New combat aircraft will be presented at MAKS-2021

Okay, guys. I was there. I saw the Su-75 at arm's length. Of the interesting details, I noticed this: The central weapon compartment occupies approximately the entire space from the front to the rear landing gear racks. two more compartments are located on the sides of the fuselage and they are not very small. Naturally, the planes of the tail plumage are rotatable - a gap is observed with the eye and a rotary attachment point to the body is visible. At the exit from the pavilion, there is a fire evacuation plan, which is signed with the date 08.07.2021. On this plan there is a designated silhouette of the aircraft. Thus, here is another confirmation that all the "leaks" were planned actions, and occurred exactly at the right moment.

GarryB wrote:Of course ships are serially produced, but with brand new designs of bigger ships there is a lot more risk involved because scale modelling has its limits and they are much more expensive to get wrong.

I hoped you would get my point without the need of giving more details. There is no production line for ships as there is for planes. That "production line" (the shipyard) is not purpose built for the ships, it builds anything, pretty much as a workshop for prototype aircraft works. The amounts produced are in the single digits or low double digit numbers. There is no significant overhead of a production line in the cost of the single unit that needs to be paid back by means of big amounts of serial units. Ships are built essentially as one offs, of course in a ship series there is some cost reduction and above all a risk reduction, but it has nothing to do with the way a big aircraft series leverages scale.

WHAT?

MiG-23 and MiG-27, Su-7 and Su-17... Su-27 and Su-34.... modifying and aircrafts shape and design to make it suit other purposes or roles has been done before...

That has nothing to do. You talk about one airframe with different pieces and different versions, Su-57 and LTS are different airframes with some of the same pieces. Tell me another plane changed from twin to single engine before, I don't know it. This, together with digital engineering, makes LTS a totally unprecedented project as far as I know. In fact, they are leaving behind the digital century series boys in that they are also partly recycling the production line of the Su-57, so they are saving even more time and money... in the US the supposedly accelerated project pace we should expect will need to be attended by some production line and that still takes time and money in truckloads to be done.

Yeah, they want to propose it because they want to sell as many airframes as they can, but how many existing drones are based on actual in service aircraft that were not in service aircraft to begin with and are now being used as target drones for air defence practise?

They propose that because they know it makes a lot of sense. I already explained that, recent figures by Mindstorm help to understand that further. This is an extremely elegant solution for the growth of the VKS in a time of high paced evolution of the air power.

It is interesting really because I remember in the 1990s a lot of people in the west were actually afraid that the dire situation in Russia might lead to a rebirth of the Japanese aerospace industry... before they were occupied by US troops they had a booming aircraft producing industry that created some impressive aircraft... many in the west that Japanese funds could buy Russian expertise and a combination of precision Japanese tooling and perfectionism and Russian space and air technology expertise and cheap educated work force with technology and experience in metals and materials might lead to something that would challenge the wests new found domination... funny it turned out the Russians did it all on their own without Japanese money...

The West would have loved to know back then  

This may kill the JF-17...

And not only that. I can imagine the designers of medium 5G fighters in Korea, China and Turkey have a bitter grin in their faces right now. They were smart to perceive that there was a gap in the market which no one was filling, because the US were abusing the F-35 as a tool of political influence and the Russians appeared to be napping. But now, their twin engine designs will have to compete with a single engine one that is not only way cheaper and simpler, but also has better performance and way more flexible weapon bays. Their products have just descended to the lower shelf of the shop, and if in the future they come up with something much better, the Russians still can release izd. 30 for export. Maybe China can catch up, for others it will be difficult, in the current state of wordly affairs.

Or maybe China might get on board and licence produce them in the tens of thousands... and hand them out free to poor countries so they can remain independent so China can trade with them without worrying about regime change imposed by the west...  

"When we talked about the XXI century MiG-21 we were serious about it"  

Well actually the Russian MIC is state owned, while the US MIC is private companies earning a buck or two...

Some people here still have not read the memo...

What happened was they took the 1:35 scale plastic model of the Su-57 and took away one engine and then tried to build the kit... it wasn't designed it was just put together that way.

But then as it uses Su-57 bits quite clearly to get it all to fit together it would need to be seriously re designed so the modified pieces actually fit and it makes sense.

I really hope you are being sarcastic, right?

There is as much room for 3D engine nozzle deflection on the Su-75 as on the Su-57... look at the pictures posted above.

Nope. The nozzles in Su-57 are canted 2D, not 3D. If a 3D nozzle was to be installed in the LTS, it would collide with the bodywork at the sides. And that TVC nozzle is not known as available, is not what Saturn does and does not match with what we saw. Probably 2D with vertical movement will be used, if true 3D was to be used, sideway deflection would need to be minimal.

