the Su-57 would be less likely to be detected when it's launching the longer range munition. Now imagine if the Su-57 launch modified versions of the Kh-101/102 or Zircon/Khinzal closer to their original lengths!

magnumcromagnon wrote:
It would be cool if future versions of the Su-57 had the 2 main bomb bays be unified in to one large bomb bay for much longer munitions, but also have optional modular munition place holders that would naturally be of shorter length with shorter bomb bay doors for smaller munitions.

That is probably not going to happen, the plane's structure relies heavily on that central section between the bays to distribute the loads.

LMFS wrote:

magnumcromagnon wrote:
It would be cool if future versions of the Su-57 had the 2 main bomb bays be unified in to one large bomb bay for much longer munitions, but also have optional modular munition place holders that would naturally be of shorter length with shorter bomb bay doors for smaller munitions.

That is probably not going to happen, the plane's structure relies heavily on that central section between the bays to distribute the loads.

I'm not proposing anything extreme here, just utilizing the (small) space in between the 2 bomb bays, so they can launch extra-long range munitions when they need to. When they don't need to use extreme long weapons, they can place smaller compartments back in the space to restore whatever lost functionality. The extreme long range munition will be launched (with the right tactics) far beyond the enemies capacity to intercept the Su-57, so whatever temporary loss in the fuselages' structural stability, it'll be a small price to pay as it's very unlikely to dog fight (and thus experience high g-forces) during that sortie.

If the weapon is extreme long range then stealth becomes less important so carry it externally... or better still put it on an Su-30 or Su-35...

Personally I would rather see a new version of the Su-57 that is like a new stealthy Su-34 version of the Su-57 that is the equivalent to the Su-34 is to the Su-35.

Not designed for such high speed but with the engines located two or three times further apart and with much bigger internal weapon bays and perhaps not designed for supersonic flight but with all internal weapons...

GarryB wrote:If the weapon is extreme long range then stealth becomes less important so carry it externally... or better still put it on an Su-30 or Su-35...

Personally I would rather see a new version of the Su-57 that is like a new stealthy Su-34 version of the Su-57 that is the equivalent to the Su-34 is to the Su-35.

Not designed for such high speed but with the engines located two or three times further apart and with much bigger internal weapon bays and perhaps not designed for supersonic flight but with all internal weapons...

Sure, extreme range weapons won't need the platform to be as stealthy as possible, but with it stored internally the vehicle will be less affected by drag, so ideally the munition can be launched as high and as fast as possible.

The MiG-41 would certainly offer the best performance boost in terms of launch speed and altitude... a bit like taking old nonupgraded MiG-31s to carry Kinzhal.

There are photos of the MiG-31K carrying bigger missiles for anti satellite or perhaps emergency satellite launch capacity to fill any gaps that might exist with a temporary satellite or to replace those lost in combat...

BTW, talking to a couple of other fellas on another military forum and I expressed my displeasure at the complete disrespect and insulting of this amazing aircraft by NATO to give it the disgusting nickname "Felon." Whomever came up with that is a full blown jerk, but so are all the other who agreed and/or voted for that name to be the NATO designation for this aircraft. Despicable.

Some of the previous names weren't so flattering, either, such as "Frogfoot" or "Fagot" or even "Fishbed", but this one has to take the cake. Felon? Really?

The name should be F-ucker. F for fighter (like in F-15, F-16 and so on)

They should give the F-35 the designation 'Turd Burglar.'

You guys realize a felon is a person who has been convicted of a felony, right? A felony is a crime in most civilized societies that use that term lol. There's nothing cool or badass or tough or complimentary in any way, shape or form. It's nothing short of an insult, really. And it's obvious that they did it on purpose, of course, which makes it even more irritating.

A smooth criminal might be a stretch.

They had to label it negatively because they still need to make a villain out of Russia, and for it to still be the enemy to make NATO relevant after the end of the Soviet Union and the Cold War.

If needing to stick with the letter F for a starter, then looking at the list there's plenty:
Fire
Fierce
Force
Freedom
Future
etc.
So many better ones that friggin Felon!

Ok, I've vented enough about that.

It is not a HATO code AFAIK, they use it, but they don't decide it... it used to be the Air Standards Coordination Committee, or ASCC that used to decide on the code name which is made up of what has become the five eyes group of bastards... US, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand...

I think the name is petty and shows the childish nature of the countries that chose the name and how spiteful they are... just a reminder to Russia how lucky they are to not be on good relations with such spoiled self absorbed arseholes.

GarryB wrote:It is not a HATO code AFAIK, they use it, but they don't decide it... it used to be the Air Standards Coordination Committee, or ASCC that used to decide on the code name which is made up of what has become the five eyes group of bastards... US, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand...

New Zealand, too? NATO must have something to do with it if they call it a "NATO designation".
I think it's pretty clear through all the decades since its creation who's been driving that organization because of the money it was putting into it giving it the most clout. Except you can't say the US was much involved in this recent naming since it pulled out back in 2017 IIRC. So this is from the current members sans the US.

GarryB wrote:I think the name is petty and shows the childish nature of the countries that chose the name and how spiteful they are... just a reminder to Russia how lucky they are to not be on good relations with such spoiled self absorbed arseholes.

There you go! This is the kind of anger I was thinking most would be feeling about this. I think it's such a disgraceful thing to do and this is probably the worst designation to date! Bastards. lol

Love the name. Felon, the invisible thief in the night, your goodies and valuables are gone, just a mess left behind and your alarms detected nothing.

The namers certainly had more nous that those coming up with Faggot.

Gomig-21 wrote:
There you go!  This is the kind of anger I was thinking most would be feeling about this.  I think it's such a disgraceful thing to do and this is probably the worst designation to date!  Bastards. lol

The worst to date is thier term for the Sarmat, childish as hell and if you fail to see how ironic it is then you are retarded. I would have said the R-36 but that is not as retardedly ironic as them giving the name to a modern Russian missile.

The whole alternate designation system is retarded, childish and completely pointless.

The-thing-next-door wrote:The whole alternate designation system is retarded, childish and completely pointless.

Have to agree there

New Zealand, too? NATO must have something to do with it if they call it a "NATO designation".

Old boys club... would not surprise me if the whole system is based around what school you went to... so boys from Eton in the UK can join, and Harvard from the US and perhaps Auckland Grammar in New Zealand etc etc etc...

People who would not speak to you on the street...

There you go! This is the kind of anger I was thinking most would be feeling about this. I think it's such a disgraceful thing to do and this is probably the worst designation to date! Bastards. lol

Passed anger... they are just noise... western publications doing stories about the I-16... a significant aircraft... and they call it the rat... Rata... which is what the Spanish nazis called it in the Spanish civil war... fuck them.

The namers certainly had more nous that those coming up with Faggot.

PC brigade means they couldn't call it that now if they wanted to...

People keep forgetting that the whole gangsta' ghetto thing is considered cool in USA these days and that this name is definitely considered more flattering by those who came up with it than most people think

I appreciate not everyone is going to be happy and their ultimate job is to find words that are distinct and can be distinguished on radio communications, and not sound like other words that need to be used including the names of friendly types as well, but they are still a bunch of dicks.

They need it for their purposes but we can use the real names and designations.