Scorpius wrote:Okay, guys. I was there. I saw the Su-75 at arm's length. Of the interesting details, I noticed this: The central weapon compartment occupies approximately the entire space from the front to the rear landing gear racks. two more compartments are located on the sides of the fuselage and they are not very small. Naturally, the planes of the tail plumage are rotatable - a gap is observed with the eye and a rotary attachment point to the body is visible. At the exit from the pavilion, there is a fire evacuation plan, which is signed with the date 08.07.2021. On this plan there is a designated silhouette of the aircraft. Thus, here is another confirmation that all the "leaks" were planned actions, and occurred exactly at the right moment.

Great, did you took the measuring tape with you? I have a truckload of questions!

> What is the general size impression compared to other fighters? Is it bigger than MiG-29, F-35 or any other that you have seen before?
> Does a R-77 fit the side bays in your opinion? Did you manage to see the suspension points or the internal layout? Are those side bays compatible with A2G weapons? May these bays be easy to load from the wells of the main landing gear?
> Did you manage to take a look at the ventral bay? How deep are they? Do you think crews can load them comfortably?
> Do wings, forward fuselage, landing gear and tail belong to the Su-57 in your opinion?

That is by now, I will keep thinking more questions hahaha

This photo nicely epitomizes the current cultural differences between Russia and the West...



I can't imagine any Western "progressive" aerospace company daring to use "Grand Prix girls" in a promotional photo. The man-hating femi-Nazi SJWs would go incandescent with misandry-fuelled rage

They could however if they embraced sufficient diversity. One black outwardly gay dude, one androgynous Hispanic transgender, plus a couple of lesbians in a close embrace. Add in a white straight male in manacles and a gimp suit, with the black dude holding his lease... /vomit

LMFS wrote:

Scorpius wrote:Okay, guys. I was there. I saw the Su-75 at arm's length. Of the interesting details, I noticed this: The central weapon compartment occupies approximately the entire space from the front to the rear landing gear racks. two more compartments are located on the sides of the fuselage and they are not very small. Naturally, the planes of the tail plumage are rotatable - a gap is observed with the eye and a rotary attachment point to the body is visible. At the exit from the pavilion, there is a fire evacuation plan, which is signed with the date 08.07.2021. On this plan there is a designated silhouette of the aircraft. Thus, here is another confirmation that all the "leaks" were planned actions, and occurred exactly at the right moment.

Great, did you took the measuring tape with you? I have a truckload of questions!  

> What is the general size impression compared to other fighters? Is it bigger than MiG-29, F-35 or any other that you have seen before?
> Does a R-77 fit the side bays in your opinion? Did you manage to see the suspension points or the internal layout? Are those side bays compatible with A2G weapons? May these bays be easy to load from the wells of the main landing gear?
> Did you manage to take a look at the ventral bay? How deep are they? Do you think crews can load them comfortably?
> Do wings, forward fuselage, landing gear and tail belong to the Su-57 in your opinion?

That is by now, I will keep thinking more questions hahaha

It's not that simple, buddy. First of all, there are only 10 minutes, during which you mostly watch a show with laser effects in a dark hall. In the photo, you have about 90 seconds. And I don't have the best technique and not the best photography skills. but some photos, I think, can be posted here. I apologize in advance for their quality.









The same evacuation plan. Approved on 08.07.2021:

Yes, I almost forgot - this is the length of the queue that had to be staying to get into the pavilion

Big_Gazza wrote:This photo nicely epitomizes the current cultural differences between Russia and the West...



I can't imagine any Western "progressive" aerospace company daring to use "Grand Prix girls" in a promotional photo.  The man-hating femi-Nazi SJWs would go incandescent with misandry-fuelled rage

They could however if they embraced sufficient diversity.  One black outwardly gay dude, one androgynous Hispanic transgender, plus a couple of lesbians in a close embrace. Add in a white straight male in manacles and a gimp suit, with the black dude holding his lease...    /vomit  

Russians are legit men of culture. Chicks in jumpsuits, fuckin hell that's like every red-blooded males fetish ever since watching Sigourney Weaver in Alien.

Scorpius wrote:It's not that simple, buddy. First of all, there are only 10 minutes, during which you mostly watch a show with laser effects in a dark hall. In the photo, you have about 90 seconds. And I don't have the best technique and not the best photography skills. but some photos, I think, can be posted here. I apologize in advance for their quality.

Thanks for the pictures, I am aware the show is not intended to give away all the details about the plane
Do you happen to know the size of the building in the evacuation plan? We would get the measures of the plane with very decent accuracy...

LMFS wrote:

Scorpius wrote:It's not that simple, buddy. First of all, there are only 10 minutes, during which you mostly watch a show with laser effects in a dark hall. In the photo, you have about 90 seconds. And I don't have the best technique and not the best photography skills. but some photos, I think, can be posted here. I apologize in advance for their quality.

Thanks for the pictures, I am aware the show is not intended to give away all the details about the plane  
Do you happen to know the size of the building in the evacuation plan? We would get the measures of the plane with very decent accuracy...

1. The dimensions in the plan may be distorted.
2. The standard width of a double door in Russia is 1300 millimeters.

Su-57 cockpit for comparison

LMFS wrote:

@kvs:
The F-35 has ca. 2800 km range on internal fuel with more than 8 t of it carried onboard. But the speed is indeed lower, the cross sectional area is huge, supersonic acceleration is low, the bays are less usable and in general it seems surpassed in the dynamic aspect, specially if izd. 30 is to be used in the LTS. Chauvinists are assuming this to be a "low end" plane compared to the F-35, but I still cannot understand what the concrete arguments are, they know basically nothing about the performance of the avionics, which are very similar in features, and there are more points where the LTS is ahead in terms of airframe than the other way around, even with export specs and at claimed four times lower cost... even at twice the stated price and from the information we have, two LTS would make short work of a F-35 so the advantage in military value should be clear.

https://www.airforce.gov.au/technology/f-35a-specifications

If the F-35 can squeeze 2800 km from 2200 km then the Su-57 can squeeze beyond 3000 km. It depends on the efficiency of the Russian
engine and here is where thermodynamics comes in. Higher operating temperatures make it more efficient. The Zorya-Stroymash replacements
for ship turbines had a substantial jump in the operating temperature.

Anyway, I can't tell which figure for the F-35 is real, 2200 or the Wikicrapia 2800 km. Wikicrapia is edited by pro-NATzO hacks so I suspect the
real numbers are the ones from the link above.

From official sources(lockeed/Air force/Army) the range is 2200km for F-35A and F-35C, and 1666 for the F-35B

https://www.lockheedmartin.com/f35/news-and-features/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-f-35c.html

https://www.military.com/equipment/f-35b-lightning-ii

And Kvs source which is official

SUCHOI has made a breakthrough

dino00 wrote:From official sources(lockeed/Air force/Army) the range is 2200km for F-35A and F-35C, and 1666 for the F-35B
................
SUCHOI has made  a breakthrough

Not exactly a breakthrough, they just used basic logic and installed extra fuel tank behind the cockpit and problem solved (maybe somewhere else as well)

It's also the reason why F-35B (VTOL) has shitty range, it has a lift-off fan there instead of a fuel tank like the other two

There are shitposts currently claiming that the LTS is a mockup because its pilots seat is too small for a real human. Lots of comparisons with the iranian stealth fighter.

limb wrote:There are shitposts currently claiming that the LTS is a mockup because its pilots seat is too small for a real human. Lots of comparisons with the iranian stealth fighter.

That comparison is slanderous nonsense.

limb wrote:There are shitposts currently claiming that the LTS is a mockup because its pilots seat is too small for a real human. Lots of comparisons with the iranian stealth fighter.

And?

I doub't that Sukhoi gives a shit

mnztr wrote:

limb wrote:There are shitposts currently claiming that the LTS is a mockup because its pilots seat is too small for a real human. Lots of comparisons with the iranian stealth fighter.

What about the video on RT where the lady journalist actually gets in and says how comfortable it is? Fake person? lol

Just ridiculous cope. When the fiberglass mockup of the tempest came out what were they saying? Russia always is treated like this. Any rational person can see how serious this project is.

Intake ducting

@kvs, dino00

For US equipment as for Russian one, there are good and bad sources, and some effort is needed to get the difficult bits of information. The A2A combat radius in hi-hi-hi profile of the F-35A (the only configuration comparable to Russia's max range on internal fuel) was presented to Israel IIRC as 1400 km, that means max range is ca. 2800 km. Other combat radius given are with heavy A2G payloads and/or include cruising out of ideal conditions (low altitude) which are very detrimental to range. The plane is not efficient in supersonic flight, but in subsonic it is quite different and carries more than 8 t fuel, so this not obvious fake information to me. It does not detract from the fact that the LTS' range is phenomenal, that is longer than that of heavy fighters not so long ago and as argued in a post before, it basically matches Su-30SM and may allow to cover their missions with a far cheaper plane to operate, that is something to consider very seriously for the VKS and other air forces. The range of the Su-57 should be clearly ahead of that, I consider conservatively the range of the Su-35 as a reference, but the plane being smaller, more aerodynamic and more advanced, I would not be surprised if it reaches 4000 km on internal fuel.

As to the engine temperature, TIT of the F135 is, acc. to available information (we can be lied to and I don't have a way to know) with difference the engine that runs hottest of them all. By far. 3600F is the official value, that is way hotter than anything in service in Russia. They are working on such technology and it is likely that izd. 30 can be a surprise in that regard (18 tf in that size of engine is not a small feat), but among the currently operational engines, F135 simply stands out.

-----

To the LTS itself: I made some dimensional check with IMHO reliable pictures of the LTS and Su-57 and indeed it seems to be a very big plane which directly uses big structural elements from its big brother, it is amazing that they had the audacity of going for this, truly ballsy move... Wings seem indeed identical, forward fuselage too, I would say tails and I am even tempted to think landing gear too. VKS would be silly not to use this to leverage the already existing production facilities for the Su-57 and I am sure UAC will tempt them with a juicy price reduction on further Su-57 orders and difficult to beat prices for eventual orders of the LTS for the military, considering a good part of the overhead that production lines place on the individual purchasing price of each airframe are already paid for... this approach is going to be difficult to beat, it is simply genius.

So 18 m long x 12 m wingspan seems a good approximation. That they manage to propel a plane this size with just one AL-31F sized engine is quite surprising, I am really looking forward to have more information about the weights of the plane and hopefully learn something about its empty weight (Russians never tell!) and whether it is closer to 10 or to 13 tons. It would be surprising if the plane is lighter than 12 t to be honest. And to me it is definitely clear that izd. 30 is the proper engine for this concept of plane and the engines we hear now just cheap export options.

The side bays are interesting: long as to hold a MRAAM, but also wide at its rear end, as if to hold A2G weapons. I think they may have interesting surprises still to be disclosed.

@Backman:

I think there are small details still to be fine tuned in Paralay's model, which ends up being the reference we all use:

Backman wrote:Intake ducting

https://2021.f.a0z.ru/07/25-9896401-7517.jpg

This thing is a flying gas tank, no wonder they expect 3k range

Broski wrote:I thought the engine used in the Su-75 was AL-41?

If you refer to my post, I said AL-31 sized, because the AL-41F-1 and 1S are derivatives of the AL-31 and with essentially the same fit and size. F135 for instance is a bigger size class.

I liked the reference from Paralay to the S-37 by Sukhoi, it had also single engine, roughly same size and weight, and used if I am not right the original AL-41F for the MFI, which was quite bigger. So this idea implemented in the LTS may be older than we think now, but the engines and other systems have improved to the point of allowing a smaller engine taking care of the task and freeing more space for payload and fuel.

The newest Checkmate fighter will receive the most modern avionics from KRET

MOSCOW, July 26. / TASS /. The Checkmate single-engine fighter will receive the most up-to-date complex of avionics. All the information necessary for the pilot will be displayed on a panoramic indicator with a touch panel and an indicator on the windshield, TASS told TASS at the MAKS-2021 air show, which took place from July 20 to 25 in Zhukovsky, Advisor to the First Deputy General Director of KRET (JSC Concern Radioelectronic Technologies, included to the state corporation "Rostec") Vladimir Mikheev.

The newest on-board complex, developed at the Ramenskoye Instrument-Making Design Bureau (part of KRET), includes a promising large-format collimator indicator, a panoramic aviation indicator and a multifunctional display panel. The products, according to Mikheev, are in no way inferior to the aviation complexes of the American F-35 aircraft, and even surpass them in some parameters.

"On the basis of these devices, products for the latest domestic combat aircraft Su-57 and MiG-35D, as well as prototypes for the Checkmate light tactical fighter presented at MAKS-2021, are being developed and tested. These developments are the next step in the development of Russian avionics and are in no way inferior to similar products installed on American F-35 aircraft, "Mikheev emphasized.

A promising large-format collimator indicator transmits basic flight information and data on the air situation to the aircraft windshield. "Information on targets is displayed on the glass, and what kind of missile weapons should be used in a given combat situation," Mikheev said.

In turn, a panoramic aviation indicator with a diagonal of 25 inches, equipped with a touch panel, displays complete information about the state of the aircraft's systems and weapons, the route and position of the aircraft along the course. This indicator has a high resolution, which allows you to display any graphic images with high quality.

The multifunctional color panel-indicator, equipped with a touch panel, is designed to display information, as well as to enter the necessary command information into the avionics complex.

https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/11983551

The F-35 is not close to the CF-18 range (3300 km) as per the Canadian government. This was a major issue several years ago given Canada's
extensive territory and limited resources. The limited range of the F-35 is a real issue and not just a matter of sources.

So the 2800 km claimed by Wikipedia is less credible since a 500 km range difference with the CF-18 is just not that substantial. I am past
giving anything from the west the benefit of the doubt. Too much dick stroking chauvinism and fail being sold as win.

Backman wrote:Intake ducting

No more drivel spew about the visibility of the engine from the front. The perennial go to for all the Su-57 "critics". They
will have to latch onto the curved support/air flow divider. It is not shaped stealthy enough.